# Sick of Brett Favre



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

I'm sick of hearing about the Brett Favre and the Green Bay Packers situation. If Favre wanted to continue to play he shouldn't have called it quits. I don't blame the Packers one bit for not wanting to grant him his unconditional release and I say if he wants to come back he should have to stand on the sidelines and compete for the Quarterback position. I wish this guy could just go away already. I've lost all of what little respect I had for Favre. There comes a time to step away and i think he needs to stay away from football now and do some commentary with Bradshaw and the guys over at Fox. Or maybe since John Madden Loves Favre so much maybe he can go to the broadcast booth with Madden and Micheals on Sunday Night Football or something. Frank Caliendo can do little skits of him and Madden on Sundays during Fox NFL Sunday


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

I think your anger should be directed at the media for talking about it non-stop.

If Favre wants to play again, that's his decision. I'll never begrudge someone for wanting to do something that makes them happy.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

I guess when you decide to retire, then unretire, then retire again, then unretire again,...it might just lead to some confusion, not to mention bad feelings.

The media has indeed milked this cow waaaaaaay to long and too much. ESPN is beginning to sound like the National Enquirer of sports. They actually helped fuel the fire with their "unconfirmed rumors".

As much as I have loved watching and following Brett all these years, and respected his "class act" leadership - he's plain wrong on this one. He's played his "the sky is falling" routine one too many times.

Brett - there's no "I" in team. 

Go cut your lawn and enjoy it as much as you say you always have.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

How many interceptions do you think he could throw in the first quarter of the first game before he gets benched? :lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RobertE said:


> How many interceptions do you think he could throw in the first quarter of the first game before he gets benched? :lol:


Oh boy....here we go... 

I guess we could also perhaps say "how many TDs would he have to throw in the first game to take away the starting job from Aaron"?


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I guess when you decide to retire, then unretire, then retire again, then unretire again,...it might just lead to some confusion, not to mention bad feelings.


Except for Brett's never done that. The last couple of years he didn't know whether or not he wanted to retire. Everyone kept asking him and it became a story (again the media). This is the first time he's ever retired and therefore the first time he's ever wanted to un-retire.

Many other athletes have unretired. Especially when they retire right after the previous season.

Now, do I think Brett has handled this well? Absolutely not. But, if he thinks he can play well and still has the urge to play, let him play (somewhere). I just don't see the big deal. He'll play or he won't. For the Packers or not. I'm fine either way.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

spartanstew said:


> Except for Brett's never done that. The last couple of years he didn't know whether or not he wanted to retire. Everyone kept asking him and it became a story (again the media). This is the first time he's ever retired and therefore the first time he's ever wanted to un-retire.


Uh....yes...he has...and just since January this year.

Not only do I read the Milwaukee news daily....I am from there originally...and I still have family who also follows this all closely.

I also have 2 shares of Packers stock and follow the team events beyond what the general public sees. I go to the games periodically as well when I can, and also attend the stockholders meetings about every other year. I also attended their 1996 and 1997 Superbowls. My Brett Favre signed picture and helmet sit 2 feet away as I type this. *Trust me *- I'm a fan.

But in this case, I can also see both sides, and Brett screwed up.

It has been verified that he waffled on his decision (more than twice), and now expects everyone to forget he ever said anything. The team was supposed to sit on hold, just in case he would change his mind. In fact, they gave him the chance to do just that right before the NFL draft. He then reversed his decision yet again. Things don't work out well that way.

Unfortunately for him, for the fans, and for alot of other folks - he's burned some bridges that cannot be crossed again.

Unless he eats humble pie, fesses up, and comes back as a backup in the beginning...which I highly doubt...he's going to be retired for real.


----------



## JM Anthony (Nov 16, 2003)

With everything else going on around us, you'd think everyone would have bigger fish to fry than to worry about some jerk jock who can't make up his mind about his future. I think he's a classless punk for the way he's handled this whole situation. What an egomaniac!

John


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Uh....yes...he has...and just since January this year.


I didn't realize he retired in January. I would have thought he would have at least waited until after the Superbowl.

But regardless, it makes no difference to me how many time he's retired or not retired. IMO, if someone/anyone changes their mind and wants to do something that they enjoy, I don't see why anyone would mind or get upset. If he plays for them, he plays for them. If he doesn't, he doesn't. Either way, the Packers will survive and he'll survive. The "fanatics" (your admitted fandom actually harms your viewpoint here, as most fans can't see things clearly - their emotion gets in the way) are the only ones that are loyal to a team. Players just want to play. Let 'em if they want. As I said before, should he have handled it different? Absolutely. But that doesn't matter. For whatever reason, he wants to play now. The Packers just need to let him or move him. Simple.

And I doubt his ego or class has anything to do with it. He didn't want to play and now he does. It's not that complicated.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Source after source, interview after invterview, and mutual friends (yes, I've met some Packers) all say basically the same thing. Brett is a very, very nice person. 

Yes, Brett has a strong ego; you have to have one to be QB. But that doesn't make one an egotist, egomanic, or a bad person at all. He doesn't go that far with his ego.

He also has one of the most competitive drives in all of professional sports. All QBs feel the pressure of the offense on their shoulders. That isn't ego either. It is competitive drive.

After Brett retired, we found out why he did so well this past season over previous ones. He studied film. All the time. Like never, ever before. He finally was playing smart along with his normal awesome skills. (Or finally playing up the level of his skills.)

So I understood why he wanted to retire. That is a LOT of very hard work and time away from the family--even when they live in Green Bay together.

I also understood exactly what he said. That he could play the game still--if he could commit to it. (And I also knew he'd come back at this time of year, but so would I if I could do half of what he does.) 

Is this a huge mess? Absolutely!!! Did Brett handle some parts badly? OMGosh yes! Did the Packers likewise? OMGosh yes! 

