Obligatory Favre discussion

by sam23 on Jul 11, 2008 7:00 PM PDT

I know its pretty far fetched, but ESPN did list the Niners in the "other possible options" category for teams Favre might join if he is indeed released by the Pack. Its almost totally unrealistic, but isnt this something that should at least be discussed here? So, assuming he is released in the next couple days would you encourage the Niners to take a look at him? I know it could just further impede the development of Smith or Hill, but I'm not a big fan of either anyway so I vote yes. For pure entertainment purposes it might not get much better than watching one of the NFL's ultimate gunslingers team up with one of its most creative offensive minds for one year. I dont know if we become actual contenders, but it would sure make every game more watchable, and we could sure use the exposure and excitement. I know it will never happen, but I felt like someone had to bring it up.

Poll

If Favre is released would you like to see him in a Niner uniform next season?

Yes

24 votes

No

41 votes

Undecided

0 votes

65 votes | Poll has closed

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 54 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I don't think Martz would be down.

I also don’t think Favre would do the whole “veteran mentor” thing. Or the rebuilding team thing. He wants a ring.

Plus I still have nightmares about the Packers beating the 49ers in the 1990s playoffs, many of which include TO crying.

Unless you are:
NE
IND
PITT
CLE
SEA
TB
ARI

you almost have to talk about it. At least as a mentor or a backup or something. I still don’t think Favre would do it, but you are right, it is pretty obligatory for many teams considering the lack of quality QBs in the NFL.

by rufio on Jul 11, 2008 7:50 PM PDT 0 recs

TO cried when we beat Favre too

when will the Kenny Thomas Reign of Terror end?!!??

by diehardkingsfan5 on Jul 11, 2008 9:12 PM PDT up 0 recs

That's what I was refering to

But “TO crying” being in my dreams makes it worth the moniker “nightmare”. Even if we did win.

by rufio on Jul 14, 2008 11:43 AM PDT up 0 recs

To Brett Favre

Please retire and go fishing and leave the NFL alone.

by 49erLou on Jul 11, 2008 8:59 PM PDT 0 recs

Dear Brett Favre,

You are a Green Bay Packer, and don’t even attempt making the 49ers the California version of the Packers. If we want a quarterback great, let it be a byproduct of the 49er draft choices. You will never be a Niner. Hell, you would reek from fishing, anyway.

Moreover, in Wisconsin, it is beer and cheddar. Here in California, it is wine and brie.

And nobody would recognize you if you wore red and gold, anyway.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 11, 2008 9:54 PM PDT 0 recs

PS. Pro Bowl Punter Andy Lee already wears number 4 and I think I heard on ESPN, Patrick Willis said he would make sure Andy got to keep his number. So yeah, sorry buddy, you probably should stay away

Simply by pulling on both ends, Patrick Willis can stretch diamonds back into coal

by 49erLou on Jul 11, 2008 10:16 PM PDT 0 recs

Fooch I apologize

I didnt see your “No Favre discussion here” motto. I ruined it for you man, sorry.

by sam23 on Jul 12, 2008 9:48 AM PDT 0 recs

we'll survive

I just didn’t want a front page post….it’s ok to roll a FanPost.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Jul 12, 2008 9:56 AM PDT up 0 recs

no

Trent Kline: Decentish. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com and on it I make jokes about things.

by groug on Jul 13, 2008 3:41 PM PDT 0 recs

I was listening to an interesting discussion about athletes like Favre yesterday on KNBR. They were saying how great atheletes often get themselves into a catch-22. They talk about retirement, but don’t want to go out on a bad note, so they look to play one more year. But if they have a great year, they think they can still capture more of that magic, so they want to stick around longer. It’s an endless cycle.

I suspect we’ll still be talking about Favre retiring when he’s 50. And I’m still not going to care then, either.

And to answer the question… No. No Favre.

"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler

by JRPhillips on Jul 15, 2008 9:51 AM PDT 0 recs

Yea

I think it was Barkley who brought that up. He admitted he hung around 2-3 years too long trying to go out on a high note.

by sam23 on Jul 18, 2008 10:55 AM PDT up 0 recs

I've argued before

that this team is not built for the long haul. Gore is already in year three of his career, the length of which is historically short for a RB, not to mention his history of injuries. The WRs are not young studs, and while they do have some promising young players (ie. Willis, Staley, Davis), much of the team is made up of players in their prime or right around it. This team can’t bank on having another rebuilding process when Smith ultimately doesn’t pan out, because their good players right now will either leave or be too old to make an impact. I think this team will be in significant trouble if they don’t get a good QB in the next year or two. Favre could certainly be this QB, at least for the next year or two until he retires again.

