Look, this probably interests only me in the limited readership of this blog, but as I write this most of the time for myself, and if anyone is interested enough to read my thoughts then thanks a lot, I am continuing on this line. If only to remind myself in future why I feel like I do about Favre.
In the US the obsession in certain quarters of the media with Brett Favre is not something that has passed by many bloggers. Peter King’s love/love relationship with Brett Favre has been noted for years, and some blogs (see link at the end of this piece make good capital out of it). This sort of relationship isn’t on the level at all – when a journalist is basically Favre’s chief Fan Boy and he isn’t afraid to show it, it puts all his other stuff into question – is he really saying what he thinks, or is he letting his rampant idolisation obscure what we all saw. In my view it taints his writing. For example, in this Q&A in his mailbag on CNNSI today:
AIKMAN MADE A GOOD POINT TO ME ABOUT THIS SUNDAY NIGHT. From T. Smith of St. Paul, Minn.: “I read your stats about Brett Favre playing well in these so-called pressure games, but I think it’s a little flimsy. He’s had a lot of bad games too — the six-interception playoff game against the Rams, the end of the game against the Giants in the championship game a couple of years ago. I’m happy he’s here, but I want to see how well he plays in the playoffs before we judge him.”
Good point, and I’m sure Favre would say the same thing. My point was the three games in which Favre has the 11-to-0 TD-to-interception ratio were games with a different kind of pressure, with his father’s death laying on him and the two games against the Packers this year.
When I spoke with Troy Aikman on Sunday night, I thought he made a great case for why he thought Favre would play well Sunday. He said this on the air too, about how he expected Favre to play well, because he’d won 76 percent of his games on this field, and because once the hoopla was over and it was a football game, Favre has played in a lot of pressure games in his life and it’d pretty quickly turn into a football game and not a circus. That’s exactly what Favre said to me after the game. Smart call by Aikman.
Absolutely brilliant. He gets a question from a punter casting doubts on the flawed logic fanboy King uses and the fanboy himself barely hesitates in utilisings it to throw in the fact he chats with all the big stars with a blatant name drop. Imagine Martin Samuel, if you must, saying, “well, yes, when I was speaking to Franz Beckenbauer he made a great point as to why he thought Lionel Messi might play brilliantly for Barcelona in the Champions League final”. If Samuel did that (and fuck me blind, Henry Winter does that sort of thing and it makes me want to scratch his eyeballs out) we’d be screaming, and his editor would rightly ask what the hell he is up to. It is puffery, ego boosting. I’m inwith the in-crowd. It is crap. Who cares what Dallas Troy thinks in answer to a question that points out that the semi-deity that is Favre needs to perform in the play-offs before this Viking fan is convinced? The point wasn’t directed at Troy, it was directed at you. Don’t get some shrill to do your work for you because it backs you up. Why didn’t you ask Thomas Jones instead?
The reason Minnesota won is that they have a better team at this point in time – it really isn’t hard. Favre is an upgrade on Jackson or Rosenfels in all likelihood, but so are pretty much every starting QB in the league – he’s a piece of the puzzle, not the reason for it all, despite what King would have you believe. The Vikings defense is great, and they have if not the best, then one of the best running backs in the league to focus defensive minds. To cherry pick two games against the Packers, and one a few years ago after his father died to show how well he plays in adversity is selective bullshit. Apart from the mid-to-late 90s, Favre has not performed well in the play-offs. The questioner is right, but alas, he doesn’t get to talk to Troy Aikman, so he’s a nobody. There’s no adversity more than trying to battle your team to the Superbowl. In the most recent massive game he played in, Brett Favre threw the key interception.
• THE CASE OF THE THROBBING GROIN. From Fred in Houston, Texas: “Favre’s a drama queen. It can’t just be about the game — it has to be about him and how he overcame this big injury to play.”
The Twitterverse — at least those people who follow me and write me Monday — were all over Favre for his admission to me that he hurt his groin in practice Wednesday, strained it Sunday, and told offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell and backup quarterback Tarvaris Jackson he might not be able to make it through the game. I guess I’d ask you this question: Would you rather have an athlete who didn’t tell you what was wrong with him, or would you rather have an athlete who leveled with you about how he felt? Now, Favre took a lot of heat for hiding his arm injury last year with the Jets. Now he tells me he had a sore groin that affected Packer play-calling in the game and you don’t think he should talk about that? Can’t have it both ways, I’d say.
How dare this questioner even suggest that Brett Favre is a drama queen. Where on earth would he get that idea from? And did he really hide his arm injury from everyone last year? I am not sure he did, I thought it was common knowledge it was toast at the end of the season, and it is why Thomas Jones, for one, was calling for him to sit as he was hurting the team. The only one having it both ways is Peter King. He wants to show he is in the loop by being Brett Favre’s press boy, and then gets all uppity when people call him on it. Oh look, Peter King has a twitter saying Favre’s injured in the run-up to his big game. Oooooh, look, Brett’s playing. Ooooooh, isn’t Brett a real man for taking all that abuse and still winning a game when injured.
Someone may well be having it both ways, but that would be a crass, crude metaphor. Better not call him on it…
HERO WORSHIP, HE ACCUSES ME OF. From Luke Fleeman of Tulare, Calif.: “Peter, you were one of the voices of reason in the Favre retirement saga, pointing out when he fibbed. But now it seems like you’ve joined the choir, falling down to help worship Favre with the rest of the media. I have to say I am disappointed, because I think most of us are just sick of hearing about him.”
My job is to report on what happens in the NFL. On Sunday, the story of the day in the NFL was the all-time passing leader’s return to the place where he parted so bitterly in 2008. Favre played well for the second time this year against the Packers under pressurized circumstances. I wrote about it. I’m not kneeling at his feet. I’m reporting the story of the day in the NFL, interviewing the player, like him or not, who is a polarizing figure.
Hey, look. Peter King gets what he wants – people reading his stuff, which I have to say I find mostly dull, but do read as I love the NFL. But his lover boy relationship with Favre had about a two week cooling off period which King has now forgotten and Brett has obviously forgiven. I am sick and tired with Favre, and actively want him to fail because he’s a prima donna. He should look at great QBs like John Elway, Joe Montana, Dan Marino and, yes, Troy Aikman as retired players and the likes of Peyton Manning (who I dislike purely because he took most of Dan’s records), Drew Brees and Tom Brady (shenanigans with models and actresses apart) who make the game the thing and not themselves. Favre is the show. He wants to be the show. He has people making him the show. That’s why he is loathed.
As always, someone always does it better, so let me pass anyone with the remotest interest in this topic onto this post.



























