Send Message
Add Friend
Block User
Invite to Group
Report User
Give it up to #4, everyone. He's managed to do what few players in the history of the NFL have ever done. Favre is now more of a story off the field than he ever was on the field. While the other 31 teams benefit from the rare pleasure of flying under the radar as Favregate enters its most critical period to date, Brett and his former bosses have woven a tapestry like none other in the history of the NFL.
While I've long been a critic of Favre holding his team mates and employer hostage come the April showers, I find myself in an unusual space for this chapter of the never retiring story.
Favre's "does he or doesn't he" act wore thin with me the very first time he engaged the media in his musings. I think it's incumbent upon every professional athlete, especially those integral to a team, to manage their communication more considerately than Favre has done. The impact of Favre's off-season vacillations has, and should have worn thin among the Packer brass after the first two spring-flings. Players constantly resort to the tried and true "hey, it's a business" rap in contract negotiations, and they have a right to do so. At the same time, resource management is as critical a part of the NFL business as exists. So why not apply the same ethic to the NFL business as any employee in any other business considering retirement would do. Announce one's retirement when one is retiring, shut up until then. The pitch and yaw of Favre's externalized internal discussion is disservice to every co-worker upon whose future organizational stability is built.
It's been sickening watching the last few offseasons turn into the Wisconson Favre watch. It's clear that throwing season busting picks isn't enough to keep the Bayou baby engaged for the non-football months. Although he could spend his time wondering why he heaves hail marys into DB's hands at the worst possible moment, or why he jams January spirals into the hands of the opponents, sending his 52 team mates to the golf course of their liking.
But aside from John Madden's glee of the extension of his annual man-crush, this offseason has gone from uncertain to gut wrenching in a blink. It's a different sitchoo because Favre and his employer had "crossed the Rubicon". Favre uppped the ante considerably once he announced his spirit was willing, but his body was unwilling although still able.
Then the Packers, maybe more tired (of watching every season of the last ten end in a loss) than they care to admit, held the "get out of Favre free card" Mike McCarthy can't tell the cheeseheads he coveted. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure McCarthy appreciates all that Favre has done to elevate the organization. But there are a lot of very successful coaches who pin their success on caretakers rather than gunslingers at the QB spot. McCarthy, regardless of his positional history, likes to win with defense and strong fundamentals. Now who is Mike Mac more able to mold at the QB spot; a living legend or an unproven commodity? It's this idea that makes me think Favre may have "crossed the Rubicon" (much like Bill Cowher in Pittsburgh) with a gentle shove. It's this idea that makes me think that much more of this year's drama sits in the hands of the Packers FO than #4.
And that's ok. Just like every player has the right to retire or un-retire, every team has the right to move on.
Here's what's not ok. Every NFL team has the right to pay a player as contracted, to play them or not play them. It's not always fair, but it's what both sides agree to when they sign at the bottom line.
The Packers, in their infinite wisdom, have chosen to play the NFL slavery card. They not only want Favre not to play for them, they want him not to play for anyone. Because the Pack own Favre's rights, they're exercising the right to preserve #4's legacy against his wishes. In trying to do so, they have already tarnished their legacy mor than Favre's annual immaturity has tarnished his own.
The Packers have geometrically outFavre'd Favre with this ugly circus, and it's incumbent upon them as a respectable organization to do not what best serves them, but best serves the game. Favre, regardless of his antics is still among the best regular season QB's in the game. He wants to play. The Packers were among the best teams in the NFL last year, in large part due to an excellent young defense and emergent running game. They want to move on with Aaron Rodgers.
It's not the easy thing, it may or not be the best short term answer for the Packers, but the right thing to do is let Favre go to play where he's wanted.
Legendary QB's have finished their careers in different colors before, and franchises lived to tell the tale. No one thinks of Joe Montana as a KC Chief (and he won 4 SB's as a 49er by the way), so the Packers' insistence that they're trying to preserve a legacy doesn't hold much water.
It's become abundantly clear that the Packers FO is trying both to eat their cake and have it too. Every day that passes only makes them look more piggish.
So please, Packers potentates, let the man go. As John Madden says, two Favres don't make a Favre.
|
As John Madden says . . . Two Favre's don't make a Farve
Tuesday, August 5, 2008, 10:27 AM EST
[General]
Tags:
|
|