Brett Favre - Now Wrecking a Succession Plan Near You...

By now, even the non-sports people have heard about the drama surrounding Brett Favre, the former Green Bay Packers (pro football) legend who has publicly flip-flopped on retirement, retiring earlier this year, then expressed interest in "un"-retiring, then got chippy with the Green Bay organization when they balked about taking him back immediately. 

Favre's a legend.  The Packer's front office is taking a beating about its handling of his request to return, although some of the press seems to be turning against Favre in the past few days.  At this point, the Packers seem intent to delay a release or trade of Favre.  In doing that, they also seem anxious to continue the process of deploying the succession plan they've had in place for years to replace Favre.

What's your take?  Does Favre deserve to un-retire and come back to the Packers without question?  Or should the Packers continue the succession plan they began when Favre retired a few months ago?  I'm siding with the Packers in moving on, here are my reasons why:

1. It's All About Brett - For all practical purposes, Favre's seemed like a great teammate through the years.  Listen closely to him in the sound bites over the past couple of weeks, and there's an important observation to be had - it's all about Brett.  It's all comments regarding him, nothing about coming back to help the Packers because they're close to a championship, etc.  It's about him, which means the next flip (or flop) can only be a few weeks away.

2. How would you handle a star who's always talking about resigning? - Favre's been talking for the last three years about giving it up.  It's something the team has had to deal with for the last three years.  Ever have a co-worker who talked about quitting for a LONG time?  How did you feel at the end? Right, you wanted them to do it so you could stop hearing about it...

3. The flip-flopping isn't new - Since Favre's been talking about quitting for a half decade, the Packers have done the right thing from an OD perspective, picking a successor (Aaron Rogers) and grooming him for the role.  Both the Packers and Rogers have felt the yo-yo of Favre saying he's leaving, then staying for the last three years.  No wonder they want to move on.

4. After three years of starting, then delaying the succession plan, the Packers have an official resignation letter.  So it's about him, the star's always talking about quitting, and then the big day comes - you've got a resignation letter on your desk.  It's the closure you've been asking for, one way or the other.  Now it's official.  As a general rule, with all the aforementioned drama, you wouldn't reopen after you had closure.

5. When the Packers didn't rush to reinstate upon request, Favre went negative - The media is starting to turn against Favre, and there are a couple of reasons why.  See my first point for reason #1.  If Favre talks about the team, he would have had the public, the media and the team eating out of his hand.  Additionally, see the Greta Van Susteren show on Fox.  That's going negative against the organization, and it's pretty much a point of no return. 

Add all these points up, and even the Green Bay community is becoming split about whether to bring Favre back. 

If you had been strung along for 3 years, had your succession plan in place and then got the closure you had been waiting for, what would you do?  Rescind the resignation letter?  For anyone other than Favre, I doubt it.  I wouldn't do it with Favre either. 

Lucky for the Packers, Favre's actions have made it easier for them to move on.  Read more HR opinion on Favre at Your HR Guy, and hat tip to Lance for reminding me to riff on this...

Comments

[Pankow]

Favre went out a legend. He went out with style and class. Now...he's trying to pull a Michael Jordan. The greats should stay great and stay gone.

[Jessica Lee]

i dunno... i'd have to say that when a star keeps threatening to quit, i'd rather have them quit. make threats just isn't sexy. i'd rather take committed #2 player who is stable over volatile #1.

can someone now tell me how to pronounce brett's last name?

[Mr. Gettit Rite]

Realizing this is NFL Football and not your normal business I would say typical rules would not apply. As the most dedicated player in the NFL earning him the title of being the "iron man" I would say that not taking him back would be similar to not taking back a key leader in your organization that is perfectly flawless as your company is on the verge of being on top. So he talked about retiring for the past 3 years. Who cares, he has earned the right to think about retiring after 243 consecutive games (the most in the league). You'd be crazzy for picking #2 when you could have #1 for another year.

[K Halseth]

Let's be clear about something. Favre has NOT been talkiing about retiring for years. The media has been stirring that pot with years of speculation about whether or not Favre would retire, but he never actually said he was considering it until this past season. Then he said, early on, that his decision was influenced by pressure from the organization to retire and he's come right out and admitted he made a mistake. Don't we encourage people to admit their mistakes? Don't we think they should be given another chance? Especially when they are hands down the best people we've got? As a rabid Packers fan, and foam-at-the-mouth rabid Favre fan I think they should have jumped at the chance to have him back. I think now, no matter what happens, the entire career of this incredible athlete is tainted. And I think that's just sad. That is not how you treat your best people...it sends a bad message to the rest of the team and hints at how they can expect to be treated in the future. If Favre goes to another team...this fan will be going with him.

I guess I'll have to post my truckload of Packer's gear on ebay. But with their Superbowl hopes gone with Brett...who'll want them?

[sammyk]

Wow, for GB it's kind of a no-brainer. They seem to want their cake and eat it too. Either keep him or let him go. However, by holding on to his contract and not releasing him to sign with another team while at the same time telling him he can sit the bench, patently unfair and not right at all.

If they maintain Rodgers is ready to step up and play like a Favre and take his place, great. Misguided but at least they seem to be making a decision. Let Favre, one of the best QBs ever to play the game, go on to continue his career. One or the other.

[Joshua Letourneau]

Kris, I'm late to this party, but your post here about succession planning is superb. Kudos on tying in current events - I couldn't agree more that this entire issue is a complete shame.

[Spike]

I agree 100%, with one important caveat.

Very few of us has had an employer who has said, "You know, we don't want you to work here anymore, because you've retired. BUT we also don't want you to do what you've done for us anywhere else." Outside of the random non-compete clause for TV anchors and CEOs....

I'm not even a football fan, but there's been bad behavior and poor decisions on both sides. Brett should have stuck to his decision. The Packers should allow him to terminate his contract and play for another team if he wishes to do so.

[mj]

Help the cause and check out www.favregate08.com. I am seeing these all over southern Wisconsin.

[Linda Ramsey]

Brett Farve is my hero I only kept up with greenbay because of him. No matter what the press has to say, he carried the team, even when he seemed to be only one who wanted to play. I have been a fan along time, the quarterbacks from other teams with New England have snobby better than you attitudes, but they play as a team to make him look good, where Brett always had to carry a team that did not back him. So by all rights is should be about Brett. Greenbay did not deserve him. Linda Ramsey, roostersclutch@yahoo.com the media is always praising then chopping..