Comments on: The Brett Favre locker question

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:05:42 +0000

I heard on the news last night that TT is dismantling the locker and it sending it Brett. So I guess that one is settled.

By: lostinutah

lostinutah — Fri, 30 May 2008 05:37:49 +0000

I’m with 3000. Move it to the Hall – that would be very cool.

By: Joe

Joe — Thu, 29 May 2008 14:56:42 +0000

I think it is a bad idea. The locker room is a work area – this would be like retiring a really great CEO’s desk. But more importantly, it just doesn’t make sense. If all of the honoring of Farve is for the fans then why do this memorial in a place the fans almost never get to see? The tributes need to be in the public spaces of Lambeau.

Moving it to the hall of fame is a good idea because it is a public space.

By: awhayes

awhayes — Wed, 28 May 2008 15:01:10 +0000

Joshy – as usual, you make solid points. Still, I guess I think 3000 has the best idea – just put it in the Pack’s HOF. It’s funny, as I think about this debate, I can’t help but think about Uncle Rico from Napoleon Dynamite longing for what once was. That’s an exaggeration of course, but a small part of me wants the players to just focus totally on what is when in that locker room.

Though I guess one other argument I hadn’t really considered enough may be that the locker being there could really inspire younger players to play harder, play through injuries, be uncommonly good at improvising, enjoy the game, get addicted to painkillers and then overcome them, marry a hot wife, fart a lot, play jokes on people, be idolized by most people, handle adversity like a champ, and most importantly, win!

By: 3000

3000 — Wed, 28 May 2008 14:42:18 +0000

What about moving the entire locker and all its contents to the Packers Hall? They could cut it out of the wall, put all the stuff back in exactly where it was, and install a new locker in its place. Seems like that’d satisfy both sides of the argument.

By: joshywoshybigfatposhy

joshywoshybigfatposhy — Wed, 28 May 2008 14:18:14 +0000

I heard the discussion on M&M – one thing that bothered me was the misrepresentation of McCarthy’s comments — “Who do you want me to put in there” was followed by “with Brett’s hygiene” or a joke similar to that in McCarthy’s comments, but that second part was left out on M&M. Greeny kept commenting that it was absurd to act like no one could take over his locker like it was mystique thing, when in fact, the whole answer revealed it was an attempt at a joke.

Overall, I don’t have a strong opinion about it, but my question quickly becomes “what’s the downside?” If the Packers played in sub-par facilities and needed the space, and if Favre were an annual hold-out prima donna, I say it has a negative impact. But neither of those things are/were true. I don’t imagine the locker will be “retired” forever, as McCarthy also said he ‘had plans’ for it. I don’t think they’re planning on regular worship services (though thousands would attend).

Also, lots of people seem to act like Rodgers or the young guys on this team are somehow disrespected by the rest of us paying attention to Favre. I think they could probably care less. Any professional, and especially one who spent time playing with him, would, should, and in my estimation IS handling it just fine. If current Packers are sick of hearing about Favre, they should avoid the midwest for about the next 72 years.