Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
3 Pages123>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Trippster  
#1 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 11:55:44 AM(UTC)
Last night I was at the HarleyFest and started talking with someone who has intimate knowledge of the situation. I can't say who it is but anyone who listens or watches the packer games knows this person.

He knows (off the record) McCarthy, Favre, and Thompson very well.

When Favre retired in March, Thompson told him then that under no circumstances will he be accepted back. The whole we want you back and will bring you back that happened at the end of March wasn't accurate. Thompson has never waivered on not bringing him back. He wanted hm back up until the retirement announcement.

McCarthy has always wanted him back However he was under strict oders from his boss that under no cicumstances could he come back.

The meeting between Favre and McCarthy was to try and figure a way to bring him back. Finally, Thompson came into the room and said, that's it. no more talking, he is not coming back here. McCarthy was not allowed to come out of that meeting with Favre coming back.

I have always said, and from very personal experience in sports, that what you read and hear in the media is seldom what actually happens.

Thompson was simply tired of Favre waffling the last few years and once he was able to make a clean break, that is what he was going to do.
Zero2Cool  
#2 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:09:00 PM(UTC)
This is not accurate, this is speculation.

Tripp, sorry, I don't mean to knock you or your source, but this is not accurate.
Pack93z  
#3 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:18:48 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
This is not accurate, this is speculation.

Tripp, sorry, I don't mean to knock you or your source, but this is not accurate.


Zero.. really how does one know for sure on this whole deal? Because a newspaper says so? They get their information from team sources and what not.. they report what they hear.

I am not saying this account is completely accurate either, but unless we were in a room listening to the conversations first hand.. it isn't known what truly happened.

Sorry I don't have blind faith in the press in this country.. they are just another human being communicating information as they hear it and interpret it..

I know this will kick off another research your facts speech.. but I have personally read as much as a single person could on this whole deal with all the misinformation and whatnot.. but like the rest of the free whole minus about 5 people.. all this is speculation, rumor and passed on information. The 5 people that truly know.. Brett, Buss, Deanna, Mike and Ted... the rest may know shaded versions.. but they were not in the direct conversations so it is all interpreted speculation.
Zero2Cool  
#4 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 1:20:29 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
" said: Go to Quoted Post
This is not accurate, this is speculation.

Tripp, sorry, I don't mean to knock you or your source, but this is not accurate.


Zero.. really how does one know for sure on this whole deal? Because a newspaper says so? They get their information from team sources and what not.. they report what they hear.

I am not saying this account is completely accurate either, but unless we were in a room listening to the conversations first hand.. it isn't known what truly happened.

Sorry I don't have blind faith in the press in this country.. they are just another human being communicating information as they hear it and interpret it..

I know this will kick off another research your facts speech.. but I have personally read as much as a single person could on this whole deal with all the misinformation and whatnot.. but like the rest of the free whole minus about 5 people.. all this is speculation, rumor and passed on information. The 5 people that truly know.. Brett, Buss, Deanna, Mike and Ted... the rest may know shaded versions.. but they were not in the direct conversations so it is all interpreted speculation.


First and foremost I take great offense to any assumption that I trust any newspaper or the like, at all. Consider that I've been proving them inaccurate and untrustworthy for years now. I know how they get their information and how they also throw their own bias twist on their write ups. I would like them to have more responsibility, but hey, they are trying to make a living and as long as the readers know the difference between fact and opinion. Not a big problem in my eyes. However, if a writer inks something as fact based on their perception of a situation, I will blast the horse urine out of them for it publicly.

There is no possible way this 'scoop' is accurate. Because it simply does not interpret the discussion in its fullness. You can not take a snipet of something and take that for face value. If you do, you will consistently be in error. Why? Because you need the entire story. That is why I only base my opinions off what I hear from the horses mouth. Keep in mind, GM's, HC's, Players and Agents all tell their own twist of the story. With that said, you can, if you pay attention, read some truths from their words. I've already documented several of Brett's mistruths in this ordeal.

