1stladyofthenfl.com
EVERYTHING YOU WANT AND NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE 2008 N.F.L. SEASON.
The Lady you want and need to visit for all things NFL.
That's Debatable
That's Debatable, That's Not
July 5, 2008
Rod Woodson and Jamie Dukes appeared on N.F.L. Network to debate the possible comeback of Brett Favre. Both Woodson and Duke reminded me of the days of my friends and I sitting around in college, watching SportsCenter and debating passionately, but definitely not eloquently our points on what should or needs to be done with an array of teams in the league. Those two men felt so strongly about their individual points of interest that they failed to realize that they basically had the exact same argument.
Woodson’s argument was based on the front office of the Packers’ organization. Woodson fervently argued that the general manager, Ted Thompson, must look to the future of the franchise and do what is best for that future. Woodson felt that the three years of indecisiveness by Favre is holding the franchise back and they need to move on and put Aaron Rodgers out there to begin leading the Packers into the future.
Now, my stance on Woodson’s argument is that if the front office truly wants to do what is best for the franchise, they will look at all possible scenarios. If the rumors of Favre contacting the team for a comeback are true, one of the rumors reported that the Packers turned him down and also refused to release him from the Packers organization. Is that good for the future? Let’s say that the Packers do not want him to come back as their QB, if you feel that he no longer has what it takes, why not allow another team that is in QB limbo to take him? I think that that would help the Packers out. The pass rush defense knows what to look for when playing against him because they have done it for so long in practice and understand it first hand and if the team feels as though he cannot contribute to their cause, why would he be able to contribute to a new team’s cause? Favre and the Packers are synonymous with one another. Favre would not be as productive this year with any other team.
Dukes took the stance that the organization should do whatever is best to win the Super Bowl this season. He argued that the Packers cam very close to getting to the Super Bowl, but missed it by a field goal. They have a Super Bowl ready team, but Aaron Rodgers is not the guy get the team to the Super Bowl while they still have the Super Bowl talent. Dukes feels that the front office should do whatever they can to get the Packers to the Super Bowl now and not worry so much about the future.
Both of these guys are talking about what should be done and going back and forth about it, but did not see that both of their arguments are one in the same. The Packers need to win another Super Bowl in order to continue to even be viewed as a threat to the rest of the league. They also need to show that they are a force to be reckoned with for years to come. Just as the Colts and the Patriots dominate in their division, the Packers need to get back to that type of consistency.
If, and that is a huge if, Favre returns, it can only benefit the Patriots. Let’s say that he does come back and does not produce (yea right), the Packers have Rodgers right there to step in. They can even play both QBs rotating them in and out. This allows Favre to rest (not saying that he needs it), it gets Rodgers some experience, and it keeps the defense guessing. What if Rodgers is the next Montana (since people keep referencing how Montana left and won more rings than Favre)? If he is then get him some playing experience on the field while you still have the wisdom of Favre playing as well. Imagine if they would have rotated Favre and Montana. That would have been a dominating force on the field. Favre’s return, in a nutshell, can only help the franchise.
With all of that being said, I believe that we should keep in mind that this is Brett Favre. Woodson seemed annoyed by his indecisiveness, but Favre has earned the right to be indecisive. Woodson made the remark that he was called two weeks after his retirement to return and he turned it down. I think that Woodson was an awesome DB and no one can look down on 71 interceptions in 17 seasons, but as great as many players are or were, they do not play with the passion of Brett Favre. Favre can be indecisive about his return because we all know that he still plays football like the little leaguers under the age of 12. He still loves the game because he plays it for fun. He is one of the few guys within the almost $8 billion dollar industry that we do not doubt plays the game not just for some big payday, but because he truly loves it. Leaving football for Favre must be like divorcing a partner after being married to them for 17 years, but being in love with them since childhood. His tears at the press conference showed us that he does truly love the sport more than most. Just as one may contemplate the return to a spouse after a separation, Favre can have the same internal battle about returning to football. Michael Jordan returned to basketball and Jay-Z returned to rap. Why must Woodson and others feel that Favre needs to make a clear-cut decision right now? Jay-Z discussed on the Tavis Smiley Show that rap started as something that he was good at and could make money off of, but it grew into something he loved and missed. We know he does not need to make albums for money, just as M.J. did not need to return to basketball for money. We can place Favre in the category with these men because they do what they do because they love it. So, I would tell Woodson that if he loved something as much as Favre loves football, he would have earned the right to be a little indecisive as well.
