Oh ****, Brett Favre

[EP Hotties]

Just wondering what people think of the Brett Favre comeback rumors. I personally think that the only team that he will comeback with would be the Packers, but other teams such as the Ravens, Bucs, and (shudder) Vikings have been thrown out there. Being a Vikings fan, there is absolutely no way that we'll sign him, but wouldn't it be awesome to see his jersey get retired while he was playing against them (Vikes play Pack in first MNF of season). What does everyone else think?

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

I seriously think its annoying and that Favre needs to go the f**k away.

[Arctic Blast]

Well, since his existing contract with the Packers would still count (he never formally filed his retirement papers, so that contract is still in effect, and there's no way the league would let him file them now that he's publicly mused about a comeback), it's not like he could sign with anyone he wants to. Green Bay would hold his rights...releasing him would cost them a fortune the next year or 2, so it would be completely at their discretion to trade him.

[Kotoll]

He never should have retired in the first place.

[Arctic Blast]

I think he should have made sure he knew what he wanted...it seems now like he made a hasty choice.

[koolzach1]

I seriously think its annoying and that Favre needs to go the f**k away.

Calm down, jeez... A man wants to do what he loves, and thats play football.

[mnstonecold]

i used to live in Wisconie land and now live in MN and no one around here wants Favre to comeback but it will not be with the Pack is my opinion.

[gRYFYN1]

Well, since his existing contract with the Packers would still count (he never formally filed his retirement papers, so that contract is still in effect, and there's no way the league would let him file them now that he's publicly mused about a comeback), it's not like he could sign with anyone he wants to. Green Bay would hold his rights...releasing him would cost them a fortune the next year or 2, so it would be completely at their discretion to trade him.

Yes Favre is under contract with the Packers untill 2011 or 2012. But Cutting him won't cost them anything. NFL contracts are non-guarenteed, so it' free to cut people (although the pro-rated portion of their Signing bonus is applied to the cap figure for the year, which for Farve is only about 4-5 million)


Farve is scheduled to make about 12 mil this year, leaving about 45- 50 mil over the last 3-4 years of his deal, so if he dosen't retire he will need to be relased anyways.

[RickD]

I think the man can still play but should he?

It also reminds me of the whole silly MJ thing in basketball...he retires..comes back...repeats the scenario until he made a fool of himself.

[dickay]

Calm down, jeez... A man wants to do what he loves, and thats play football.

Amen........the guy thought he made up his mind. He now regrets that decision.

MJ never made a fool of himself, never. Neither will Favre. If he throws for 8TDs and 15 picks for a last place team, he still would not have made a fool of himself. Does anyone regard MJ as a fool because of his last subpar year?? No, they remember his greatness.

Let the guy play as long as he wants. I think the pack will release him, but then again...i think they must be worried the Vikings might want to grab him. It'll be interesting, but all that counts is this;

There is NOBODY that can sell me that the NFL is better without Favre!

[Rongar]

Amen........the guy thought he made up his mind. He now regrets that decision.

MJ never made a fool of himself, never. Neither will Favre. If he throws for 8TDs and 15 picks for a last place team, he still would not have made a fool of himself. Does anyone regard MJ as a fool because of his last subpar year?? No, they remember his greatness.

Let the guy play as long as he wants. I think the pack will release him, but then again...i think they must be worried the Vikings might want to grab him. It'll be interesting, but all that counts is this;

There is NOBODY that can sell me that the NFL is better without Favre!

I like him, too...would always watch if he were playing

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

I get that he loves football and all that, and I loved watching him play too, but this is getting ridiculous. I didn't have a huge problem with him taking his time to make a decision in the past couple seasons, but its his own fault now that he made a hasty decision to retire and is regretting it. All the drama and stuff hes putting everyone and the team through is completely unnecessary and he should simply live with his decision.

[Arctic Blast]

Yes Favre is under contract with the Packers untill 2011 or 2012. But Cutting him won't cost them anything. NFL contracts are non-guarenteed, so it' free to cut people (although the pro-rated portion of their Signing bonus is applied to the cap figure for the year, which for Farve is only about 4-5 million)


Farve is scheduled to make about 12 mil this year, leaving about 45- 50 mil over the last 3-4 years of his deal, so if he dosen't retire he will need to be relased anyways.

