Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wilde beast

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wilde beast

    Wilde: A different path would better serve Favre
    By JASON WILDE

    GREEN BAY — Now that Brett Favre's three-part softball-a-thon with Greta Van Susteren is finally over, how do you feel about the Green Bay Packers retired-for-now quarterback?

    From Favre's liar-liar, pants-on-fire rip job of general manager Ted Thompson; to the Packers' tampering allegations against their rivals, the "Minneapolis" Vikings (thanks, Greta!); to Favre showing up at the ESPY awards in an out-of-character black suit instead of Wranglers and flip-flops — the story has taken a few strange and ugly turns, and it's hard to imagine how the two sides will ever get over it, regardless of where Favre ends up in 2008.

    It's incredible just how divided Packer Nation has become.

    Based on an overflowing e-mail inbox and unscientific sports talk radio sampling, there are three clear groups: Favre lovers who still think their favorite quarterback can do no wrong, reasonable people who effectively argue that Favre still gives the Packers the best chance to win this season, and Favre-fatigued Packers fans who've maxed out on his annual hemming and hawing about playing.

    We're not here to judge, although after all that's happened, that first group — some of whom could absolve Favre of blame for all 316 interceptions he's thrown (including playoffs) in his career — might have a slight credibility problem.

    But here are couple of thoughts to chew on:

    At any point during his chat with Van Susteren, did you hear Favre say anything remotely about the team and its potential?

    No. It was all about him.

    He said in passing that he liked his teammates and had fun with them, but he should've said, "I want to come back because I know we can win it all this year. We were 13-3 last year, made it to the NFC Championship Game with the youngest team in the league, and we'd have been in the Super Bowl if not for my overtime interception against the Giants. We've got a great team, and I want to be a part of it."

    Second, it's too late now, but public opinion would be completely on his side had he come out and said, "I love playing in Green Bay, I love that franchise, I love the fans, and I don't want to go anywhere else. If the Packers only want me back as a backup, then that's what I'll do. I'll be the backup, I'll be third-string, heck, I'll play tight end if they want me to.

    "Sure, I want to play — every backup does — but what we have in Green Bay is special. We've got a great team, and I want to be a part of it, no matter what my role. I'll support Aaron Rodgers, give him any advice I can, and I'll prepare so I'm ready if needed."

    Had he just said this — rather than trashing Thompson and throwing both Rodgers and Favre's pal, offensive line coach James Campen, under the bus — he would've been a sympathetic figure who was, despite incredibly unfair treatment, doing the right thing because he's that great of a guy.

    It's hard to figure out whether anyone in Mississippi is giving Favre any public-relations advice.

    From here, it sure looks like he's surrounded by a bunch of enablers who keep telling him how great he is and how unjust and disrespectful the Packers' treatment of him has been — rather than warning him that he might be eroding some of his fan base with his words and actions.

    As for Thompson, while Favre's beef that Thompson wasn't forthcoming with him about his decisions — not signing Randy Moss, not re-signing guards Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle, not interviewing Steve Mariucci for the head-coaching job — might be valid, let's not forget that Rivera's body broke down as soon as he got to Dallas, Wahle had one good year in Carolina and is now in Seattle, and no one, including New England, knew Moss was going to have the monster year he had last year.

    And his complaint about hiring Mike McCarthy without interviewing Mariucci, Favre's buddy and ex-quarterbacks coach?

    Explain this: Favre throws 29 interceptions in a 4-12 season in 2005 because his head coach, Mike Sherman, didn't crack down on him for his decision-making and risk-taking.

    And then Favre wants his best friend in the coaching world to get an interview? So he can keep doing what he wants?

    Where's the credit McCarthy deserves for reining Favre in and helping him produce the renaissance season he had last year?

    Sure, Favre's point probably was that he felt Thompson hadn't been fully truthful with him about not wanting to hire Mariucci, but is it really Favre's right to expect the GM to interview a candidate of his choosing?

    The tampering charges Wednesday were simply the capper.

    The Vikings released a statement Thursday, saying, "We are not commenting on the issue. These types of matters are handled by the league."

    But the guess here is that the Packers' accusations against the Vikings are less about sticking it to their rivals and more about sending the following message to Favre and Cook: We've told you we're not releasing you, we know you want to play in Minnesota, and hell will freeze over before we let that happen.

    And that, as opposed to a softball, is a fastball high and tight.

