It seems clear that Favre wants to play for the Packers, and if he's going to play anywhere in the league, we're the logical team to give him a good shot at the Super Bowl. His implied threat of wanting to play for the Vikes so he can play against the Packers is simply a negotiating maneuver the Packers should ignore.
At the end of the day, when you put aside all the emotion (always hard with such an emotional guy like Brett), everyone left last season saying Favre was playing well enough to continue playing. My prediction late last year was that he had 2-3 years left and would retire with more than 500 TD passes, my assumption being he was smart enough to realize he'd play those 2-3 years and wanted to stick with a young, talented team where he's comfortable rather than suffer the slings and arrows of going somewhere else and probably ending up being that team's non-savior (huge blow to ego and reputation).
So yeah, I was shocked when he retired--really stunned. Then I did my best to put on a happy face.
When he gets the itch, my initial reaction was "take him back," only to get later turned off by his negotiations in the press.
But when push comes to shove and it seems like he's going to be playing somewhere in this league, I really don't want it to be anywhere but here. A declining Favre won't be any worse than a rising Rodgers. So long as we have Favre, everyone has to plan against him, much like it was with Reggie White, even in his late, declining years. Once White left, no one feared our D any more, and it showed. The same would happen with Favre leaving.
Even if Brett doesn't pull out the sort of finish that his idol Elway did (my scenario all along) in the same age range, I'd enjoy the ride better with Brett than with anybody else. After his long career, it's what the fans are owed, it's what Brett is owed, and it's what the franchise is owed.
But if the Packers go through with this nonsense suggestion of trading Favre to the Vikes, there will be no end to the fans' anger at the management.
| Permalink |
Comments (9)
As a loyal Golden Bear Backer, I would suggest Aaron Rodgers begins a contract holdout the minute Favre steps onto the field in a Packer uniform.
What a farce.
Posted by SR | August 4, 2008 4:38 PM
When the Pack's 6 and oh with Peyton coming in to Lambeau before the bye it won't be so farcical (5-1 maybe).
Rodgers has only thrown 59 passes in his career: if Favre had been mediocre last year it would be different but he was very
efficient and at times spectacular.
http://soylentgreenrecipebook.blogspot.com/2008/08/sportswriter.html
Posted by Jarrod Myrick | August 4, 2008 11:59 PM
Brett Favre has done more for GB's national image and brand than anything since the Lombardi era.
Never mind the posturing. Give Brett the bit and let him run. He is old school just like most Americans. He's what good about sport in an age of 'me' above all else, agents, and player associations.
No surprise that the NFL reinstated him.
Let him play, for the good of the game.
Posted by JS | August 5, 2008 12:58 AM
I have to agree with the first comment.
Sure, the guy's only thrown 60 passes, but only because someone won't retire. THe Pack drafted Rodgers to be the replacement. They traded picks to get this kid. Favre is not the entire organization, and you're talking about screwing the entire orgnaization. Fine Favre wins another SB. Rodgers stinks because he's not played in like 7 years. Teams without established QBs have a real difficulty in this league(look at the teams wanting to trade for Favre, see a pattern?). Fine. Great for the Packers. 1 and done as Favre rides off into the sunset having retired(or has he?) yet again. What do you do next year? Rodgers isn't getting any younger and you never know if you're going to get a chance for a quality kid at QB again without sucking like the Raiders.
At some point you realize you're screwing someone else over and step aside because you've had yout time in the sun. YOu realize it's better for the entire org if you do so, because hey, wouldn't it be great if AJ Hawk played for a crap team for the rest of his career because we can't sign a RB because we kept Favre and don't have an established QB? Yeah, that'd be grand.
As this plays out I think more and more Chmura was right all those years ago. Brett's turning out to be extremely selfish.
Posted by ry | August 5, 2008 10:46 AM
ry,
it's not an easy call at all because this is favre's fault alone. still i want the best offense on the field as personnel allows. if rodgers outplays him in the preseason, let him play. if he wins the nod and struggles, how long to stick with him? if he wins the nod and excels, you have a problem a lot of teams would die for. if rodgers struggles or got hurt minus favre, you have fresh meat rook and trouble.
Posted by Jarrod Myrick | August 5, 2008 2:59 PM
Hmm. I take it Packers fans feel the same way about the Vikings that Broncos fans feel about the Raiders?
Posted by Michael
|
August 5, 2008 3:57 PM
Michael: no, because we Vikings fans have zero Super Bowl wins to relish unlike the other 3 teams you mentioned :-(
if the Packers feel that way about us, it's misplaced aggression.
Posted by Anonymous
|
August 5, 2008 9:07 PM
Wait a minute, you're injecting logic into a discussion of football?*grin*
Posted by Michael
|
August 6, 2008 4:51 PM
I am so excited that Favre might be back! I know that some people might be mad at all his indecision, but the guy can play man. Here is a cool article about why we should just be happy Favre is back, especially if you are a Vikings fan: https://www.mindreign.com/en/mindshare/Sports/Favre-is-Back-Again/sl40763392bp488cpp10pn1.html
Posted by Jimmy T | August 18, 2009 3:33 PM