Those of you who think Smith is going to work out as the QB of this team’s future are pretty much kidding yourselves. He has only sporadically shown the ability to be even average. The 49ers will need to look at QBs via free agency, and I think signing Favre for a year or two could be a pretty smart decision.

Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!

by UnleashTheGore on Jul 15, 2008 12:42 PM PDT 0 recs

Favre

Bringing him into this team is not even a guarantee that this team will improve. Not only that, it’s setting you team up to completely fail in a year (or maybe two, if you’re lucky) when Favre leaves again and there’s STILL no franchise QB in place. Most of the players on this team have only been with this team for two or three years. In Gore’s case, I’ll agree that an average NFL running back doesn’t really have much longevity, career-wise. However, for the remaining players, guys like Lawson, Willis, Staley, Davis and any other recently drafted player who holds a lot of potential, there is still a lot of career left to be played.

I think the defense is pretty much set to continue to grow for at least another three to five years. Willis more undoubtedly get a contract extension at the end of this season (his base salary for this season and next are ridiculously low, and the 49ers have been very good at rewarding their good players). The linebackers, aside from Banta-Cain and Ulbrich, are young or have very little mileage on them. The secondary, as long as they find a #2 CB in Smith, Spencer, or someone else in the next year or so, is kind of set for a few more years as well.

While I don’t disagree with looking to free agency for a QB, I disagree with picking up a one year rental (again, two if you’re lucky) for a team who isn’t even close to being a guaranteed lock for playoffs. While Smith has shown VERY little in terms of becoming the franchise QB everyone envisioned him to become, there’s a heck of a lot more to come out of Smith becoming average than there is for Favre to play Superman for two years. If Smith proves to be competent, and that’s a sort of big if, there’s the potential for longevity. The guy (obviously) has many years left on his clock, so if he’s finally going to start figuring it out, that can’t be anything BUT good for the 49ers.

I don’t think very many fans envision Smith becoming anything like the next Montana, Young, Brady, Manning, or any other great. I think most fans are hoping he at least shows he’s better than someone like Rex Grossman or (a healthy) Chad Pennington. At least that’s all I’m hoping for.

by sfgfan on Jul 15, 2008 2:45 PM PDT up 0 recs

So if he does become average...

is that the QB you want for this team? Do you want average? Out of the last 15 Super Bowl winners, only 3 have had average QBs (Dilfer, B Johnson, E Manning)...and that’s even stretching it, as Johnson and Manning could be considered above average. I guess it depends on if you think Smith can become better than average, which I certainly don’t based on his career thus far.

Yeah, Favre’s only a rental for a year or two, but he proved last year he’s still a pretty good QB, considering the talent of the team around him is pretty similar to the 49ers, I would say. If we concede that the team has to look to FA for a QB, then he’s really the only option because as far as I know, better-than-average QBs are not currently available on the market (which is even more reason to get him—wait for a good QB to become available in a year or two while Favre is a stopgap).

I guess I just don’t see the point of developing Smith to become average. Average QBs generally don’t win you championships, and I haven’t seen anything to suggest he’ll be anything more than average. On the flip side, it could really hurt the team if they continue to develop him for naught. The rest of the players get older and more beat up, and players like Gore and Willis will get tired of losing and will leave.

Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!

by UnleashTheGore on Jul 16, 2008 8:48 AM PDT up 0 recs

You're missing my point.

Aside from the fact that I’m NOT hoping he’s just average, you’re missing my point. I think that having 5 years of an average quarterback who knows his teammates and can play with them is better than having two years of a guy who may retire at any moment.

You’re saying Favre’s options last year may have been similar to what the 49ers have this year? I disagree with that. Driver is closer to a #1 WR than any of the WRs the 49ers have. He had a #2 that was able to shine in light of having a #1 on the other side. He had the benefit of a defense that started off hot and stayed pretty good the rest of the way. He also had the benefit of an offensive line that knew how to block. The personnel is not really that similar at all. Heck, you can even look beyond personnel for the reasons why Favre is no guarantee to succeed here. He had the benefit of having the SAME system in place for YEARS (coaches changed, but the system didn’t very much), and many of his teammates sharing that same benefit.