What will happen? My dad in Green Bay isn't sure yet. My personal guess is trade, but that is so weak a guess I won't be surprised by much of anything.

I know it won't be a complete release.

I'm pretty sure it won't be automatic starter.

I'm pretty sure Brett won't take backup with Rodgers as automatic starter.

It might be a shootout for starter. It might end up Brett benched. (Ouch!)

Now, time to go back to reading the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel online. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

I think after watching Brett's face grimace during the playoff game in Green Bay due to the cold weather I had to say he was feeling pain. I think he'd do a lot better somewhere else. Though his age will get him...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

spartanstew said:


> The Packers just need to let him (go) or move him. Simple.
> 
> And I doubt his ego or class has anything to do with it. He didn't want to play and now he does. It's not that complicated.


Actually its very complicated...since we're talking about more than just Brett's position with the team, let alone the team's future plans as a whole.

His waffling is what made this all complicated.


Tom Robertson said:


> Source after source, interview after invterview, and mutual friends (yes, I've met some Packers) all say basically the same thing. Brett is a very, very nice person.
> 
> Yes, Brett has a strong ego; you have to have one to be QB. But that doesn't make one an egotist, egomanic, or a bad person at all. He doesn't go that far with his ego.
> 
> ...


As Tom correctly pointed out....Brett is known as a very nice guy. But if you keep tabs on the local feedback on all this, including about 12 polls the past few days along on local TV and radio (as well as the local paper in Milwaukee) its almost 50-50 in terms of those supporting him now and those who just want him to hang up the cleats and be quiet.

Tom's summation in blue above (I highlighted this) is dead on, and points out just how complicated this has all become. We now have breakdowns in the communication channels, hurt feelings, and the like on both sides. Even Brett himself admits how "tough things must be for Aaron (Rodgers) with all this going on".

In any case....it would be easy to play Monday quarterback and say Brett should have made up his mind and stuck with it, or else changed his mind and stuck with it...unfortunately...neither happened....so here we are.

Tom and I happened to share our passion for the Green and Gold, and I suspect we share out need for a few extra Tums these days about all this.

It kinda reminds me of the dilemma over Joe Montana getting traded after all those glory years in S.F. to the Chiefs. Perhaps that may happen in the end with Brett (some team anyway via a trade). The idea of him in another uniform makes me ill. That comes from any fan and about any player they have supported for 15+ years.

The only good is that one way or another, we'll know what's up in less than 2 weeks when team camp starts....rosters have to start to be reviewed for trimming soon thereafter.

If there's any way to make Brett and the Pack whole in all this, that's the path I'd like to see.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

What always bugs me are the athletes that sign multi million dollar contracts and then when they want to change the terms mid contract they make a big stink about how the owners are unfair. They signed the deal, took the money and need to live by the contract and if it says Green Bay has the rights for Brett then he needs to just live with it.


----------



## Jhorwitz (Sep 14, 2005)

Couldn't agree more. Great to see him doing more to hurt the Packers than the Bears have done since his arrival (the last few years excepted, of course).


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

I'm not sick of Favre and I was disappointed when he decided to retire. But, when he made that decision, his team moved forward bringing the next guy in line up to start as QB. Now, he's having second thoughts (again) but the team has already moved on. And, fortunately or unfortunately, the Packers aren't going to release him or trade him because he's still good enough that they don't want to have to play against him. 

As much as I'd like to see him play again, he made a decision at the end of last season with which he'll have to live.


----------



## bigwad (Oct 19, 2006)

Packer fan first, Favre second. I don't like the way he's handled this and the Packers are showing a lot of class in my opinion by not throwing the sentimental crap out there for the media to rehash over and over. The pack has to protect its interest. Minnesota would love to have him, but that ain't gonna happen, I hope! I would love to see Rogers get a fair shot with Favre there in case, but that ain't gonna happen either. Favre was given ample opportunity to return or not, in most of our cases, if you retire or quit your job, that's it!


----------



## steve053 (May 11, 2007)

From what I've heard and read the Packers board of directors is not very happy w/ Brett and they are standing behind Thompson (fyi - there is no single owner of the Packers, and the board of directors act on behalf of the shareholders). Thompson's current stance is we're not trading Brett and he can return as a backup to Rodgers.

Brett's stated that he wants to start for the Packers, but I'm guessing that he would rather start for another team that has a legit chance at post season play. He definitely won't be traded to a team that doesn't have that chance.

Part of Brett's problem is his current contract. He's due over $11M, and there aren't many teams with that much cap room. The Packers are in a unique position that they could reabsorb his contract and still field basically the same team.

I think there are only 4 possible outcomes:

1 - Brett comes back as a Packer starter and Rogers sits the pine.
2 - Brett comes back as a Packer starter, Rogers is traded, Brian Brohm is the new heir apparent.
3 - Brett comes back to training camp, the Packers hold firm w/ Rodgers and insist that Brett is the backup. Brett retires.
4 - At some point Buss Cook works a deal w/ another team for a trade. The Packers trade Brett. The Packers end up w/ 2-3 draft picks as compensation. Tampa and Gruden might be a fit.

I'm thinking that 2 and 4 are the most likely scenarios, with #4 being my guess as of today.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

bigwad said:


> in most of our cases, if you retire or quit your job, that's it!


I don't think that's actually true. Most of the people I know that have retired would have been welcomed back to their former companies if they had wanted to. Now, quitting could be different, depending on the circumstances.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

steve053 said:


> From what I've heard and read the Packers board of directors is not very happy w/ Brett and they are standing behind Thompson (fyi - there is no single owner of the Packers, and the board of directors act on behalf of the shareholders). Thompson's current stance is we're not trading Brett and he can return as a backup to Rodgers.


