Brett Favre probably will play football this fall, but it won't be for the Green Bay Packers.
It will be for the Baltimore Ravens, or the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, or maybe even the hated rival Minnesota Vikings.
Favre asked Friday for his unconditional release from Green Bay and the team's response said it all. Like a bride at the altar with a new husband, the Packers have moved on.
"The finality of his decision to retire was accepted by the organization," the club said in a statement. "At that point, the Green Bay Packers made the commitment to move forward with our football team. . . .
"As with all Packers greats, Brett's legacy will always be celebrated by our fans and the organization, regardless of any change in his personal intentions."
Friday's development, first aired by ESPN, came three months after The Times reported Favre's agent, Bus Cook, was checking around with other teams about their interest in trading for the player.
At the time, Cook called that story "absolutely false."
But what Cook was telling teams was this: Brett still wants to play. He was disappointed that the Packers didn't make a bigger effort to talk him out of retiring, especially after his terrific performance last season, and he was frustrated the Packers didn't try to sign All-Pro receiver Randy Moss -- also a client of Cook's -- when they twice had the chance.
So what happens now?
The Packers have several options, none of them appetizing.
They can bring Favre back, but that would mean derailing the Aaron Rodgers era -- and just try re-signing Rodgers when he becomes a free agent after the 2009 season -- and paying Favre his entire $12-million salary, even if they were to release him after one day of training camp. The prospect of Favre backing up Rodgers is unthinkable.
The Packers can grant Favre's request and release him, knowing that might mean they'll face him twice a season as a member of the Vikings or Chicago Bears.
With a running back like Adrian Peterson, and a defense bolstered by the addition of Jared Allen, the Vikings are a lot of people's Super Bowl team, anyway. Replace young quarterback Tarvaris Jackson with Favre, and Minnesota would have a dream team of talent.
A couple things to consider, though: The Vikings have only about $5 million in salary cap space -- and that's without signing their draft picks -- and Jackson had an outstanding off-season. That said, the franchise probably would do whatever was necessary to sign Favre if he were on the open market.
Surely, the Packers want value in the form of draft picks for Favre and don't want to see him playing for an NFC North rival. The two most obvious landing spots are Tampa Bay and Baltimore.
Buccaneers Coach Jon Gruden, who has a history of stockpiling quarterbacks and loves veterans and star players, is a huge admirer of Favre and coached him as an assistant in Green Bay. Tampa Bay has the cap room to sign Favre, a modified West Coast offense that fits him, and it's geographically desirable for a quarterback whose family lives in Mississippi.
The Ravens would be a logical fit for Favre too, because they're an AFC team, they're coming off the retirement of Steve McNair, and they're looking to groom first-round pick Joe Flacco. Favre could be an ideal mentor for him, far better than the current Kyle Boller or Troy Smith.
There is always a chance Favre and the Packers could somehow hash out their differences and find a way for him to finish his career in Green Bay. But, as training camp nears, that's becoming less likely by the day.
Although no one knows just where No. 4 will be taking snaps in September, Favre and Green Bay now find themselves miles apart philosophically, yet sharing the same ZIP code.
In Splitsville.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Re:Brett Favre
Date: 2008/07/15 00:15
By: iluvgossip
Status: User
Karma: 0
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 1253
Retired quarterback Brett Favre wants to play in the NFL but doesn't feel welcome at the Green Bay Packers, so he's asking to be released.
Favre, who retired in March after a record-setting, 17-year pro career, made his first substantial comments on his latest retirement decision reversal in an interview with Fox News on Monday.
"I am guilty of retiring early and there is a reason for that," Favre said, according to an excerpt provided to The Associated Press before the broadcast. "And the major issue is 'Why did he retire?' and 'He asked for a release because he doesn't want to play in Green Bay.' That's not true. And I hope people are hearing this and saying 'OK, that clears it up.'"
According to Fox News, Favre said he was "never fully committed" to retiring and felt pressured by the Packers to make a decision, a notion Packers general manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy tried to dispel in an interview with the AP on Saturday.
"Ted always wanted Brett back," McCarthy said. "We always wanted Brett back."Favre told Fox he understands that the Packers want to move on — but if they're doing so, they should let him go.