Yes, and that cap hit wouldn't be too bad...except that, when Favre agreed to sign that big extension back in 2001 to give the Pack some cap relief, they also guaranteed a portion of it BEYOND the $15 mil in signing bonus, as sort of a thank you. In fact, the entire amount of guaranteed cash, including signing bonus, comes out close to $35-40 mil out of the total deal. The cap hit would be a bit bigger than what you were mentioning. Also, keep in mind that Green Bay has been acting this offseason like that contract was off the books (only the remaining bonus money would still count towards a retirement cap hit,l and it can be spread out over 2 years). They still have to sign Ryan Grant, who's going to get money, and they want to sign several other players to extensions, most of which are going to involve raises (hello, Greg Jennings!). Besides...if you're Green Bay, why would you want to take a cap hit to lose a guy for nothing, ESPECIALLY when he basically put you IN this situation by not taking the time to truly make a decision beforehand? Screw that, you hold his rights, and you trade them.

[dickay]

I get that he loves football and all that, and I loved watching him play too, but this is getting ridiculous. I didn't have a huge problem with him taking his time to make a decision in the past couple seasons, but its his own fault now that he made a hasty decision to retire and is regretting it. All the drama and stuff hes putting everyone and the team through is completely unnecessary and he should simply live with his decision.

OK, well his decision now is that he wants to play apparnetly. So live with decision A, but not wth decision B????

Screw your drama.....if the guy wants to play, there's nothing wrong with it.

[gogosox11]

Coming from a Bears fan, I don't want Favre anywhere near the Packers, or the Vikings for that matter. Really, he should just retire. It really is getting to be like a Michael Jordan or Roger Clemens type of thing. Obviously, Clemens eventually got into trobule for staying around for so long and MJ just got annoying. I don't want Brett to taint his legcy if he keeps coming back.

[EP Hotties]

Well, if he really wanted to play so bad, why did he retire in the first place? Personally, I don't think that his legacy would take much of a hit, but he is making this very hard on everyone, most of all his beloved Packers and their fans. The stupid thing is that immediately after he retired, people were saying "I wonder when he'll come back?" This was so obvious, it's pathetic.

[Arctic Blast]

Well, if he really wanted to play so bad, why did he retire in the first place? Personally, I don't think that his legacy would take much of a hit, but he is making this very hard on everyone, most of all his beloved Packers and their fans. The stupid thing is that immediately after he retired, people were saying "I wonder when he'll come back?" This was so obvious, it's pathetic.

That's my take on it, too. He obviously jumped the gun on his retirement decision in the first place, and now he's put the organization he played for in a potentially very awkward financial position.

[dickay]

That's my take on it, too. He obviously jumped the gun on his retirement decision in the first place, and now he's put the organization he played for in a potentially very awkward financial position.

ahhh poor packers. why doesn't anyone ever cry for the player when he's released mid contract to save cap space, and none of that salary is guarenteed? Screw the teams! They'll find a way around it.

[Arctic Blast]

ahhh poor packers. why doesn't anyone ever cry for the player when he's released mid contract to save cap space, and none of that salary is guarenteed? Screw the teams! They'll find a way around it.

Hey, I'm the guy that mocked the Miami Dolphins when Ricky Williams decided to retire in the midst of his contract, and they decided to go after his signing bonus.

[MichelleWie]

Yes, and that cap hit wouldn't be too bad...except that, when Favre agreed to sign that big extension back in 2001 to give the Pack some cap relief, they also guaranteed a portion of it BEYOND the $15 mil in signing bonus, as sort of a thank you. In fact, the entire amount of guaranteed cash, including signing bonus, comes out close to $35-40 mil out of the total deal. The cap hit would be a bit bigger than what you were mentioning. Also, keep in mind that Green Bay has been acting this offseason like that contract was off the books (only the remaining bonus money would still count towards a retirement cap hit,l and it can be spread out over 2 years). They still have to sign Ryan Grant, who's going to get money, and they want to sign several other players to extensions, most of which are going to involve raises (hello, Greg Jennings!). Besides...if you're Green Bay, why would you want to take a cap hit to lose a guy for nothing, ESPECIALLY when he basically put you IN this situation by not taking the time to truly make a decision beforehand? Screw that, you hold his rights, and you trade them.