I don't remember if I ever had faith in the press in this country or any country for that matter. I form MY opinions from my OWN research. I will not committ to another several days of researching and documenting for others to simply toss it aside. I've done that in the past and my record speaks for itself. I speak on facts when available otherwise I state it as speculation, rumor, opinion, etc.

You say five people truly know. I'm not saying Brett lies to his wife, but I'm more apt to narrow the only three people who know the truth are Brett, Mike and Ted.


This thread's initial post indicate this was an inside scoop which to some means "Fact". I simply am saying this is speculation, this is not accurate. This is not factual. I am in no way saying I know more than the next guy, but like yourself. I watch every press conference, read every transcript and read every article about the Packers I can find. I form my opinions on quotes from the source, the source meaning, the subject, the individual.
Zero2Cool  
#5 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 1:40:45 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Last night I was at the HarleyFest and started talking with someone who has intimate knowledge of the situation. I can't say who it is but anyone who listens or watches the packer games knows this person.

He knows (off the record) McCarthy, Favre, and Thompson very well.

When Favre retired in March, Thompson told him then that under no circumstances will he be accepted back. The whole we want you back and will bring you back that happened at the end of March wasn't accurate. Thompson has never waivered on not bringing him back. He wanted hm back up until the retirement announcement.

McCarthy has always wanted him back However he was under strict oders from his boss that under no cicumstances could he come back.

The meeting between Favre and McCarthy was to try and figure a way to bring him back. Finally, Thompson came into the room and said, that's it. no more talking, he is not coming back here. McCarthy was not allowed to come out of that meeting with Favre coming back.

I have always said, and from very personal experience in sports, that what you read and hear in the media is seldom what actually happens.

Thompson was simply tired of Favre waffling the last few years and once he was able to make a clean break, that is what he was going to do.


Let's say this information has backbone. This is where I feel it was derived from, based on all the information I have observed and collected through my own personal research.

I believe that Thompson did tell Brett something to the affect "Brett, if you retire, that's it man, theres no coming back, are you sure you want to retire?" I have a difficult time beleiving that Ted would say it in a tone of a threatening manner when he (as everyone else) knows the Packers chances of winning a Super Bowl in 2008 are better under Favre than Rodgers. I'd lean that itwas more to convince Brett to return for another year rather than the wrongfully popular belief that it was to force him to retire.

The un-retirement deal in March, the end of March that is. I feel that was a miscommunication of some sort. I think the Packers took soem of Brett's comments out of context and ran with it. There probably was more communication between say, James Campen and others that informed Brett onto the Packers thinking he was changing his mind so Brett respectfully contacted the Packers to advise them un-retirement was not in the near future.

The notion that Ted wanted a clean break from the waffling is not something to discredit, even players have said it was getting old and tiresome. Players like knowing who their QB is going to be going into the season. That's why many teams try to avoid the QB by competition. It's always best to know your leader and built a rapport with them.

One thing I have a difficult time agreeing with. McCarthy wanted Brett back. I know coaches tend to not tell all the truth, but McCarthy said the Packers were a better team with Brett, true. He also said that Brett was not in the right state of mind to be the QB of the Packers. This is from my own research and opinion, but, I truly believe it was McCarthy who made the decision that the Packers would be better served with Rodgers at QB than Favre under his current state of mind.

Regarding the speculation that McCarthy was not allowed to come out of the meeting with Brett returning. Does this not wreak of stupidity? Why waste the time? Why waste the energy? Why let the fans get their hopes up? If that was the truth, it was extremely stupid on the Packers part. It got the fans hopes up, it got the media kicking things up a gear and it took valuable time from the head coach and his evaluation of his team... for what? To waste Brett's time and everyone elses?

