During his interview on HBO's "Joe Buck Live," Brett Favre made a seven-word statement that, when taken in the context of his comments around them, makes perfect sense.

"I play because I love to play."

He was discussing how, as he put it, he's not motivated to consider coming back in the 2009 season by the things that surround the game.

But I guarantee you, the "where he's playing," the Minnesota Vikings - the only team he's considering playing for, the one he referred to as "we" in this talk with Buck - is not because he loves to play.

I am still convinced it's because he wants revenge on Packers General Manager Ted Thompson.

Did he come out and say on Joe Buck's show that he wants two shots at the Packers so he can get back at Ted Thompson for what he perceives Thompson did to him?

No.

That already came out of his mouth in his statements to ESPN when he discussed how playing last year was all about "sticking it to Ted (Thompson, Packers General Manager)."

He tried on Buck's show to explain away his thoughts about why it's the Vikings because of his familiarity of the system the Vikings run - thanks to their offensive coordinator, former Packers quarterback coach Darrell Bevell.

"It makes perfect sense, because it is an offense that I ran for 16 years," said Favre to Buck.

"I could teach the offense. Going to the Jets was tough since I was 2 weeks late and it was a completely new offense. The coaches were great to me because the condensed the offense so I can at least call the plays. It is like learning a different language."

Does it make sense that going back to the Vikings would be easiest for him and can bring him more possibilities of success because of the familiarity of the system?

Sure.

But I'm still not convinced that's his reason, that's his motivation, for choosing the Minnesota Vikings.

"Some things happened there that may have ruffled the feathers for both sides," he admitted on Buck.

We all know the reasons why those ruffles are there, and why Favre couldn't stomach having to eat those ruffles.

Hence, that's why I believe he still wants to put a purple and gold crunch on the Packers by playing in the NFC North.

Amazingly, he attempted to spin the story by using the example of a legendary Packers coach who, 40 years ago, unretired from coaching.

"Vince Lombardi left Green Bay to go to the Washington Redskins, and his name is on the trophy that we give out every year."

Why did he go to the Washington Redskins, Brett? Was it revenge? Was it "sticking it to" the Packers?

Not at all.

Lombardi left because he, as general manager, had hired Phil Bengston to be his head coach in 1968, and he refused to do what Pat Riley did to Stan Van Gundy and the Miami Heat by demoting him so he could win a championship as head coach again once the coaching bug returned.

The Packers were not on the 1969 Redskins schedule, nor was Washington located in the NFC Central Division in 1969.

The Packers are twice on the 2009 Vikings schedule, and every Minnesota win makes it harder for Ted Thompson's team to return to the playoffs in a year where not doing so could cost him his job.

That, I'm sure, would make Brett Favre smile. Certainly, it would make a number of Packers fans who side with Favre be filled with glee.

But is it right for him to act out of revenge? As I said in a previous analysis: no way.

Did he come out and say directly to Joe Buck that he wants to play for the Vikings because he wants to "stick it to Ted?"

No.

But I'm still convinced it's why.

To all those who scoff the idea of having an advertisement on a Packers jersey, I'm with you.

Never in a game would I ever want to see a wine cooler ad, insurance firm or some other logo besides the "G" on a player's uniform or helmet when the beloved Packers are in action.

I don't want to see the NFL go the way of the English Premier League (and most other soccer leagues) and have the Chicago Bears with a big Bank One logo replacing the "C" battling the Detroit Ford Focus Lions.

But we've been here before.

What?  What in the name of Vince Lombardi are you thinking, oh boneheaded Packers Radio Network reporter?

I'm saying the Packers have had sponsors on their uniforms before.

You don't think so?  What about this?

      Yep...some of the very first Packers teams had "Acme Packers" stuck all over them.  The company that gave the most storied franchise in the NFL its name advertised "Acme Packers."To my knowledge, this company no longer exists, and if they did, I don't think they'd ever pony up the kind of cash the franchise would want for a game jersey.But if the Packers ever did have to go to a corporate sponsor for a jersey, this is the one I'd want.

"The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could; but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge."
- Montresor in "The Cask of Amontillado"

"Part of me coming back...was sticking it to Ted (Thompson).''
- Brett Favre

Brett Favre, if it's correct that your reported desire to play for the Minnesota Vikings is because of the same motivation that you had last year in playing for the New York Jets, "sticking it to Ted," you have officially joined the dark side.

