In an exclusive interview with Greta Van Susteren of Fox News, quarterback Brett Favre claims that the Green Bay Packers want him to play neither for them nor for anyone else.

Several minutes in to an often rambling monologue with few moments of clear, succinct thought, Favre delivered the key contention:  “I was told that playing in Green Bay was not an option, regardless of what you hear from up there, and, you know, I’m not making it up.  I was told that playing in Green Bay was not an option.  And then I was told that we can’t imagine you playing or can’t envision you playing with another team as well.  What does that tell me?  It tells me we don’t want you playing, period.”   

But Favre himself says that he “can’t envision being with anyone else” and “haven’t envisioned being with anyone else,” despite the fact that he asked for his unconditional release only three days ago.

That obvious point was never brought up by the interviewer, who interrupted Brett’s stream of consciousness from time to time only to lob meaningless softballs.

As one point, for example, Van Susteren asked Favre if he has filed any official retirement papers.  And as we’ve pointed out a few dozen times in this space, the question of whether he has filed any official retirement papers is meaningless.  If he didn’t file them, he can unretire.  If he filed them, he can still unretire.

She also mentioned that Favre’s back-and-forth deliberations as to whether he’ll retire have happened in past years, and in so doing implied that the Packers should have expected him to do it again.  A more balanced interviewer would have included, at a minimum, a question pressing him to address why he has opted to permit his annual will-I-or-won’t-I-retire considerations to become a matter of public record, discourse, and speculation. 

As to the initial outcome of this year’s round of “I’m A Grown Man Who Can’t Make A Decision,” Favre strongly implies that coach Mike McCarthy pushed him into making that decision as to whether to retire in March, at a time when Favre was not prepared to make the full commitment to play football.  Favre also points out that McCarthy has said that he knew Favre would have second thoughts, which points to an inference that the Packers preyed on Favre for a decision at a time when they knew he was likely to decide to retire.

Favre claims that, during his retirement press conference, he “sort of left the door open” about returning.  And on June 20 he tried to go through that door.  When he met resistance about returning, he told McCarthy, “So that mean’s either you give me my helmet, welcome back, you release me, or you attempt to trade me.”

The team’s resistance to letting him play for another team supposedly, per Favre, arises from its desire to protect Favre’s legacy.  “Apparently now they’re wanting to protect my legacy by bringing me back and having me be a backup.  Boy, that is really good.”

Though we’ve concluded that Favre is being a bit of a diva (our case was made for SportingNews.com on Monday), the notion that the Packers have tried to steer him into not playing anywhere seems to be credible, and it causes us to conclude that both sides share blame on this one.

Still, if Brett wants to play, he needs to merely show up and play.  While he thinks that the Packers have in some way “done him wrong,” they’re due to pay him $12 million in 2008, which will become fully guaranteed if he’s on the roster on opening day. 

We should all be so wronged by our employers.

Anyway, there’s a second part of the interview, which will be aired on Tuesday night.  And we really can’t stand such obvious ploys to increase ratings.

And did we mention that our latest take on Favre as a diva can be seen right here?