I was thinking about Mike Sherman again, (Sorry, lol). It always struck me as a little strange that the best job offer Sherman could get, was the job he has now with the Texans. He had a winning record during his entire tenure in GB, up until Ted Thompson took over as GM and "re-did" the O-line.
Do you think that people around the NFL got it into their heads that if it wasnt for Brett Favre, Sherman would not have had the great winning record he had in GB?
Taking it a step further, when Thompson made the changes he made on the O-line during his first year in GB, many people thought that the new guys on our O-line played really well. I on the other hand saw Favre scrambling for his life very consistantly.
Again, has the new O-line been all that good, or did Favre's scrambling and getting rid of the ball make them look better. (more interceptions, but less sacks than he would have taken by not scrambling and getting rid of the ball)
Whenever I think about one single player making everyone around him look better, the first person I think of is Barry Sanders. Barry Sanders changed games all by himself. "Back in the day" , when the Packers played the Lions, no matter how bad their team was.......you never marked it down as an easy win for the Packers, simply because they had Barry Sanders.
I see Favre as that same kind of "game changing" player. Do you think that the rest of the NFL had such respect for Favre that they just figured that anyone could have been coaching the Packers with Favre at QB and gotten the number of wins that Sherman racked up during his tenure in GB?
Or, was it simply the "4th and 26" that put Sherman where he is now instead of working as a Head Coach or a GM somewhere else?
Do you think that people around the NFL got it into their heads that if it wasnt for Brett Favre, Sherman would not have had the great winning record he had in GB?
Taking it a step further, when Thompson made the changes he made on the O-line during his first year in GB, many people thought that the new guys on our O-line played really well. I on the other hand saw Favre scrambling for his life very consistantly.
Again, has the new O-line been all that good, or did Favre's scrambling and getting rid of the ball make them look better. (more interceptions, but less sacks than he would have taken by not scrambling and getting rid of the ball)
Whenever I think about one single player making everyone around him look better, the first person I think of is Barry Sanders. Barry Sanders changed games all by himself. "Back in the day" , when the Packers played the Lions, no matter how bad their team was.......you never marked it down as an easy win for the Packers, simply because they had Barry Sanders.
I see Favre as that same kind of "game changing" player. Do you think that the rest of the NFL had such respect for Favre that they just figured that anyone could have been coaching the Packers with Favre at QB and gotten the number of wins that Sherman racked up during his tenure in GB?
Or, was it simply the "4th and 26" that put Sherman where he is now instead of working as a Head Coach or a GM somewhere else?


Comment