Ryan Grant? Ryan Grant he's not going to get any money he's an exclusive rights FA. He's not even a restricted FA. He basically will end up signing a 1 year tender or the pakers might sign him to a 2 or maybe 3 year deal. But I doubt it, Either way he won't break the bank. At least not yet. He only had a little more than a 1/2 season of experience. As far a Favre goes, all this talk about the Bears and Vikings is funny. With his big salary a trade is almost impossible to any team. Also to cut him would be a huge hit as well. He'll either play for the Packers or nobody. His salary makes it almost impossible to go some place else. This isn't like baseball where big salaries get traded. The only big name trade I can remeber was the bailey/Portis trade a few years ago.

[Arctic Blast]

Ryan Grant? Ryan Grant he's not going to get any money he's an exclusive rights FA. He's not even a restricted FA. He basically will end up signing a 1 year tender or the pakers might sign him to a 2 or maybe 3 year deal. But I doubt it, Either way he won't break the bank. At least not yet. He only had a little more than a 1/2 season of experience. As far a Favre goes, all this talk about the Bears and Vikings is funny. With his big salary a trade is almost impossible to any team. Also to cut him would be a huge hit as well. He'll either play for the Packers or nobody. His salary makes it almost impossible to go some place else. This isn't like baseball where big salaries get traded. The only big name trade I can remeber was the bailey/Portis trade a few years ago.

Agreed, there is NO WAY Green Bay would trade him within the division.

Trades do happen, but they tend to be for draft picks, rather than other players.

[dickay]

The only big name trade I can remeber was the bailey/Portis trade a few years ago.

T.O., Randy Moss, Willis McGahee to name a few others.

I agree its highly unlikely he'll be traded or released however.

[dickay]

Hey, I'm the guy that mocked the Miami Dolphins when Ricky Williams decided to retire in the midst of his contract, and they decided to go after his signing bonus.

I'm a huge Eagles fan, but I felt T.O. had every right to demand more money one year into his deal. If he stunk it up he'd have been released, so its gotta work both ways. At least you appear to see the difference, but far too many side with the teams and ESPECIALLY in football where career spans are so short, I'll take the players side 99% of the time.

[MichelleWie]

I'm a huge Eagles fan, but I felt T.O. had every right to demand more money one year into his deal. If he stunk it up he'd have been released, so its gotta work both ways. At least you appear to see the difference, but far too many side with the teams and ESPECIALLY in football where career spans are so short, I'll take the players side 99% of the time.

Well it depends on the situation. I was glad to see Vick get his signing bonus money back. Because Vick brought the team so much revenue in ticket sales, etc. They were playing in empty stadiums without him last year. The Ryan Grant situation really irritates me. You played 10 games and you expect a long term deal. He must realize he has no leverage. He cannot sign witn another team. One of the big reasons the general public has a hard time taking the players side is, the contracts. When your busting your a$$ in a hot smelly factory for $10 an hour it's hard to feel sympathy for some athlete who has a contract paying him millions, whining he wants more money. I'll never forget Milwaukee's own Latrell Sprewell after turning down a huge multi million dollar extension. " I got a family to feed."

[dickay]

One of the big reasons the general public has a hard time taking the players side is, the contracts. When your busting your a$$ in a hot smelly factory for $10 an hour it's hard to feel sympathy for some athlete who has a contract paying him millions, whining he wants more money. I'll never forget Milwaukee's own Latrell Sprewell after turning down a huge multi million dollar extension. " I got a family to feed."

Understandable, but the owners are making millions as well on the sport and these guys, with such a short window, put their health and life on the line. They have to cash in when that window arises. T.O. just came off a big injury, overplayed his value and was at a point age wise where he needed security. He had a 7yr contract but much wasn't guarenteed. The media and fans always attack the players and seem to look the other way when a player is released mid-'contract'. The NFL players union is really weak....in the sport where guarenteed money is MOST important, these guys are signing 'contracts' that carry no weight...unless of course if your the player trying to get out of it. Then you're a hipocrite money hungry fool.

I agree with you that Sprewells statements were rediculous and insulting to many Americans going paycheck to paycheck. It is case by case and I don't think Spree ever got that big contract he was looking for. He was an idiot. I'm not familiar with Grants situation.

[MichelleWie]

They have to cash in when that window arises. T.O. just came off a big injury, overplayed his value and was at a point age wise where he needed security.

I guess this is where I don't understand. Security? He was getting paid peanuts before that? I don't have the exact numbers but up that point I'm sure T.O. had made tens of millions of dollars. How much security does a guy need?

[koolzach1]

Yeah, Sprewell's comments were just terrible. He is still made fun of to this day by MANY people.

