Skip to main content

Favre traded to Jets (I think)

In a move that must be breaking hearts across Wisconsin, the Green Bay Packers have traded quarterback Brett Favre to the New York Jets. It's a sad finish to an avoidable saga.

We never found out the answer to the most important question: why wouldn't the Packers take Favre back? He had them a home game from the Super Bowl just a few months ago, right? I didn't just dream that, did I?

My impression based on the news of the last few days is that Favre was willing to stay in Green Bay (and even compete for his job, which is lame), but that the Packers were ready to move on. I'm going to assume that's true. I've heard many reasons why the Packers were so eager to go forward without Favre, and most of them had two things in common: they involved Aaron Rodgers, and they were incredibly stupid.

Common was the contention that the team owed something to Rodgers, who has, after all, endured three years on the bench despite a sparkling career quarterback rating of 73. This is so absurd it's practically offensive. Where to start with the rhetorical questions. Okay, first off: does every Packer who sits for three years get an automatic starting job? Don't the Packers at other positions who risk injury and unemployment on every play deserve a front office that will build the best team possible? Did the team perhaps already reward Rodgers for his three years of service with a paycheck? Does the franchise really owe Rodgers more than its three-time MVP and one-time Super Bowl champion? Does Rodgers really "deserve" not to wait as long as, say, Steve Young?

(On the flip side, does Favre really "deserve" the starting spot? Um, YES, if he's the best quarterback on the roster (something it sounded like he was willing to prove). We're talking sports! Isn't it a meritocracy?)

Another idea that while keeping Favre around now will help the Packers in the short term, it will only infuriate Rodgers and spur him to leave at the end of his contract. Um, so what? It's no big loss. Besides, even if Rodgers really is a star, they'll tear up his deal and give him a new one that keeps him in town before he even hits free agency. When was the last time an awesome quarterback switched teams? (Um, not counting tonight.) It never happens.

Also, the Packers had plans already! And those plans didn't include Brett Favre, who said he was retiring! Seriously, I don't get this. Putting Favre in your plans makes you a much better football team. Don't you think the rest of the team craves the stability that would bring? Imagining myself in a young player's shoes, I'd much rather have a shot to prove myself with the Hall of Famer throwing to me, rather than some bonus baby who could be erratic and make me look bad.

I also think the issue has become clouded because Favre has fallen out of favor with many football fans for a few reasons. One, he gets a ton of pub out of proportion with the kind of player he's been the last few years (though he was great during last season specifically). Fine, whatever, I hate hype, too, though this guy is a legit legend. Many people are also saying Favre has been a jerk about this whole thing and put the Packers in a tough spot. In my book, he hasn't been nearly as big of a jerk as so many players have been. I mean, set aside the truly controversial guys (Leonard Little, anyone?). But if Barry Bonds wasn't enough of a jerk to lose his shot at 755, then Brett Favre definitely wasn't enough of a jerk to lose his starting spot in Green Bay.

Also, I keep seeing people suggest on the Web that the league or Packers should somehow be able to force Favre to stay retired. After all, he made a decision. And you're not allowed to change your mind in life! It is funny how many people saw Favre's return coming even when he announced his retirement, even if they meant it in jest.

Anyway, as I've said before, I feel terrible for Packers fans. But I feel terrible for all NFL fans now. First of all, the whiny bastards who keep announcing how sick they are of Favre now have to hear about him more. Actually, that part makes me happy. But why does Favre have to go to the Jets of all teams?

The Packers were 13-3 last year. The Jets? 4-12. I enjoy raining on your parade, Jets fans. Let's be realistic: there is no way Favre takes you to the Super Bowl, so why even bother? Also, Super Bowl III aside, I've always thought of New York's AFC sqaud as one of the lamer franchises in the league. Forget the past; can a 4-12 team have much of a roster? Who's Favre going to throw to, Al Toon?

It all adds up to some incredible lameness. The Packers won't be any good, the Jets won't be any good, and Favre will eventually leave the game unsatisfied. The Packers were a flawed team last year, but give 'em Brett for one more year and who knows what happens? Guess we'll never get to find out.

Comments

blaine said…
It would be interesting to see what the Jet's true motivations were when trading for Brett. Were they really trying to improve their team, or were the simply trying to sell some more tickets to help fund their new stadium?

