| Matthew Gordon. 29th January, 2008 - 1:47 pm
 In 1997, when I think it’s safe to say that I was far younger than I am now, I had one of the greatest experiences a boy can imagine. Brett Favre was my favorite player in my favorite sport, and his Green Bay Packers won the Super Bowl for the first time in almost thirty years. That’s the dream of a kid who grew up loving the NFL, and it happened to me.
Eleven years later, the Packers were 13-3, and I thought they had something magical again. Favre was sharp, the defense was merciless, and Ryan Grant looked like the missing piece that could put an already dangerous team over the top. They were also one of the few contenders the Patriots hadn’t yet beaten and became the only one when Jacksonville faltered in New England. Even if the Packers had eventually lost to the Patriots in the Super Bowl, I would have tipped my hat to an incredible victor and beamed with joy at the way Favre could hang up his helmet: with his team’s first Super Bowl appearance since that glorious day over a decade ago.
The Packers/Giants' game initially looked like one the Packers should have won easily. I didn’t see the Giants as being much better than the Seahawks, who the Packers obliterated, and it was potentially Favre’s last game ever in Lambeau Field. The Packers couldn’t possibly lose this one, could they?
Somehow, they did. The Giants played well and deserved the win, even if Laurence Tynes seemed determined to delay it, but there was an overwhelming feeling that the Packers could’ve won. Maybe it was Al Harris playing far below his abilities, or maybe it was the Favre interception in overtime that could end up being his last NFL play. If it is, it’ll be an ironic end considering the criticism Favre has received in the past for being careless with the ball and his reduced interceptions this season.
Something that really hit me during the game was when the announcers mentioned Favre’s previous NFC championship appearances. Oddly, it had been ten years since his last time being so close to the Super Bowl. All three of his previous NFC championship appearances had come in a row: first the loss to the Cowboys and then the two victories. That got me thinking that maybe there wasn’t that much to Favre’s staying power and that my admiration for his game was something buried in the mid-to-late ‘90s.
Oddly enough, Favre might just be remembered for the thing he wasn’t supposed to have: consistency. Sure, his coach might gape in appalled disbelief at a bullet pass into double coverage, and he might bookend a 400-yard game with two mediocre ones, but his results have been successful and to largely the same extent every time.
A fun fact about the Packers is that since 1991, they’ve only finished under the .500 mark once, in 2005. Even when they haven’t made the playoffs, they’ve finished 8-8 or 9-7 almost without fail. That’s testament to a good organization, sure, albeit one that made the playoffs twice between the ‘60s and the ‘90s. More so, it’s the mark of a team that had a great leader the entire time.
Stats-wise, Favre’s career has been bordering on ridiculous if not completely off the edge. While a Packer (ignoring his brief and uneventful cameo as a Falcon), he’s averaged almost 28 touchdowns per season while completing over 61% of his passes. Sure, he’s had three seasons with more interceptions than touchdowns, but they’ve tended to be indicative of team failure as a whole, with only one of those seasons (1993-1994) being a playoff campaign; over the course of his Packer career, he’s averaged under 18 interceptions per season. At his best, when the Packers were seeing the Super Bowl, he averaged three times as many touchdowns as interceptions.
A quick and easy answer to pundits mentioning his decline comes in his passing yards. Although Green Bay has never had a dominant running back, forcing Favre into continuous outbursts of verticality, it’s tough to take a guaranteed 3000 yards lightly. Even in the couple of seasons directly preceding this one, in which his play was admittedly a little worse, he still passed for almost 3900 yards in each of those seasons. This is not the mark of a quarterback whose age has limited his capacity to throw.
His rejuvenation this season is something beyond his own personal feelings of urgency. Even at his worst, Favre is the paragon of good quarterbacking, interceptions and all. What he’s had this season is a stifling defense and an improved running game, the former being reminiscent of the mid-‘90s. While the defensive line isn’t what it was, the Pickett/Williams' tandem at defensive tackle has the size and physicality to remind us of Santana Dotson and Gilbert Brown, and Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila is the team’s best pass-rusher since Reggie White, even if he can’t quite emulate him. In the secondary, Charles Woodson and Atari Bigby might very well be better than Craig Newsome and Leroy Butler were, to name a couple.
Back to Lambeau. The final score may be 23-20 and in overtime to boot (yes, the terrible pun was intended), but it was a Packer loss and I couldn’t accept it. Then I took a week to think about it, to realize how well that Giants' team played and that as painful a way to end a career as that interception would be, it wouldn’t be so disastrous to Favre’s legacy. It wasn’t the first time a team won a playoff game in Lambeau, and the other two (Falcons and Vikings) were under Favre’s watch as well. Those losses, while blemishes on Favre’s record, are the result of his having played in the playoffs so many times.
As with any offseason, there’s the inevitable question of whether Favre will return. Those who want him back say he’s still good and that if the team can be competitive with him at the helm, it’s worthwhile. Those who want him to retire say that he’s holding the franchise back from a true rebuild and that a guy like Aaron Rodgers would be great to have as a full-time starter, especially if Favre’s skills diminish.
Having been in the latter camp for many a year, this season made me think differently. It didn’t do that because Favre played so well; Favre playing well is a given. What gave me hope was seeing how well the team played as a whole rather than as a collection of misfits loosely propped up by the arm of a greying, tired man. If the Packers have indeed found their stride again, and they never seem to lose it for long, this season might mean much more than a boneheaded home loss to the Giants. What it might be is proof that Favre, great as he is, finally has the help he so desperately needs.
Bad as things looked a couple of years ago, when Favre threw a repugnant twenty-nine interceptions and the team won four games, they’re looking equally good now. He’s just come off of a 32-touchdown season in which he completed 66.5% of his passes, a career best. If this is the Favre we’d be seeing next season, and his supporting cast indicates that it will be, I don’t want to see him go. He might not win another Super Bowl, but he’s averaged ten wins per season as a Packer; even keeping in line with that would be really good football. There may be low points in a player’s career but why panic? The Giants' loss was a disappointing end to a stellar season but Favre’s legacy isn’t tarnished in the least. If anything, it’s just another reason to hope for more. |
