Signing
Brett Favre is a bad idea. A really bad idea. For a lot of reasons. Of course, it is being discussed by fans, columnist, pundits, as if there are two logical sides, as if the best decision isn't obvious.
The issue of how we Vikings fans receive Favre might be the most fragmented. 'Hardcore' fans seem to take one side or the other; there are plenty, including those in the Twin Cities media, that apparently support the signing 100 percent. Others, myself included, oppose the signing as if it were a life-threatening issue. Casual Vikings fans, which make up the vast (and alarmingly self-loathing) majority of the team's supporters, seem to welcome the idea of having a Hall of Fame quarterback--and why not?
Fran Tarkenton is the only Vikings quarterback to earn his gold jacket while in Minnesota, and these casual fans haven't had much else to pin their hopes on lately.
The problem for us hardcore types is that we cannot separate the Brett Favre in green and gold (or green and white for the matter) from the prospect of a Brett Favre in purple. It is hard to deny the intense rivalry between Green Bay and Minnesota. Packers players have always tried to. Between 1996-2000 (arguably the best years of Favre's career) the Chicago Bears managed only 26 wins, while the Vikings ('98, '00) and Packers ('96, '97) won four NFC Central division titles and made a combined eight playoff appearances, yet Packers players and fans insisted that the two games against Chicago each year represented the true rivalry. While there is something to be said for a rivalry that goes back to 1921, there is also something to be said for the Bears' 2-8 record against Green Bay during that span, with both wins coming in seasons where neither team made the playoffs.
One would think that any Vikings fan would remember that, and would harbor some pretty deep-seated animosity for the Packers, and for Favre. During the Packers mid-90s run among the NFL elite, which included two Super Bowl appearances, the Vikings could only play the role of spoiler to the Packers. A wildcard team at best, they managed to
frustrate the Packers in most games, especially at the Metrodome, where Favre seemed to play his absolute worst games over and over. In 1998, with the addition of Randy Moss, the Vikings stole the series from Green Bay, going 15-1 and starting a stretch where they won two out of three Central division titles and made the playoffs three straight years, while Green Bay lost Mike Holmgren and missed the playoffs in '99 and '00.
While those seasons were contentious and competitive, it was the following years that should have cemented the (fan)hatred for Favre. The Vikings fell off fast, losing Dennis Green and Cris Carter in 2001 and reaching the playoffs only twice between 2001 and 2008. Meanwhile, Green Bay, taking advantage of a weak division, racked up a few more division titles and even made an appearance in the NFC Championship following the 2007 season. During this time Green Bay dominated the series between the teams, and Favre even seemed to conquer his Metrodome issues, at the Vikings expense.
It seems logical that fans would not welcome the defining character of their only major rival. Especially with 17 years worth of history. But these are Vikings fans. Those pessimistic, Sunday-afternoon-in-the-tree-stand, fair weather Vikings fans. Apparently one year removed, Brett Favre isn't so bad after all.
There is almost precedent for such a move in the team's history:
Warren Moon, a member of both the Pro Football Hall of Fame and the Canadian Football Hall of Fame, spent three seasons with the Vikings in the mid-1990s. Moon turned 38 in his first season with the team, 1994, and was far past his prime. Moon managed to turn in two solid seasons before a broken collarbone forced him to miss most of the 1996 season.
Don't jump on this comparison too quickly though. There are a number of reasons why that move, now 15 years past, was different than the potential (inevitible) Favre addition. It's worth noting that while the Vikings signed Moon 15 years ago, Favre is only 13 years younger than Moon. He will turn 40 the day before a Week 5 match-up with the St. Louis Rams. Moon turned 40 the day after Brad Johnson led the Vikes to a
16-13 overtime win over Oakland in 1996--Moon was on the sideline for the game, nursing a week-old broken collarbone. In Favre's case, the health of his right arm isn't really up in the air; we already know that he needed arthroscopic surgery on his right shoulder this summer. While we know that Favre has almost no history of injuries (he has started 261 consecutive games since 1992), can we ignore the fact that this is a shoulder injury, to the throwing arm, of a
(40-year-old) quarterback?
It would be irresponsible not to mention Jim McMahon in this conversation. In some ways he is almost a better example than Moon. He came from a rival team and that team, the Bears, had played a similar role in the 80s as the Packers did in the 90s. But in
1993 the Vikings weren't really a serious contender. They had a new coach, and had just started attendant eh NFL draft regularly again. McMahon wasn't a savior. He had hardly played in the previous few season. He was no risk to a team that didn't have any young quarterbacks and was a few years away from real contention anyway.
Favre is hailed not only as a jolt of energy, but a steadying presence at a position that has been anything but for the Vikings in recent memory. While his presence would certainly add a new flavor, the rest is pure delusion. Favre has proven over and over that he is no longer the 'closer' that once took the Packers to the two consecutive Super Bowls. The last two seasons Favre has almost single-handedly brought down teams on the cusp of success, but the problem really goes back further.
In the 2001 season Green Bay bounced back from a stunning three-year playoff drought and posted a 12-4 record, earning a home game in the wild card round. After disposing of San Francisco they went to St. Louis. Favre posted one of the most horrific playoff performances in recent history by any quarterback, tossing
six interceptions--including three that were returned for touchdowns-- in a 45-19 loss. The next year Green Bay managed another 12-4 season, then lost a home wild card game to Atlanta
27-7. In 2003 the Packers went to Philadelphia for a divisional round game. After Donovan McNabb played the hero in the 4th quarter, rallying the Eagles to tie the game at 17 and send it to overtime, Favre threw an interception on the Packers' first offensive play, setting the Eagles up with excellent field position and eventually, a
game-winning field goal.
