To combat the Denver article that seems to knock our recent QB signing, I figured we could use some positive feedback from a guy who went from the 49ers to the Chiefs and went to the AFC Championship game his 1st year there. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...e_montana_says_brett_favre_move_looks_-2.html Joe Montana never wanted to leave San Francisco but he also didn't want to stay where he wasn't wanted. So he forced a trade, wound up playing two successful years in Kansas City, and in the end cherished it as one of life's adventures. "I'm glad I did it," Joe Cool told the Daily News. "My experience was wonderful. The people were great, the fans were great, we won." Forget about comparing Brett Favre to Joe Namath, who finished up by playing four games with the Rams in 1977, or to Johnny Unitas playing in five for the Chargers in 1973. Namath and Unitas were washed up by the time they put on a different uniform for the start of the last year of their careers. Montana is the appropriate comparison. He had plenty left. So does Broadway Brett. Montana was 37 when he was traded. Favre will be 39 in October. "New York is a completely different atmosphere and it may not be Brett's personality, but the people will love him in New York and he will love it, too," said Montana, who gets to the city once a month on business. "I think Brett will be glad he played in New York. I think it will be a positive, as much as he wanted to be in Green Bay." Putting on a new shade of red was strange for Montana, just as it is for Favre putting on a different shade of green. "In a way it tears at you. We're only human," Montana said. "I'm sure Brett wants the best for Green Bay, but Green Bay is looking after Green Bay. Brett has to look after Brett." It was sad watching Namath and Unitas hang on. There was nothing sad about Montana getting the Chiefs to the AFC Championship Game in his first year in 1993 and then losing a wild-card shootout to Dan Marino in what was the final game of his career in 1994. And there won't be anything sad - except for those in Green Bay if Aaron Rodgers is a bust - about watching Favre with the Jets playing on the biggest and best stage in sports. Favre shook off his first-day rust by unleashing his rocket right arm in practice Sunday. He will get better as the week goes on and should produce a couple of memorable moments in his Jets debut against the Redskins on Saturday night. So much has been made of Favre only having one month to digest Eric Mangini's playbook. But as Favre said the other day about offensive and defensive plans in the NFL, "There's way too much volume. The coaches have way too much free time. You don't have to have 1,000 plays to be successful. You have to run five or 10 of them very well. Bottom line is you run 70 plays a game. You repeat half of those." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Search my post history, I've been saying this all along.
Not everyone is going to like this move. And if he stinks it up, alot of Jets fans will not be happy.
The Denver media HATES NY. I clearly remember writing emails to the rocky mountain news back in 98 when it was trashing NY leading up to the AFC CG (a not so fond memory- ugh). F Denver. With any luck, they'll choose the wrong nominee at the convention and get burned down. :up: :wink:
I'm a packers fan from way back, live in the upper midwest in a small town and have seen over 200 of Brett's 253 regular season games. Thank you Jets for giving the best QB a home. Reality is the pack have not been all that good since the late 90s and he just carries his team. Last year the pack is 8-8 w/o Favre. Brady and Manning play for juggernauts, figure out their schemes and they look like deer in the headlights when the linebackers come.
Most people think Joe was no longer Joe when he left San Fran but as note he did great in that first years into the playoffs. Brett Favre never has missed a game either!
Help me out here... I'm arguing back and forth with someone whose basically decided Favre is the devil incarnate himself, that he fracked over the Packers, fracked over poor little Aaron Rodgers, and is the most classless person to ever walk the halls of the NFL... all because he outright demanded that he be sent to Minnesota... Can anyone help me with a link or something? I don't actually remember seeing him speak the words, but rather the whole Minnesota thing was a widespread media report.
He did admit he wanted to play within the divison for "selfish reasons" Doesn't make him a bad guy...
He did say and I will look for a link. If you wont let me start then let me start against you 2 times a year. I'll look for a link.
Here's what I found... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080715...ckers_favre;_ylt=AryVHspqVCrno0f8d7i6TXSs0NUE http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/0-2-61/Favre-II--Not-interested-in-spite.html July 15, 2008 11:18 PM GVS: That's also the day they're supposed to retire the Green Bay '4.' To have you run out in a purple uniform will make the fans crazy. BF: I've never envisioned that. I've heard all the talk like everyone else. It's hard not to. But that's always been our biggest rivalry, obviously with the Bears. Did I ever think of that? No. Did I ever think it would happen? Absolutely not. In my getting a release, obviously it gives you an option. I don't know if other teams would make a play for me. ... It may not work out. We won't know unless we're released. And how am I supposed to trust that they're working on a trade after the things that have been told to me in the past? Teams may have called and said, 'Hey, we're interested.' Well, you know, I mean, they may never tell us. The longer this goes on, the less likely that I am to play with someone because of the time factor. GVS: Allowing them to trade you so that they get something in return? BF: It's hard to imagine. But if I'm going to play, I mean obviously I would have to agree to whoever it is. And I'm sure they're not going to do it with a big rival or a competitor or whatever. But that may be our only option. I don't know what else to do. GVS: If they release you -- which is now your first choice if you can't be the starting quarterback -- if they release you, that at least enables you to make your own decisions. BF: Why not ask for it? That's what Bus [Cook] and I, we talked about it. Why not ask for it? Do we think we'll get it? But that gives you freedom to sign with anyone. But I'm still under contract, and as far as I know, you can't talk to anyone and they can't talk to you. They have to go through the Packers via the trade scenario. 'Hey, we understand that Brett possibly could be traded.' How do we know that he hasn't talked to someone? I guess he yesterday said that no one has inquired. That may very well be true. But then again, how do we know it's not? http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3512348 The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported Thursday that Packers officials have had internal discussions about trading Favre to the Minnesota Vikings or Chicago Bears as a "last resort" to resolve the smoldering controversy. As recently as Monday, there appeared to be no way the Packers would give Favre *****what they suspect***** he's wanted all along: A one-way ticket to Minnesota. Packers general manager Ted Thompson said earlier this week that he would not consider trading Favre to one of its NFC North division rivals.
There's been a lot of speculation and assumptions about him wanting to go to the Vikings, but in the end. Who knows? I do think it was reported at one point that he wanted to be traded within the division "for obvious reasons," but that's all I've heard directly from Favre or Cook.
Oh, and let's not forget how much the Packers bogus tampering charges contributed to this speculation . . . (8 more posts. . .)
You can hate the move for what it does longterm to the Jets (push the QB search over the horizon with no resolution in sight) and still like it for what it does for the Jet's entertainment value this season. I don't think I've seen a single article on the move, positive or negative, that I did not agree with some aspects of. Personally I've kind of given up on this FO/CS and I'm in caretaker mode of my opinions until the next one comes along in a few years. In that light I'm happy to have Favre here simply because the football we all watch on the field is going to be much more entertaining in the interim.
Given up on this current regime??? Why??? Arguably we've just had one of the best offseasons in recent memory...(of course we'll see how it translates on the field) but on paper... They have one playoff and one horrid season...I think the jury is still out on this regime but I think that this is going to be a successful season AND the offseason moves will pan out. Just my own opinion but I think you're jumping ship a little too early....again jmho. Peace! The Mezz
I'm not giving up on Tangini yet either. There's a fairly proven statistic that stability in terms of the management team and wins on the field are correlated. It's kind of a chicken and the egg question though. Do long-lived management teams develop enough experience to win more? Or, do teams that win more have long-lived management teams, simply by virtue of winning. I look at it like this, I've gotten better at every job I've done the longer I've done it. Why would this not hold true for HC/GM of an NFL team? I suppose Matt Millen is the exception to this rule.