We'll know more after the next stockholders meeting, which is at Lambeau Field (again) this year next week on July 24th (I don't think I'll make it this year, but did the past 2 of them) -- interesting enough - that meeting is just before the team camp opens a few days later...all of this will sort itself out one way or the other quite soon.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

spartanstew said:


> I don't think that's actually true. Most of the people I know that have retired would have been welcomed back to their former companies if they had wanted to. Now, quitting could be different, depending on the circumstances.


Welcomed back, perhaps... but not at the position you retired from. I posted in another thread about this. If your boss retires, then you are trained and promoted to manager... if your boss decided to un-retire they couldn't just put him back in place and demote you again.

I think in Favre's case, it would be fine if he and the team can work a trade that he is happy with... but otherwise, he is pretty much stuck with his retirement and being backup to Aaron Rogers IF he decides to return and stays with Green Bay. That would still put some unfair pressure on Rogers, but at least his success/failure will be in his own hands as long as the team doesn't put him on a short leash with Favre looking over his shoulder.

Bottom line for me... I wish Favre hadn't retired... but he did, and not only that but was pretty clear that his heart wasn't in it 100% anymore... and that was something I could respect. But if he now has 2nd thoughts, that may be understandable but he has to live with the consequences of his actions.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Bottom line for me... I wish Favre hadn't retired... but he did, and not only that but was pretty clear that his heart wasn't in it 100% anymore... and that was something I could respect. But if he now has 2nd thoughts, that may be understandable but he has to live with the consequences of his actions.


I agree 100%


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

spartanstew said:


> I agree 100%


PLUS ONE.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

If they were sick *last week*...by now....some of these folks must be *really *enjoying their daily doses of updates....  :lol:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

If he were "100% committed to playing football", why didn't he request reinstatement? I'm confused. (Or maybe he is.)

Still a sad situation, he's put himself in. I hope the best for him and even better for the Packers. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## MrMojoJojo (May 23, 2008)

Honestly, as far as this whole situation is concerned I say this:

Go ahead Favre, come back. Have fun with it. But take a page from the REAL greatest QB to ever play. His number was 16 and his last name was a state.

He knew he didn't have much left and still wanted to go out with a bit of a bang. He could have stayed with his team from the Bay and showed up everyone, or let everyone down by not playing to his former glory. So what did he do? He said "hey, lets give some of these new guys the glory and let them have their chance to shine. I'm gonna go play for the Chiefs."

That season was nowhere near his peak or even the middle of the mountain for what he had done in the past, but he still got to play his last year that he wanted to, and let everyone else on his former team not worry about standing in the Great One's immense shadow.


I really hope that made as much sense to you all as it did in my head.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

I suspect we'll all know what's up with Brett's future playing plans in a couple more days at the most.

1) He files for reinstatement and is immediately traded
2) He files for reinstatement and accepts the backup job, with the idea that if Aaron flops...
3) He stays retired

Door #1 is the most painful for him and the Packers (and any fans he may have left out there)

Door #2 is the most painful to Aaron Rodgers

Door #3 is the most painful to Brett

I bet the Las Vegas odsmakers are having some fun with all this...


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

My money would be on Door #3. 

I don't see Brett as someone who likes to sit on the bench and play second string to anyone nor do I see the Packers trading him or wanting to do him any favors.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

fluffybear said:


> My money would be on Door #3.
> 
> I don't see Brett as someone who likes to sit on the bench and play second string to anyone nor do I see the Packers trading him or wanting to do him any favors.


I believe Door #1 and Door #2 are in play. In response to Brett telling Ted Thompson Thrusday in a call that he intended to report to camp today, the GM told Brett to give him "a few extra days to resolve the issues".

There would be nothing to resolve with Door #3.

The idea of seeing Brett wearing one of those ugly Jets helmets is nausiating...but not out of the question for possibilities as of today...we won't have long to wait and find out what will really happen.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Did I miss something? Did he file for reinstatement? If not, then how can he report to training camp if he is still retired? Seems like he needs to be reinstated before he can do anything else officially.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Did I miss something? Did he file for reinstatement? If not, then how can he report to training camp if he is still retired? Seems like he needs to be reinstated before he can do anything else officially.


Doesn't sound like you've missed anything. 

He hasn't filed his official retirement papers. (At least as of this morning.)

He accepted (not sure how formal that is) the Packers listing him as retired.

He hasn't filed for reinstatement, tho he claims he's 100% committed to football again. (I really don't get this, myself.)

He can't be accepted at training camp even if he reports until his reinstatement is accepted by the NFL head office. (Very much expected to be instantaneous, tho they can take up to 10 days or even turn it down.)

He also needs to pass a physical, likely another formality.

He has decided to let the Packers work on this before trying to show up at the training camp, where I bet he'd have to suffer the indignity of being turned away without papers. (Have I mentioned that I still don't get that he hasn't filed for reinstatement?)

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

MrMojoJojo said:


> Honestly, as far as this whole situation is concerned I say this:
> 
> Go ahead Favre, come back. Have fun with it. But take a page from the REAL greatest QB to ever play. His number was 16 and his last name was a state.
> 
> ...


It made sense to me. Joe Montana was the greatest QB ever in the NFL, honestly I cannot stand Favre, I never could, he was always the media's little golden boy, but I have a lot of respect for him. Payton Manning on the other hand, I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Favre pretty much made his decision and now he needs to live with that, or go play else ware. If he does come back and play for another team I hope he doesn't do what some players do. Sign a one day contract with the Packers just so he can retire a Packer. That would be a huge slap in the face to Green Bay fans.


----------



## bobkvjr (Aug 4, 2007)

What I dont get is why with 2 years remaining on his contract with GB, everyone thinks he should be let go and GB is left eat the 12million/yr salary cap hit? If this was T.O. everyone would say"Oh, just honor your contract". GB has him under contract for 2 more years, and they may trade his contract to whom ever they please. It is kind of like Jake Plummber being traded from Denver to Tampa Bay. He did not want to play for Tampa and had to pay back money to Tampa from his signing bonus, which was orginally paid by Denver. I beleive that GB has more of an upper hand in this respect due to the player being under contract. Case closed.