I don’t think continuing to develop Smith is really detrimental to this team at all. There REALLY isn’t another viable option out there. As you say, Favre may be the only above-average QB available, but how long will he be here? What will he do if the team starts out 2-6? No one knows what the guy is thinking one minute to the next. That’s NOT what you want from your “leader.” Smith may not be very good, or at least he hasn’t shown it, but at least you know where he wants to be next week and next year.

That’s one of the reasons why I say having an average Smith for the next 5 years is better than having Favre for the next 2 (and of course, the possibility it is only ONE) year. I think consistency at the QB over a period of time is more important than a revolving door. What does the team do IF Favre leaves after one year? Heck, what does the team do when he leaves after two? The team will have to start over, and the remaining players will want to leave anyway. As I said in my original comment: “there’s a heck of a lot more to come out of Smith becoming average than there is for Favre to play Superman for two years.”

If the bad outcome is probably going to be the same for either choice, shouldn’t the team take the one that has the possibility of longevity or going beyond two years? You don’t build a team for this year or the next and only that.

by sfgfan on Jul 16, 2008 11:06 AM PDT up 0 recs

To add to...

... You don’t build a team for this year or the next and only that.>

You definitely don’t do that if the team isn’t even close to being a playoff team yet.

by sfgfan on Jul 16, 2008 11:06 AM PDT up 0 recs

Hmm...

Now that formatting is weird. I just copied and pasted the sentence.

by sfgfan on Jul 16, 2008 11:09 AM PDT up 0 recs

I think I understand what you're saying...

You’re more comfortable with an inferior QB as long as you’re assured he’s not going anywhere? I guess I can understand that, but if in fact that is what you’re getting at, I’ll have to respectfully disagree. Sure, you get the peace of mind that he’ll be there, you don’t have to deal with the should-I-stay-or-should-I-go crap, and he’ll be more familiar with his teammates, but does that really make you a better football team?

Sure, having Favre would probably be a huge headache at times. However, I feel like this team is pretty much a very good QB away from contending, and I do think Favre is a very good QB. I think having the threat of Gore around him will help him even more than last year, albeit your points of GB’s better OL and WR corps, which I cant’ disagree with. With a good QB, it will open up the running game for Gore, whereas other teams can keep putting 8 or 9 guys in the box against their offense and force Smith to throw the ball, which worked out pretty well for other teams last year.

I think you’re also assuming the 49ers will resign/extend Smith, because otherwise if Favre leaves after two years, they’re in the same situation as if they kept Smith and didn’t resign him. Unless Smith shows some dramatic improvement, I don’t see how he’s earned a new contract, and I think either way the team is going to have to look for a new QB in two or three years.

And in response to this question:

If the bad outcome is probably going to be the same for either choice, shouldn’t the team take the one that has the possibility of longevity or going beyond two years?

I have to say that no, I would only take the longetivity possibility if their QB shows the talent to bring them somewhere in the future. I do not think Smith does.

Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!

by UnleashTheGore on Jul 16, 2008 1:44 PM PDT up 0 recs

I guess...

... that is where our opinions differ. And by “that,” I mean the idea that this team is a good QB away from contending. I don’t think the team is THAT close at all. I think the OL is a huge question mark. So much so, I think it’s about as big of a question mark as the non-existent pass rush. While neither may not be completely necessary for a playoff run, both can be extremely important.

According to Maiocco’s most recent post, just two years ago, his TD-INT ratio was similar to that of Alex Smith’s (18:18 and 16:16, respectively). Three years ago, it was 20:29. Those two years were the highest sack totals the last five years and even then it was only 24 and 21, respectively. 49ers QBs took on 55 sacks last season, I believe. I don’t envision that improving THAT dramatically, so he’ll be dealing with that ON TOP OF learning an entirely new system (and new terminology) in less than two months. With that said, do you think those two years were anomalies, or do you think last year was the anomaly? Considering he’s now 39 and would be in a new system, I think it’s more likely he’d turn in the 2005 and 2006 results rather than the results from last season.

I guess our opinions also differ in regards to Alex Smith. While we both agree that it’s unlikely he’ll be an All-Pro QB, we disagree on the degree of his non-All-Pro-ness. You’ve completely given up on him while I still think he can be at least be somewhere above average. As I said, I think it wouldn’t be too difficult for him to be better than Rex Grossman or (a healthy) Chad Pennington, which I think is all this team EVENTUALLY needs to get to playoffs. By eventually, I’m already conceding that this year has very slim playoff hopes.

Our opinions just differ on quite a few of the key points for either side: Favre, Smith, and how far along the team is.

by sfgfan on Jul 16, 2008 2:22 PM PDT up 0 recs

I've given up on Alex Smith ...

... but there’s no way in HELL fans would accept Brett Favre as a Niner.

I’d rather hire a deadbeat off the street first and teach him how to be a QB. But there’s no need, we’ve got Shaun Hill (huge potential with Martz’s offense) and Smith may still be trying to get better, whatever.

suck it Brett Favre

by Persiflage on Jul 18, 2008 6:55 AM PDT up 0 recs

Hill... huge potential?

I think I’ve said/asked this before, but where the heck do some fans get off thinking that Hill definitely has a better chance to succeed that Smith? I’m not sure if that’s what you implied, but it’s what I gathered from you giving up on Smith but saying a former cast-off like Hill has “huge potential.”

by sfgfan on Jul 18, 2008 11:37 AM PDT up 0 recs

Hill vs. Smith

“Though Smith must be considered the favorite after three stormy seasons in San Francisco, Hill went undefeated as a starter late last season in the first significant playing time of his six-year career. Hill’s throwing style, body type and even field demeanor remind some of Marc Bulger, who became a Pro Bowl MVP in St. Louis under Martz’s tutelage.” – Greg Beacham, USA Today

“Hill made the Vikings as a free agent. But through four seasons in Minnesota and the 2006 season in San Francisco, his regular-season action consisted of two kneel-downs. Hill finally got his shot last season, when Alex Smith separated a shoulder and backup Trent Dilfer suffered a concussion. Hill got the next two starts and led the 49ers to wins in both games. A back injury sidelined him for the season finale, but Hill finished with 54 completions in 79 attempts for five touchdowns and one interception, plus one rushing touchdown.” – Clifton Brown, SportingNews.com

Compare that with Smith only completing under 50% of his passes and throwing for only 2 touchdowns for the whole ‘07 season. Sure he was battling an injury, sure he’s had different OCs, sure he got in fights with Nolan – whatever. Compared to Smith, Hill did more and looked better in just 2 games than Smith’s looked in 3 years.

on a sidenote, I’d still take a sucking Smith over the evil Favre

by Persiflage on Jul 18, 2008 12:07 PM PDT up 0 recs

Short version:

1) Weak ass defenses.
2) Offensive line played for the first time all year.
3) Run-first gameplanning
4) An insane amount of checkdowns.

These are the benefits that Hill had in the games he played that the other guys didn’t have. The fact that we won those games is no reflection on Hill. Even his high completion percentage is more indicative of the checkdown offense he was playing in than any sort of accuracy he actually displayed. As Smith’s completion percentage is concerned, it’s deeply hampered by the games he played injured (and no, I’m not forgetting that Hill played injured as well… not exactly a shoulder, but still), and in the games he was healthy it’s hampered by a high number of easy catches that were dropped. I remember reading that if most of the dropped passes in Smith’s first 3 games last season had been caught, his completion percentage would have been up around 60%.

There are serious reasons to believe that the bare numbers for both players last season are pretty misleading.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 18, 2008 1:01 PM PDT up 0 recs

Sample sizes...

I really don’t feel like digging up the standard counter-points for the “SHINY SHINY SHAUN HILL IS 2-0!” being given as a reason why he is even good. Any QB can scrounge up two good games when the cards are all laying faced up (which is kind of what Hill faced late last season). I’m not saying the other team completely gave the 49ers those two wins or gave Hill his “performances,” but it’s very likely that team standings and the approaching end of the season had a lot to do with things.

I’m not saying Hill for sure sucks, though. I just don’t get where people think Hill is some kind of star QB in the making, though. Before I even finished writing this HTS made some of those points for me. Bottom line is, while I understand that people are excited about Hill’s potential, he’s far from proven that he’s a better option than Smith. If that were the case, he wouldn’t have signed his extension and just hoped he found a starting job elsewhere.

by sfgfan on Jul 18, 2008 1:04 PM PDT up 0 recs

At one point of the '07 season

ALEX SMITH WAS 2-0!

by methodrampage on Jul 18, 2008 6:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

I would much rather have 2 seasons of average Alex Smith then put up with 2 seasons of Favre drama queen crybaby bullshit.

Simply by pulling on both ends, Patrick Willis can stretch diamonds back into coal

by 49erLou on Jul 16, 2008 9:37 AM PDT 0 recs

Absolutely.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 16, 2008 11:04 AM PDT up 0 recs

Eh.

I don’t think it’s wrong for him to want to come back. If Joe or Steve had wanted to come back a few months after announcing they’d retire, I’d take them back in a heartbeat. Similarly here, I think it’s okay he wants back. He wouldn’t have to whine if the Packers would just let him go.

I mean seriously. If the guy isn’t in your plans, let him go. Don’t hold onto him because you don’t want his name tied to another team for the sake of your team’s history. That’s what it seems like the Packers are doing, and that’s just wrong.

My sole reason for not wanting Favre around SF is that you don’t know where he’s going next. I think his best fit is a team who is just QB away from being a championship team. Sadly, there aren’t very many teams in that very situation.

by sfgfan on Jul 16, 2008 11:09 AM PDT up 0 recs

Personally speaking, if Steve Young wanted to come back, I’d have been extremely against it! Having suffered through seven concussions, it was definitely time, maybe past time, for him to retire. For his own sake, I’m glad he hung it up when he did.

"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler

by JRPhillips on Jul 16, 2008 11:39 AM PDT up 0 recs

Oh, I totally agree.

I think Steve made a great choice in retiring when he did. Aside from being (AT LEAST) coherent for the majority of the remainder of his life, he’s still got a great mind to analyze for a living. I’m not saying he didn’t make a great choice in retiring, I’m just saying I wouldn’t hate him (or even hold anything against him) if he had been as indecisive as Favre has been.

by sfgfan on Jul 16, 2008 2:01 PM PDT up 0 recs

I couldn't agree more

"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler

by JRPhillips on Jul 16, 2008 2:24 PM PDT up 0 recs

Wow. You know the weird thing is that my eyes didn’t even read the end of the sentence when I replied to it. All I saw was:

I would much rather have 2 seasons of average Alex Smith then put up with 2 seasons of Favre…

And to that much I agree absolutely. As far as not seeing the rest of the sentence… just call it the overtime glaze.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 16, 2008 1:41 PM PDT up 0 recs

+1

I dont really understand the suddenly common and widespread hatred for Favre. Certainly he shouldnt have announced his retirement, but why the outrage? sfgfan I understand your argument for not wanting him here and your debate with Unleashthegore is kinda what I envisioned, I dont get all the Favre haters. Granted, Green Bay was a bit of a rival in the 90’s, but its not like he was a Cowboy or Ram.

by sam23 on Jul 18, 2008 11:03 AM PDT up 0 recs

Dude, I HATED Favre back in the day!

I wanted him to eat dirt with all my heart!

Then the Niners started sucking big time… It actually allowed me the time to get over my hatred of Favre and eventually be able to appreciate him as a very very good quarterback and a pretty decent dude.

But I’d rather… Well, I’m just going to say I don’t want to see Favre as a 49er. Nothing personal, I’m just in the DO NOT WANT camp.

"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler

by JRPhillips on Jul 18, 2008 12:08 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yeah, put me down firmly in the “always hated Favre” camp. This isn’t even remotely a change of tune for me.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 18, 2008 1:03 PM PDT up 0 recs

sorry, i’ve just had a little bit more then enough Favre. I think it sucks what the Pack is doing to the guy but in the same respect it could have been handled by Favre much better then it was. Hence the drama queen crybaby tag…but hey that’s just my opinion…and I definitiely don’t expect everyone to feel the same way as I do

Simply by pulling on both ends, Patrick Willis can stretch diamonds back into coal

by 49erLou on Jul 16, 2008 7:31 PM PDT 0 recs

I commend the Packers

Favre is being a wiener crybaby and is trying to get release so that he can sign with the Vikings. Hence the tampering charges Green Bay has filed against Minnesota. Favre needs to realize he isn’t bigger than the team, he isn’t bigger than Green Bay and he isn’t bigger than the NFL.

by methodrampage on Jul 16, 2008 8:36 PM PDT up 0 recs

WE NEED BRETT FAVRE

No Ifs ands or buts, Monster park will rock !! can u imagine Arnaz, Isaac, Bryant, Vernon, frank and Deshawn with Brett we will be SB bound!!! Martz and Brett go back, actually Nolan too. There is no games with GB this year so no brainer maybe a 3rd round draft pick, GITTER DONE…..

by skilkrax on Jul 16, 2008 10:58 PM PDT 0 recs

There are a number of things wrong with this comment.

But mostly… does hating a guy for killing your team years ago mean NOTHING anymore?!

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 16, 2008 11:51 PM PDT up 0 recs

If

Isaac Bruce will be wearing red and gold, why not Favre? Shoot, Mike Martz will be running our offense. .

by sam23 on Jul 18, 2008 11:10 AM PDT up 0 recs

Well, to be fair to that, Isaac Bruce was never anywhere near as hated by me as Favre, and I’m still coming to terms with the fact that Bruce will be on our team. I haven’t completely accepted it yet.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 18, 2008 1:05 PM PDT up 0 recs

What?!

Isaac Bruce played for our biggest division rival? Brett Favre matched up against us a few times in the playoffs in the 90’s but Bruce killed us twice a year for over 10 years. It shouldnt even be close.

by sam23 on Jul 18, 2008 3:27 PM PDT up 0 recs

Nothing against that Rams rivalry in the ‘90s, but next to the Cowboys I’ve never hated any teams so much as I hated those Packers teams that spent the better part of the mid-’90s creaming us year in and year out.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 18, 2008 3:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

meh

youre obviously entitled to your own hatred rankings but mine are:
1. Cowboys
2. Cowboys
3. Rams
4. Cowboys
5. Any team with Kurt Warner

by sam23 on Jul 18, 2008 3:36 PM PDT up 0 recs

6.

oh and having spent a couple years in DC, the annoying Redskin fan base is more than enough to make you hate them despite the shared hatred of the Cowboys. Too bad because I’d always sorta liked them before.

by sam23 on Jul 18, 2008 3:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

Here's mine.

http://www.ninersnation.com/2008/2/20/123139/808

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 18, 2008 3:55 PM PDT up 0 recs

ha

by sam23 on Jul 19, 2008 12:36 AM PDT up 0 recs

We need Brett Favre ... like we need a deafening collection of BOOS! filling our own stadium every time the Niners' offense walks onto the field.

Screw that. Screw the Packers. And screw Brett Favre.

by Persiflage on Jul 18, 2008 6:49 AM PDT up 0 recs

Favre doesn't own us, we own HIM

And I own YOu..just kidding…please, no more pillars of salt…

Favre acts like he owns the world, wanting back into the game and there are whispers that the 49ers could be one of the viable choices, but he brings bad news..he will mess up the team chemistry wherever he goes.

With Favre, it’s about HIM. It’s not about Green Bay, Chicago, Minnesota, or San Francisco. Favre’s writing is all over the wall.

And the crybaby he is.

Oh, he’ll cry retiring as a San Francisco 49er..what a scenario!

If I retired, I’d laugh and laugh until I came back to win it all.

I literally did, just not in football, but in another sport. I don’t have to elaborate, because there are too many crazies out there.

Or pillars of salt.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 17, 2008 1:13 AM PDT 0 recs

HELL NO!

Brett Favre is and always has been the enemy. A true 49ers fan would rather root for a underdog, young upcoming QB like Hill or Smith rather than see Favre in red and gold. Absolutely not – for the all same reasons Big Daddy Drew lists here -

http://deadspin.com/5023793/brett-favre-as-a-viking-and-the-importance-of-your-one-true-hate

by Persiflage on Jul 18, 2008 6:44 AM PDT 0 recs

Its not like

we want Troy Aikman. If we can welcome Isaac Bruce, I think we could certainly take Favre if he was going to make the team better.

by sam23 on Jul 18, 2008 11:08 AM PDT up 0 recs

“I have spent the past 15 years nursing my blind hatred for Brett Favre. I’ve brought up my hate. Raised it. Fed it. Nurtured it. Taught it valuable lessons. I’ve watched it grow into full blossom. If my hate were a child (and I do think of my hate that way), he’d be off to Hate College in just a couple years. He’d probably major in Death Threats. Why, he’d be driving by now! He’d be driving his little Hate Car over burning effigies of Favre I would lay out on the driveway. I’ve put a lot of hard work into this hate. My hate and I, we don’t even need to use words to communicate anymore. We can just give each other a subtle glance and know exactly what kind of horrible fate we’d like Favre to experience …” – Drew Magary from Deadspin

by Persiflage on Jul 18, 2008 11:46 AM PDT up 0 recs