[etothep]

i just want favre to shut the heck up


wait a sec, i think he's just called a press conference to announce his dinner plans for tonite

[Arctic Blast]

Well it depends on the situation. I was glad to see Vick get his signing bonus money back. Because Vick brought the team so much revenue in ticket sales, etc. They were playing in empty stadiums without him last year. The Ryan Grant situation really irritates me. You played 10 games and you expect a long term deal. He must realize he has no leverage. He cannot sign witn another team. One of the big reasons the general public has a hard time taking the players side is, the contracts. When your busting your a$$ in a hot smelly factory for $10 an hour it's hard to feel sympathy for some athlete who has a contract paying him millions, whining he wants more money. I'll never forget Milwaukee's own Latrell Sprewell after turning down a huge multi million dollar extension. " I got a family to feed."

He DOES have leverage, though, because the only other backs the Packers have are the same guys who did nothing last season. Besides, running backs have a shorter lifespan than any other position on the field...I can certainly understand him trying to get paid NOW.

Sprewell was an idiot, and that was one of the all time dumbest statements ever made by an athlete. The best part is...he never signed another contract again. That was his last year in the league as an active player.


I guess this is where I don't understand. Security? He was getting paid peanuts before that? I don't have the exact numbers but up that point I'm sure T.O. had made tens of millions of dollars. How much security does a guy need?

Security can also mean ROSTER security. A guy with a lot of bonus money still eligible to be paid has a much better chance of remaining on a roster than a guy who's guaranteed dollars are paid out.

[MichelleWie]

He DOES have leverage, though, because the only other backs the Packers have are the same guys who did nothing last season. Besides, running backs have a shorter lifespan than any other position on the field...I can certainly understand him trying to get paid NOW.

Sprewell was an idiot, and that was one of the all time dumbest statements ever made by an athlete. The best part is...he never signed another contract again. That was his last year in the league as an active player.



He has no leverage. Once the packers offer him the tender he has to sign it or he can't play with anyone. It's the same thing in baseball. Fielder cried about getting a small contract but their is nothing he can do about it. Thats the way the system works. He knows if he produces he's going to get paid. The Packers are loaded at the RB position anyway. Brandon Jackson is the future at that position. I'll bet you dollars to donuts Grant does not get any kind of big contract. Security is a weak argument. If T.O. does his job he'll have a roster spot. He is a millionaire many times over. If Dallas cuts him tomorrow he'd still get his signing bonus and somebody would sign him and if they didn't so what? He still a multi- millionaire. I find it hard to believe anyone feels bad for an athlete like T.O. who signs a huge contracts and then wants a new one the next year.

[Arctic Blast]

He has no leverage. Once the packers offer him the tender he has to sign it or he can't play with anyone. It's the same thing in baseball. Fielder cried about getting a small contract but their is nothing he can do about it. Thats the way the system works. He knows if he produces he's going to get paid. The Packers are loaded at the RB position anyway. Brandon Jackson is the future at that position. I'll bet you dollars to donuts Grant does not get any kind of big contract. Security is a weak argument. If T.O. does his job he'll have a roster spot. He is a millionaire many times over. If Dallas cuts him tomorrow he'd still get his signing bonus and somebody would sign him and if they didn't so what? He still a multi- millionaire. I find it hard to believe anyone feels bad for an athlete like T.O. who signs a huge contracts and then wants a new one the next year.

Uhhh...TO already HAS his signing bonus...all of it...that's why it's called a signing bonus, the player gets it, all of it, when they sign their deal. NFL rules let the team spread out the cap hit across the contract's length, but the player gets all of it immediately upon signing the contract. And, the thing is, nobody thinks ANYTHING of teams constantly going to players, frequently productive ones, and telling them to take a pay cut, or they're gone...guess what, that's the same thing as a player asking for his deal redone. Now, I agree it gets stupid with some of these guys wanting a new contract on a bi-annual basis, especially the ones who are already getting paid. But I am completely on the side of a guy like Anquan Boldin who, 2 years in to his deal, was one of the most productive receivers in the league, AND one of the lowest paid starters in football, when he wants a new deal.

I was not at all impressed with the glimpses seen of Brandon Jackson last year. I think he can be a nice niche back, but I don't see him as a guy who is ever going to be a feature running back. Has Grant proven he IS over the long haul? No, BUT he has a lot more evidence of success and consistency on his side than Jackson does.

