Can you play your way out of the Hall of Fame?
That’s the question that comes to my mind lately whenever someone brings up Brett Favre. Favre, of course, is the longtime Green Bay Packers quarterback who won a record three Associated Press league MVP awards. (He shared his final award, in 1997, with Barry Sanders.) He’s also a member of the most elite class of sports heores in America: franchise quarterbacks who’ve won the Super Bowl.
His talent was and remains off the charts. Unbelieveable arm strength from any of a thousand release points. Accuracy from the pocket, on the run, falling backwards, or over defenders. Great mobility and improvisation, especially in his younger years. And his toughness-oh my, but we’ll get to that later.
Not only that, he’s now considered (if a bit inaccurately) to be the last remaining symbol of loyalty in team sports. He’s certainly had to clout to ask to be traded to a winner for his last few seasons. And, conversely, he’s certainly given his team cause to look in other directions, yet they’ve stood by him.
Last year Favre led the league with room to spare by throwing 29 interceptions. Would he come back? Will the Packers bench the franchise and start building for the future by playing Aaron Rodgers?
(When Aaron Rodgers is your best bet for future success, your franchise has problems outside of just the quarterback position.)
Favre, of course, came back. He’s off to a rocky start-statistically, he’s had two fine games and two abysmal ones. It’s funny-in his first few years, he was immune to criticism. Now he’s become immune to praise. People all over the country can’t wait to say he should have retired-or, more absurdly, that the Packers should cut him.
Any football fan can tell you Favre has been going downhill for several years now. Really? The numbers don’t bear that out in the slightest, except that he was bad last year. That said, his go-for-broke mentality-long his most-admired trait-may backfire the most in the playoffs. He threw six picks against the Rams in the playoffs following the 2001 season, and chucked another four to Vikings defenders after 2004. But even his playoff performances-statistically anyway-haven’t really been all bad. (You have to scroll down that link to see postseason numbers.)
If it’s not obvious yet, I still think Favre’s a first-ballot Hall of Famer, no questions asked. But his legacy will never be the same. By the time he comes up for Hall of Fame consideration, his MVP trophies will be at least fifteen years old, and his historic prime will be but a distant memory. And it taints everything else he’s done-his painkiller addiction, once swept under the rug, is just one more talking point for armchair analysts on the bury-Favre bandwagon. He was the toughest QB ever-now he’s Barry Bonds in shoulder pads.
Of course, it’s not fair to consider decade-and-a-half-old events and not the more recent past, and Favre’s last few years should certainly count against him-I just think his struggles have been blown way out of proportion. What’s interesting, though, is how much Favre’s early fame will count against him in terms of public sentiment. If he hadn’t been so popular when he was young, no one would be so quick to deride him now.
Let’s look at a more borderline candidate: Jerome Bettis. Bettis ran for more than 13,000 yards in his career-good enough for top-five, all-time. But while Bettis was a dangerous young player, his production really tailed off his last few years. Yes, he was injured. Not to be heartless, but so were countless other backs-like the superior Terrell Davis.
Do you remember ever hearing discussion of Bettis’ Hall of Fame chances before his last season? I don’t. But his syrupy-sweet storybook ending overshadowed the obvious: his decline bagan a long, long time ago. While he’d always been more of a power runner than a distance guy (an understatement if there ever was one), he averaged more than four yards a carry only once after 1997. (Check his career stats here for a more complete picture.)
By the end of his career, he morphed into primarily a short-yardage back-a tremendous, tough-to-stop short-yardage back, capable of starring on occasion-but a role player nonetheless. Is that somehow better than having one awful year in a career full of great ones?
While Bettis’ on-field performance should have been, by any reasonable standard, hurting his shot at Hall of Fame glory, his personality, perseverance, and superstar quarterback may have played him right into the Hall. I just think that’s funny.
3 comments:
By the way, who else got a kick out of Marcus Nash speaking Saturday night?
yeah, bettis might just ride his fairytale ending right on into the hall. but my argument against him is the same as it was against e. smith. you shouldn't be rewarded for longevity... you should be rewarded for greatness. i honestly don't think bettis was a great player. good. yes. an assett to have when you are in short yardage situations? probably. but those aren't make or break situations. there are at least four or five viable options when you are in short yardage territory, just becuase you weigh 349 lbs and are 4'3" and can fall over for a couple doesn't make you great.
you hit a good point, his average plauged him his entire year. i think great backs have career avg's up near 4.7 and above... but that's just me.
favre, no brainer. but i did hear some stink about him being pretty cold to incoming rogers. i thought that was pretty lame. help the kid out... teach him a few things. then go back to making cameos on friends and ben stiller movies.
Mr. P, you bring up a great point about quality vs. quantity. It's sort of my argument for T.D., but ultimately also why I don't care whether he gets in: for at least a year, and maybe more like two, he was the absolute best player in the league. There are more guys who get into the Hall of Fame than there are guys who can say they were the very best-so which is the greater honor anyway? It's also a good point because that's exactly the stance I was trying to explain to a new HPS reader who refuses to comment on the blog. And I loved your crack about Bettis in short yardage.
If that's true of Favre, that is lame.
Cap, I agree, and of course Favre has major media backing too, not that he needs it. In fact, the hype is surely the main cause of all the recent backlash.
I do think the media hype can make a difference, though maybe not in the way you'd think. I don't think the writers certain players were nice to are necessarily going to consciously sway their Hall of Fame vote in a certain guy's favor, though it's possible it could help a borderline guy. A bigger factor is what everyone else-including future HoF voters not necessarily even in the biz yet-is going to think as a result of positive coverage today. For example, let's say I got a reporting job and got a vote years down the line. Well, I can't really say with authority whether many players today who aren't quarterbacks deserve the Hall, you know? For example, take Ray Lewis. He was awesome, and he's clearly in decline now, but I haven't watched enough Ravens games over the years to know how long he was really good without going, at least partially, off other people's opinions.
You're right: position and supporting cast make a big difference here. That said, I still think Favre was at a really high level relative to other QBs longer than Bettis was relative to runners.
Favre has lost some of the best aspects of his game, no question. I was just trying to point out that he hasn't "sucked" as long as everyone seems to think he has.
Post a Comment