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Did I miss something? Did he file for reinstatement? If not, then how can he report to training camp if he is still retired? Seems like he needs to be reinstated before he can do anything else officially.


I just heard on the radio that GM wanting a "few days to work things out" may be to trade him to Jets or Tampa Bay. In my opinion, Favre could take a bad-to-mediocre team to greatness so, hopefully, this is what happens. I, for one, would love to see him get a chance to play a couple more seasons so maybe this would be best for all.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

bobkvjr said:


> What I dont get is why with 2 years remaining on his contract with GB, everyone thinks he should be let go and GB is left eat the 12million/yr salary cap hit? If this was T.O. everyone would say"Oh, just honor your contract". GB has him under contract for 2 more years, and they may trade his contract to whom ever they please. It is kind of like Jake Plummber being traded from Denver to Tampa Bay. He did not want to play for Tampa and had to pay back money to Tampa from his signing bonus, which was orginally paid by Denver. I beleive that GB has more of an upper hand in this respect due to the player being under contract. Case closed.


GB won't take a salary cap hit if he's released. All his bonus money has been accounted for already. And the rest of his salary is conditional therefor no salary cap hit--

Unless the Packers hold him to his contract and keep him. And the Packers have plenty of room to do that. But aren't interested in the distraction that would be.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## tberg73 (Aug 6, 2007)

You all might be sick of brett favre and the packers situation, but most of you don't understand a thing..

1. He has signed his reinstatement papers but has not faxed them in to the commissioners office because, he then goes back on the packers active roster and can be subjected to $15,000 a day fines for not being at training camp, he can be traded to team he doesn't want to play for and then they would have his rights and would have to retire again and the new team could go after prorated signing bonus money do to him from the original contract he signed( example jake plummer and tampa bay) The packers could have gone after that money when he retired but let the 45 days expire. If he reinstated that 45 day clock goes back to zero for the new team. Once he goes back to the active roster his $12 million salary goes back on the packers book, the packers don't want that on the books right now until they know what they're going to do.

2. He has only retired once in his career, March 4th 2008

3. He asked Ted thompson to be allowed to compete for the job at training camp and was told no. 

4. If the packers don't think Brett favre is any good anymore and aaron rodgers is better than release brett and have him go anywhere he wants. If he's not good enough to play for you than he shouldn't be good enough to play for anyone and beat you. Stand behind your convictions and let him go. Trade him to a team he wants and get a draft pick and see what happens.

5. In the last month Favre himself has spoken publicly twice on this subject. One with greta on fox news and one with peter king of S.I. , So blame the media for all the talk and articles. It's not like favre is going on tv everyday.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

wow, tberg73, thems mighty strong words. Seems like many of us understand lots of things...


1) The $15k/day started yesterday. He's been in this limbo for longer than that. Lots longer. If he wanted reinstatement to be traded or release, he should have filed immediately. (And does the signed papers matter if they aren't faxed/mailed/overnited or otherwise not delivered?) 

2) He has only retired once. And sorta un-retired several times. And sorta not un-retired several times. About time he made up his mind...

3) He asked Ted Thompson too late. He has been welcomed to join the team. He chooses not to.

4) Release? If he thinks he has value, do you expect any team would just release him? 

4)b The Packers are not saying he is not any good. They are even willing to pay him $12M this year to be on the team. And welcomed. His choice to dishonor his contract--after extolling so many other players to honor theirs.

And yes, trade talks appear to be in the works. 

All in all, a very, very sad time in Brett's career. The first time he's really shown that Team does not come first. That he can act like a Super-Diva (note, I'm not ready to say he is one, but that he can act like one from time to time.)

And I am a huge Packer fan. Grew up in Green Bay. Have never left my team as I've moved into other areas. So I follow this situation too. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## tberg73 (Aug 6, 2007)

He chooses not to show up, He called Ted Thompson on saturday night to tell him he was coming to camp sunday morning and he was sending his reinstatement papers to the league office.. Ted told him you can't come, I'll get fired. Please give me a couple of days to work something out before you come & send in your papers. Doesn't sound to me like he was choosing not to go. 

Filing the papers is a five minute process sign em, fax em and once they arrive at Rogers G's office desk, he is reinstated. He should of sent them in weeks ago if he wanted to be traded/released. 1. once he reinstates the team can then trade him to anybody they want and he has to report or retire again. If he is still on the retired/reserve list he can tell them if you trade me to that team(miami) I will not unretire. No one would give that kind of leverage away. 2. he doesn't have to be reinstated to be released, the packers still hold his rights for three years, they can release those rights whenever they want.

And no they our not willing to pay him $12 million to be a back up and cause all this commotion, They are willing to have him sit at home and if aaron gets hurt to come back. But the packers don't want him to send in his papers and go back on the payroll, they don't want to pay him sitting at home because they don't want him at camp to cause a big circus, they would be locking him out of camp. Hence why brett has talked to Roger Godell twice in the last two days to be a mediator between the two.

I have been a season ticket holder for 21 years now since my grandpa died and have been very close to the Favre family for about 12 years since the super bowl in N.O. I love both the team and Favre the same.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Don't know how close you are to the Favre family, I am not at all. So I can only go by what has happened and what has been said in public.

He did not file the papers. The articles sounded as if the League office would be closed on Sunday, so if he waited until saturday nite, he was too late. If he was really committed to football 100%, he really needed to file those paper shortly after he became committed. Anything else doesn't make sense to me. (I am willing to be edumacated, but to be released, to be traded, or to be in football in any playing capacity sounds like they needed filing.)

I too love the team and what Brett has done for the NFL, the packers, and sports in general. This short time will pass, but it is a disappointment how he's played his part. 

I'm not sure enough of the Packers performance here as to how disappointed I should be with them.

