I know everyone is completely sick of the Brett Favre situation and I said I wasn't going to talk about it, and then I did anyway, but I just want to touch on one singular topic and bust out a theoretical. In order to get Favre to stay in Mississippi, the Packers offered him 20 million to stay retired. The single question that came to my mind is how the hell could the NFL allow this. Shouldn't the NFL be about paying people to play and not paying people no to play. And then here comes the theoretical.
Say coming the AFC clearly identified the Pats as the divisional front runner. Now inarguably the key player to the Patriots is Tom Brady. He's probably their best player but simply put their most irreplaceable player. His backups are Matt Cassell and Matt Gutierrez both of whom could not start at Michigan or USC back in their school days. So, if it was ever legal for the Packers to offer 20 million to Favre to stay retired, why would it not be legal for the AFC teams not including the Patriots to offer a massive lump sum of money to sit out the season. Would it not be worth it for the Jets, Dolphins, Colts, Bills, etc. to throw down 10 million dollars into a pot of 150 million in order to get Brady to sit out a year? It wouldn't cost against the cap, they would just be hiring Tom as an AFC spokesperson and letting the Patriots get and AFC spokesperson free of charge.
Obviously that would never be allowed to happen in the NFL, but allowing Favre to get paid by the Packers to go away would be similar, just on a smaller and less corrupt/collusional scale.
Comments
I think tampering rules would stop other teams from paying brady to not play, plus, you better believe the patriots are going to pay brady to not go somewhere else at the end of his career. Teams just dont want the player that they've had forever to wear another jersey, since favre will always be a big money maker for them.
I never understood why the 49ers let Rice go. I thought this would be the way to handle something like that.