Brett Favre Talked to Greg Jennings Before He Signed With Minnesota Vikings

Mar 19, 2013 Full story: rantsports.com 62

It's one thing for a popular NFL player to sign with a different team, but sometimes it becomes more difficult when that player jumps to a division rival-which is exactly what Greg Jennings did when he left the Green Bay Packers to join the Minnesota Vikings last week.

Full Story
eric

Marshfield, WI

#22 Mar 21, 2013
I still say Reggie White doesnt get nearly the credit he deserves,White played in GB 93-98 and we made the playoffs every year he was here.
Id love to sign AR,but 20M out of 120M of the cap,,then you throw in Mathews nad his 10M or so,thats 30 of 120M or 25% of the cap,SO we will need to have a few players from every draft to hit the starting lineup.We should be able to free up serious cash after next year,as i pointed out earlier but look at Baltimore ( as was pointed out earlier),,SO while we have the best qb in football,we still may not have a LT to protect him and his career ( ironically enough) may be cut short as we cant afford a good LT ( unless we land a LT and keep him for 4 years,lose him to LA,then draft another one and hit on him as well).Teams have won SB with lesser qb then Rodgers,SO,if his demands get to out of hand,well......
eric

Marshfield, WI

#23 Mar 21, 2013
Looks like Brian Urlacher and the Bears have moved forward.They couldnt reach a deal so both will move on,although theres no a big market for him at this point.
viking nation

Madera, CA

#24 Mar 21, 2013
eric wrote:
I still say Reggie White doesnt get nearly the credit he deserves,White played in GB 93-98 and we made the playoffs every year he was here.
Id love to sign AR,but 20M out of 120M of the cap,,then you throw in Mathews nad his 10M or so,thats 30 of 120M or 25% of the cap,SO we will need to have a few players from every draft to hit the starting lineup.We should be able to free up serious cash after next year,as i pointed out earlier but look at Baltimore ( as was pointed out earlier),,SO while we have the best qb in football,we still may not have a LT to protect him and his career ( ironically enough) may be cut short as we cant afford a good LT ( unless we land a LT and keep him for 4 years,lose him to LA,then draft another one and hit on him as well).Teams have won SB with lesser qb then Rodgers,SO,if his demands get to out of hand,well......
Wow so do think the Packers wont resign Rodgers? Its not every day a team runs across a QB like him. I agree that the Packers need a LT & a few others on its front line but they got reach a agreement with Aaron or the Packers franchise will have to start over. not all rookie QBs have a good season like Luck or Griffin. I know there is other needs like Mathew but I wouldn't think even he would stand first over rodgers.
Air Rodgers

Miami, FL

#25 Mar 21, 2013
eric wrote:
Teams have won SB with lesser qb then Rodgers,SO,if his demands get to out of hand,well......
Not really true anymore. It's a QB league now. Look at the QBs of the last 10 SB winners--they're all at or just below Rodgers' talent level.
eric

Marshfield, WI

#26 Mar 21, 2013
viking nation wrote:
<quoted text>Wow so do think the Packers wont resign Rodgers? Its not every day a team runs across a QB like him. I agree that the Packers need a LT & a few others on its front line but they got reach a agreement with Aaron or the Packers franchise will have to start over. not all rookie QBs have a good season like Luck or Griffin. I know there is other needs like Mathew but I wouldn't think even he would stand first over rodgers.
No, they will sign him for sure but with the cash going AR way,Have fun tring to sign a LT,which if AR got injured on a sack from the blind side,that would be a tragic irony.We didnt have enough cash to protect the franchise by signing a great LT and AR got injured? That indeed would be a tragic ironic situation wouldnt it and very sadly so?
eric

Marshfield, WI

#27 Mar 21, 2013
Now the other side of the coin is,TT will have to hit on many rookies and 2nd year players who havent hit the FA market yet and have a few guys in reserve for the ones who hit the market and are lost and Thank God for Packer fans,that TT is one of the best GMs in the game to do that!
GB record proves as such.
Laughing Bear Fan

Longmont, CO

#28 Mar 21, 2013
GBPmies wrote:
<quoted text>
A good example is the Bears, look how dominant they were in our division in the 70s and 80s but look at what they have done since the salary cap. They have been less than impressive actually quite mediocre for the most part.
Can I have what you are smoking? The immortal 70's bears probably had a winning percentage of 35%, they had a run from 84-89 but that was it. I'll take Mediocre...You always know how to sweet talk people :) Its too bad about urlacher, maybe he can go to a contender and get a ring

“Zimmer Turner Overdrive”

Since: Jan 07

Minneapolis

#29 Mar 21, 2013
GBPmies wrote:
<quoted text>
Depends on how you define a dynasty I guess, and I didn't get the last 2 sentences can you explain what you meant?
Last two sentences i made were about the vikings winning a lot of games in the pre-cap days. Just because Green Bay did not win, does not mean all small market teams struggled. We went 0-4 in sb's, but were favored in 2 of them and had the 4th best defense all-time, according to most.(1969 vikes - others are teams like 1985 bears, first ravens sb squad and the tampa sb winner). So, cap is nice and all, as the vikes would not have lost guys like Gary Zimmerman, but the overall quality of play is down heavily and the salary cap has caused money to get congregated in certain positions - you'll see soon enough when Rodgers gets his contract.

Last sentence was directed to the fan who did not think it was mostly the addition of Favre who turned around the packers. He thought the salary cap era did it. That is false, because that is not what caused the packers to make poor draft choices, poor free agents, etc. Packers could have drafted Montana, right? What round was it? Ron Wolf came on, added a QB and made good draft choices. Good decisions matter or the Yankees would win every year in baseball, right? I was not packer-bashing or whatever eric thought there.

“Zimmer Turner Overdrive”

Since: Jan 07

Minneapolis

#30 Mar 21, 2013
eric wrote:
actually Football has been light years better since the cap! We dont have SF and Dal every year in the SB with an occational Wash.NY thrown in.
Now it takes management skills and management to make it work,not just throw money at someone ( like Baseball)
When you said your deluding yourself,No favre ,no packers anything..
DO you mean,,w/o Favre no Packer anything,
or
do you mean that statement was wrong?
I can argue Reggie White was more important that Favre
Quality of play is down. Teams are not as good. or rather, all the teams are about equal, which is not to say all teams are now elite. It does not take management skills to make it work - it takes a quarterback, usually, and management skills. The QB must at least be elite in the post-season. And in baseball, the big payrolls are not winning, maybe you have a better example? Like, how in basketball, the cap there has led to...utter c(r)ap? Let the yankees/cowboys sign all the guys they want. Cowboys only won when they fleeced the vikings, drafted aikman, and a few other few players THAT WERE DRAFTED. Look, pack is doing great now for quite some time, but it is because they had favre, and now have rodgers. that's it. Reggie White went to the packers BECAUSE THEY HAD BRETT FAVRE. I am a huge reggie white fan; i think most know i love me some DT, lol. Not saying favre would have won it all without great DT play, but he could have maybe just done it with a guy who had one good year at DT. For argument's sake, we'll call that guy by the hypothetical name "raji".

so, in short, your hatred for favre because after he got shown the door in green bay, he spent two years in MN is clouding reality. No rodgers next year means no shot at another packers championship.(unless your back-up is the next tom brady, lol, god, I'll hate you if that's the case ;))

“Zimmer Turner Overdrive”

Since: Jan 07

Minneapolis

#31 Mar 21, 2013
Laughing Bear Fan wrote:
<quoted text>Can I have what you are smoking? The immortal 70's bears probably had a winning percentage of 35%, they had a run from 84-89 but that was it. I'll take Mediocre...You always know how to sweet talk people :) Its too bad about urlacher, maybe he can go to a contender and get a ring
Yes, it was the vikings who had the winning percentage - beating on tampa/green bay and usually the bears. just no rings, because our hof QB played worse than dilfer in super bowls. wow, that hurts. And we had Alan Page, the only DT who can be compared with reggie white for my money.

“HHhhhoooowwwlll”

Since: Feb 08

Craigville

#32 Mar 21, 2013
Brett talked to Rodgers about taking the swim accross the St. Croix too, even sold him a life jacket.

“HHhhhoooowwwlll”

Since: Feb 08

Craigville

#33 Mar 21, 2013
Purple Faithful wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, it was the vikings who had the winning percentage - beating on tampa/green bay and usually the bears. just no rings, because our hof QB played worse than dilfer in super bowls. wow, that hurts. And we had Alan Page, the only DT who can be compared with reggie white for my money.
And Reggie White was an Eagle......
Laughing Bear Fan

Longmont, CO

#34 Mar 21, 2013
Purple Faithful wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, it was the vikings who had the winning percentage - beating on tampa/green bay and usually the bears. just no rings, because our hof QB played worse than dilfer in super bowls. wow, that hurts. And we had Alan Page, the only DT who can be compared with reggie white for my money.
Who is going into camp as the #1 QB PF? Ponder or Cassel?