And I'm sure misunderstandings play a huge part of all this. I knew on March 4 that Brett would be back. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Excellent article about Brett and the Packers in today's Peter King Monday Morning Quarterback article for Sports Illustrated.

Starts with 10 Things He Thinks He Knows about the situation.

Basic point--this will be ugly.
Second basic point--this will be very ugly.
Third basic point--Brett will not be released.

(Did I mention that this will get very ugly?) 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## steve053 (May 11, 2007)

tberg73 said:


> You all might be sick of brett favre and the packers situation, but most of you don't understand a thing....
> 
> 5. In the last month Favre himself has spoken publicly twice on this subject. One with greta on fox news and one with peter king of S.I. , So blame the media for all the talk and articles. It's not like favre is going on tv everyday.


And if you believe that then you might not understand everything as well. Leaks and comments from his agent, brother, mother, and personal reporter (Al Jones), have been going on for several months now. And let's not forget the famous "Rumor" text from Brett to the media. Brett may have a lot of Southern charm, but he isn't a hick. He definitely knows how to get his side of the story out.


----------



## steve053 (May 11, 2007)

tberg73 said:


> He chooses not to show up, He called Ted Thompson on saturday night to tell him he was coming to camp sunday morning and he was sending his reinstatement papers to the league office.. Ted told him you can't come, I'll get fired....


:scratch: Why would TT get fired if Brett showed up for camp on Monday? That makes absolutely no sense at all.

I'm sure that TT doesn't want the media circus, or to put his coach and players in a position where they have to side with Brett or the Team. That's a complete no win situation for the Packers.

Brett knows this, but he also knows that TT may just be willing to eat Brett's contract and let him ride the pine as a backup. If Brett comes to camp without giveing TT an option, then Brett has no real options and the last move is up to TT. Brett can ***** and moan in the press, but that just makes him look bad (and Brett is very aware of his public image).

By staying out of camp, leaking to the media he might be comming Tuesday or Wednesday, Brett keeps the spotlight on TT and the Packers.

If Brett reports to the Packers it means there is definitely a trade that is agreeable to Brett and the Packers; OR Brett has an assurance that he is the Packer's starter for the year. I'd bet on the former, not the latter of the two.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

I think I can read some sense in to the TT statement about "being fired". It very well might have been a semi-humorous hyperbole that isn't really what he really feels; or it could be a Brett projection of what TT really did say. (Or some mixture of both.)

My frustration is Brett "seems" to understand this is a business decision, yet is also "seems" to be unwilling to do his part of the business work:
1) filing the reinstatement papers. Why the delay? Any delay signals he's not really ready to play as far as I can tell.
2) listing teams he's willing to play for and therefore assist in the trading process.
3) PR about the situation. He's done some good work, but somehow when it was announced he was "demanding a release" was very poorly done. He might not have demanded, he might have suggested; what I mean is he let control get out of his hand so the perception became he demanded.
4) PR thru Greta Van Sustern also had its good points and bad. Don't burn bridges that control your destiny. (Generally speaking don't burn them afterwards either, but certainly not while they still control.) 

Now before I forget this VERY important point, I do not know how much Bus Cook, Brett's agent might be helping or hurting in this situation. Brett may have been ready to work with the Packers at the right times (like filing papers, giving a list of teams, etc) and Cook might have mucked it all up thinking that would help things. I just don't now. Tho Peter King's article, talking straight with Brett on Saturday when a lot of this latest unfolded, seems to imply Brett's unwillingness to supply a list of teams...

Very unfortunate, and very likely to be forgotten--at some point. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I'm sure there are lots of things we don't know from both camps... but here are things that we do know:

1. Favre retired earlier this year, and in his press conference specifically made a point of saying no one had pressured him to retire and that he just wasn't 100% committed to it.

2. Favre says he is 100% committed to football now, and that he was pressured to retire, but he also has not filed for reinstatement yet.

These two things that we definately know (words and actions from Favre himself) do not jive... so whatever else may or may not be going on, he is not helping his own credibility.

I was disappointed when he retired. I wish he had not done so... but he did, and now he's on that train which is hard to get off without backtracking on some of the things he has said.

Ultimately Favre and only Favre at this point is in control of his retirement, because he can file for reinstatement and must before anything else can happen. If he is trying to play negotiation games and will not come out of retirement unless he gets what he wants, then it is hard to say he is 100% committed to football since he apparently would rather stay retired than come back without full control.


----------



## bobkvjr (Aug 4, 2007)

Favre, Brett

Year Team ___ Base Salary Sign Bonus Other Bonus Total Salary Cap Value Position 
2007 Packers $ 11,000,000 $ 0 $ 480 $ 11,000,480 $ 11,800,480 QB 
2006 Packers $ 7,000,000 $ 0 $ 3,000,990 $ 10,000,990 $ 12,634,325 QB 
2005 Packers $ 6,500,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 9,500,000 $ 10,133,333 QB 
2004 Packers $ 5,500,000 $ 1,200,000 $ 1,801,000 $ 8,501,000 $ 9,534,333 QB 
2003 Packers $ 4,300,000 $ 0 $ 1,600,800 $ 5,900,800 $ 9,159,133 QB 
2002 Packers $ 750,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 720 $ 2,150,720 $ 5,957,706 QB 
2001 Packers $ 477,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 880 $ 5,484,866 $ 5,484,866 QB 
2000 Packers $ 450,000 $ 3,173,700 $ 600 $ 3,624,300 $ 3,624,200 QB

3/2/2001: Signed a ten-year, $100 million contract. The deal included a $10 million signing bonus.
2008: $12 million, 
2009: $13 million, 
2010: $14 million, 
2011: Free Agent

ABC interview Mar 3, 2001
"I couldn't envision myself playing with another team," Favre said. "Don't want to. If that was to ever come up, I probably would just retire. I've made enough money to where I don't need to jump ship and go somewhere else. It was just important to me to stay here."

