During the last offseason, I was very critical of Brett Favre and the Green Bay Packers for their handling of his retirement and eventual un-retirement.
I felt that Favre was being a prima donna and was really putting his replacement, Aaron Rodgers, in a no-win situation.
I also felt that Favre wasn’t all that he has been built up to be as a quarterback.
Maybe, I was wrong on that last point.
While I still believe Favre is somewhat overrated, in the sense that he seems to hurt his team at the most inopportune time, I am surprised at how well he is doing as the quarterback on the New York Jets.
Especially when you consider the fact that he had a shortened training camp and is learning a completely different system.
It is a real possibility that the Jets could win the AFC East division this year and a big part of that would be because of Favre – although I can’t forget to mention their defense, which is pretty good too.
Right now, Favre looks like he is a lock for an AFC Pro-Bowl spot. And, I believe that, as of right now, he has to be considered among the candidates for NFL MVP.
As for the Packers, their decision to trade Favre is looking like a bad one. A team that was 13-3 last year, and pretty much returned everybody, except for Favre, of course, is in serious danger of not making the playoffs. Naturally, the question is would they be in the same predicament if Favre was still their quarterback?
Obviously, no one knows the answer to that question. It is possible they would have the same record even if Favre was still the starter – albeit not likely.
The one thing that is certain is that the Packers were wrong in hastily dispatching Brett. He deserved a chance to come back to the team that he almost singlehandedly brought back into prominence.
It’ll be interesting if their decision to cut ties with Favre will cost both head coach, Mike McCarthy, and general manager, Ted Thompson, their jobs.
I’m sure there will be some Packers fans calling for their respective heads.
The Wizard has spoken
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment