Favre Saga Unlikely To End Happily

Brett Favre can't be trusted. But then again, if you've watched him play the Lions for the past 16 years, especially in Wisconsin, you already knew that. You knew that he couldn't be trusted to do anything but beat them consistently. You couldn't trust him if he had a poor first half, or a poor 3/4 of a game. Chances would be, at the end, he'd walk off victorious.

So no wonder that Favre can now not be trusted with his words, either.

As you know, the maybe-erstwhile QB of the Green Bay Packers is trying to "unretire", some four months after telling the Pack and the football world that he was hanging them up after 16 wonderful seasons, a stretch during which he never missed a start. And the Packers aren't making it easy for him, figuring that there's the small matter of having already told Favre's heir, Aaron Rodgers, that he's the guy, starting in 2008.

"We're prepared to move on," has been the paraphrased sentiment of the Packers' hierarchy.

Not without me, Favre says. Or else, release me and I'll play for someone who wants me.

Nuh-uh, the Pack said to Favre's requested release.

At first blush, I was seeing Favre's side of the story. How much different is it now, really, than it was four months ago, in Green Bay? How far along could the team have possibly moved with Rodgers in such a short time? What was the big deal if Favre came back for another run? The Packers fielded a surprisingly strong team in 2007; who says Favre couldn't nudge them further in 2008?

Of course, it might be bad form to mention at this juncture that it was Favre's gaffe that probably cost the Packers their playoff game -- at home -- last January.

But after further review, as they say in the NFL, I see where the Packers front office is coming from.

How can they trust Favre anymore? How do they know when he's really retiring? How many "comebacks" does he have in him? Is this the only one?

The question of whether Favre will return for the next NFL season has been asked for several springs now -- and recently, during the ongoing campaign. It can't possibly NOT have been a distraction. And Favre has been taking longer and longer to make his decision. This time, he decided -- or so we thought -- in early March.

So is this how it works? Favre can string the Packers along yearly, and they'll acquiesce to him?

Retire? Sure! Oh, come back, you say? Sure! We'll just tell Mr. Rodgers to sit tight and that he'll get his chance...someday.

Not the way to run a business.

But Favre has placed the Packers in a tough spot. Internet polls (and probably sports talk radio sentiment) have Favre in a big lead over Rodgers as far as who folks would like to see as the Green Bay QB in 2008. He's making team management out as the villain here. The media seems willing to go along with that portrayal.

Favre wants to play so badly, apparently, that he's willing to be released so he can play with another NFL team. I wonder if just ANY NFL team will do. I wonder if he'd play for a sad sack team? Or does he want to win? And which contending teams are able to fit a Brett Favre under their salary cap at the expense of their probably already-expensive signal caller? How much contract would have to be devoured and digested to bring Favre in?

Ahh, but what if, you might ask, Barry Sanders had pulled the same switcheroo back in 1999?

A fair question.

First, running back isn't the same as QB, in terms of importance to the team. In other words, it's a lot easier to bring in a new starting RB than to have invested all that time and teaching into a new quarterback, only to shove him aside. Second, Sanders didn't have an heir apparent, mainly because no one truly thought he was on the brink of retirement. His announcement on the eve of training camp -- that was different, too -- caught a lot of folks off guard, even though in retrospect it shouldn't have, necessarily. There was no one waiting in the wings -- not that you can replace someone like Sanders, anyway.

So what should the Packers do? They've offered to let Favre return -- but as the backup. That's quite a gesture, I think -- for even though Favre himself has been durable, that's not really the norm. Rodgers could go down -- it's quite feasible.

But think about Rodgers for a second. How terrible would it be for him as a rookie QB to play with Brett Favre over his shoulder, and with public sentiment wanting Favre to start? As if being a first-year QB in the NFL isn't hard enough...

It's hard to imagine this saga ending any way other than badly. But the "bad guys" aren't the ones who created this mess. Brett Favre did, public sentiment be damned.