WinnipegPackFan
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2005
- Messages
- 1,943
- Reaction score
- 0
Favre, Packers in no-win situation
Written by PackerChatters Staff
Thursday, 06 April 2006
Team's future doesn't look promising with or without quarterback
Brett Favre's offseason has become as painful to watch as his season. As he wrestles with his emotions, the NFL world, far beyond Wisconsin, ponders two possibilities and cringes at both: what if he comes back and what if he doesn't.
At the moment, the choices appear to be between two evils. Things can't possibly get better without him and don't look very promising with him.
Even worse, Favre is teetering on a very unhappy brink of damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
The Green Bay natives are restless, inside and outside the Packer organization. Is he being spiteful by delaying his decision? Is he trying to force the Packers into releasing him? Or is he just being Brett, honestly trying to sort out his thoughts and in no hurry to accommodate anybody else?
One ex-teammate, Mark Chmura, has come out and labeled Favre selfish. Chmura might lack credibility given his checkered past, but it's safe to say he isn't the only Packer fan with that thought.
Favre would like the Packers to show they are serious about assembling a team with Super Bowl aspirations. If that's his criteria, he might as well keep mowing his Mississippi grass. Packers' general manager Ted Thompson is building for the team's future, not Brett Favre's.
So why don't the Packers just cut him and move on? Think about it. Firing Vince Lombardi would be easier. Setting fire to Lambeau Field would make more sense.
For one thing, the Packers are better off with Favre this year no matter who else is on the team. For another, anybody with any sense of football history knows the future is dim without him.
With all due respect to Aaron Rodgers, life without Favre is likely to be a long, dark period of unsatisfying comparisons. Favre's arm alone, still the strongest in the NFL, is enough to scare away any thoughts of his retirement. Arms like that don't come around every decade.
Let's see. Before Favre, there was Bart Starr. Between Starr and Favre, there were 20 years. Green Bay fans need to remember the facts of the past before eagerly embracing the uncertainty of the future.
Starr's last years of 1969-70-71 were shared with Don Horn and Scott Hunter. Favre has yet to share with anyone, and is hardly fading into the sunset like Starr did.
After Starr retired, the Packers started Jerry Tagge, like Rodgers a promising first-round draft pick. He lasted a year before they traded for broken-down John Hadl. He lasted two years before Lynn ****ey arrived in a trade for Hadl with Houston. With Starr as head coach, ****ey and David Whitehurst muddled through eight seasons, two of them winning but only one playoff appearance during the shortened 1982 strike season.
Next came Randy Wright and Jim Zorn and Vince Ferragamo and Anthony Dilweg and Mike Tomczak and finally Don Majkowski with only a single winning season in 1989 under coach Lindy Infante to show for it.
Then came Favre. It seems like ancient history and in football years it is. Spoiled doesn't begin to describe Packer fans since 1992. And now some of them want it to end?
Life goes on, but in Packerland it would never be the same. Favre's consecutive starting streak is like Gehrig's with no Cal Ripken in sight. If Favre is beginning to sound a bit spoiled himself, indulge him for a minute. He gave the team more years than anybody has a right to expect from anybody.
Is it Favre's fault that the Packer decline can be traced to the 1999 exit of defensive end Reggie White and coach Mike Holmgren? The Packers never adequately made up for White's departure, failing first with Vonnie Holliday and then failing miserably with free-agent pickup Joe Johnson.
Even while Favre was winning three league MVPs in a row, he knew it was a team effort starting with defense. Two years after White left, safety LeRoy Butler followed and the Packers still haven't replaced him either.
But replacing Favre will be the most difficult task yet.
Does Favre want to play? Few athletes want to quit, and none of them want to admit to diminished skills. When one like Favre sees with his own eyes that nobody can throw a football like he can, there is no reason to quit.
So what is the holdup? Could he possibly be angling for an out? Is it thinkable that he would want to play somewhere else?
Because Favre is exploring all possibilities, that can't be ruled out. But it's hard to believe he would push the Packers to pull the plug. He wouldn't want to jeopardize his legacy. Now if the Packers push him, that's a different story. Then he could rationalize a new start elsewhere. But does he really want to start over? There are no guarantees anywhere, and he is most comfortable in Green Bay.
The educated guess remains that he returns for one more season. If he announces his retirement, here's another guess: by training camp, he will change his mind. That may be why he is taking his good-old time. He doesn't want to undo a hasty decision.