"Them moving on does not bother me," Favre said. "It doesn't. I totally understand that. By me retiring March 3rd, I knew that could possibly happen. All I was saying is, you know, I'm thinking about playing again."
Favre told Fox he would not return to the Packers if he wasn't the starter. And while Favre said the Packers asked him for a list of teams to which he would accept a trade, he wants to be released to make sure he ends up on a competitive club.
Thompson said the team Favre led to a Super Bowl title in 1997 wasn't going to release him, but he could come back in a "different role than he was" because the team was committed to starting Aaron Rodgers at quarterback.
Thompson and McCarthy wouldn't discuss the possibility of trading Favre, and gave AP a detailed description of their dealings with Favre throughout the offseason, including an episode a few weeks after Favre's retirement where the two were prepared to fly to Favre to seal the deal on his comeback — only to have the 38-year-old change his mind again.
Favre's interview is the latest development in what is looking more and more like an irreparable schism between one of the NFL's most revered teams and perhaps its most beloved quarterback.
Thompson called the situation "gut-wrenching" on Saturday.
"I mean, it hurts," he said. "I'm not talking about physically hurting, but the sensitivity. We understand where the fans are coming from. This is a hot-button issue that surpasses anything I've ever gone through."
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Re:Brett Favre
Date: 2008/07/15 14:55
By: iluvgossip
Status: User
Karma: 0
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 1253
Brett Favre finally is speaking for himself: He wants to play but doesn't feel welcome in Green Bay, so he's asking to be released. The quarterback's first substantial comments on his latest retirement decision reversal come in an interview with Fox News on "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren."
"I am guilty of retiring early and there is a reason for that," Favre said, according to an excerpt provided to The Associated Press before the Monday night broadcast. "And the major issue is 'Why did he retire?,' and 'He asked for a release because he doesn't want to play in Green Bay.' That's not true. And I hope people are hearing this and saying 'OK, that clears it up.'"
According to Van Susteren, who spoke to the AP by telephone Monday afternoon, Favre said he was "never fully committed" to retiring and felt pressured by the Packers to make a decision, a notion Packers general manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy tried to dispel in an interview with the AP on Saturday.
Favre told Fox he understands that the Packers want to move on — but if they're doing so, they should let him go.
"Them moving on does not bother me," Favre said. "It doesn't. I totally understand that. By me retiring March 3rd, I knew that could possibly happen. All I was saying is, you know, I'm thinking about playing again."
Van Susteren — who is from Appleton, Wis., is a Packers shareholder and previously had interviewed Favre and his wife, Deanna — said Favre made it clear he would not return to the Packers if he wasn't the starter. And while Favre said the Packers asked him for a list of teams to which he would accept a trade, he wants to be released to make sure he ends up on a competitive club.
Thompson said the team wasn't going to release Favre, but he could come back in a "different role than he was" because the team is committed to going forward with Aaron Rodgers.
Thompson and McCarthy wouldn't discuss the possibility of trading Favre and said they hadn't received any trade inquiries as of Saturday.
Thompson and McCarthy gave AP a detailed description of their dealings with Favre throughout the offseason, including an episode a few weeks after Favre's retirement where the two were prepared to fly to Mississippi to seal the deal on a Favre comeback — only to have the quarterback change his mind again.
In the interview, Favre said the Packers were being dishonest, although the excerpt provided to AP did not offer specific instances Favre was challenging.
"If you move on, you tell me one thing, don't come back and tell the public ... just say it, 'You know, we've moved on and we'll work with Brett on whatever it is,'" Favre said. "Don't make up a lot of stuff or give half of the truth."
McCarthy and Thompson also expressed concern Saturday that Favre spent most of the offseason questioning whether he still had the commitment to play football. But Favre told Fox News it wasn't going to be an issue.
"If I'm going to play it's going to be 100 percent commitment," Favre said.
Favre's interview — which was receiving top billing over an interview with presidential candidate John McCain in promos for Van Susteren's show that aired during the day Monday — is the latest development in what is looking more and more like an irreparable schism between one of the NFL's most storied franchises and perhaps its most beloved quarterback.
Thompson called the situation "gut-wrenching" Saturday.
"I mean, it hurts," he said. "I'm not talking about physically hurting, but the sensitivity. We understand where the fans are coming from. This is a hot-button issue that surpasses anything I've ever gone through."
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Forums
