Post#87 » by Kerb Hohl » Fri Oct 2, 2009 9:01 pm
Here is where I come down on this whole Favre zealot/ Ted-Head thing:
First, Favre:
1990s he was an absolute, bona-fide MVP guy every year. Pull a Ditka and trade your entire draft for him, etc.
2000s: Still extremely talented, but didn't have the total motivation anymore. In the early 2000s, it was still solid. A power running game and all you needed was Brett to toss a few deep ones and you'd win. The clash of Favre's good and bad "gunslinger" qualities, a defense that was prone to giving up massive plays, and a ball-control power running game made it very hard for the perfect storm to come together for a deep run. We were still successful, however, because Favre was still one of the better players at his position.
Mid 2000's the supporting cast started to fall off, and Favre's lack of motivation, commitment, and the fact that he was getting old started to kill the team. Suddenly they were 4-12, 8-8 caliber.
2007: Favre gets some motivation, Thompson gets a good mix of talent to support the fact that he doesn't completely have 1990's form in him, the team explodes but falls short because of Favre's gunslinger mentality and a ton of other shortcomings vs. the Giants (such as pass rush, run game, etc.)
I have been "anti-Favre" because I agree the guy wanted out a while ago. he didn't like the way things were run and Ted gave him backlash and didn't want to build his future with Favre in it because you had to catch lightning in a bottle again to have Favre have the motivation, dedication, and not fall apart with age to have one more good year. Or you had to have an amazing supporting cast like the early 2000s and let him ride on his talent.
Anyways, I think he wanted out. And he did, it is pretty obvious.
This will segway into my thoughts on Ted:
First, with Favre: As I stated, to duplicate '07 they would have to have a solid D AND have Favre have some motivation. Clearly Favre didn't and also Favre was playing a game to skip town. If he wasn't playing the game, Favre would have said he wanted to come back and he would have showed up 10 seconds later on a plane. Ted decided that allowing Favre to come back would mean 1 or 2 years of winning 8, 9 games and then having to rebuild, possibly without Rodgers. He weighed the risks, and did it.
The Favre zealots flip out because of 1990s Favre. The one that just needed a Reggie White + average supporting cast and he'd show his true ability to win by taking you deep every year. But people fell in love with that and the Chuck Norris jokes. It was 2008, Favre was in 2000's form with minimal motivation (I don't totally blame him, he's old, had accomplished a ton, and has already made a ton of money).
It's hard to argue Thompson made the wrong decision. Anyone that wants to say Favre "transformed" that Jets team and turned them around needs to look no further than what rookie Mark Sanchez is doing against a tougher schedule with that plethora of talent they assembled aside Favre last year.
Now Favre got his wish. He got a bit more motivated and he has the supporting cast. We'll see if age comes up to bite him though. It may be an early 2000s Favre with a great cast and his talent taking them over the top.
Back to Thompson. The reason I'm a "Teddy phile" is that he plays with the correct style to win a Super Bowl. Most people think, plug in Favre, buy a high profile RB, buy a WR, have a decent defense = SUPER BOWL!!! Every year there was a new flavor of the free agent period. Daniel Graham as Favre's go-to tight end for 30 million? SIGN HIM TED!!! Travis Henry and Nate Clements. The list goes on and on. Sure, there was Charles Woodson, but that was a high-risk, high-reward signing. Though the risk wasn't so high because Woodson came fairly cheap. The place Ted has faltered is in the draft. But only so much. He has drafted top tier guys but has also taken Harrell and not gotten us any sort of offensive line. That said, all great GMs fail on a lot of high picks. But they don't cave to the demand to sign this overpriced guy or that overhyped guy. That is why we all go for Ted. He tries to do what is right for the team and not right for the fanbase. Favre, the draft, etc.
He has been wrong in free agency/trades in one big occasion. Moss. But even then, it apparently had a lot of other factors and also we were seeing late 2000s Favre. Worth taking the risk?
How many times has he been right? He has a great success rate of free agent guys and what their value is. His fault may be that he should have splurged on 1 more FA tackle (but then again, how many of those are out there?). He tried a little too hard to work the draft and it has nipped him.
I could write more but I'm just rambling.