Source: Don Pierson: NBC Sports.com
Written by PackerChatters Staff
Thursday, 06 April 2006
Team's future doesn't look promising with or without quarterback
Brett Favre's offseason has become as painful to watch as his season. As he wrestles with his emotions, the NFL world, far beyond Wisconsin, ponders two possibilities and cringes at both: what if he comes back and what if he doesn't.
At the moment, the choices appear to be between two evils. Things can't possibly get better without him and don't look very promising with him.
Even worse, Favre is teetering on a very unhappy brink of damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
The Green Bay natives are restless, inside and outside the Packer organization. Is he being spiteful by delaying his decision? Is he trying to force the Packers into releasing him? Or is he just being Brett, honestly trying to sort out his thoughts and in no hurry to accommodate anybody else?
One ex-teammate, Mark Chmura, has come out and labeled Favre selfish. Chmura might lack credibility given his checkered past, but it's safe to say he isn't the only Packer fan with that thought.
Favre would like the Packers to show they are serious about assembling a team with Super Bowl aspirations. If that's his criteria, he might as well keep mowing his Mississippi grass. Packers' general manager Ted Thompson is building for the team's future, not Brett Favre's.
So why don't the Packers just cut him and move on? Think about it. Firing Vince Lombardi would be easier. Setting fire to Lambeau Field would make more sense.
For one thing, the Packers are better off with Favre this year no matter who else is on the team. For another, anybody with any sense of football history knows the future is dim without him.
With all due respect to Aaron Rodgers, life without Favre is likely to be a long, dark period of unsatisfying comparisons. Favre's arm alone, still the strongest in the NFL, is enough to scare away any thoughts of his retirement. Arms like that don't come around every decade.
Let's see. Before Favre, there was Bart Starr. Between Starr and Favre, there were 20 years. Green Bay fans need to remember the facts of the past before eagerly embracing the uncertainty of the future.
Starr's last years of 1969-70-71 were shared with Don Horn and Scott Hunter. Favre has yet to share with anyone, and is hardly fading into the sunset like Starr did.
After Starr retired, the Packers started Jerry Tagge, like Rodgers a promising first-round draft pick. He lasted a year before they traded for broken-down John Hadl. He lasted two years before Lynn ****ey arrived in a trade for Hadl with Houston. With Starr as head coach, ****ey and David Whitehurst muddled through eight seasons, two of them winning but only one playoff appearance during the shortened 1982 strike season.
Next came Randy Wright and Jim Zorn and Vince Ferragamo and Anthony Dilweg and Mike Tomczak and finally Don Majkowski with only a single winning season in 1989 under coach Lindy Infante to show for it.
Then came Favre. It seems like ancient history and in football years it is. Spoiled doesn't begin to describe Packer fans since 1992. And now some of them want it to end?
Life goes on, but in Packerland it would never be the same. Favre's consecutive starting streak is like Gehrig's with no Cal Ripken in sight. If Favre is beginning to sound a bit spoiled himself, indulge him for a minute. He gave the team more years than anybody has a right to expect from anybody.
Is it Favre's fault that the Packer decline can be traced to the 1999 exit of defensive end Reggie White and coach Mike Holmgren? The Packers never adequately made up for White's departure, failing first with Vonnie Holliday and then failing miserably with free-agent pickup Joe Johnson.
Even while Favre was winning three league MVPs in a row, he knew it was a team effort starting with defense. Two years after White left, safety LeRoy Butler followed and the Packers still haven't replaced him either.
But replacing Favre will be the most difficult task yet.
Does Favre want to play? Few athletes want to quit, and none of them want to admit to diminished skills. When one like Favre sees with his own eyes that nobody can throw a football like he can, there is no reason to quit.
So what is the holdup? Could he possibly be angling for an out? Is it thinkable that he would want to play somewhere else?
Because Favre is exploring all possibilities, that can't be ruled out. But it's hard to believe he would push the Packers to pull the plug. He wouldn't want to jeopardize his legacy. Now if the Packers push him, that's a different story. Then he could rationalize a new start elsewhere. But does he really want to start over? There are no guarantees anywhere, and he is most comfortable in Green Bay.
The educated guess remains that he returns for one more season. If he announces his retirement, here's another guess: by training camp, he will change his mind. That may be why he is taking his good-old time. He doesn't want to undo a hasty decision.
Source: Don Pierson: NBC Sports.com