Brett Favre is SI's Sportsman of the Year

[BF4MVP]

Man, if you read the fans' comments on SI.com most of them are pissed..Saying things like "he's not even the best player in his own sport, how can he have been the best of any sport?" Whereas if those ignorant assholes would have actually read the article ( ) they would have seen that THATS NOT WHAT THE AWARD IS ACTUALLY ABOUT...

[mraynrand]

Man, if you read the fans' comments on SI.com most of them are pissed..Saying things like "he's not even the best player in his own sport, how can he have been the best of any sport?" Whereas if those ignorant assholes would have actually read the article ( ) they would have seen that THATS NOT WHAT THE AWARD IS ACTUALLY ABOUT...

What is it about? pray tell us.

[mraynrand]

Oh, BTW: Yay, Favre won another popularity contest!

[HarveyWallbangers]

The award doesn't go to the best athlete of the year. It goes to the most newsworthy or interesting athlete of the year. Otherwise, he might have won it during his MVP years. In 2004, the Red Sox AND their fans won the award. In 2003, it went to Tim Duncan AND David Robinson. Yes, Favre deserves this award--after breaking all of the records, the heartache he's gone through, and the rebirth. His story is probably the most interesting of the year. It was either Favre or the Patriots. The Patriots only if they go undefeated and win the Super Bowl. We don't know that will happen yet.

[pbmax]

Congratulations to Brett. I hope the family life is as settled as its been portrayed, these folks deserve a little peace after their losses and battles.

One of my favorite Favre moments was when he spoke out in favor of keeping Robinson within the confines of the team during the suspension. Its much easier to throw these guys under the bus and get pats on the back for being tough on drugs than it is to actually get involved and make a difference in someone's life. He stood to gain little here, as sentiment was running against Robinson.

And its time to face facts people, Dr. Z is/was not a hater. His teammates this year give him greater support and confidence, but Favre had been operating outside the norms of a regular offense for sometime. Z (and I) may have underestimated how far that talent and confidence had fallen (until Antonio Chatman was a starter), but decisions on when and where to throw were still the purview of the QB.

[Harlan Huckleby]

when I saw this headline, I thought it was "sportsman" like in Field & Stream. Thought it might be for his deer hunting or something.

[packers11]

When is the magazine coming out??? I'm going to go to the store and get it...

[Bossman641]

When is the magazine coming out??? I'm going to go to the store and get it...

I normally get mine in the mail on Wednesdays. I think it comes out a day or 2 after that, not sure though.

[HarveyWallbangers]

And its time to face facts people, Dr. Z is/was not a hater. His teammates this year give him greater support and confidence, but Favre had been operating outside the norms of a regular offense for sometime. Z (and I) may have underestimated how far that talent and confidence had fallen (until Antonio Chatman was a starter), but decisions on when and where to throw were still the purview of the QB.

If your playmakers aren't very good, you are forced to try to make things happen. If not, you still lose. Yes, Favre has done this occasionally in his career--even at times when he has playmakers. However, not as much as it's been portrayed. In 270 career games, he's thrown more than 3 interceptions in 8 games. That means there's a 3% chance that he'll throw 3 or more interceptions. Only once has he thrown more than 3 interceptions at home.

4 - 6 (1993; at Detroit; 1999; vs. Seattle; 2002; at Tampa Bay; 2003, at Minnesota; 2004, vs. Minnesota; 2005, vs. Chicago)
5 - 1 (2005; at Cincinnati)
6 - 1 (2001; at St. Louis)

On the opposite side, only two players come close to Favre's TD rate (Marino and Manning)--which I think has been underrated when evaluating Favre. Because of his arm and confidence, he's been able to turn drives into TDs instead of FGs at an incredible rate. That's very important.

The bottom line is that he's won. With good players and without. Most wins all-time. The Packers have the best or second-best record (not sure if Pittsburgh is better or not, but it's close) over his 16 years with the Packers. That, in an era of FA. He's consistently won in this era. Unfortunately, because of free agency, the Packers have seldom been able to surround him with championship caliber talent.

Kind of funny that Bart Starr's interception rate of 4.4% was considerably higher than Brett's 3.3%.

[woodbuck27]

And . . . he is all that.

[FritzDontBlitz]

Man, if you read the fans' comments on SI.com most of them are pissed..Saying things like "he's not even the best player in his own sport, how can he have been the best of any sport?" Whereas if those ignorant assholes would have actually read the article ( ) they would have seen that THATS NOT WHAT THE AWARD IS ACTUALLY ABOUT...

