I still don't understand this distraction theory. I said it last year and I'll say it again. If our team is that mentally weak that they can't fully perform their potential because of a distraction in early August, we have NO chance of ever winning a Super Bowl with this squad.

If you can't handle that distraction, how are you going to handle the playoffs or even the Super Bowl.

Perfect example, the 2007-08 season. Two teams in the Super Bowl:

The NY Giants - Tiki Barber situation, they won the Super Bowl
The NE Patroits - Spygate, which is a 1000X bigger distraction than Favre because that popped up DURING the season and they went 18-1. Like any mentally strong and well coached team, they used it as motivation. If anything they should have been motivated to "stick it" to Favre.

If it did "distract" them and that was even A cause of last year's garbage, then get new players.

I suspect that wasn't a reason and it had more to do with a rookie QB growing through growing pains, a running back showing his true form, a horrible D, bad coaching, etc.

---

RedSox, I don't think anyone's saying that. But, I don't see why anyone would think that the whole deal wouldn't be a pain in the ass.

---

+1

But ADD to that the whole distration BF caused.
Professionals or not, that did NOT help the team in my view.

Trust me, if i AM right, see how BF gets treated IF he comes back as a Queen by the current Packers.

---

You can't not factor in the distraction especially when you spend most of training camp installing your offense and defense of the up and coming season. Teams evolve and it's not as simple as just re-learning one thing and redoing it. Nobody on here can tell me they function best when they're dealing with something or involved in the middle of something. People try to make football out to be something that is an easy thing to do. Put your pads on and play. It's not that simple. Not anymore at least.

It'd be one if Donald Driver feuded with the Packers, but when it's your quarterback from last season, it's a distraction. It's going to effect the teams' mentality. That doesn't mean they're weak. It means they're human.

Guys probably took sides. That probably caused for some tension. I guarantee you there was some second guessing both on the coaching staff and on the field. That is just human nature. It may not happen in the moment, but after you reflect on it, you second guess.

It's not any different than Favre second guessing Super Bowl 32 or Ron Wolf second guessing not bringing back Byrce Paup.

The Tiki comparison doesn't work and even spygate doesn't compare. Tiki said things on television. So do a ton of other guys. Teams are far more accustomed to ignoring comments by commentators. In fact they use it as motivation. As did New England. They used spygate as motivation throughout he season.

Green Bay really couldn't use Favre as motivation last season. He played for the Jets and basically picked his fight with the GM and not the players. Maybe Rodgers did and his play would suggest it worked, but not everyone.

Players play for fans and themeselves. Not GMs.

With all this said the Packers defense is reason No. 1 why they won six games. However, football is like an equation and the distraction is part of it. As was Ryan Grant as was Aaron Rodgers' ups and downs. Everything contributed.

---

Certainly with the amount of hype and with how the whole thing played out there was some distraction involved with the players. You don't get asked over and over again for months what you think about something and after awhile it not get on your nerves.

I don't think that has anything to do with what happened being any form of excuse either. I don't see how that had anything to do with the defense collapsing in the fourth quarter over and over.

I never heard any player ever say anything like "oh well, with all that junk that went on before the season ever got going what do you expect." After the first play of the first game all that was history and I never felt like anybody was using any previous issue as an excuse for when we lost.

I think Greg may have just used a poor choice of words in describing the current position and focus of the team and the players in that there are no more ties to the past.

As far as I am concerned let the Vikes deal with it now. Let the circus begin for them. For us the elephants danced and the lions roared. Now the tents are all packed up and it's on to the next place for the "Greatest show on Earth". Maybe Greg should have put it like that. I think thats closer to how he feels about it.

---

Ted Thompson could have come out and said "Green Bay is no longer interested in having Brett Favre as the QB of thier football team" and it would have ended the whole circus before it started.

RedSox nailed it though. If these guys can't work through distractions get new guys. Don't use it as a crutch for your poor performance

---

That would not have ended it. It is still a story and it's obvious we no longer are interested in Brett as the GB QB.
I also don't see the team using this as a crutch or an excuse. It was just another problem to deal with that they didn't need. I run into those daily and it is a distraction. I could be far more productive if stupid things didn't come up all the time.

How would have that not ended the whole thing?

It wasn't a physical distraction it was mental. Had Ted stated right away "BRETT WILL NOT BE THE QB OF THIS TEAM IN 2009" I can't see how it would interfere with any players currently on the roster.

What was the big distraction?

The media asking them questions about the ordeal? Is that really distracting to the players?

---

Football is as much mental as it is physical.

Ted Thompson clearly made mistakes, but he could have also kept Favre and made him a backup too or he could have traded him to the Vikings or Buccaneers or start him as a Packer.

Any of those options other than being a Packer sound good? Not really.

Favre didn't decide what to do until the Summer. Clearly, Green Bay thought he was done. However, they should have been prepared.

Teams had to figure out whether they wanted Favre or not. Then a deal needed to be worked out. It's not as easy as just saying "let's get rid of Favre". The only team that probably would've taken him right away was the Vikings and you can't do that. You can't move a QB to a division rival. Same reason why Denver wasn't going to move Jay Cutler to one of their division rivals.

To state distractions doesn't effect players and that you should dump them because it does is absolutely absurd. Even TO has become a locker room distraction especially in Philly.

I'm not getting rid of say Donovan McNabb because he couldn't handle TO's ego.

Distractions are apart of the game, but you also have minor ones and big ones. A minor one shouldn't effect you. Unless you've been living under a rock on the moon, you should know that Favre was a huge distraction last year.

I'm certain Minnesota and Green Bay are going to be distracted in early October and early November this year. How can they not be? It will effect them, but again the outcome of the game will be determined largely due to the play on the field. Everything will contribute, but some more than others.

---