Favre has two years left on his contract at an average of about $12.5 million per season. The Packers placed him on the reserve-retired list in the spring so his salary does not now count toward the cap.

NFL Contract & Collective Bargaining Agreement

http://nflplayers.com/user/template.aspx?fmid=181&lmid=231&pid=708&type=c
Appendix C
16. EXTENSION. Unless this contract specifically provides otherwise, if Player becomes a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or any other country, *or retires from professional football *as an active player, or otherwise fails or refuses to perform his services under this contract, then this contract will be tolled between the date of Player's induction into the Armed Forces, or his retirement, or his failure or refusal to perform, and the later date of his return to professional football. During the period this contract is tolled, Player will not be entitled to any compensation or benefits. On Player's return to professional football, the term of this contract will be extended for a period of time equal to the number of seasons (to the nearest multiple of one) remaining at the time the contract was tolled. The right of renewal, if any, contained in this contract will remain in effect until the end of any such extended term.

ARTICLE XXIV
http://nflplayers.com/user/template.aspx?fmid=181&lmid=231&pid=612&type=c

(f) Traded Contracts. 
(i) In the event that a Player Contract is assigned to another NFL Team, either by trade or pursuant to the NFL's waiver procedure, the assignee Team will count as part of its Team Salary only that portion of the player's Salary which remains unpaid and for which the Team may be obligated. The assignor Team will continue to count as part of its Team Salary only that portion of the player's Salary which has already been paid by the Team and/or any Salary for which the Team remains obligated. 
(ii) A Club is not required to have Room to execute a Player Contract with a player to whom the Club has exclusive negotiating rights if the player is assigned to another Club via a trade on the same business day as the execution of the contract, and the assignee Club has or makes Room for such Player Contract.


----------



## jazzyd971fm (Sep 1, 2007)

HDMe said:


> Seems like he needs to be reinstated before he can do anything else officially.


Finally, the real show begins. This should have been done a while ago http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3509944


----------



## braven (Apr 9, 2007)

I'm not sick of Bret Favre, but I am sick of the story.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Let the games begin, uh, continue...


----------



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

Another Reason to hate Brett Favre is this. I like what Jeff Garcia said down in Tampa Bay. He Basically Said he is the Quarterback in Tampa and rightfully so. What is Brett Favre thinking here? If he goes anywhere else he's going to have to compete for the Quarterback position. What does he think is going to do? Waltz into some other teams locker room and be there starter? I say HELL No and This should be a reason for every teams Quarterback to work extra hard this year and not let this guy take over some other team. Favre Crapped in his own nest I am afraid and now he is going to have to lay in it. He is the one who cried Tears as big as Horse Turds and said he was retiring and Now he wants to return. Well Booo Hooo To You Brett Favre. You should stay retired. The Packers have moved on and you should move on to. There Comes a Time to walk away and now is that time. Just be gone already! I've lost all respect for the man known as Brett Favre.


----------



## Gonesouth (Dec 26, 2007)

So the man changed his mind. We all can admit that he loves the game and realized that he still has the fire in his gut. Do you really think that Rogers is better than Brett? Please!

EGO? I sure hope so! He is the leader of a NFL team. I sure do hope he thinks that way. Have you ever met a fighter pilot? You think Brett has a ego problem?

Here we are now. Papers signed and on the comish desk. Now we wait for GB to decide. They will have to trade him now because of the teams stance with starting Rogers. He will play for a year or two more than retire a Packer. Why not? Another famous QB did it. What was his name? Oh that's right, that Montana guy.

I am a Packer fan. Fell in love with them about 12 years ago. I love the tradition and the whole Green Bay Experience. Some day I will go to a game. I would rather go to see a Packer game than go to the HOF.

Let's not get caught up with the media and just be thankful that we get to see him start one more time. To bounce up after being sacked and giving the D-man a high five for job well down. He is a player!

*GO PACK GO*


----------



## bigwad (Oct 19, 2006)

Who knows if Rogers is better than Favre? He has not had much of a chance to prove himself. I have always loved the Packers and Favre. But, he hasn't done much the last few years, except last year, of course. BUT, he throws a STUPID interception that cost the Pack a Super Bowl appearance. Maybe Rogers would have had enough SENSE NOT to force that idiotic throw. Let's give him a chance and see wha he can do. And having Favre as his backup would be ridiculous! And the way Favre has handled this situation, the whining and crying would be a WHOLE lot WORSE than it is now. Talk about Favre being a team player? Give me a break!


----------



## ziggy29 (Nov 18, 2004)

If Favre wants to play, I suspect all he has to do is allow himself to be traded outside the NFC North. Seems like he has his mind set on playing for the Vikes or the Bears, and I can't fault the Pack one bit for not being willing to trade him within the division.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Gonesouth said:


> So the man changed his mind. We all can admit that he loves the game and realized that he still has the fire in his gut. Do you really think that Rogers is better than Brett? Please!
> 
> EGO? I sure hope so! He is the leader of a NFL team. I sure do hope he thinks that way. Have you ever met a fighter pilot? You think Brett has a ego problem?
> 
> ...


Well said.

And I hope you get to a Packer game in Lambeau; an awesome place to see football done right. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## CapeCodder (Mar 19, 2008)

Favre should give it up. He's past his prime, but like many others before
him, he can't face it. He certainly doesn't need the money, but it's hard to
walk away from all the attention. My view is he should go now while his
reputation is still intact as a great player rather than piling up
mediocre results and have the fans remember him as a has-been.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Gonesouth said:


> So the man changed his mind. We all can admit that he loves the game and realized that he still has the fire in his gut. Do you really think that Rogers is better than Brett? Please!


Changing his mind is not the problem... the problem is the cascading problems that come from that. I've said it before... Would you feel the same way if your manager retired, you were promoted to head of the department, then 5 months later your old boss decided to un-retire? If he was a better boss than you, you would happily accept the demotion right?