And it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it's the Vikings, in vengeance of the team you gave your mind, heart, body and spirit to for 16 years.

It has to do with your reason why:
• The reason that brought you to the New York Jets in 2008.
• The reason that made Khan seek the death of anyone remotely connected to Captain Kirk in Star Trek II, Mad Max wreak havoc on those who killed his family and best friend, and comes all over the plots of everything from Hamlet to MacBeth to Unforgiven to Kill Bill.
• The reason that causes many of us to inflict unnecessary pain, suffering and hurt in the world when turning the other cheek proves you'd be a better man that he whom you believed has wronged you, Packers general Manager Ted Thompson.
• The reason that gives me pause to believe that your time as a role model - at least when it comes to this particular human character trait - should end until you offer your mea culpas and bury the hatchet instead of inflicting it on Thompson and the Packers.

Revenge.

"Revenge is a dish that is best served cold."
- Ancient proverb

Those words have been uttered time and time again in literature and popular culture.

Literally, Brett, you'd have the chance to prove that phrase right if you join the Minnesota Vikings. Well, maybe not literally, because the Humpty Dump is a dome and it might not be below freezing on November 1st when you'd return to Lambeau Field.

But in doing so, you're choosing to follow the darker aspects of our human nature, the ones that cause us to add to the list of sins that have victimized us and victimize others.

Over the years, Brett, you've had the courage to publicly show us so much of what makes us human:
• Pure, unadulterated child-like joy when you pumped your helmet in the air after the game-winning touchdown pass to beat the Bengals in 1992.
• The scary but very real depths of our ability to let detrimental things and people control us, such as the Vicodin addiction you successfully battled in the 1990's.
• The growth so many of us take from twenty-something adolescent to thirty-something responsible man, as you winged and cried the Packers to victory on game-winning touchdown passes in 1999 while defeating your appetite for alcohol to solidify a wonderful marriage to Deanna.
• The moving, powerful testimony to the love of a father remaining with a son after they pass on, delivered with 399 yards, four touchdowns and millions of tears and prayers among Packers nation in the 2003 Raiders game.
• The answer to the call to loving action you exhibited to your wife when she battled *** cancer in 2004 and to your hometown when was nearly destroyed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

Now, you're returning us to see your darker side, the side of human nature that too often shows up in a desire to inflict pain on an offender not to protect, like an animal does when threatened, but to worsen their life to simply make others feel their pain.

Minnesota's own governor calls the vengeful act you're discerning "a wonderful little salt to rub in the eyes of some of our Green Bay Packer friends."

But in truth, would he advocate actions, in general, meant in revenge?

Would he say it's OK to do unto others as they have had done unto you?

The teaching actually is "do unto others as YOU WOULD DO onto unto you."

Otherwise, revenge killings in the streets would be perfectly believed to be OK.

We've all probably done it at some point in our lives: embarrassing an ex-significant other in a public setting after they wronged us, getting our little brother or sister in trouble after they did it to us, etc. etc.

But what does an eye for an eye do?

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
- Mahatma Gandhi

It makes you blind to the example you're giving people, that you should inflict pain upon those who inflict pain upon you.

All because of your anger at the man you want to "stick it to," an anger that has lasted for two years.

It doesn't matter whether it's you're changing colors from green to purple or vice versa.

It's simply the legacy you're leaving in general, not the great quarterback, husband and humanitarian, but the man who teaches that vengeance makes right.

If you turned to your father about this, what would he say? Would he tell you, "son, stick it to the man who butted you out," or would he tell you, "you're a better man than this. Be a better man than the hurt and vengeance you're feeling?"

Brett, you don't need this. Your legacy doesn't need this. The people who are your fans don't need this lesson taught to them.

Be the better man. Just like your old coach, Mike McCarthy, suggested: if you want to play football, play football.

But do it for the right reasons.
• The love of the game that is so immense in you, perhaps more than any other player in NFL history.
• The platform you can set to make a difference and positively impact others with your example, as you have so often done.

End the eye for an eye, Brett Favre, before the eyes of football nation look upon you with scorn instead of love.

