Brett Favre: Free Agent

You sure Michael Vick didn't have anything to do with that?

 

Vick had plenty to do with it but Favre wasn't able to answer the early strikes. It was as if Favre "shut it down" when they fell behind. Same with the Minnesota game.

 

Vick probably had something to do with it, but not with the Packers scoring only seven points.

 

First Favre retirment, we played big.

Second one, inside.

Third one may get in briefs. Maybe.

 

Ok this makes no sense -- the 13-3 Packers overachieved and were not that good -- yet it is Favre's fault they didn't make the Super Bowl?

Are you joking?

Favre was one of the only reasons that team had 13 wins and were in the NFC championship game in the first place.

And once again -- in that game they rushed for only 28 yards and New York held the ball for 40 minutes.

You find me a team with that combination of stats against them that won a playoff game and get back to me.

The Falcons were up 24-0 at the half in that game -- the Packers had far more problems than Favre.


And more importantly -- even if we concede these two playoff losses were "on Favre's shoulders" are we really now trying to make the case that he couldn't help at least a few teams because he didn't get it done in a few playoff games?

How many Super Bowls did Dan Marino take the Dolphins to after his first one? You think you could probably find a playoff loss or two in there that was on "Marino's shoulders"?

I'm not sure what it proves.

These are things we do know.....

Tavarias Jackson sucks and will never be an even adequate starting quarterback on a team with aspirations of going to the Super Bowl.

The Vikings appear to have everything else around the quarterback position in place to make a run at the Super Bowl this year.

Brett Favre may not be the Brett Favre of the mid to late 1990's but he is when he is compared to Tavarias Jackson.

This is a no-brainer for the Vikings if they can get it done.

 

My only question is this -- does Favre go to the Vikings for a chance to win the Super Bowl, or does Favre go to the Vikings for a chance to stick it to the Packers? If he's returning to play two games, that doesn't mesh with what the Vikings are trying to do for 16 games, maybe more. He could play well for those two games against the Packers, but he would still need to find motivation for the other 14 games.

 

In my opinion it's all about fucking the Packers.

 

A no-brainer for the Vikings? Maybe.

If they want to go "all in" in 2009, which I DO respect, then getting Favre is the right move. The Vikings are pursuing Favre for self-preservation, which I also respect. Anything short of the NFC Title Game probably sends Childress out the door. Also, in a weak economy where Minnesotans have already paid for Twins and Gopher stadiums, the team is pushing for a deal with only 2 years left on the Metrodome lease.

What the ideal move for the Vikings would be to do whatever possible to keep Favre limited to 11-12 games a year. Maybe a Roger Clemens deal where he can only play at home -- or skip the Monday games (no, scratch that, he loves the reverential tone on MNF), or a clause where he can back out 30 minutes before game time if the temp is below 47 degrees. I'm kidding here...I think.

Seriously, what Favre and the Vikings would need to do is keep him where he can be effective (I have serious doubts he could be effective for a 20 games) plus I also think that when teams get a "second look" at him, they can be much more effective in defending him.

zag: take a peek...

http://www.packers.com/gameday/schedule/2007/

Three teams with winning records the entire regular season. Three.

A lot of awful teams on that schedule and the decent teams they did play (San Diego, N.Y. Giants) were far from their January peak. SD had Norv Turner and the Giants had quit during that game in Week 2.

I think THAT is the #1 reason the Packers were 13-3. Still, the 2007 Packers were in position to make the Super Bowl and they had a QB who simply looked like he couldn't fight through the cold when it mattered most.

 

Don Banks summed this thing up quite nicely:

"It's beyond tiresome by now. Let's face it, it's sad and kind of pathetic that we're once again being sucked into another Brett Favre watch. What are we up to now, four, five summers in a row with the same basic storyline: Will he play or won't he? The indecision of the man has become as legendary as his football feats, and infinitely less entertaining."

 

NFL Network has led with this "story" in each of the last three days -- this is not two weeks after the draft. And if he signs, it won't get cycled out like other stories do. It will just keep churning.

 

"Part of me coming back last year, I have to admit now, was sticking it to Ted.''
- Brett Favre, SI, Feb. 16, 2009

 

It's 100 percent about fucking the Packers. Favre thinks if he goes to Minnesota and they beat the Packers twice that he can help get Thompson and McCarthy fired. He might not be wrong.

I don't think it will happen though. He's just not that good anymore, but he's still better than anyone the Vikings have.