Does Brett Favre Know When to Say When?
Published July 18, 2008
The melancholy drama playing out in Green Bay between Brett Favre and Packers management is a painful reminder that, at its core, professional sports is far more about the business than the game. One doesn't survive without the other but never forget, as Favre certainly won't now, that when business imperatives crash head on with personal issues, the business will win every time.
Each day may bring a new wrinkle or two in the ongoing Favre saga, but its essential elements are as old as the business, indeed any business: an aging, once productive player who still feels he can contribute vs. a business that must constantly replenish its talent to survive in the long-term.
You can compile a list where this same scenario has played out in any city. Because it's Favre and because he's a quarterback, football fans can quickly tick off Joe Montana's two-year run of sorts with the Kansas City Chiefs, the year Johnny Unitas spent in San Diego and even Joe Namath's lost year with the Los Angeles Rams as the most obvious examples.
There have been plenty of examples right here in Cleveland. Bill Belichick's mid-season banishment of Bernie Kosar comes immediately to mind, although fans on both sides of that debate are still arguing whether it was truly a case of diminished skills or the clash of two head-strong personalities. It's far from the only example. On the other side of it, the Browns seem intent on wringing out whatever might be left in Willie McGinest's reservoir. In baseball, the Indians tried the same thing with both Steve Carlton and Phil Niekro, two distinguished pitchers who desperately tried to hang on longer than was probably advisable. Arguably, even the Indians' refusal to resign Omar Vizquel falls into this category.
As much as every situation is different, each also is very much the same: a high profile, Hall of Fame-type player unable to know when to say when and a front office wrestling with a potential public relations disaster. The Baltimore Colts could no more relish the though of turning their back on Johnny U as could the Packers turning away Favre. Each also involves a heavy dose of emotion emanating from every corner.
And, as usual, fans are caught in the middle. Almost universally, they'll support the player. Fans are far more interested in watching their favorites long past their primes than in retiring too soon. Jim Brown and Barry Sanders may set the standard for retiring on top, but they are as much criticized by parochial interests for retiring too soon.
Packer fans are predictably distraught. The thought of Favre not playing again is as distasteful to them as the thought that he could end up with one of their rivals. That's why you hear the argument that the Packers are making a colossal mistake in seemingly not allowing Favre to return because by any measure, Favre is a better quarterback than Aaron Rogers. It's an emotional argument, but it's also incomplete because Rogers really hasn't had any opportunity to establish himself and Favre is a Hall of Famer. It's also an argument that looks back without any appreciation of what is to come.
- Does Brett Favre Know When to Say When?
- Published: July 18, 2008
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Sports
- Filed Under: Sports: Football (American)
- Writer: Gary D. Benz
- Gary D. Benz's BC Writer page
- Gary D. Benz's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments
Later in life Matisse had his paint brush strapped to his crippled arthritic hand to paint.And still later he cut out colored paper shapes he made into collages, staying engaged in his art and life until the end. His work of this period has a child-like purity, clarity and joy--the poetic justice of an unruly heart. A true artist will always find expression--there is no when to say when. Athletes aren't so lucky but can still re-invent themselves if the will is there--and certainly Brett has the means and time to do so. I know I'm talking apples and oranges--but who isn't challenged? Your logic and pragmatism are not lost on me. My point is that real life is made up of more than just the bottom line. Whether you're on top of the skyscraper corporate pile being accountable or independently plucking daisies at the bottom of the heap wearing rose-colored glasses--at the end of the day--be it late into the night--everyone needs a soft place to fall. And there is more comfort to be had in a bed of rose petals than wrapped in a blanket of cynicism. Be it big business or big ideas, would'nt you agree we are all in service to something? And isn't sacrifice a common denominator in everyone's lives? Giving up is for when you're dead.







Favre has shown himself to be nothing but selfish in this embarrassing saga. He retired; the Packers moved on. He has no right to be offended that they're not embracing his change of heart with open arms. The Packers can't afford to live in the past, and it's Favre's outspoken whining that will tarnish his legacy with the team, not the Packers' decision to move ahead with Rodgers.