  • #2
    I don't think his suggestion that Favre should be willing to back up Rodgers is a realistic one. Rodgers would get a sore neck from looking over his shoulder. However, I largely agree with the article. Favre has a mostly sympathetic audience when he says he wants to play football. He does not when he tries to play GM. And he probably didn't endear himself to a lot of GM's around the league by ripping Ted Thompson, especially since the Packers just went 13-3.
    I can't run no more
    With that lawless crowd
    While the killers in high places
    Say their prayers out loud
    But they've summoned, they've summoned up
    A thundercloud
    They're going to hear from me - Leonard Cohen

    Comment


    • #3
      Great article. The good sense is finally starting to come out in all of this.
      Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Joemailman
        I don't think his suggestion that Favre should be willing to back up Rodgers is a realistic one. Rodgers would get a sore neck from looking over his shoulder.
        Maybe. It's unpredictable, something that McCarthy has to work out. What if Rodgers stands up to the pressure and plays well? Or maybe it becomes obvious in training camp that Favre is playing far better.

        You can't say what will happen.

        Comment


        • #5
          Well, everything will be fine as long as they're winning virtually every game. But if they lose a couple in a row with Favre on the bench, you know what the storyline will be.
          I can't run no more
          With that lawless crowd
          While the killers in high places
          Say their prayers out loud
          But they've summoned, they've summoned up
          A thundercloud
          They're going to hear from me - Leonard Cohen

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Joemailman
            Well, everything will be fine as long as they're winning virtually every game. But if they lose a couple in a row with Favre on the bench, you know what the storyline will be.
            if Rodgers is struggling, what's to not like about having Favre on the bench?

            Comment


            • #7
              I think having Favre sitting there on the bench greatly increases the chances that Rodgers would succumb to the pressure of replacing Favre. If you're going to have Favre on the team, you might as well start him.
              I can't run no more
              With that lawless crowd
              While the killers in high places
              Say their prayers out loud
              But they've summoned, they've summoned up
              A thundercloud
              They're going to hear from me - Leonard Cohen

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Joemailman
                I think having Favre sitting there on the bench greatly increases the chances that Rodgers would succumb to the pressure of replacing Favre. If you're going to have Favre on the team, you might as well start him.

                maybe so. that is something for McCarthy, Favre and Rodgers to work out. I wouldn't say anything for sure.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Put a link to the article you idiot.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MadtownPacker
                    Put a link to the article you idiot.
                    Madtown,

                    It won't work with Harlan. After all "You can't teach an old dog new tricks..."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      my bad, here's your link, Pepe

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Harlan Huckleby
                        if Rodgers is struggling, what's to not like about having Favre on the bench?
                        If the anti-Favres are so concerned with "Rodgers' psyche" about bringing Favre back as the starter...bringing him in as a backup is probably worse.

                        Rodgers WILL struggle at times. He hasn't had ONE DAMN START in the league yet! Having Favre sitting on the bench would do Rodgers no favors. There is zero chance that Thompson would consider that. He'd bring Favre back as the starter before he let him sit on the bench...putting more pressure on Rodgers.
                        My signature has NUDITY in it...whatcha gonna do?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by The Leaper
                          Originally posted by Harlan Huckleby
                          if Rodgers is struggling, what's to not like about having Favre on the bench?
                          If the anti-Favres are so concerned with "Rodgers' psyche" about bringing Favre back as the starter...bringing him in as a backup is probably worse.

                          Rodgers WILL struggle at times. He hasn't had ONE DAMN START in the league yet! Having Favre sitting on the bench would do Rodgers no favors. There is zero chance that Thompson would consider that. He'd bring Favre back as the starter before he let him sit on the bench...putting more pressure on Rodgers.
                          If you want to be fair and honest about it, how many people are actually anti-Favre instead of just anti-stupid ass actions of his over the last 4 months? Makes a less compelling statement for you I suppose, but at least call a spade a spade.
                          Originally posted by 3irty1
                          This is museum quality stupidity.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Zool
                            If you want to be fair and honest about it, how many people are actually anti-Favre instead of just anti-stupid ass actions of his over the last 4 months? Makes a less compelling statement for you I suppose, but at least call a spade a spade.
                            I'm just referring to the current situation. I'm relatively certain 99.9% of Packer fans aren't anti-Favre period.
                            My signature has NUDITY in it...whatcha gonna do?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              That is definitely not how you worded your post.
                              Originally posted by 3irty1
                              This is museum quality stupidity.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X