So Brett Favre's agent Bus Cook says his client won't be playing in 2009.
But for now, let's just assume there is still a possibility Favre could change his mind. Here are a few recent opinions on the Favre-to-Minnesota speculation.
Star-Tribune columnist Patrick Reusse thinks Favre will make another comeback and play for the Vikings. He thinks it's a bad move for the Vikes.
The National Football Post's Matt Bowen (a former player and teammate of Favre) thinks Favre will make another comeback and play for the Vikings. He thinks it would be a good move for the Vikes.
Finally, the National Football Post's Andrew Brandt (who worked in the Green Bay front office during the Favre years) doesn't think Favre will make a comeback. He thinks that's a good move for Favre.
Over the next week or so, I think Brad Childress should make a strong statement that the Vikings are not interested in Brett Favre – retired or unretired. If they wanted to get their quarterback of the future, they should have done what was necessary to trade for Jay Cutler. I don't think the 2009 Brett Favre gets the Vikings to an NFC Championship game, let alone a Super Bowl.
But then Bowen writes this in his post:
"as much as we still want to say Favre can no longer play football, he’s better than anyone on the Vikings’ roster. Sage Rosenfels? Tarvaris Jackson? I want someone — anyone — to come up with an argument why those two names are better than Brett Favre now, or three years for now, because we know they aren’t."
And Bowen's right – I can't make an argument (with a straight face) that Jackson or Rosenfels are better than a 40-year-old Favre. I think Rosenfels might be, but it's far from a sure thing, and if the goal of every team is to improve its talent level at every position it possibly can during the off-season, maybe signing Favre wouldn't be such a bad idea.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
if the goal of every team is to improve its talent level at every position it possibly can during the off-seasonI think the goal of every team should be to field the best team possible. Sometimes increased talent comes at the cost of team chemistry, and it's been clear ever since Favre announced his unretirement that he's committed to himself first. There's no way hiring a 40-year-old Favre has a net positive impact on the Vikings.
Cutler may have been worth his diva personality, but his best years are likely yet to come.
Favre would be better than what we have, and that's pretty depressing. You almost have to want him to come here, despite the side show he would cause and the embarrassment of going to a "washed up" QB.
Here's entertaining food for thought - could Jackson (Alabama St.) or Rosenfels (Iowa St.) even win the QB job at BCS Bowl contending school? Let's look at last year's BCS Bowl crop:
Probably not at these places:
Tebow, Florida
Bradford, Oklahoma
Sanchez, USC
Pryor, Ohio St.
Would have a chance here:
McCoy, Texas
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt at the other BCS bowl teams of last year.
This list didn't include Stafford (Georgia not a BCS Bowl team last year).
Pretty sad, once you think of it.
Bismuth:
I think you have a point there about a self-absorbed (although I don't know if Favre qualifies as that) player screwing up team chemistry – otherwise known as T.O. disease. But winning usually does wonders for team chemistry. If Favre could do that in Minnesota, and by that I mean an 11-5 record or better, I don't think anyone on the team is going to moan if he misses practices and sis perceived as getting preferential treatment.
Travis:
I think you overestimate the level of talent at the college level. I'd say Jackson and, especially, Rosenfels, could have won all those QB jobs for the BCS schools based on the experience they've racked up playing against the best football players in the world the past few years.
However, that doesn't mean our quarterback situation is still any good. Still, I'm hopeful about Rosenfels. All his stats besides interceptions the past two years have been pretty good. But the interceptions are problematic. He'll have to find a way to cut back on those if he's going to beat out Jackson this summer.
I agree that winning generally is good for team chemistry, but the Jets were 8-3 at one point last season before totally collapsing. In this case, a couple of bad games sent them spiraling, prompting comments like this one from other team members near the end of the season.
Given how susceptible the Vikes are to late-season collapses, I think Favre in purple has disaster written all over it.
Whoops, that last comment was me...
Bismuth/Derek:
The past two seasons, it's been collapses early in the year that have doomed (2007) and almost doomed (2008) the Vikings.
Anyway ... back to Favre. Assuming he might be interested in playing again and assuming Childress/Spielman/Zygi are interested in having him, perhaps put this to the Chillster's veteran leadership committee. Explain to them, 'Look, this is what we want to do, this is what Favre wants to do. Expect him to be distant, that it'll be a media circus, etc, etc.' and see if they are onside with signing him. If they're not, management has some serious thinking to do. If they are on board, then you go for it and can sleep at night if things do go sour.
Post a Comment