“HHhhhoooowwwlll”

Since: Feb 08

Craigville

#35 Mar 21, 2013
Cassel was brought in to back up Ponder, Frazier said it, as did Cassel.
Laughing Bear Fan

Longmont, CO

#36 Mar 21, 2013
40for60 wrote:
Cassel was brought in to back up Ponder, Frazier said it, as did Cassel.
He must really really suck then

“HHhhhoooowwwlll”

Since: Feb 08

Craigville

#37 Mar 21, 2013
Laughing Bear Fan wrote:
<quoted text>He must really really suck then
They're trying to build Christian' confidence, it is only his third year. Replacing Webb was a must though, rewind to his playoff performance.
GBPmies

Finland

#38 Mar 21, 2013
Purple Faithful wrote:
<quoted text>Last two sentences i made were about the vikings winning a lot of games in the pre-cap days. Just because Green Bay did not win, does not mean all small market teams struggled. We went 0-4 in sb's, but were favored in 2 of them and had the 4th best defense all-time, according to most.(1969 vikes - others are teams like 1985 bears, first ravens sb squad and the tampa sb winner). So, cap is nice and all, as the vikes would not have lost guys like Gary Zimmerman, but the overall quality of play is down heavily and the salary cap has caused money to get congregated in certain positions - you'll see soon enough when Rodgers gets his contract.
Last sentence was directed to the fan who did not think it was mostly the addition of Favre who turned around the packers. He thought the salary cap era did it. That is false, because that is not what caused the packers to make poor draft choices, poor free agents, etc. Packers could have drafted Montana, right? What round was it? Ron Wolf came on, added a QB and made good draft choices. Good decisions matter or the Yankees would win every year in baseball, right? I was not packer-bashing or whatever eric thought there.
Thanks for explaining. I canít argue against your reasoning it was Favre that turned the Packers around. Other teams that have enjoyed the same success after 1994 have also had great QBs. I donít think the Packers would have had the revenue to compete against some of the other teams that have rich owners willing to spend more if not for the salary cap. The Packers have had no rich owners but then again Favre turned the Packers into a money making machine. You did mentioned Wolf and how he brought in Favre and drafted better and made better decisions. Maybe he deserves the most credit since he had a bigger role for the overall team management, then Favre? then Salary Cap?

“Zimmer Turner Overdrive”

Since: Jan 07

Minneapolis

#39 Mar 21, 2013
40for60 wrote:
<quoted text>And Reggie White was an Eagle......
Yeah, that's where he had his years comparable to Alan Page.

“Zimmer Turner Overdrive”

Since: Jan 07

Minneapolis

#40 Mar 21, 2013
GBPmies wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for explaining. I canít argue against your reasoning it was Favre that turned the Packers around. Other teams that have enjoyed the same success after 1994 have also had great QBs. I donít think the Packers would have had the revenue to compete against some of the other teams that have rich owners willing to spend more if not for the salary cap. The Packers have had no rich owners but then again Favre turned the Packers into a money making machine. You did mentioned Wolf and how he brought in Favre and drafted better and made better decisions. Maybe he deserves the most credit since he had a bigger role for the overall team management, then Favre? then Salary Cap?
Yeah, that would be fine if you want to credit Wolf mostly, as he brought in Favre. Thing is, if Wolfe brings in Scott Mitchell instead of Favre, do you still think Wolfe is "the man"? See, I think the player makes the genius management. So, Favre > Wolfe, Tom Brady > Bill Belicheck, to make it non-packer for ease of discussion or Montana > Walsh. No "genius" ever had a bum at QB, you know? I know the BB comment will be the one most disagreed with, but all you have to do is look at BB's record before brady. He was a bum....

“Zimmer Turner Overdrive”

Since: Jan 07

Minneapolis

#41 Mar 21, 2013
Laughing Bear Fan wrote:
<quoted text>Who is going into camp as the #1 QB PF? Ponder or Cassel?
Ponder. Thing is, if Ponder struggles as he has for stretches his first few years, the Vikes have an instant QB controversy now. Fans may chant "Cassel" as they probably never seen him play in KC. Vikes are unlikely to win 10 next year with a tougher schedule, but the fans are unlikely to have tempered enthusiasum here. We're not used to sucking like the Lions, bears, bucs, and pack have/had for long stretches in the North/Central. Vike fans are very fickle - packers show up no matter what and support - we throw sh!tz and boo wildly, etc. We have had like 2 terrible years in the last 30 - Steckel and frazier first year. We're kinda spoiled (other than the 0-4 thing)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minnesota Vikings Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Hall rights a wrong with Tingelhoff 3 hr Magnum Man II 3
Super Bowl prediction 5 hr Avant 1
Teddy Bridgewater wins Pepsi Rookie of the Year... Sat Magnum Man II 4
Happy 55th BDay MN Vikings Fri Sammy Hagar 3
Authorities To Ramp Up DWI Enforcement Over Sup... Fri Tanked Johnson 1
Josh Gordon Fri Burger King 34
2015 draft and free agency Fri Jimmy the Greek 20
More from around the web