[dickay]

Uhhh...TO already HAS his signing bonus...all of it...that's why it's called a signing bonus, the player gets it, all of it, when they sign their deal. NFL rules let the team spread out the cap hit across the contract's length, but the player gets all of it immediately upon signing the contract. And, the thing is, nobody thinks ANYTHING of teams constantly going to players, frequently productive ones, and telling them to take a pay cut, or they're gone...guess what, that's the same thing as a player asking for his deal redone. Now, I agree it gets stupid with some of these guys wanting a new contract on a bi-annual basis, especially the ones who are already getting paid. But I am completely on the side of a guy like Anquan Boldin who, 2 years in to his deal, was one of the most productive receivers in the league, AND one of the lowest paid starters in football, when he wants a new deal.

I was not at all impressed with the glimpses seen of Brandon Jackson last year. I think he can be a nice niche back, but I don't see him as a guy who is ever going to be a feature running back. Has Grant proven he IS over the long haul? No, BUT he has a lot more evidence of success and consistency on his side than Jackson does.

Well said and agree 100%.

And Michelle, its not about feeling sorry for T.O., its about understanding his situation and that its a business. What, do you actually feel sorry for the teams??

I"m an eagle fan first off. T.O. signed a 7 year deal to go to philly at a bargain no less because he had a dumb agent who didn't submit paperwork to make him a FA if you recall. Everyone knew at the time of the deal that he'd never play that full 7 years, it was done however to help the team cap wise. Philly, one of the stingiest teams with the cap had plenty of room but they are always looking ahead and structured the deal heavy in their favor.

T.O. was having an MVP record breaking year with philly but had a career threatening type of injury if you recall, the first major one of his career and then came back amazingly and put on one of the Super Bowls best performances ever. After that type of year, and seeing the significant injury potential first hand the guy simply said.....it's my turn now to get paid, screw the team. Why does he owe them any favors? Why do they have the luxury of tearing up his contract but he doesn't have the same? He wasn't getting any younger.

Anyhow, very understandable to me. And Grant, at such a brutal position I can understand him trying to cash in on his recent performance. These guys are multimillionaires and alot of them are troublemakers. I know its hard to be understanding when its so public, but the owners and teams are also raking in millions upon millions and somehow they come off better asking a player to renegotiate or releasing them mid-contract. Backwards thinking, considering the players are the ones who pay great sacrifice later in life.

[MichelleWie]

Uhhh...TO already HAS his signing bonus...all of it...that's why it's called a signing bonus, the player gets it, all of it, when they sign their deal. NFL rules let the team spread out the cap hit across the contract's length, but the player gets all of it immediately upon signing the contract. And, the thing is, nobody thinks ANYTHING of teams constantly going to players, frequently productive ones, and telling them to take a pay cut, or they're gone...guess what, that's the same thing as a player asking for his deal redone. Now, I agree it gets stupid with some of these guys wanting a new contract on a bi-annual basis, especially the ones who are already getting paid. But I am completely on the side of a guy like Anquan Boldin who, 2 years in to his deal, was one of the most productive receivers in the league, AND one of the lowest paid starters in football, when he wants a new deal.

I was not at all impressed with the glimpses seen of Brandon Jackson last year. I think he can be a nice niche back, but I don't see him as a guy who is ever going to be a feature running back. Has Grant proven he IS over the long haul? No, BUT he has a lot more evidence of success and consistency on his side than Jackson does.

Thanks for explaining to me what a signing bonus is. I never knew:) You just made my point for me. Even if he never plays a down of Football again he's walking away with 13 million dollars. If Dallas asks him to take a pay cut he has still has 13 million in his pocket. If Dallas cuts him. He still gets his 13 million guaranteed. If a team asks a player to take a pay cut it's usually because he's not producing enough to warrant the big salary. If he is a good player someone will sign him anyway. If he is past his prime then it's time for him to retire anyway. Will you ever see 13 million in your life? Jackson struggled early last year then got hurt. Then did better in the final game. If you watched any Packers game last year you would have noticed how the blocking scheme started to come togther the last half of the season. In the zone blocking system supposedly you can plug in any back and get a good result. Grant may be better than Jackson, but it is way to big of a risk to give to give him any kind of huge signing bonus after only a half season. Once training camp gets closer he will sign the tender, because he has no choice. And if he doesn't want to sign the tender he can go work in a factory for $10 an hour. If you know anything about football and you seem to think you do:). Then you would know that running back is the most easily replacable position in the game. You cry all you want over overpaid spoiled athletes, but I wont. Good day:)

