Should Favre be given chance to compete for the starting job? This is a question that I have been considering the last few days. I didn’t want to have to consider this, but it’s a legit question right now. I find it somewhat curious that the Packers have maintained the stance that Favre cannot compete for the starting job. I know it’s a hard-line stance that they developed mostly due to Favre’s wavering and the significant issues this continues to present. And, I understand that the team had made a decision to move forward which has led to subsequent, key organizational decisions (like implementing Rodgers-specific plays, figuring life with $12M more in cap space, drafting 2 QBs…despite TT always stating he doesn’t draft for need…).
But not allowing Favre to compete for the starting spot would seem to fly in the face of McCarthy’s philosophy of “open competition”. Every year we hear about the various open competitions going on. There was an open competition between Mason Crosby and Dave Rayner last year and despite Rayner being a solid incumbent who competed at a high level, Crosby was able to beat him out because it was “open”. The Poppinga/Chillar battle has apparently been an “open” competition as have the never-ending battles for the guard spots. There is an open punter competition and right now at least an open RB competition. There is an open competition at safety with Rouse factoring in and an open competition for the 3rd cornerback spot. There is an open competition at WR, at TE, etc.
So, it would seem to me that one reasonable compromise would be to have the Packers tell Favre he can compete for the starting job against Rodgers (and Brohm) and that in exchange for doing so, the team would like Favre to agree to restructuring his contract to a 1 year $8 million deal and an a clear agreement now that Favre would make any retirement decision at the end of this season by February of 2009 (after the Super Bowl) at the latest. If the money isn’t critical to Favre, he’d agreed to this as a way of apologizing for his part in this mess. And this would enable Favre to start waffling now. And, let’s face it, while Favre was great last year, he’s old for an NFL player and he may be getting to a playing age where a younger guy may finally catch up with him and be able to outperform him. Having an open competition would also enable Rodgers (and Brohm) a real chance to simply outperform Favre in camp and win the job. Frankly, it’s what Rodgers would have to do right now anywhere else in the entire NFL if he weren’t a Packer – so it makes some sense. If he is indeed so well-versed in the offense as they say and the offense flows really well through him, he would have the opportunity to start which would still be an improvement from last year where he didn’t have this opportunity.
(Interesting note: one guy you have to feel for in all of this is Matt Flynn. He was probably all fired up to come to Green Bay where he could fight for the #2 spot, but if Favre does return, he may end up being the odd man out. I’ll bet Flynn’s family and friends are pulling hard for a Favre retirement or a last-minute trade!)
(Interesting note #2: interesting candor by some other players re their preferences (in McGinn’s jsonline article this morning, like Ryan Pickett very clearly wanting Favre to come back).
packergeeks 
July 30, 2008 at 5:54 pm |
Makes sense to me. I’m not sure why they’ve had a hard-line “no-Favre” stance throughout this whole thing. Either it’s mulish, or Thompson’s in love with his guy Rodgers, or there’s more behind-the-scenes problems with Favre than they’ve admitted. (Not running the right plays, maybe?)
It would be odd seeing #4 running the second team in pre-season games. I suspect the over/under on broken fingers on opposing DBs would be ten.
I still think in the cold hard light of day, if they can get Favre to play for one or two years, they should. Rodgers, as good as he looks, is totally unproven and has had some weird injuries. If he wants to walk after 2009, ok, fair enough. Brohm (or Flynn) will have had two years under his belt at that point, and he becomes the heir apparent. It just seems the window of opportunity for winning is so short: how long will Woodson & Harris hold up? Can Grant take the pounding for three or four more years without dropping off? Etc.
July 30, 2008 at 6:00 pm |
It sounds great in theory, but I just don’t see how it could work. Even if Rodgers wins the job, the minute he has a shakey performance (and that unavoidable) there will be clamoring for Favre to replace him. On the other hand, Favre can (and has) thrown 5 INTs is a single game and his fans eat it up ’cause “he’s a gunslinger.”
It’s a one-way ratchet. Fans will want Favre if Rodgers plays poorly, but wouldn’t think about benching Favre no matter how badly he stinks.
July 30, 2008 at 7:44 pm |
I think the ‘no competition’ line may be one more way to try to convince Favre to either accept a trade or stay retired. If they told him that he could come and compete then he has an additional incentive to report to camp, which really isn’t what the Packers want. If the Packers basically say “you can’t get your starting job back and we aren’t releasing you or trading you to the Vikings” then Favre has less of an incentive to report since he thinks that there is no way he gets to start. Has been an effective strategy? Not really, but given all that has gone on I wouldn’t blame the Packers if this is what they were trying since rational thought seems to have gone out the window with Favre.
July 30, 2008 at 8:31 pm |
I give up. Let the crazy bastard compete for the job. Bring him back, I guess.
July 30, 2008 at 9:51 pm |
No matter how this all plays out, it is going to hang over the team for the entire year. The national talking heads will bring it up at every opportunity:
– if AR is having a Tom Brady-type season (“Thank goodness Favre retired/was traded to insert team here and Rodgers got to play”),
-throws up a medicore season (“Obviously TT wanted his man in there and he wasn’t the best man for the job”),
-or is hurt in Week 3 (“I bet the Packers wish they had Favre right about now”).
Anyway I look at it this is going to be a looonnnggg season in terms of the in game announcing and pre/post game shows.
July 30, 2008 at 10:21 pm |
Al Jones (Favre’s reporter friend from Biloxi) was interviewed on 1250 WSSP in Milwaukee this afternoon. He feels that something happened to cause things to go bad after Favre met with Campen in March. He said, Favre indicated to Campen that he had changed his mind and wanted to come back. Campen went back to GB and told Thompson and Mc Carthy. TT and MM told Favre that was fine and would come to Mississippi April 1 (does that have any sugnificance?) and make a joint statement (Most of this has been around in bits and pieces). He feels that during the time between Campens visit and the day he called Mc Carthy and told him not come, someone or something changed his mind again. He said he didn’t know what it was.
His feeling is that there are only three possibilities Favre has available to him now. Go back and play at GB (He said he feels this is what Favre really wants). Get his outright release from the Packers but even that doesn’t guarentee he will play for another team. Or finally, retire once again (He would only be slightly surprised if this happened.
Based on the interview above it seems that something happened to make Favre tell TT and MM not to come. What could that be? Jones said if that can be revealed we would know why Favre has been acting as he has.
My guess — I smell Bevell and Childress.
July 31, 2008 at 10:47 am |
@Ron La Canne – Excellent insight from Jones. Thanks for the comment.