July 5, 2008
Rod Woodson and Jamie Dukes appeared on N.F.L. Network to debate the possible comeback of Brett Favre. Both Woodson and Duke reminded me of the days of my friends and I sitting around in college, watching SportsCenter and debating passionately, but definitely not eloquently our points on what should or needs to be done with an array of teams in the league. Those two men felt so strongly about their individual points of interest that they failed to realize that they basically had the exact same argument.
Woodson’s argument was based on the front office of the Packers’ organization. Woodson fervently argued that the general manager, Ted Thompson, must look to the future of the franchise and do what is best for that future. Woodson felt that the three years of indecisiveness by Favre is holding the franchise back and they need to move on and put Aaron Rodgers out there to begin leading the Packers into the future.
Now, my stance on Woodson’s argument is that if the front office truly wants to do what is best for the franchise, they will look at all possible scenarios. If the rumors of Favre contacting the team for a comeback are true, one of the rumors reported that the Packers turned him down and also refused to release him from the Packers organization. Is that good for the future? Let’s say that the Packers do not want him to come back as their QB, if you feel that he no longer has what it takes, why not allow another team that is in QB limbo to take him? I think that that would help the Packers out. The pass rush defense knows what to look for when playing against him because they have done it for so long in practice and understand it first hand and if the team feels as though he cannot contribute to their cause, why would he be able to contribute to a new team’s cause? Favre and the Packers are synonymous with one another. Favre would not be as productive this year with any other team.
Dukes took the stance that the organization should do whatever is best to win the Super Bowl this season. He argued that the Packers cam very close to getting to the Super Bowl, but missed it by a field goal. They have a Super Bowl ready team, but Aaron Rodgers is not the guy get the team to the Super Bowl while they still have the Super Bowl talent. Dukes feels that the front office should do whatever they can to get the Packers to the Super Bowl now and not worry so much about the future.
Both of these guys are talking about what should be done and going back and forth about it, but did not see that both of their arguments are one in the same. The Packers need to win another Super Bowl in order to continue to even be viewed as a threat to the rest of the league. They also need to show that they are a force to be reckoned with for years to come. Just as the Colts and the Patriots dominate in their division, the Packers need to get back to that type of consistency. If, and that is a huge if, Favre returns, it can only benefit the Patriots. Let’s say that he does come back and does not produce (yea right), the Packers have Rodgers right there to step in. They can even play both QBs rotating them in and out. This allows Favre to rest (not saying that he needs it), it gets Rodgers some experience, and it keeps the defense guessing. What if Rodgers is the next Montana (since people keep referencing how Montana left and won more rings than Favre)? If he is then get him some playing experience on the field while you still have the wisdom of Favre playing as well. Imagine if they would have rotated Favre and Montana. That would have been a dominating force on the field. Favre’s return, in a nutshell, can only help the franchise.
With all of that being said, I believe that we should keep in mind that this is Brett Favre. Woodson seemed annoyed by his indecisiveness, but Favre has earned the right to be indecisive. Woodson made the remark that he was called two weeks after his retirement to return and he turned it down. I think that Woodson was an awesome DB and no one can look down on 71 interceptions in 17 seasons, but as great as many players are or were, they do not play with the passion of Brett Favre. Favre can be indecisive about his return because we all know that he still plays football like the little leaguers under the age of 12. He still loves the game because he plays it for fun. He is one of the few guys within the almost $8 billion dollar industry that we do not doubt plays the game not just for some big payday, but because he truly loves it. Leaving football for Favre must be like divorcing a partner after being married to them for 17 years, but being in love with them since childhood. His tears at the press conference showed us that he does truly love the sport more than most. Just as one may contemplate the return to a spouse after a separation, Favre can have the same internal battle about returning to football. Michael Jordan returned to basketball and Jay-Z returned to rap. Why must Woodson and others feel that Favre needs to make a clear-cut decision right now? Jay-Z discussed on the Tavis Smiley Show that rap started as something that he was good at and could make money off of, but it grew into something he loved and missed. We know he does not need to make albums for money, just as M.J. did not need to return to basketball for money. We can place Favre in the category with these men because they do what they do because they love it. So, I would tell Woodson that if he loved something as much as Favre loves football, he would have earned the right to be a little indecisive as well.