[Arctic Blast]

I'll give you an example...Randall Godfrey. Godfrey was the heart of Tennessee's defense when they went to the Super Bowl. He didn't get the headlines (that would be Jevon Kearse, who is one of the most orverrated players I have EVER seen), but he was the heart of their run D. Had had a great run with the Titans, and had made a Pro Bowl. The team told him he would have to take a pay cut to stick, even though he had definitely lived up to his contract. He did, once management told ghim that they would keep him on the roster if he did so. Guess what? They didn't...he took tyhe vut, and they STILL cut him, doing so in the last week before the season started, knowing there was no way he was going to sign anywhere for less than the minimum.

Now, management lied right to his face, and screwed him over, but where was the sports media to complain about that treatment? The only time we EVER hear about someone not living up to a contract, it's always the player.

I'm not saying I agree with what they get paid...I also don't agree with the ridiculous ticket prices we, the fans, get charged to watch games, and THAT is the choice of the owners. If a player holds out for more, or starts whining when he's already one of the highest paid guys (hello, Chad Johnson), I have no time for that. However, when a guy like Godfrey gets screwed for trying to be a good guy, or when a guy like Boldin is asking for what he's earned with his play, I am completely on their side, too.

[MichelleWie]

Every situation is different. Mcnair got screwed around by ten as well. This whole thing started with T.O. I was replying about T.O initially. T.O is IMO one of the most selfish self serving athlete's in the HISTORY of sports. You and Dickay were basically defending T.O. witch is what got me started. You guys both said how Sprewell is an idiot as he is, but T.O. is way worse than Sprewell. I can't understand how anyone could defend he actions. I just heard today that Grant and the Packers are close to a multi year incentive laden deal. So you may be right about Grant, but I don't see Tompson giving him alot of guarantedd money maybe a couple of million. Anyway the whole time Grant has been basically holding out. Brandon Jackson has spent the entire off-season in GB working out and has been getting alot of praise heaped on him. I understand the business end of the game. I can understand where grant is coming from, but that doesn't mean I have to like it or agree with it.

[Arctic Blast]

Every situation is different. Mcnair got screwed around by ten as well. This whole thing started with T.O. I was replying about T.O initially. T.O is IMO one of the most selfish self serving athlete's in the HISTORY of sports. You and Dickay were basically defending T.O. witch is what got me started. You guys both said how Sprewell is an idiot as he is, but T.O. is way worse than Sprewell. I can't understand how anyone could defend he actions. I just heard today that Grant and the Packers are close to a multi year incentive laden deal. So you may be right about Grant, but I don't see Tompson giving him alot of guarantedd money maybe a couple of million. Anyway the whole time Grant has been basically holding out. Brandon Jackson has spent the entire off-season in GB working out and has been getting alot of praise heaped on him. I understand the business end of the game. I can understand where grant is coming from, but that doesn't mean I have to like it or agree with it.

I disagree about TO being worse than Spree (though, really, that isn't saying much ;))...Spree ALWAYS put himself ahead of the team. TO HAS at times been a team guy, the best example being that insane Super Bowl performance, when he shouldn't have even really been on the field. No way would Spree ever do that. However, don't get me wrong, man, I am NOT a fan of Owens at all, never have been. And, while I think he was right to ask to have his deal redone after Year 1 in Philly (in fact, I've read in a few places that the Eagles had pretty much told him they would do it, then never did, and Philly doesn't exactly have a fantastic track record for 'doing right' by their players in the Joe Banner era), he went way too far when he made himself bigger than the team, and started smacking down his teammates. That's pretty much the worst thing you can do if you're trying to get a big, new deal. Agree that Grant isn't going to get a MASSIVE deal, but I think he's going to get some solid, midlevel money, which wouldn't be too bad. Training camp hasn't even started up, yet, so I don't think there's any reason to be too worried about falling behind, if you're Grant.

As for McNair, I think Tennessee made the right decision in that case (the guy was physically not at the same level, anymore), but they went about it in about as wrong a manner as a team can. It just made them look bad. They were another organization that, for awhile, people would not sign with because they also had a bad rap for not 'doing right' by the players.

[ayhoser]

Farve asked to be released.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3483521

[RickD]

Yeah here is another story on that from the USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/packers/2008-07-11-favre_N.htm)