I agree with the statement that what we hear and read from the media is seldom what actually happens. No question about that one. I think I've supported many proofs of that.


edit, another thing I'd like to add to this. Notice how many people still hate Ted Thompson even though his PEERS respect him as the best executive of the year 2008 and he's turned the packers team around in the right direction? Ask yourself, why do so many hate Ted Thompson? I'll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with Brett Favre.
Trippster  
#6 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:29:49 PM(UTC)
Zero,

The source spoke this to me regarding conversations HE had with Brett, MM, and TT. What possible research can you provide that is closer other than having a conversation with those three? What each of them say in public is mostly nothing more than PR.

Why would the packers go through the meeting? Mike McCarthy wanted Favre back. Ted Thompson did not. Mike McCarthy wanted to meet with BF. Ted Thompson said, go ahead, but don't make any deal. He's not coming back. That is how.

I don't hate TT. This is not a Ted Thompson bash. He was/is simply fed up with BF's waffling. That is why it was how it was. There is no other reason why he wouldn't bring BF back.

You can not get any closer than talking directly with those three.
Trippster  
#7 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:30:23 PM(UTC)
P.S. we need a BF head. :)
Zero2Cool  
#8 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:39:33 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Zero,

The source spoke this to me regarding conversations HE had with Brett, MM, and TT. What possible research can you provide that is closer other than having a conversation with those three? What each of them say in public is mostly nothing more than PR.

Why would the packers go through the meeting? Mike McCarthy wanted Favre back. Ted Thompson did not. Mike McCarthy wanted to meet with BF. Ted Thompson said, go ahead, but don't make any deal. He's not coming back. That is how.

I don't hate TT. This is not aTed Thompsonbash. He was/is simply fed up with BF's waffling. That is why it was how it was. There is no other reason why he wouldn't bring BF back.

You can not get any closer than talking directly with those three.


Sorry, if I don't see it or hear it for myself, I am not naive enough to believe it. Not on a sensitive subject like this. Although I suspect I know the source, but I wasn't there so I do not know.

I am glad the Packers and Brett have moved forward from this, I can't wait until we collectively follow suit.
Zero2Cool  
#9 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:39:59 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
P.S. we need a BF head. :)


heh ... I have a few of them in the works already ;)

Too many ideas, not enough time :(
Trippster  
#10 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:45:27 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Zero,

The source spoke this to me regarding conversations HE had with Brett, MM, and TT. What possible research can you provide that is closer other than having a conversation with those three? What each of them say in public is mostly nothing more than PR.

Why would the packers go through the meeting? Mike McCarthy wanted Favre back. Ted Thompson did not. Mike McCarthy wanted to meet with BF. Ted Thompson said, go ahead, but don't make any deal. He's not coming back. That is how.

I don't hate TT. This is not aTed Thompsonbash. He was/is simply fed up with BF's waffling. That is why it was how it was. There is no other reason why he wouldn't bring BF back.

You can not get any closer than talking directly with those three.


Sorry, if I don't see it or hear it for myself, I am not naive enough to believe it. Not on a sensitive subject like this. Although I suspect I know the source, but I wasn't there so I do not know.

I am glad the Packers and Brett have moved forward from this, I can't wait until we collectively follow suit.


I have moved on, just thought the conversation was interesting. nice person too. I spent about 25 min. with them. took a pic of them with an extrememe hottie on their bike.
Pack93z  
#11 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:51:32 PM(UTC)
Zero.. sorry if you took offense as that was not the intention.. but how else does one do research upon such a topic?

From people inside the Packers organization? .. do we believe that they would be unbiased in their viewpoint or have all the details.

Unless someone knows one of the 4 main players in this past mess, then where else would you gather your information?

IMO, each and every person that pens any piece does it with some personal bias attached.. directly upon the story or indirectly with which source they utilize.. my point is the only way to do research upon this is to utilize someones view of the fact they have gathered. There was no film to study, no taping of the calls, no score being kept someplace on the fiasco.

My only point of saying anything is that we are so quick to slam a source that may have intimate knowledge of the story behind the press.. I would love to know exactly how it played out, but quite honestly, that story probably will never be told with an unbiased voice. IMO of course.

It was just another viewpoint based on their conversations with the three individuals and treated as such... but as most things in the past, there will always be some shading to the story with the reality buried to never be found.