That situation played out again in January of 2008, when the Giants won the NFC Championship in Green Bay. Favre threw a critical interception in overtime, giving Lawrence Tynes a chance to hit a
game-winning field goal. Oh, almost forgot: In January of 2005 Green Bay lost another home playoff game.
To the Vikings. Brett Favre threw four interceptions in this one, helping the the Packers
squander another division title.
All of the above happened when Favre was in his 30's. Most of it when he was in his
early 30's, before
everybody thought he was old. Before he had any shoulder surgeries. But the list is not yet complete. We haven't gone into his 2008 season in New York.
The Jets jumped out to an 8-3 record in 2008, which landed them atop the AFC East with five games left. And at 8-3, they had just cemented their place among the best teams in the league with two huge victories: In Week 11 they traveled to New England and bested the Patriots
34-31 in overtime to take the lead in the division; then, again on the road, they blasted the Titans
34-13, handing the Tennessee their first loss of the season. Things looked pretty good for the Jets.
Then Brett Favre self destructed, and took the Jets with him.
Starting November 30th, the Jets went on a 1-4 stretch that knocked them out of playoff contention. During those five games Favre threw just two touchdowns and racked up nine interceptions. Sure, we've now learned that much of his downfall was due to the shoulder injury, which is now 'fixed'. Sure, the Jets probably were over-achieving for most of the season, and came down to Earth hard. I'll give you that. But again, surgery or no surgery, Favre is another year older.
When have we ever seen Brett Favre play the role of game manager? The last thing the Vikings need is to bring in a guy and let him have free rein. Can anybody honestly believe that Childress will do anything but defer to Favre? What happens when Favre gets that wild hair and throw up a stupid (yes, it deserves that word) pass, as he is prone to do (18 years and running, maybe)? As he is walking to the sideline, chinstrap already unsnapped, with that wry grin on his face, there is no way Childress will even look at him. What could he say? "Gee, Brett, I wish you hadn't tossed that one up for grabs..." Of course not.
And worse, what if Favre is terrible? What if he throws eight interceptions in September and Minnesota starts 1-3 and it is despite Favre's worst effort? Childress is not going to bench him. He won't and everybody knows it, including Favre. There was rumor that the Vikings were adjusting their playbook to accommodate Favre. Last year 3rd and five was a running play for the Vikings, because the offensive line pushed people around and Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor have the ability to fall forward almost every time they are tackled. There is no reason why 3rd and five should not still be a running down for the Vikings, with or without Favre.
There is no doubt that Childress will change his philosophy with Favre under center. Which would have been fine, and would have made sense, when Favre was 25 or 30 or even 35. But he is not that quarterback anymore. And that is the central problem with this whole situation. Brett Favre is not the same quarterback he used to be. He is a lot worse than that quarterback. And either way, is not the 'type' of quarterback the Vikings need, or even could use for that matter. If you wanted a 'Favre-type', Jay Cutler was your man. At least he is still young and spry with a cannon. Oops, he is
on the Bears now, your biggest competition in the NFC North this season.
This week, we have read that Favre will decide whether he will play in 2009 by Friday. Apparently, he is convinced that his arm has enough in it to get through the year, but is questioning whether he can handle the grind of training camp and one more season mentally. Talk about a red flag. What more could a coaching staff need to hear from a potential signing?
The fact that he is questioning this at all should be enough. If you aren't sure you can make it mentally, and it is the end of July, what is going to change? What exactly is Brett Favre doing right now? Is he filling a note book with pros and cons? Evaluating various aspects of becoming a Minnesota Viking and rating their relative impact on his overall emotional and mental health? I guess he might be. Or he might just be saying whatever he needs to say in order to keep his name on ESPN.com everyday.
Childress clearly has lost any sense of perspective on this issue. Desperation may be a strong word, but it is the closest description of this situation. Is there nobody in the Vikings organization who can just boil the situation down to the facts for Childress? Maybe a simple list? Something like this:
Dear Chilly:
- We are the defending division champions.
- We win games (when we win games, that is) by playing solid defense and protecting the ball. With our running game and our defense's ability to keep opposing offenses in check, all we need from a quarterback is to manage the game. Think Trent Dilfer as a Baltimore Raven.
- It is very likely that either Rosenfels or Jackson will be the starter in 2010, regardless of Favre's decision. If neither plays at all this season, 2010 may as well be a rebuilding year. Try telling Mark Brunell, Aaron Brooks, and Kurt Warner that Brett Favre is a great teacher of offenses.
- You are pinning your hopes on a quarterback that has proven that he can no longer win in December and January, repeatedly. He is going to be 40 this season, and is questioning whether or not he can handle another NFL season mentally.
- It would be unrealistic to expect anything more than a 11-5 season with one or no playoff wins with Brett Favre as quarterback. It would be completely within the realm of realistic expectations to assume that Jackson or Rosenfels will lead the team to 10 or 11 wins and a win in the playoffs. Jackson already helped the team finish a 10-6 season and NFC North division title, last year.
Best,
Any Vikings coach, player, administrator, ball boy with any sense.
Maybe I'm jut a Favre-hater. Or maybe I just don't want a quarterback
throwing passes from his knees, calling audibles on 3rd and two that lead to interceptions, or losing his mind come December. Here's hoping Favre makes the right decision.
Nobody else involved can.