For years, we have heard the mantra from general manager Ted Thompson that the Packers' draft philosophy involves selecting the most favorite three-word phrase every late April: "best player available."

There are differing theories as to whether that's the best move for Green Bay to make because of the vast needs at defensive line, linebacker and offensive line, and perhaps in the secondary.

But there is one thing that may become the most important need in his mind, and it could affect how he makes his selections on Saturday:

His own employment status with the Packers.

It is absolutely true that the Packers have Thompson locked up as the team's GM for the next four seasons, including this upcoming 2009 campaign.

But if you look at the first four years, you'll see a rather mixed bag, and a not-so-successful track record if you believe Bill Parcells' adage that you are what your record says you are:

• 2005: 4-12
• 2006: 8-8
• 2007: 13-3
• 2008: 6-10
• Total: 31-33

In some people's minds (including the Packers' brass?), two games under .500 isn't good enough, especially in a city with the nickname of Titletown and a tradition that demands more titles under the Packers' banner.

And that could reflect on the potentially tenuous nature of his job status should his team fail to make the playoffs this year.

Certainly, the 2005 record doesn't necessarily stand as something that is his fault.

Mike Sherman proved that as a general manager, he was a good coach and nothing else, and he left the cupboard bare, one that no NFL general manager probably could have filled quickly enough for one season.

Thompson has certainly made some solid moves, but they balance the scales with highly questionable picks.

For every Aaron Rodgers, there's a Justin Harrell.

For every Charles Woodson signed, there's all the potential free agents that weren't which could improve the Packers.

(Not the high-priced ones, mind you, but the smart mid-range selections teams like the Patriots and Steelers have made successfully over the decade.)

He also traded away a first round-pick to the Jets and received a second-rounder to select a player at the position where the Packers are perhaps strongest in the NFL, at wide receiver, instead of picking a defensive player at a need spot.

Now, his team's defensive cupboard is nearly as bare as it was back in 2005.

Besides the obvious problems at defensive line and the adjustments of changing to a 3-4 defense, he also has to take care of some age, and potentially lost steps at cornerback with Al Harris (thanks to his spleen injury, which truly isn't his fault), along with other players' inconsistency at defensive back.

He has just as many questions at running back as he had at that time, thanks to a subpar sophomore performance by Ryan Grant.

Note: to all the Thompson haters because of the whole Brett Favre divorce saga, I don't choose to involve that in this discussion, because this is purely about how his teams have performed based on his personnel moves.

If you look at the stats, Rodgers far-outperformed Favre last year, and should shoulder the smallest blame for the 6-10 campaign.

Still, with all that is there and not there on the roster right now, Thompson has an arduous task ahead of him this draft, with so many holes to fill.

I may be a rather patient person, and barring a total collapse, I would probably give him one more shot after 2009.

Many of you, including the higher-ups in Green Bay, might not.

He may need immediate performance out of rookies (and a new defensive system) to keep this team above the NFL Mendoza Line of 8-8.

That's a rare accomplishment to pull off.

Do it, and the genius tag gets stuck on him in super glue.

Fail to improve this year, and the vultures may grab him with claws stronger than super glue to fly him away from 1265 Lombardi Avenue.

And it's all based on the Parcells mantra: you are what your record says you are.

To avoid being a loser, Thompson will have to win a draft based on need: his own.

The Green Bay Packers will play a Super Bowl team from 2008 and the AFC's '08 number one playoff seed as part of its 2009 preseason schedule, but perhaps the spotlight game may come when the Cleveland Browns come to town.

Week one of the Packers' preseason will bring the Cleveland Browns to Lambeau Field in the Midwest Shrine game, to be played anywhere between Thursday, August 13th and Monday, August 17th.

A report from the New York Daily News said that Favre was invited to assist in Browns training camp, which would mean that if the report is correct, and knowing his past, unpredictable offseason history, there is a chance number four may find his way to Lambeau Field for the Packers' first preseason game, though it's unknown in what capacity.

Doesn't this just sound like an ex-girlfriend showing up at her former boyfriend's party just to make him uncomfortable?

Click here for the rest of the story, including the other three Packers' 2009 preseason opponents which include a Super Bowl team from '08.