Posts tagged BrettFavre at FanHouse - AOL Sports Blog

I always had a sneaking suspicion that Greg Olsen hated Rex Grossman's guts. Now I have confirmation:



Yeah, maybe I overstated* it a bit there in the lead; Olsen admits that the Bears would never land Brett Favre because of their NFC North rivalry with the Packers, and the second-year tight end remarks that "I think we're happy with the two guys we got."

Of course, he said it with all the conviction of Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti pledging his support for Brian Billick -- right before firing him -- but whatever. Olsen continued: "I think we have a good quarterback competition right now with Kyle and Rex, and I think the team is real comfortable with one of those two guys being the guy for us for the future."

He then added, "But, yeah, who the hell wouldn't want Favre? I mean, we could have Kyle and Rex on the field at the same time and wouldn't be as successful with Favre under center."

Okay, I definitely made up that last sentence, and to Olsen's credit, he handled the Favre-to-Chicago talk about as well as you could expect. And as he explained to First Take's Jay Crawford, given the history between these two organizations, it's ain't happening so it's not even worth discussing.

Ideally, Favre would go to an organization that was a quarterback away from making a deep postseason run. The Bears, as currently constituted, don't qualify, but there is that other NFC North team...

* overstated = lied

As you can't have enough Brett Favre news that is opined out of someone's rear end, Bill Williamson of ESPN recently wrote a list of the top potential destinations for the questionably retired quarterback. The alliterative headline of his piece reads: "Ravens, Texans, Bucs finer fits for Favre." Why the Texans?

The Texans are on the verge of good things, but they are not exactly settled at quarterback. Sage Rosenfels is waiting in the wings should Matt Schaub have issues. If Favre were available, then Texans coach Gary Kubiak, a quarterback lover, would be tempted."

I guess it is nice for Williamson to acknowledge that the Texans are a team with potential, but his one paragraph synopsis of the Texans quarterback situation and Kubiak's thought processes is way off.

The Texans salary cap situation is a little tight, and I just don't see the Texans wanting to spend their money on an old distracting quarterback rental. The Texans quarterback situation is one of the stronger positions on the team, so why would they throw money at that when they have other needs? Too bad Favre isn't a cornerback.

Hmm. Apparently Phil Simms was against Brett Favre's retirement before he was for it. Two years ago, during Favre Retirement Scenario No. 4, Simms had this to say during a radio appearance: "Play as long as you can. When you think it's over, play another or two years . . . because life after football, it's forever."

And that's exactly what Favre did, until he officially retired earlier this spring. Now, a few months later, something's afoot. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel caught up with Simms to get his thoughts now that speculation has Favre still wanting to play. Again:

"Just my opinion, I hope he stays retired," Simms said, referring to Favre. "He'll get over it, the fact that he is not playing. For the Green Bay Packers, I think they have moved on. If they had to give you an answer since he said he was retired, I believe their answer would be, go ahead let him stay retired. We're moving on and let's see what's in the future for them and for the new quarterback.

In the middle of Peter King's informative look at what's going to happen with the Packers and Brett Favre, he dropped in this nugget which should frighten Packers fans and give Vikings fans plenty of reasons to hope for a Favre return.

Overwhelmingly the team that makes the most sense to sign Favre for a couple of years is Minnesota. The Vikings are training Tarvaris Jackson to be their quarterback of the future, but he's an unproven commodity with promise at best. Their offensive coordinator is Darrell Bevell, who was Favre's quarterback coach for three years, from 2003-05. They have a close relationship. Not Steve Mariucci-Favre close, but Favre has a lot of respect for him. Imagine Favre in purple. It's an absolutely vomitous scenario for the Packers, imagining Favre playing for their arch-rivals -- and imagining Favre charging out of the tunnel at Lambeau Field for the opening game of the 2008 season. Lambeau Field, Monday Night Football, the night Favre was supposed to have his number retired for the Packers.

Obviously, if the Packers decide to release Favre to get out from under his $12 million cap hit, the Vikings should be calling him immediately. Offensively, the only real questions with this team are whether Tarvaris Jackson is ready to lead them to the playoffs. Give Adrian Peterson, Chester Taylor and Bernard Berrian Brett Favre and watch the points pile up. Minnesota is a team that was on the cusp of the playoffs last year with horrendous quarterback play and a mediocre pass rush, adding Favre and Jared Allen would make the Vikes a legitimate Super Bowl contender.

So does Brett Favre want to play football again? And if so do the Packers want him? The answers seem right now to be "maybe" and "probably not."

The latest report comes from the Milwaukee TV station WTMJ, via the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: Favre sent a text message to Packers general manager Ted Thompson on Saturday, but instead of engaging Favre in a discussion, Thompson replied that he was on vacation, and the two would have to talk later.

I'd think Thompson would take a few minutes out from his vacation to talk to a guy who has done more for the franchise than anyone since Vince Lombardi, but apparently not. Anyway, we don't know what the content of the text was, but the implication is that Favre wants to talk about a possible comeback, while Thompson wants to talk about nothing of the sort.

My money is still on stay retired, but this story isn't over.

How the latest episode in the never-ending Brett Favre saga ends up is anybody's guess, but just in case he somehow makes his way back to Green Bay (even though Peter King doesn't see it happening), you have nothing to worry about, Cowboys fans.

At least according to the Dallas Morning News' Jean-Jacques Taylor.

If you cheer for the Dallas Cowboys, then you want Brett Favre wearing a Green Bay Packers uniform this season.

That's because he's one of the most overrated, overhyped, good quarterbacks of this generation

Such sentiments should go over well in Wisconsin. Of course, Packers fans could soon be directing their ire at general manager Ted Thompson if the organization chooses to part ways with the future Hall of Famer.

Taylor readily admits that Favre is an excellent player but points out that he's "as capable of throwing the game-winning touchdown pass as he was the gut-wrenching interception." And look no further than Favre's last NFL pass (to date) for proof.

Fair enough, but it's hard to argue that the Packers aren't a better team with Favre under center than the unproven Aaron Rodgers. And since the Packers won 13 times last season and have virtually the same team intact for '08, they would naturally be among the favorites in the NFC to make it back to the Super Bowl, right?

Sure, the Cowboys could beat a Favre-led Packers team, but Taylor makes him out to be more Vinny Testaverde or Drew Bledsoe than the guy who threw 28 touchdowns last season. But this is all conjecture, of course, because Favre's happily retired.

Peter King of Sports Illustrated has had a long, close relationship with Brett Favre, so when King writes that Favre wants to play in the NFL again, that's an indication that Favre is telling the people close to him that he wants to play in the NFL again.

And this is what King writes today:

what I can tell you for sure is this: No. 4 wants to play football again, and the Green Bay Packers desperately do not want him to.

Will he play? I don't know. I don't think he knows. He has, however, told coach Mike McCarthy he wants to return.

So where do the Packers and Favre go from here? According to King, Favre's agent will send the Packers a letter asking them to take him off the NFL's reserve/retired list. By NFL rule, the Packers have no right to keep a player on the retired list if he has said he doesn't want to be on it, so then they'd have to either put him back on their roster or release him.

That doesn't mean Favre is coming back. It just means that, if King is right, he doesn't want to completely rule out coming back. Which means we're not done talking about this.

On Thursday, ProFootballTalk.com posted word that Brett Favre's agent, Bus Cook, was floating the idea that his client would love to play for the Panthers. The Rock Hill Herald's Darin Gantt had to take time out from his Fourth of July preparations to shoot down the rumor, because, no matter where Favre may or may not want to play in 2008, Carolina is very happy with their current quarterback, Jake Delhomme.

And yesterday, we heard from pithy Panthers general manager Marty Hurney: "I don't know where these things come from." This motivated PFT's Mike Florio to give an impromptu lesson in child development:

Well, Marty, here's how it works. Human beings have vocal cords. At a point roughly between 18 and 30 months of age, human beings begin using their vocal cords to articulate words. By the time we reach adulthood, we use them all the freakin' time.

In this case, "these things" came from Cook using those vocal cords to talk to other people about Favre's desire to play for the Panthers.

So there you have it.

I'm pretty sure Hurney understands how these things work. That he chose not to comment on them hardly seems surprising since, you know, honesty is the best policy except when you're an NFL general manager. Either way, whatever Hurney knows doesn't change the fact that Delhomme's still the Panthers' starting quarterback.

It only makes sense; word on the street is that Brett Favre is mulling a re-comeback, and even though he sorta denies it, speculation runs rampant. Not so much among the 32 NFL franchises and Aaron Rodgers, but the newspapers that cover each of these teams (and, of course, the blogs that follow the newspapers that cover these teams).

Earlier today, I mentioned that the Dolphins should Just Say No to Favre, even though, to my knowledge, there has never been any discussion about the future Hall of Famer heading to South Beach. But, then again, I thought Randy Moss would catch 10 passes last season in New England.

In addition to the Dolphins, writers from papers that cover two of Green Bay's NFC North division rivals have also gotten in on the mix. Yep, the Bears and Vikings are both teams in need of a 38-year-old wily veteran who just doesn't know what it means to quit. Ever.

First, Rick Morrissey of the Chicago Tribune:

We're three days into Brett Favre Watch '08 and the speculation continues. In yesterday's Palm Beach Post, Greg Stoda writes that the Dolphins shouldn't even think about making a deal for Favre.

Huh. I didn't know Miami was interested. Sure, they don't have much experience at quarterback, but Bill Parcells is trying to get younger, and the draft picks it would take to acquire Favre would be at odds with that roster-building philosophy. But what if the Dolphins traded a player currently on the team? Stoda advises us to perish the thought.

Don't so much as whisper a Jason Taylor-for-Favre trade scenario. Because the Dolphins don't need - and shouldn't want - Favre.

Is he better at 38 than young bucks John Beck or Chad Henne or Josh McCown or anybody else the Dolphins might trot out this year in their endless search for a quarterback to command the position? Yes. Would he be better than anybody Miami has tried since Dan Marino was great? Almost certainly. Doesn't matter.

Stoda admits that Favre might be good for a few more wins than what Beck/McCown/Henne might provide (woo-hoo! 3-13!), but he wouldn't be the long-term solution. Fair enough, but I suspect that if the Packers trade Favre to the Dolphins (assuming he's still itchy), he'll promptly re-un-retire. For a few weeks, anyway.