The reason most people get attitude about Favre being chosen as sportsman of the year is because most fans today don't understand the definition of the word "sportsman." Most subscribe to the first definition of "a man who is interested in, or takes part in sports." Most completely miss out on the second, even deeper meaning: "a person who can take loss or defeat without complaint, or victory without gloating, and who treats his opponents with fairness, generosity, courtesy, etc."

The words most frequently used to describe a person who exhibits the second definition is "good sportsmanship." Most athletes today barely even qualify for the second definition. Favre exceeds it by a mile.

Its not about the stats, gentlemen, although Favre certainly has those. Its about what kind of man, what kind of player he is after accumulating them all. He has definitely changed, but all for the better. That is why he wins hands down.

Somebody be sure to forward this post to the Roger Federer fan club that is trying to overrun SI right now.

[pbmax]

Its not surprising that the threshold of acceptable TD vs. FG rates and TDs versus INTs rates have changed. After the rules changes in 1978 and the development of sophisticated passing attacks (esp. after the run heavy 1970s, even by previous decades standards, the 70s were 3 yards and a cloud of dust).

You can't compare Starr's numbers versus Favre's and not account for the different rules the defenses were forced to play under.

Kind of funny that Bart Starr's interception rate of 4.4% was considerably higher than Brett's 3.3%.

[pbmax]

There is a point of diminishing returns on forcing the issue if you don't have playmakers as receivers. Favre has not had a defense as good as the Raven's defense that allowed Dilfer to manage his way to a title since the 95-97 teams. So he often cannot be JUST a game manager.

Yet it is possible to minimize the risk, especially in playoff games, where the odds are that you will face a team capable of making you pay for mistakes.

Of course, the flip side is that with playmakers and his risk-non-averseness, he can be unstoppable. The fact that at times there doesn't seem to be a throttle is the most curious thing about his career.

If your playmakers aren't very good, you are forced to try to make things happen. If not, you still lose. Yes, Favre has done this occasionally in his career--even at times when he has playmakers.

[HarveyWallbangers]

You can't compare Starr's numbers versus Favre's and not account for the different rules the defenses were forced to play under.

Just like you can't compare a guy like Starr to Favre because of the era. Starr played with boatloads of Hall of Famers and the greatest coach in the history of football. I'll grant you that you can't compare numbers between the different eras, but I also think passer rating can be overrated. I've said many times before: I'll take a guy who throws a TD every two drives over a guy who manages the team down to two FGs every two drives. I think the reward for a TD is much greater than the risk of a turnover on occasion. Game managers make me want to puke. You score three TDs and a FG in your 15 drives, you've had a good offensive day. You score four and you've had a great offensive day. It's why I liked Elway. He didn't play with great teams, but they won and he was the reason for that. It wasn't until Terrell Davis came around that he finally had a championship caliber teams, but he made them highly competitve, year in and year out. Green Bay has seldom had a great defense and great special teams surrounding Favre. The one year it did, Favre was a virtual one man wrecking crew that led a team with decent, but not great, offensive personnel to be the best offense in the league. One losing season in 16 years... in the FA era. Pretty damn good.

Think back to those playoff games that people like to point out. St. Louis was much better than the Packers, and Favre threw four of his picks after the Pack fell way behind. Against Minnesota, his receiving corps was depleted and the defense came out giving up 14 points before he threw his first pass... 17 points in the first three drives. Against Atlanta, again injury depleted. He played against some damn good Cowboys teams in the early 90s in those losses. You can't pin the loss to Philly on Favre. He made one mistake the whole game and the game should have been long over. These are excuses, but they are valid. Let's not forget that he's won more playoff games than he's lost, and he's played very well in most of those 11 victories. He's played well in some of those losses even. If not for the bad call on Rice's fumble, he would be remembered for a great comeback victory. Against Dallas in 1995, the offense scored 27 points and he threw for 307 yards and 3 TDs. He threw for 256 with 3 TDs and 1 interception in the Super Bowl loss. He's probably played well in 13-14 of those 20 playoff games (against the cream of the crop in the league), but people remember the bad games because they've been more recent.

[FritzDontBlitz]

The two most fascinating things about Favre winning the award are:

Its his first time ever winning.

Tom Brady got the same award in 2005.

Apparently it is about the stats....