Buftex Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 There are so many Favre threads, I didn't want this to get buried somewhere. Listening to Fox Sports Radio, John Fricke said that if Favre reports to Packer camp, and is reinstated, he has no power of veto over any trades... I find this hard to believe, because I don't think Favre would show up. He wants control of his destiny...anyone else here this?
lets_go_bills Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 Favre has been reinstated and will report to camp Monday. It has already been confirmed. There are also reports that it will now be an open competition for the QB job. This Favre thread probably will get buried, as it should.
Buftex Posted August 4, 2008 Author Posted August 4, 2008 Favre has been reinstated and will report to camp Monday. It has already been confirmed. There are also reports that it will now be an open competition for the QB job. This Favre thread probably will get buried, as it should. Yes sir....thanks for ignoring the content and repeating what we already know...great insight!
DrDawkinstein Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 he has an unwritten power of veto in that some teams might be interested in trading for him if he would re-do his contract. he can always stonewall that front... thats my 2 cents at least
MattyT Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 If he doesn't like his new team he could always "retire."
LongLiveRalph Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 There are so many Favre threads, I didn't want this to get buried somewhere. Listening to Fox Sports Radio, John Fricke said that if Favre reports to Packer camp, and is reinstated, he has no power of veto over any trades... I find this hard to believe, because I don't think Favre would show up. He wants control of his destiny...anyone else here this? If the Packers trade Favre, do they have any leverage in controlling what that team decides to do with him? For example, if they traded Favre to the Raiders...Could the Packers write language in the deal stating that if the Raiders then trade Favre to the Vikings, the Packers get [x] picks in the draft?
nucci Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 If the Packers trade Favre, do they have any leverage in controlling what that team decides to do with him? For example, if they traded Favre to the Raiders...Could the Packers write language in the deal stating that if the Raiders then trade Favre to the Vikings, the Packers get [x] picks in the draft? They could, but no team would trade for a player with the condition that they can not trade him eventually.
lets_go_bills Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 Yes sir....thanks for ignoring the content and repeating what we already know...great insight! No, thank YOU. Perhaps you ought to read before you post. You stated IF Favre reports and IF he is reinstated. But he already said he WILL report and he already IS reinstated. You posted your nonsense AFTER these things already were announced. If you need further clarification, let me know.
Lori Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 No, thank YOU. Perhaps you ought to read before you post. You stated IF Favre reports and IF he is reinstated. But he already said he WILL report and he already IS reinstated. You posted your nonsense AFTER these things already were announced. If you need further clarification, let me know. Don't work in hypotheticals much, do you?
stuckincincy Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 Don't work in hypotheticals much, do you? Conjecture, contemplation, inference...has been declared to be...so "last week". "Don't'ya know???"
Chilly Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 There are so many Favre threads, I didn't want this to get buried somewhere. Listening to Fox Sports Radio, John Fricke said that if Favre reports to Packer camp, and is reinstated, he has no power of veto over any trades... I find this hard to believe, because I don't think Favre would show up. He wants control of his destiny...anyone else here this? Hmm, I did a quick google search and ran across this article claiming he doesn't have one in his contract, but because of the whole choosing not to report deal. I think you may be on to something.
Beerball Posted August 4, 2008 Posted August 4, 2008 Don't work in hypotheticals much, do you? I really really want that :fyou smilie. I wouldn't over use it, I promise.
Buftex Posted August 4, 2008 Author Posted August 4, 2008 No, thank YOU. Perhaps you ought to read before you post. You stated IF Favre reports and IF he is reinstated. But he already said he WILL report and he already IS reinstated. You posted your nonsense AFTER these things already were announced. If you need further clarification, let me know. Uh...okay...once again, you miss the point...but I understand...I heard that Favre RETIRED, that Favre WOULD be traded to the Vikings, or that he WOULD be traded to the Jets...that he WOULD NOT be able to compete for the Packers starting QB job...so should I assume all of those things are true because whoever writes the copy for the ESPN crawler said they would happen? This story has had more twist and turns and false reports than any sports related story that I can remember. When I posted that, Favre had still not reported to camp, and there was only the speculation that he would, just like last week...
lets_go_bills Posted August 5, 2008 Posted August 5, 2008 Uh...okay...once again, you miss the point...but I understand...I heard that Favre RETIRED, that Favre WOULD be traded to the Vikings, or that he WOULD be traded to the Jets...that he WOULD NOT be able to compete for the Packers starting QB job...so should I assume all of those things are true because whoever writes the copy for the ESPN crawler said they would happen? This story has had more twist and turns and false reports than any sports related story that I can remember. When I posted that, Favre had still not reported to camp, and there was only the speculation that he would, just like last week... My apologies. I was not trying to bust yer balls. I just noticed that your post came well after it was already reported that Favre would in fact report to camp and had been reinstated.
Dan Posted August 5, 2008 Posted August 5, 2008 If the Packers trade Favre, do they have any leverage in controlling what that team decides to do with him? For example, if they traded Favre to the Raiders...Could the Packers write language in the deal stating that if the Raiders then trade Favre to the Vikings, the Packers get [x] picks in the draft? Perhaps they could they put in one of those "poison pill" statements? For example, they trade Favre to the Jets and a if Favre doesn't play at least XX% of the Jets snaps, then the Jets owe the Pack another 1st rounder or a case of brew. That wouldn't necessarily rule out a quick trade, but might deter one. Possibly?
apuszczalowski Posted August 5, 2008 Posted August 5, 2008 I don't think its possible to put conditions into a trade like that where it would restrict teams from being able to flip him, and I doubt anyone trading for him would do that considering that team would basically be sending a big FU to the Pack by doing it and straining a relationship between the 2 teams on any future deals. A team that is going to trade for Favre will be bringing him in to play for them. Plus the Packs GM has stated that he may consider dealing to a Division rival if it comes down to it, so why not offer him to a rival but make them give up alot for him? If they want him that bad, it will cost them to get him from a rival, if not, they can deal him somewhere thats planning on keeping him
Buftex Posted August 5, 2008 Author Posted August 5, 2008 I find it hard to believe that the Packers, after all the non-sense they have been through, will try to trade Favre at this point. If they do, they are even more foolish than they already appear. His trade value has plummeted, I would think, over the last two weeks. Say what you will about Favre's behavior in this whole thing (and it hasn't been great), but the Packers really botched this thing for themselves, and, in the process, tarnished Favre and themselves. This is one case where, maybe, not having a real owner, backfired on the Packers. Even hiring professional liar Ari Fleischer isn't going to help them, and makes them look even more pathetic. If I was a Packers fan (I like the Packers, but mostly because of Favre), there wouldn't be a bus leaving soon enough from Green Bay, that I wouldn't want Ted Thompson on. A battle of egos...what is it with white haired GMs? If they are trying to trade him, any team they deal with will know that they are desperate to get him out of Green Bay. What a sad chapeter in sports history. I know, 20 years from now, most won't remember all of this, but it will always put a pall on Favre and the Packers for some. Look at the way people still hold a grudge against John Elway, for opting his freedom to play baseball, rather than play for the Colts, 25 years ago. Late edit: looks like Favre just wants out... http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp...tory?id=3520064 If Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson, had just said "Aaron Rodgers is the starting QB of this team, right now (before Favre was re-instated)" they might be able to get out of this a little more gracefully. Their choice is to trade away last seasons' MVP (and arguably the greatest player in team franchise), or to backpeddle, and go with Favre at QB. At this point, there has been so much said, and so much damage done...it would likely be a miserable year for all involved.
stuckincincy Posted August 5, 2008 Posted August 5, 2008 I find it hard to believe that the Packers, after all the non-sense they have been through, will try to trade Favre at this point. If they do, they are even more foolish than they already appear. His trade value has plummeted, I would think, over the last two weeks. Say what you will about Favre's behavior in this whole thing (and it hasn't been great), but the Packers really botched this thing for themselves, and, in the process, tarnished Favre and themselves. This is one case where, maybe, not having a real owner, backfired on the Packers. Even hiring professional liar Ari Fleischer isn't going to help them, and makes them look even more pathetic. If I was a Packers fan (I like the Packers, but mostly because of Favre), there wouldn't be a bus leaving soon enough from Green Bay, that I wouldn't want Ted Thompson on. A battle of egos...what is it with white haired GMs? If they are trying to trade him, any team they deal with will know that they are desperate to get him out of Green Bay. What a sad chapeter in sports history. I know, 20 years from now, most won't remember all of this, but it will always put a pall on Favre and the Packers for some. Look at the way people still hold a grudge against John Elway, for opting his freedom to play baseball, rather than play for the Colts, 25 years ago. If they decide to cut their losses and move him, don't they save 12 million bucks when he goes away? Perhaps they need to hire a better professional liar like George Stephanopoulos?
Buftex Posted August 5, 2008 Author Posted August 5, 2008 If they decide to cut their losses and move him, don't they save 12 million bucks when he goes away? Perhaps they need to hire a better professional liar like George Stephanopoulos? That would be even more pathetic than Fleischer...George Stephanopoulos doesn't have near the experience as Ari!
bills44 Posted August 5, 2008 Posted August 5, 2008 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp...tory?id=3520064 What a baby....
Recommended Posts