It is of the past, sorry I ruffled a feather.
Zero2Cool  
#12 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:58:03 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
I have moved on, just thought the conversation was interesting. nice person too. I spent about 25 min. with them. took a pic of them with an extrememe hottie on their bike.


No doubt interesting, and I appreciate you sharing it with us :) Even though I think its unreliable :P
Zero2Cool  
#13 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 3:07:38 PM(UTC)
I said that I take offense to any assumption that I trust the newspapers, etc, so if you weren't assuming that, no problem :)

How does one do research? Effort, read transcripts and watch press conferences, pay attention to detail and don't let your emotion's pursuade your opinion. You hear it from the individual themselves. It's not much to go on, but its a helluva lot better than a source that you can't name but will give out that information.

As I said, it was interesting and glad it was shared. Do I believe it? Not how it was presented, no.

The only feather I have ruffled is people thinking they know what happened. We don't. We might not ever know so why does this have to be an issue?

Maybe I see this all wrong. I've kind of felt about it like this. I love the Packers and I love Brett Favre. It's like two kids. I wouldn't disown either of them. Am I disapointed them in them both? Most defintely. Will I allow anyone to throw negative speculation around as it is factual? Not on this website. I will do my best to make sure both sides are viewed accurately.
Trippster  
#14 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 3:25:22 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
I said that I take offense to any assumption that I trust the newspapers, etc, so if you weren't assuming that, no problem :)

How does one do research? Effort, read transcripts and watch press conferences, pay attention to detail and don't let your emotion's pursuade your opinion. You hear it from the individual themselves. It's not much to go on, but its a helluva lot better than a source that you can't name but will give out that information.

As I said, it was interesting and glad it was shared. Do I believe it? Not how it was presented, no.

The only feather I have ruffled is people thinking they know what happened. We don't. We might not ever know so why does this have to be an issue?

Maybe I see this all wrong. I've kind of felt about it like this. I love the Packers and I love Brett Favre. It's like two kids. I wouldn't disown either of them. Am I disapointed them in them both? Most defintely. Will I allow anyone to throw negative speculation around as it is factual? Not on this website. I will do my best to make sure both sides are viewed accurately.


What your saying then is you only believe what people say with the camera on or the pen writing. Not what they say in private to trusted sources.

I will give you an example from the past. When Greg Maddux left the Cubs for Atlanta, the story that was reported was nowhere near what really happened. I knwo that because I knew those that were involved with the actual events.

I simply put down what the guy told me was his imipression of his conversations with TT,BF,and MM. If you are going to go by what thay say in the media then maybe you think OJ is innocent and is still out there looking for the real killer. Or that nothing really happened between Kobe and the girl, cuz he said so directly.
Zero2Cool  
#15 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 3:41:52 PM(UTC)
The last portion was extremely uncalled for and inappropriate and strong indication you don't understand what I'm saying.
4PackGirl  
#16 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 3:46:19 PM(UTC)
is there any way i can iggy an ENTIRE section of the site? cuz everytime i read something in this particular section, my blood pressure ends up going thru the ROOF!!! ;)
Zero2Cool  
#17 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 3:47:43 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
is there any way i can iggy an ENTIRE section of the site? cuz everytime i read something in this particular section, my blood pressure ends up going thru the ROOF!!! ;)


Mine is getting there when I read things like the post most recent to my last one. The tail end of it anyhow. I don't mind being misunderstood, but to be taken out of context so rudely, irritates me greatly. Its fine not understand someone, but to go and insult them like that, ... I feel thats wrong.
Trippster  
#18 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:16:05 PM(UTC)
Then I guess I don't understand what you are trying to say. My comments weren't rude, simply if one believes what people say in regard to their own situations on TV then logic would suggest that those beliefs are also held. besides Zero, I was just egging you on.

However, you were quick to point out that what you say is so and what my source says is not.

