If Favre Is Traded Where Would You Rank Him?

bill · Post by **bill** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:08 pm

I just went down the QB list and I could not insert Favre as a Buc or Jet until #20. I prefer Rivers, Kitna and Schaub at 17-19.

When I look at the free agent pick-ups of the Jets, I think they will be a much improved team. Their O-Line will be much better and Coles, Cotchery and T. Jones are solid players. I even like their QB play behind a good O-Line.

Hammerheads · Post by **Hammerheads** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:16 pm

When was the last time farve had to learn a new system with entirely new personel? 16 years ago?I would have him no more then a QB2. I certainly wouldn't want to count on him out of the gate.

bmiller · Post by **bmiller** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:10 pm

Originally posted by bill:
When I look at the free agent pick-ups of the Jets, I think they will be a much improved team. Their O-Line will be much better and Coles, Cotchery and T. Jones are solid players. I even like their QB play behind a good O-Line. So with the much improved O-line and the solid skill positions you still don't put him in the top 20???

bill · Post by **bill** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:18 am

Originally posted by bmiller:
quote:Originally posted by bill:
When I look at the free agent pick-ups of the Jets, I think they will be a much improved team. Their O-Line will be much better and Coles, Cotchery and T. Jones are solid players. I even like their QB play behind a good O-Line. So with the much improved O-line and the solid skill positions you still don't put him in the top 20??? [/QUOTE]Good point. I may be letting my personal views get in the way a little bit here. Favre toned down his play last year: a lot more shorter passes, not forcing the ball down field (knew he had a very good D)

If Favre gets on a team that may not be a playoff contender and has an average D so he feels he needs to make a lot happen, I would anticipate a lot more turnoves out of him. Plus at his age he is more of an injury risk and a risk of just retiring again if things are not going well.

I would have a hard time picking him ahead of Rivers, Kitna and Schaub. His erratic play has burned me many times in the past (when gambling on the Pack) so I may not be completely objective here.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:55 am

What are the Packers doing with Favre anyway?

I mean, this has almost gotten absurd and embarrassing from a fan's perspective and Packers' fan's perspective. The fact that the president flew to Mississippi today to talk Favre out of reporting to camp is bizarre. I mean, how dumb is this soap opera going to get before it gets cancelled??

I understood the Packers' position originally that they had moved on and had to plan for 2008 without Favre. I understood that they were hurt by Favre's accusations that they forced him into retirement early and then rejected him when he tried to come back. I understand they had to move on and now need to get a draft pick if they trade him.

But the bottom line is that nobody is going to give them a top pick -- certainly not a first round pick -- and if TAmpa is only offering a seventh round pick for him then they have to keep him. Activate him, let him show up for camp and let the position battle begin. It's already a circus at camp, so why not bring in the main event? I mean, it's stupid NOT to bring him back at this point if he's insistent on playing in 2008.

I think the Packers continue to handle this poorly and the relationship is irrepairable. But you don't release him for nothing, you don't trade him for nothing and you don't lock him out of camp. He needs to be allowed to play in 2008 and right now the best case is to play for Green Bay. Let him compete for the job.

Anyone agree??

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:29 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
But you don't release him for nothing, you don't trade him for nothing and you don't lock him out of camp. He needs to be allowed to play in 2008 and right now the best case is to play for Green Bay. Let him compete for the job.

Anyone agree?? I agree ... I would have NO problem if management said we are going to let Favre compete for the starting QB position. If he loses ... they cut him ... save 12 mil ... and know they have a better QB than Favre. If he wins the Job ... Packers win.

Favre "HAS" to be allowed to COMPETE for a starting job somewhere this year. Even T.O. (who's agent screwed up and was traded to Balt) ... got to play for Philly the year he backed out of a contract.

If GB eats Favre's 12 mil so they can bench him and he can't play anywhere else ... I will officially hate the organization.

Why spend 12 mil on Moss and 3 offensive linemen when you can use the money to keep Farve off everyone else's team?

BTW ... as a Viking ... QB14

D-Day Heroes · Post by **D-Day Heroes** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:52 am

Greg.... The only good thing that has come out of this "Favre Fiassco ", is it has shown that Arron Rogers seems to be a class act, he has been cool as a cuccumber through this whole thunderstorm. I would suspect that would go over big in the locker room, so when it does come time for him to take over the ship, he will have a very loyal crew. As far as Favre goes, if he wanted to put this whole thing to rest, he could just say , i'll take Rogers under my wing and back him up. These accomplishes 2 things, one, if Rogers succedes, Favre gets Credit for doing the Honarable thing, he gets a year off, everyones happy, and they can make a great deal in the off-season for Him. Two, if Rogers fails, Favre comes in, save the day or not, goes down
as a Great guy, football playerand still goes into next year with a better deal, for having done the right thing. The way things are going

now, I can't think of a better scenario, can you ?

liquidhippo · Post by **liquidhippo** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:10 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
What are the Packers doing with Favre anyway?

I mean, this has almost gotten absurd and embarrassing from a fan's perspective and Packers' fan's perspective. The fact that the president flew to Mississippi today to talk Favre out of reporting to camp is bizarre. I mean, how dumb is this soap opera going to get before it gets cancelled??

I understood the Packers' position originally that they had moved on and had to plan for 2008 without Favre. I understood that they were hurt by Favre's accusations that they forced him into retirement early and then rejected him when he tried to come back. I understand they had to move on and now need to get a draft pick if they trade him.

But the bottom line is that nobody is going to give them a top pick -- certainly not a first round pick -- and if TAmpa is only offering a seventh round pick for him then they have to keep him. Activate him, let him show up for camp and let the position battle begin. It's already a circus at camp, so why not bring in the main event? I mean, it's stupid NOT to bring him back at this point if he's insistent on playing in 2008.

I think the Packers continue to handle this poorly and the relationship is irrepairable. But you don't release him for nothing, you don't trade him for nothing and you don't lock him out of camp. He needs to be allowed to play in 2008 and right now the best case is to play for Green Bay. Let him compete for the job.

Anyone agree?? Totally agree. I still think the most likely place for him to land is Lambeau Field. Those who say that's impossible are the same people who said it was impossible he'd even come out of retirement.

Assuming what I hear is correct(that he can veto any trade) Favre holds the cards and can ultimately play where he wants. He can veto all trades to ultimately play for the Packers, or demand his release and go to the Vikings. If he stays with the Packers, he'll be the starter in short order. If he's released, he'll go to the Vikings and lead them to the superbowl.