I am waiting for Jon Stewart of The Daily Show to weigh in on the Favre-Packer vs. Viking matter. Here is what mystifies me:
How can someone who is washed up, retired, not valuable enough to play first string if he did return, ......be also a threat if he was released?
Is there such a thing as a contract between Favre and the Packers that would say that he will not play, and will not be released...would that contract have no consideration or money involved? Favre is not being paid according to his interview.
Thus----unless we have reinstated indentured servitude---it appears to me that unless the Packers want to pay Favre, they have to release him. If they do not release him, he rightfully should show up to training camp and expect to be paid. Right?
The only thing I can think of is if the Packers say that in consideration of the money they have paid him in the past and his covenant not to compete with them, thus even though he is not of value to them, they insist that he not compete with them in any event. How strong of an argument do you think the Packers have?
What are your thoughts?
The Evansville Observer Archive: The unofficial history of Evansville, Wisconsin from 2005-2013: Thousands of Video and Audio and Articles; Free: To Search scroll to the Search this Blog line and enter name of person, topic, or issue. Then scroll up to see all articles. Or use Google Search by topic. Enjoy.
1) Brett Favre is retired right now. The Packers owe him nothing today.
ReplyDelete2) If BF wants to play he must apply to the league for reinstatement. His call entirely and a formality for approval.
3) If he's reinstated the Packers own his rights with a valid contract. He would be paid by the Packers whether he palyed or not.
4) None of this is a surprise to BF or his agent.
5) BF signed a valid contract with the Packers and a letter of resignation. As of right now both are in effect.