Somehow I think not.

The problem here really is not Favre retiring... but the team moved onward, THEN he changed his mind and expects to just go back to where he left off. It can't work that way because the team had to move forward... and you can't undo things like that with a wave of your hand.

You can't even say "let him compete with Rodgers" for the job... again, what if your old boss comes back and the company says "each of you take a project and whoever does the best will be the boss"... that's just not fair competition.

Whatever else is or isn't going on... Favre did retire, and did say he was done. Now he's changed his mind, and that's ok... but there are still consequences and he has no right to expect status quo.

I keep saying it... I wish he hadn't retired... but he did.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

I suspect we'll all know how this story ends very soon....perhaps Friday.


----------



## CapeCodder (Mar 19, 2008)

Green Bay has a Farve problem, and here in Boston we have a Ramirez problem. Both have placed themselves above their teams and fans. I have an idea, let's send Brett to Frankfurt of the NFL-Europe league and Manny to the Japanese Baseball League, that way we won't have to put up with either one of the prima-donnas!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

CapeCodder said:


> Green Bay has a Farve problem, and here in Boston we have a Ramirez problem. Both have placed themselves above their teams and fans. I have an idea, let's send Brett to Frankfurt of the NFL-Europe league and Manny to the Japanese Baseball League, that way we won't have to put up with either one of the prima-donnas!


I'm sure that thought has crossed both teams' minds....


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

CapeCodder said:


> Green Bay has a Farve problem, and here in Boston we have a Ramirez problem. Both have placed themselves above their teams and fans. I have an idea, let's send Brett to Frankfurt of the NFL-Europe league and Manny to the Japanese Baseball League, that way we won't have to put up with either one of the prima-donnas!


As much as I'd like to see Mr. Brett 'Ego as big as Texas' Favre deported to another country, NFL Europe ceased operations a year or two ago. What I said in my previous post holds true, after the media circus, I have no respect any more for Favre. Favre's true colors are showing and he's a pretty classless jerk. Good for the Green Bay Packers organization for backing Rodgers.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> As much as I'd like to see Mr. Brett 'Ego as big as Texas' Favre deported to another country, NFL Europe ceased operations a year or two ago.


...and your point would be? :lol:

What needs to happen is for this come to a close where each side can save a bit.

Brett has a plane waiting for him to fly up there tonight, so as I said earlier - this will come to a head in the next day or so.

He is a bit of a villian for starting all this, but the Packers need to be flexible a bit so that they don't get turned into the villian.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> He is a bit of a villian for starting all this, but the Packers need to be flexible a bit so that they don't get turned into the villian.


the pack offered him 20 million over the next 10 years to stay retired:lol: that sounds like a PR nightmare:eek2:


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

Msguy said:


> I'm sick of hearing about the Brett Favre and the Green Bay Packers 'situation'.


Ditto.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

dave29 said:


> the pack offered him 20 million over the next 10 years to stay retired:lol: that sounds like a PR nightmare:eek2:


I would prefer to use the term bribe. 

Why don't I get those offers for me to stay away from work?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

dave29 said:


> the pack offered him 20 million over the next 10 years to stay retired:lol: that sounds like a PR nightmare:eek2:


Yeah, that one leaves me quite confused. The Packers were apparently willing to pay Brett MORE to stay home over the next ten years than they would have to pay him under contract for (I believe) the next 2 years to sit on the bench and/or play.

That kind of smoke sends signals of a fire somewhere... which, as I suspected, means we still don't know really what is going on from either side.

This news does make Favre look a little better though... and the pendulum swings again.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

HDMe said:


> Yeah, that one leaves me quite confused. The Packers were apparently willing to pay Brett MORE to stay home over the next ten years than they would have to pay him under contract for (I believe) the next 2 years to sit on the bench and/or play.
> 
> That kind of smoke sends signals of a fire somewhere... which, as I suspected, means we still don't know really what is going on from either side.
> 
> This news does make Favre look a little better though... and the pendulum swings again.


Actually he's due 12 Million this year and 11 plus incentives next year...

But in a nutshell...they're ahead if he took it - that wouldn't count towards their cap anywhere near the salary.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Upon further review......

this saga is still not over. You may want to pick up some more Tums the next trip to the store. 

We now know that the "bribe" is not a bribe after all. Another example of how the media gets things wrong and then plays the public.

ESPN in particular is filling their time with the story as a back-and-forth soap opera event. In reality, when you hear the quoted comments on both sides, it doesn not appear to be that at all.

Brett wants to play, and Green Bay committed to Aaron Rodgers based on Brett;'s retirement. Green Bay is standing behind their committment based on what Brett announced publically. Simple as that.

I commend them as an organization for standing behind their committment. Brett created this situation and actually is the only one who can end it.

Can't wait to find out what *really* went on after this is finally over....soon. :eek2: :lol:


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I would prefer to use the term bribe.
> 
> Why don't I get those offers for me to stay away from work?


i wonder if they would sell 20 million worth of #4 jerseys over the next 10 years:lol:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Could you see Brett Favre's likeness being worth $20M over 10 years for the Packers? Heck yes!  

I've always been amazed at how few endorsements Brett has gone after actually. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Tom Robertson said:


> I've always been amazed at how few endorsements Brett has gone after actually.


Agreed...but then...he's not motivated all that much my the money...he's only said it (and proven it based on his salary ranking for QB's over the years) a Million times.

During his 3 MVP years, he was the #7, #4, and #6 ranked salary QB in the league....he's not even in the top 10 right now.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Agreed...but then...he's not motivated all that much my the money...he's only said it (and proven it based on his salary ranking for QB's over the years) a Million times.
> 
> During his 3 MVP years, he was the #7, #4, and #6 ranked salary QB in the league....he's not even in the top 10 right now.


