It's amazing. Just when he was officially retired once again, Brett Favre "un-retired", agreeing to come back to Minnesota for two more years of football. This move is getting all kinds of media attention and generating excitement in Minnesota, but I really don't see the big deal.
Favre will be 40 in October. How many quarterbacks lead their teams to Super Bowls at 40. He's as durable as they come and he's showed great longevity through his career, but still...
He's coming off some bicep surgery. He also has a torn rotator cuff. His body is obviously starting to give, and between the quickness one loses as they age, the strength they lose as they age, their increased recovery time, and their susceptibility to injuries, Favre seems like he has a high chance of disaster during these next two seasons.
In New York last season, Favre began to taper later in the season. Many interceptions and much inconsistency cost the Jets a few games. Favre's 9 INTs during the final five weeks of the season were far more than Tarvaris Jackson's 1 INT during the final four weeks of the season. Who's to say that Favre is a better option?
Then there's the whole issue of team chemistry. It seemed like Jackson had a close bond with his wide receivers. This is a critical element to a team's success. Favre, on the other hand, is coming into a team that he doesn't know, missed an entire training camp, and will have no rapport with any of his receivers.
Aside from his chemistry with the receivers, how about his chemistry with the rest of the team? Last year after the Jets missed the playoffs (largely thanks to Favre's poor play down the stretch), many Jets players, including Thomas Jones, commented about how Favre didn't dress with the team and didn't stay in the same hotel room, among other things. Oh yeah, Favre seems like a real team player. Just the kind of guy I want to be the leader of my team. The Vikings were already "expecting" a playoff berth and were even considered one of the top teams in the NFC, without Favre leading the team. With the addition of Favre, many people have elevated the Vikings to Super Bowl contender status, which I believe is preposterous. As I showed earlier, Favre faded down the stretch. So what does that mean about the playoffs? He hasn't been very good in the playoffs recently, and if the Vikings don't win the Super Bowl, or at least make it there, the season will be considered a bust, and the Favre acquisition a waste. I mean, they already have arguably the best running game in the NFL and the best run defense in the NFL, so they have the foundation for a playoff team in place. If Favre can't get them a Super Bowl, and only gets them into the playoffs, then what was the point of adding Favre in the first place?
I understand where the Vikings are coming from. They probably won't contend without Favre. This will increase ratings, sell more tickets, and might give them a shot to go big this year, but I don't think he's the future in Minnesota and you have to wonder what they'll do after him.
To wrap it up, I believe Favre will not be a good addition to the Vikings because of his age/injury risk, his deteriorating arm strength and skills as a QB, and his inconsistency. Not to mention, he won't be able to develop any chemistry with his receivers, and if they don't win the Super Bowl this year, it would be a huge setback for the Vikings' organization. Honestly, it seems like Favre signed with the Vikings out of spite. Heck, just about a month ago, Favre said he wasn't going to play this season because "he didn't think he could perform at a high level." Uh huh. So what has changed? Aside from the fact that he now has a slight tear in his rotator cuff. While I still think Favre is one of the best QB's ever, I feel like this whole situation has somewhat tainted his brilliant career. I really do hope he does well because I don't want to see him fall flat on his face. I want to see him go out on top, but with Favre constantly "un-retiring," I think he never will.
Favre will be 40 in October. How many quarterbacks lead their teams to Super Bowls at 40. He's as durable as they come and he's showed great longevity through his career, but still...
He's coming off some bicep surgery. He also has a torn rotator cuff. His body is obviously starting to give, and between the quickness one loses as they age, the strength they lose as they age, their increased recovery time, and their susceptibility to injuries, Favre seems like he has a high chance of disaster during these next two seasons.
In New York last season, Favre began to taper later in the season. Many interceptions and much inconsistency cost the Jets a few games. Favre's 9 INTs during the final five weeks of the season were far more than Tarvaris Jackson's 1 INT during the final four weeks of the season. Who's to say that Favre is a better option?
Then there's the whole issue of team chemistry. It seemed like Jackson had a close bond with his wide receivers. This is a critical element to a team's success. Favre, on the other hand, is coming into a team that he doesn't know, missed an entire training camp, and will have no rapport with any of his receivers.
Aside from his chemistry with the receivers, how about his chemistry with the rest of the team? Last year after the Jets missed the playoffs (largely thanks to Favre's poor play down the stretch), many Jets players, including Thomas Jones, commented about how Favre didn't dress with the team and didn't stay in the same hotel room, among other things. Oh yeah, Favre seems like a real team player. Just the kind of guy I want to be the leader of my team. The Vikings were already "expecting" a playoff berth and were even considered one of the top teams in the NFC, without Favre leading the team. With the addition of Favre, many people have elevated the Vikings to Super Bowl contender status, which I believe is preposterous. As I showed earlier, Favre faded down the stretch. So what does that mean about the playoffs? He hasn't been very good in the playoffs recently, and if the Vikings don't win the Super Bowl, or at least make it there, the season will be considered a bust, and the Favre acquisition a waste. I mean, they already have arguably the best running game in the NFL and the best run defense in the NFL, so they have the foundation for a playoff team in place. If Favre can't get them a Super Bowl, and only gets them into the playoffs, then what was the point of adding Favre in the first place?
I understand where the Vikings are coming from. They probably won't contend without Favre. This will increase ratings, sell more tickets, and might give them a shot to go big this year, but I don't think he's the future in Minnesota and you have to wonder what they'll do after him.
To wrap it up, I believe Favre will not be a good addition to the Vikings because of his age/injury risk, his deteriorating arm strength and skills as a QB, and his inconsistency. Not to mention, he won't be able to develop any chemistry with his receivers, and if they don't win the Super Bowl this year, it would be a huge setback for the Vikings' organization. Honestly, it seems like Favre signed with the Vikings out of spite. Heck, just about a month ago, Favre said he wasn't going to play this season because "he didn't think he could perform at a high level." Uh huh. So what has changed? Aside from the fact that he now has a slight tear in his rotator cuff. While I still think Favre is one of the best QB's ever, I feel like this whole situation has somewhat tainted his brilliant career. I really do hope he does well because I don't want to see him fall flat on his face. I want to see him go out on top, but with Favre constantly "un-retiring," I think he never will.
About the Author:
The 2009 NFL season is around the corner! It's a matter of time before it begins, and the best way to get ready for it is by playing some NFL pickem at RootZoo Sports. Additionally, the NFL forum is booming, and you may want to check it out.
0 comments:
Post a Comment