I'm sure Brett will improve the offense, after all, the Jets were looking at having either Pennington or Clemons at QB this year, but whose to say that Brett won't have another year like he did two years ago? Why does everyone assume Brett will be as good as he was last year? I think last year was an anomaly and this year Brett will go back to throwing 20+ interceptions while filling his "gunslinger" role.
John said…
Acutally, Blaine, at 20+ interceptions and filling his gunslinging role, Brett Favre is still better than Pennington, Clemons, and Rodgers combined. At least he can connect on a 5-yard screen pass to a wide-open tailback.

This whole thing is just bizarre. I can't imagine how the Packers think they can placate their fan base by running off the best player in franchise history. And I don't get why Favre would accept a trade to the Jets, especially now that Al Toon is no longer on the roster. Couldn't he have at least landed in Tampa Bay?

As for the genesis of this situation, it is clear to me that the issue is interpersonal. This move wasn't based on performance; it was based on the Packers' ownership deciding it had had enough of Favre. And the NFL is still a management league, so they held all the cards and could make this move. The whole thing is exactly like the Eagles running off T.O., except that Favre is an even bigger star and better player.

I hope the Packers' ownership pays dearly, because the only thing I am more sick of hearing than Favre news is whining about Aaron Rodgers getting his chance.
Mike said…
Kenny Smith traded for Brett Favre? I don't know what the Jets' financial situation is like, but I doubt they're hurting for cash. For all I know it's just a move to make themselves more media-friendly since the Giants won it all.

No one knows what Favre's exact statistics will be, but you guys are right-even at his worst he's still quite the upgrade. Chad Pennington has somehow been bad and overrated for years, which should be impossible for a New York quarterback. But whenever I've seen him on TV, someone's in awe of his touch on swing passes to fullbacks.

John, you have a good point. It HAS to be personal because the Jets totally ripped the Packers off on this trade.

I would have been much happier to see Favre go to Tampa Bay; I think he'd be sick with Gruden, and at least the team would have the potential for excitement.

Popular posts from this blog

National Basketball Association Finals Preview Blowout!

If you're looking for a stereotypical matchup breakdown for the NBA Finals between the Detroit Pistons and San Antonio Spurs, (Game One is tonight, 7 o'clock Mountain, ABC), you've come to the right place! Center: Ben Wallace, Pistons vs. Nazr Mohammed, Spurs Wallace might be the league's top defender, winning his third Defensive Player of the Year award this season and leading the Pistons in both blocks and steals. It's said he's an improved offensive player, but he still scores primarily on tips and wide-open dunks. "Big Ben" is horrific from the foul line, connecting on 42.8% this season. Also, his brother has taken on NBA players and can probably beat up Mohammed's brother. Mohammed has been a good fit for the Spurs since being traded from the Knicks. It appears Isiah Thomas may have finally made his first mistake as general manager in New York, as Mohammed has started every Spurs' playoff game, averaging 8.1 points to go with a solid seven...

Forget Brett Favre (*)

From my 2007 NFL season preview : Favre's not as good as he once was-who is?-but he's not the disgrace people make him out to be...I don't think he "deserves" to go out with another Lombardi or anything, but I hope he gets to leave on a good note. Oops. What a mistake. And I even knew this day was coming. Let me say that Brett Favre deserves to go down in history with whatever records he earns, so long as a giant asterisk is placed by each and every one of them. As you may have heard, Sunday's victory over the New York Giants made Favre the winningest quarterback in NFL history. I don't know what ESPN did on TV, but this record practically went unnoticed in the places I follow sports. But it's of crucial importance to me. Why? "Maybe someday down the road it will mean a lot," a typically humble Favre said after the 149th win of his career, moving past Hall of Famer [and indisputable greatest quarterback of all time] John Elway. Humble...

Did CU ever win the Pac-12?

In 2010, I bet a college buddy of mine (who longtime readers may remember as the only other contributor to Hole Punch Sports) that CU’s football team would not win the Pac-12 in the next 15 years. Guess what? It’s time for me to gloat, because I was right. Why we were doomed Back in the day, a lot of people made the argument that CU should join the Pac-12 because we’d get so much more TV money there. Of course, given college football is the answer to the question, “what if you had a sport where multiple teams were like the Yankees, and you created a whole universe of haves and have-nots?”, then yeah, you want to be aligned with some of the haves. But the question in my mind wasn’t, “will CU be better off with more money?” That’s an obvious yes. The question I asked was, will CU be any more competitive in their own conference if they’re competing against teams who are also getting more money? I couldn’t see why they would be. The mathematical angle Legend has it that Cowboys runn...