Agreed... there were quite a few years there where he could (and perhaps should) have negotiated/demanded to be the highest paid quarterback in the league. He does appear to be one of the true rare breed that while certainly enjoying the money  he would play just as hard whether he was paid more or less.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

HDMe said:


> Agreed... there were quite a few years there where he could (and perhaps should) have negotiated/demanded to be the highest paid quarterback in the league. He does appear to be one of the true rare breed that while certainly enjoying the money  he would play just as hard whether he was paid more or less.


I think that this kind of attitude and his passion for playing in general despite all the things he's had to deal with personally over the years...is why he is adored by sooooo many people.

Those same things are what makes him taking the first *real and permanent* step to hang up the cleats so tough.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

My guess is that we're kinda getting sick about being sick on this topic....  

Even Goodell wants out after Monday. :lol:


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> My guess is that we're kinda getting sick about being sick on this topic....
> 
> Even Goodell wants out after Monday. :lol:


Goodell got out of it today.Favre says that he is now reinstated, and will report to Packers training camp Monday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3517219


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

To me, this makes more sense than Brett taking the marketing deal. If he wants to play (and we all know he wants to at least on Sunday ), I was surprised he even thought about the marketing plan for more than 2 minutes.

If I was the Packers and Brett, I'd schedule a press conference to get that part over with.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve615 said:


> Goodell got out of it today.Favre says that he is now reinstated, and will report to Packers training camp Monday.


Believe me I know....I knew before ESPN announced it.....the benefit of having a little bird who work at Lambeau....

It was the buzz in the hallways for hours there.

Anyone want to forecast what logo is on the helmet he is wearing for the opening Monday night game?

I bet we all know after the Press Conference tonight.

Poor Aaron....think this will change "negotiations" or "plans" with his contract (which expires at the end of this season)?


----------



## steve053 (May 11, 2007)

Well the soap opera continues:

- Friday the Pack contact the Viks about a BF trade
- ER plays poorly against the 2nd string D on Sunday night
- Brett is back in camp on Monday
- Packer press conference scheduled for late Monday night

I just wish this would finally be over.


----------



## durl (Mar 27, 2003)

I've always liked Favre. He plays a little reckless at times but you gotta love the guy's attitude. He loves to play the game. And I'll also say that I don't love the Packers but I don't hate them either. I do have lots of respect for their tradition.

I think Favre should stay retired. While I admire his drive, I believe it's a little too late for him to reconsider.

The Packers have spent months revamping their offense to Rodgers. They used draft picks on QBs when they might not have otherwise. I believe it puts the whole organization on somewhat shaky ground to suddenly shut down your entire system and be forced to revamp the offense at this point in the year.

If he had changed his mind in March or early April I might feel differently but I think the organization moved on because Favre told them to. He should let them carry out the plans that he set in motion.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

From tonight's aborted press conference: Brett Favre and Coach McCarthy started their meeting at 6PM CT tonight and have moved their team meeting to tomorrow. 

Another press conference time will be set for tomorrow as well.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## steve053 (May 11, 2007)

Was listening to one of the morning radio shows that has a segment with Jason Wilde (JW) from the WI State Journal. Jason's a pretty good beat writer for the Packers and has some good insights.

Take the following for what it's worth - my interpretation of someone else's educated speculation:

1 - JW was at last night's Packer's aborted press conference
2 - JW and another reporter hung out near the player and staff exit ramp at Lambeau field
3 - JW's take is that shortely after the Favre/MM meeting, Brett left very quickly in his Escalade. Shortly after this, MM drove by, slowed, beeped his horn and waved at the 2 reporters.
4 - After talking with others in the organizatoin JW speculates that Favre may not really want to play in GB, and that GB may not be giving Favre an equal chance to compete for the starting position.

No one really knows what's going to happen next. I think it's and educated guess to say that the starting job isn't going to be handed to Favre. Will he be in a GB uniform for the home opener (and previously scheduled #4 retirement ceremony) - that's the $1M question.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

Well,it looks like Brett will likely end up in one of two cities:
In NY with the Jets,or in Tampa,FL with the Buccaneers.
Latest info/update from the NFL site at the following link.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d809c475c&template=with-video&confirm=true


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Traded to Jets: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8381934


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

One team's media circus is another team's..........media circus.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Well said


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Why is it always a media "circus" anyway? Why not a media carnival? At a carnival there are games like shooting at targets to win a prize... and at media events someone is always taking "shots"...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

HDMe said:


> Why is it always a media "circus" anyway? Why not a media carnival? At a carnival there are games like shooting at targets to win a prive... and at media events someone is always taking "shots"...


You have a point....

But the past month or so...especially with all the self-proclaimed "experts" on ESPN in particular.....I saw alot of clowns.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Why is it always a media "circus" anyway? Why not a media carnival? At a carnival there are games like shooting at targets to win a prive... and at media events someone is always taking "shots"...


Are you channeling the late, great George Carlin? Well asked. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> Are you channeling the late, great George Carlin? Well asked.


I always liked Carlin, especially as a wordsmith. Some of his best stuff was questioning the meanings vs usage of words and ideas because he was usually spot-on.

I went with carnival over circus since I have seen clowns at a carnival, but haven't seen shooting at a circus (except for the cannon trick).

Meanwhile, back at the ranch... there has been a slight die-down of Favre news this weekend. Maybe in NY it is going hot and heavy still, but at least nationally not as much. Probably will be more after the Monday night game with Green Bay/Cincinnatti especially if Rodgers is either very good or very bad.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

We'll have to open the chat room for game time...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Tom Robertson said:


> We'll have to open the chat room for game time...


I was there.....ghost town....:eek2:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

I planned to be there--until the great grandtibber showed up. Watching the game in three rooms--depending on which she lets me stay in. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Being in the chatroom solo was truly a weird experience....at least until I started getting responses to my own posts...


----------

