I used to like Brett Favre. I used to believe him a rare combination of heart, skill and toughness. After his most recent retirement/unretirement debacle with the Minnesota Vikings however, the bloom is most decidedly off the rose. My disenchantment began last season with his retirement/unretirement saga involving the Packers and Jets. I had a lot more sympathy for him then. I sensed that his weepy retirement press conference in March 2008 was largely based on how his season had ended two months before and on pressure from the Packers for him to decide.
I was unsurprised by reports that he was reconsidering retirement. I was, however, a little surprised by the Packers' reaction, basically telling their star they'd moved on to Aaron Rodgers and that Favre could return only as a backup or--at best--to compete for the starting job. What followed was a surprising, eye-rolling back and forth that ended with Favre in a New York Jets uniform. At the time, I thought that both sides handled the situation poorly. In hindsight however, it seems the Packers made the right choices.
So now he's back. Viking fans rejoice; Packer fans fume; the rest of us shake our heads. The following are the reasons I believe Favre's pseudo comeback will fall short of justifying the $12 million the Vikings have invested in him this season. I have a deep suspicion, in fact, that Favre may not even finish the season. Here's why:
1) The Training Camp Factor
Favre's absence from Vikings camp is a big deal for a number of reasons. Training camp consists of several weeks of hard physical and mental training. It's where players get ready for the rigors of the upcoming NFL season and where many players struggle to earn a spot on the team's roster. Favre spent that time throwing the ball to and--one would assume--working out with a local high school team in his home town. It's difficult to believe he could be in NFL shape from that type of regimen though.
Additionally, training camp is where quarterbacks work on timing routes with receivers and on studying and practicing the playbook; it's also where quarterbacks become acquainted with and adapted to their offensive lines. This is important for both quarterback and linemen, as the time in camp builds chemistry, familiarity and trust. More, that time in camp working towards a common goal, running and struggling and sweating together helps--one would think--to build team cohesion and mutual respect. Favre participated in none of that and, as such, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a bit of resentment among the other players for that. Favre spent that time supposedly having decided to stay retired and then, low and behold, when camp is over, he changes his mind and returns--which brings me to my next reason why I believe Favre's return will be less than advertised:
2) The Trust Factor
In my opinion, Favre has badly damaged his image. Whereas he was once seen as one of the NFL's most stand-up guys, he now seems like the very definition of the primadonna-type he's spent much of his career railing against. Does anyone really believe he spent those weeks during camp retired, only to change his mind when camp ended? I strongly doubt it. Everything fell into place too perfectly. It very much appears that Favre's ultimate goal was to avoid camp. And, based on some of the things he said at the press conference announcing his 'comeback,' his attitude appears to be: I'm too good to need training camp anyway.
The Viking players are not deaf to all this and though they're saying the right things publicly, I suspect a thread of resent lingers in that locker room. That resentment will quickly surface once Favre's play doesn't live up to expectations--much as was the case with the NY Jets last season. Count on it. What teammate of Favre, based on his recent behavior, couldn't help questioning his integrity? Additionally, there's a palpable air to all this that reeks of a player that thinks he's better than everybody else--a diva in other words. That's a potential death sentence in the NFL--which brings me to my next reason why I believe Favre's return will be less than advertised:
3) The Injury Factor
Yes, I know; throughout his career, Favre's been one of the toughest, most durable players in the NFL. He's closing in on age 40 though, an age when the body doesn't heal itself as quickly and all those years of hard hits have a cumulative effect. Additionally, Favre had off-season surgery to repair a partially-torn biceps tendon in his throwing arm. The doctor cleared him and he's supposedly throwing 100%, but a small rotator-cuff tear was also found on the same side, a common injury for athletes who throw or pitch a ball. Surgical repair for such an injury would require an entire season to recuperate and of course, at age 40, Favre can't afford to lose a whole season. The doctor cleared him to play without surgical repair but, with that injury being public knowledge, how long until some 300+-lb linemen puts a lick on that shoulder that completely blows it out? Does anyone really believe every defensive linemen Favre faces this season won't be gunning for it?
It would suck to be Favre's shoulder this season.
If I were a gambler (which I'm not), I would put money on Favre not finishing the season. Look for him to go from one of Minnesota's most loved athletes to one of its most hated, run out of town as the primadonna/diva he's become. I know you'll never read this Brett, but my advice: take the $12 million you make this season, have your shoulder repaired and run. Lay low a season or two, giving the fans time to forget--which they will--then come back as a broadcaster or maybe even a coach of some sort. But for God's sake, please, please don't even think of another comeback as a player.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Michael Vick: Public Servant or PETA Pariah?
Michael Vick's crimes were reprehensible. I don’t say that to mollify the PETA types (in truth, there probably isn’t any mollifying PETA on this issue) or anyone else arguing that he should never be allowed to play football again. The man deserved to be brought low for what he did. Why? Because treating animals in such ways--brutalizing and devaluing their lives--is just one step below treating people that way. Yeah, I know, some will argue that makes me sound like a PETA type. But it’s true.