My source has talked, off the record, and knows all parties concerned very well. What I posted was his take. Does it have bias? I am sure. Can there be some inaacuracies? maybe. But to say the whole thing is innacurate is to assume that your research is.

Unless you have a source closer than mine, I would take my source as most accurate.

You can't really go by what they said cuz it is only what they said in the media.
Zero2Cool  
#19 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:23:40 PM(UTC)
if u could spare a few mins... plz read my posts again.
Trippster  
#20 Posted : Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:30:18 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
This is not accurate, this is speculation.

Tripp, sorry, I don't mean to knock you or your source, but this is not accurate.


To me Zero, this is uncalled for...

To know that what I posted was innacurate, one must know what IS accurate. There are some on this board that are informed and have sources close to particualr situations. Responses like this only encourage others NOT to share.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages123>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
uffda udfa (1h) : No more clutter.
Cheesey (2h) : Go get him Uncle Ted!!
Zero2Cool (2h) : Former Packers pass-rusher Datone Jones is back on the market.
Zero2Cool (4h) : Good news for #Packers secondary: rookie CB Kevin King and vet CB Davon House (quad) both practiced. King has cleared concussion protocol.
Zero2Cool (5h) : Vince Biegel back on practice field!!
Zero2Cool (11h) : Maybe this little shout has no value if people gonna use it instead of the forum.
Zero2Cool (11h) : He's not writing. He's shouting, and its making the shout kind of without point with the clutter.
buckeyepackfan (16h) : Just like last year at 4-6. The guy is just too funny!
buckeyepackfan (16h) : GOOD news Uffda is already all but writing The Packers off for 2017!
uffda udfa (21h) : Masturbation talk from Barfan? Nothing could make me COME back, quicker.
wpr (22h) : Maybe the shout box needs to take a timeout. People keep using it. ;)
Zero2Cool (22h) : Why do this is in shout? So frustrating. Post in forums. Thanks
Barfarn (22h) : Masterbation will relieve some of that nervous tension!
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Now, a guy they really liked and have groomed for 3 years is the guy. Tons of toys on O. Let's see how it runs with a great coach, now.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : The Flynn Patriots game has been used to say that he is. Seneca and Scott showed otherwise.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Hundley is going to settle the debate once and for all in whether Mike McCarthy is a great coach, or not.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Doesn't speak well to the talent acquired by the org, does it? Easy to say talent is great until Rodgers is gone and you have to see it wit
Porforis (17-Oct) : Could Sam Bradford come into the Packers and post a winning record from here on out? Are there any non-starters in the NFL that could?
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Teddy is replaceable. Aaron is not. Vikings have a really good defense. We do not. Understand??
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : You are wise enough to know the difference. Right?
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Here's one for you, Z. Vikes lose Teddy B. and go out and aggressively get Bradford. Packers lose 12 and go out and get a UDFA.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : :) Evans had a pre-draft visit with Packers.
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Put it in a topic. My lord why so difficult lol
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/jerod-evans?id=2558099
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/former-virginia-tech-qb-jerod-evans-issues-warning-after-going-undrafted-043017
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Oh, Jerod Evans formerly of Va Tech is our Hokie QB plan
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Was previously on Eagles PS
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Tweeted the below due to huge chip on his shoulder for going undrafted after leaving early.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Packers add Jerod Evans to PS. He went undrafted: https://twitter.com/rodfor6_/status/858382534274682884
Smokey (17-Oct) : NO a 6 point favorite to beat the Packers in GB .
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Yes!!!!!
Porforis (17-Oct) : "I said that too. Why don't you quote me?? I'm famous!" - Zero2Cool
Zero2Cool (16-Oct) : I said that too. Why don't you quote me?? I'm famous!
uffda udfa (16-Oct) : @ProFootballDoc says Rodgers could return Week 14 at earliest, and surgery speeds up return timeline.
Zero2Cool (16-Oct) : McCarthy dropped a "bullshit" on packers.com stream. No delay apparently lol
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
5m / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

14m / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Oct / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / gotarace

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

16-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

Headlines