For those who may not have
heard, over the past few weeks there has been some kind of controversy
going on between the Green Bay Packers and Brett Favre, one of the
greatest quarterbacks in football history.
It
seems that Favre, who led the Packers to a stunning 13-3 record last
year and came within a game of taking the team to the Super Bowl, was
threatening to come back to try to do it again.
Ordinarily,
any professional football team would be overjoyed to have a great
quarterback decide not to retire and instead attempt to lead them to
another championship. But in the case of the Green Bay Packers, it
messed up all their plans.
See,
the Packers had a terrific idea to replace Favre, one of the most
durable players in football, with unproven backup quarterback Aaron
Rodgers, one of the most fragile.
Because
Favre was busy setting football’s all-time record for consecutive
starts by a quarterback, Rodgers seldom got any chances to play, but
pretty much every time he did, he got hurt.
Well,
when you have an opportunity to replace someone who never gets hurt
with someone who gets hurt tying his shoes, you can see how that would
make the game a lot more exciting.
Also, Packers General
Manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy had been planning to
surround Rodgers with improved players at other positions to make the
novice quarterback look good. If a Hall of Fame quarterback like Favre
were leading the team, he would get all the credit instead of Thompson
and McCarthy.
Since neither Thompson nor McCarthy was around
when Favre was rising to greatness in Green Bay, they have always been
in Favre’s shadow. That’s what was really behind Favre’s public
ambivalence in recent years about whether he would play or retire.
Favre
tried to use his popularity to prod Thompson into surrounding him with
better players. Favre would hold off announcing whether he would
return to try to pressure Thompson into going after top-of the-line
veterans.
When the great receiver Randy Moss became available, Favre went even further. He
personally reached out to Moss and offered to restructure his own
salary to make money available to bring Moss to Green Bay.
Thompson
basically snubbed them both. As general manager of the Packers,
Thompson wasn’t about to let a couple of Hall of Fame football players
tell him how to do his job. The next time you hear sports talk shows
ranting about Favre’s ego, consider the enormous, self-defeating ego it
takes for a general manager to turn down the kind of spectacular
passing combination Tom Brady and Moss put together for the New England
Patriots last year.
Why Turn Against Favre?
That
explains why Thompson wasn’t thrilled to have one of the greatest
quarterbacks of all time decide to return to Green Bay. But it’s
harder to explain why so many sports reporters and even some fans
turned against Favre during the recent unpleasantness. It’s true many
sportswriters take their cues from management. Sports reporters these
days often try to prove their independence and professionalism by
attacking the players they cover.
That’s been of great
assistance to millionaire owners whenever they want to collude to hold
down salaries or unilaterally institute drug tests and other changes
in working conditions without going through all the bother of
negotiating with tough unions.
Oh, sure. You’ll get your
predictable “Fire Ned Yost” blather, but top management really has to
run a sports franchise into the ground as the Selig family did before
you’ll hear a word of criticism.
But why did so much of the
sports press and sports talk radio join Thompson in reacting negatively
to Favre coming back to Green Bay? Could they really be concerned about
shattering the team’s “plans” of moving forward with a mediocre
work-in progress who could well be injured shortly after the season
starts? Local sportswriters in Green Bay, Milwaukee and every other
state media have never been particularly close to Favre.
Whenever Favre wants to put something out, he talks to ESPN, Sports Illustrated or his old friend Al Jones at the Sun Herald in
Biloxi, Miss. That should give the state press the luxury of being
more objective. But, objectively, there’s little question which
quarterback gives the Packers the best chance of winning this season,
despite all of Thompson’s beau tiful plans for moving on. As
sportswriter Michael Wilbon of The Washington Post wrote last week, “Anybody in his right mind knows Favre, even at 38 years old, is 100 times better than Rodgers.”
At
this writing, Favre is expected to be in Green Bay, competing for the
starting quarterback job. It’s unbelievable sports reporters would
consider that a problem for Green Bay. Not having Favre would be a
problem.
What’s your take? Write: editor@shepex.com or comment on this story online at www.expressmilwaukee.com.