Think about what the Nazis did to the Jews in WWII. Granted, the reasons for the holocaust (and I certainly don’t mean to get into all of them here) were vast and complex, but at it’s most basic level, that historical atrocity succeeded because of the dehumanization of an entire group of human beings. Jews were devalued as rats and dogs and less than human--the reason for all of society’s woes. Similarly, if one can so easily devalue the life of a dog--or almost any other animal--it’s not hard to imagine that person graduating to the devaluation of human life. So yeah, Michael Vick definitely had it coming.
The most frequently stated reason for why he should be given another chance in the NFL (and one with which I agree) is that NFL rosters are fairly rife with men who’ve done worse--manslaughter, domestic abuse, so forth. Make no mistake, though what Vick did was reprehensible, it still does not rise to the level, in my opinion, of taking human life. It’s a close second but still not the same. Critics who don’t want to see Vick play again argue there’s no reason to believe he’s sorry for anything beyond being caught. True enough (there are, however, signs that his remorse is genuine too).
But it doesn’t matter. Regardless of whether Vick is truly remorseful, he should be given one more chance in the NFL. Why? Obviously resuming play in the NFL is the best outcome for Vick. But though I believe in second chances, Vick’s prosperity is not my biggest consideration in forming that opinion. Hardly. The resumption of Vick’s playing career is actually what’s best for the hundreds--thousands maybe--of dogs who are still victimized by illegal fighting and other abuse. Does anyone really think Michael Vick will ever go anywhere near a dog fight again? Ever? Hell, does anyone think he’ll ever go near another dog without heavy supervision and at least one camera rolling? With that being the case, what better spokesman for the plight of these animals than Michael Vick? Who better to raise public awareness, to help get the message out LOUD and CLEAR that this behavior is intolerable, inhumane, reprehensible and illegal?
Of course, there’s also a legitimate argument for making an example of Vick, using him as a deterrent to help end this kind of behavior. But which scenario is likely to leave a more lasting mark on public discourse and thought regarding this issue? Which scenario is more likely to keep the issue in the public arena longer? A washed-up, ostracized Vick will be much more quickly forgotten and disposed of. I argue that the resumption of Vick’s playing career would be the most productive outcome regarding this issue. Obviously, in the remote chance that he were to do anything like this again, he should be covertly shipped in a box to PETA headquarters never to be heard from again.
Otherwise, let’s listen to his upcoming interviews, give the man a second chance, keep his feet to the fire and never forget that, above all other considerations, saving these animals is far more important than punishing Michael Vick.
Think about what the Nazis did to the Jews in WWII. Granted, the reasons for the holocaust (and I certainly don’t mean to get into all of them here) were vast and complex, but at it’s most basic level, that historical atrocity succeeded because of the dehumanization of an entire group of human beings. Jews were devalued as rats and dogs and less than human--the reason for all of society’s woes. Similarly, if one can so easily devalue the life of a dog--or almost any other animal--it’s not hard to imagine that person graduating to the devaluation of human life. So yeah, Michael Vick definitely had it coming.
The most frequently stated reason for why he should be given another chance in the NFL (and one with which I agree) is that NFL rosters are fairly rife with men who’ve done worse--manslaughter, domestic abuse, so forth. Make no mistake, though what Vick did was reprehensible, it still does not rise to the level, in my opinion, of taking human life. It’s a close second but still not the same. Critics who don’t want to see Vick play again argue there’s no reason to believe he’s sorry for anything beyond being caught. True enough (there are, however, signs that his remorse is genuine too).
But it doesn’t matter. Regardless of whether Vick is truly remorseful, he should be given one more chance in the NFL. Why? Obviously resuming play in the NFL is the best outcome for Vick. But though I believe in second chances, Vick’s prosperity is not my biggest consideration in forming that opinion. Hardly. The resumption of Vick’s playing career is actually what’s best for the hundreds--thousands maybe--of dogs who are still victimized by illegal fighting and other abuse. Does anyone really think Michael Vick will ever go anywhere near a dog fight again? Ever? Hell, does anyone think he’ll ever go near another dog without heavy supervision and at least one camera rolling? With that being the case, what better spokesman for the plight of these animals than Michael Vick? Who better to raise public awareness, to help get the message out LOUD and CLEAR that this behavior is intolerable, inhumane, reprehensible and illegal?
Of course, there’s also a legitimate argument for making an example of Vick, using him as a deterrent to help end this kind of behavior. But which scenario is likely to leave a more lasting mark on public discourse and thought regarding this issue? Which scenario is more likely to keep the issue in the public arena longer? A washed-up, ostracized Vick will be much more quickly forgotten and disposed of. I argue that the resumption of Vick’s playing career would be the most productive outcome regarding this issue. Obviously, in the remote chance that he were to do anything like this again, he should be covertly shipped in a box to PETA headquarters never to be heard from again.
Otherwise, let’s listen to his upcoming interviews, give the man a second chance, keep his feet to the fire and never forget that, above all other considerations, saving these animals is far more important than punishing Michael Vick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
