Welcome to the News Editorial section of PackerChatters.com where you will find Green Bay Packers news updates throughout the year. Packer fans editorial's, pre and post game reports, draft talk and more.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Favre isn't the problem!

by fan4life
For PackerChatters

Last year I read where one writer chastised the Packers for not bringing in better talent to support Favre. I took offense at the remark, and thought to myself: we have players.

*This year, we lost JWalk in the first game - our only legitimate premier receiver.
*Our remaining starting receivers are legitimate 2nds and 3rds; one of them rapidly putting to rest any doubts about why his greatest value to the team has been on special teams - not at flanker.
*We have a rookie, a born-again never-was and a recovering member of the hot tub club keeping guard on the O-line. It appears that they are improving. Or is it that Favre has given up on 7-step drops, in favor of keeping his tusch off the ground? (Bevell has been seen timing Favre's releases; wants to get them down from 1.3 seconds to 1.2....)
*Perhaps, because of the aforementioned O-line studs, our running game has no punch; without Rivera and Wahle, it appears to have no wiggle, either.
*Yesterday, Ben "hands of" Steele was our best option at TE (excluding the great pretender, #71, of course.) Need I say more?

I look at this team and think, "I finally understand what that writer meant. We have no players."

Yet the offense took on one of the best defenses in the NFL Sunday and somehow managed enough scoring opportunities to win. Sure, they missed some, too. But Favre, Fergy, Donald, Chatman, Murphy, Green and Hendu didn't leave 4 pts on the field. Special Teams did.

Favre hurting this team?

Get real. Go watch some other games. Find another QB who will score 6 points by hitting his #2 (formerly special teams standout) receiver with a perfectly thrown 39-yd pass on 4th-and-4. It surely makes the ESPN highlight reel when it happens.

"Oh, but if he would just manage the game and quit making those risky decisions......"

He'd manage 6 or 7 possessions per game, with exactly 3 plays each. And the highlight of GB football would be watching B J Sander do his thing in the Pro-Bowl.

This team has no margin for error. But that is not Favre's fault. He is a victim of his own success: he lead the team to such success that GB has only had one high draft pick in 10 years; propped up a marginal coach who has ridden him to respectable regular season records, but had his inadequacies exposed in post-season competition; and spoiled a generation of GB fans into believing that there is nothing extraordinary about making the playoffs year after year. In fact, it's Super Bowl or bust.

Favre isn't perfect, so he isn't blameless. But he surely isn't the biggest reason this team is 0-3. Unfortunately, until Ahmad Carroll manages to run into the end zone with his booty, Favre's willingness to try to make something out of nothing may be the only hope that this team won't go 0-16.
99% of the fans cannot comprehend the complexities & intricacies of the pro NFL offenses. They marvel that a receiver can be wide open and Favre not throw to him, without understanding that he was "wide open" because he missed a hot read or broke off a pattern. An interception is often the fault of the WR, or just an extraordinary defensive play more than the QB's fault.
It takes premier athletes a long time to familiarize themselves with each other, to the point that a single look will signal a whole new route.
We weren't that far off vs. TB. There is still hope.
I'd venture to say that 99% of fans can figure out the odds of success when throwing into double and triple coverage, unless of course your receiver is Randy Moss. But Favre isn't throwing to Randy Moss. Therefore, Favre is being risky with many of his throws. While it's true we should applaud him when his risks pay off, we should also shake our heads when they don't. That's what being a fan of the GAME is about.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?