December 29, 2005

Brett Favre & Marshall Faulk want to retire,: but I don't think either should. In the case of Favre, though, if the Packer board allows Mike 'half-assed' Sherman to return next year, then I'd do it. He has said he'd play for Steve Mariucci, and Mariucci was screwed royally in Detroit, where this article comes from.

posted by mrhockey to football at 02:49 PM - 38 comments

I'm not going to lie but I'll be happy when Favre retires. He can stop kicking the crap out of the bears then (except for this year of course). I also would'nt mind Faulk heading out to the Cardinals in a reunion with Warner. I think that offense with a running game could be awfully fun to watch.

posted by sadsadcubsfan at 03:31 PM on December 29, 2005

I think that Farve should retire unless he can go somewhere like Clevland where he will get a good wide reciever or running back to work with. Although, Clevland will probably get Vince Young or Matt Leinart.

posted by bronxbomber at 03:38 PM on December 29, 2005

Cleveland has a good running back?? Farve would be the perfect man to take over the ailing Saints. Fans might actually come to the game, and no matter how bad he is, the team won't get any worse.

posted by LostInDaJungle at 03:53 PM on December 29, 2005

Now thers an idea, Faulk and Warner back together. I'm up for seeing them together again. However I dought highly that will happen.

posted by countrygirllostinLA at 03:55 PM on December 29, 2005

Favre isn't going anywhere. He's been just-this-close to retiring for the last half-dozen years, and he'd leave the game before he'd go to another team. There's more drama in this soap opera to come in the offseason, I bet. Faulk... I don't know. I gotta believe he's been beaten up enough. I keep thinking about people like Earl Campbell, now basically a cripple from the punishment he took in his playing days, and I think better a year too soon than a year too late for a great, great back who's been hit a lot in his career.

posted by chicobangs at 03:57 PM on December 29, 2005

You have a point there chicobangs, Faulk has taken quite a beating in the past years, again Farve isnt going anywhere.

posted by countrygirllostinLA at 04:07 PM on December 29, 2005

I like Favre, I really do. I'm just getting so sick of this retirement bullshit after after freakin' season. Will he, won't he, blah, blah, blah. I couldn't see him playing for anyone but Green Bay, but they stink. I honestly think he'll be back for at least one more year in Green Bay, and probably announce before the season begins that it will be his final season. It would have been nice if he could have had Javon Walker all season. I'd say the same about Ahman Green, but I'm not sure he's got much left in the tank. As for Faulk, he's done unless he goes to a perfect situation. If Vermeil was going to stay in KC (which I doubt) I could see them being reunited for a season. Faulk would be a great addition to spell Larry Johnson, and would still be good coming out of the backfield as a receiver. But any back would be decent in KC.

posted by dyams at 04:50 PM on December 29, 2005

CLEVELAND???? Are you on crack bronxbomber? I would expect more from a pinstripe boy (like myself). Unfortunetely, I live in Cleveland. What "good" wide receiver are you talking about? Certainly not Braylon "I drop 3x as many balls as I catch" Edwards. Dennis Northcutt? Tight End "Kneivel" Winslow? There isnt one. The only wide receiver the Browns have had in recent memory is Art "I bend over for Mayor White" Modell. He received the wide ones! Vince Young?? Matt Leinart?? Not a chance for either. Matt will be long gone, 4th pick at worst. Vince Young will NEVER make it in the NFL and Cleveland wont trade up. Charlie Frye is the Browns sad future at QB...another Paul McDonald! I cant see Favre playing outside of Green Bay. Faulk, he could go anywhere. NEITHER OF WHICH WILL END UP IN THE MISTAKE BY THE LAKE!

posted by CountDracula58 at 05:27 PM on December 29, 2005

How is Faulk the "best running back of his generation"? If generation means those years between being dropped by Indy and the "Mike Martz pass every down Rams offense", then yeah maybe he was the best. I think he was a great back for several years, but the best of his generation? No way. Early in his career there were Emmitt and Barry, and he's not better than either of them. Now there's LT and Alexander, in between is Curtis Martin and Bettis. For my money Martin is the pick over Faulk. It's not his fault though, he was misused in Indy and definatley didn't get enough touches under Martz. Farve is the best of his generation, but Faulk is not.

posted by sumokenobi at 05:28 PM on December 29, 2005

Braylon "I drop 3x as many balls as I catch" Edwards. Have you watched Roy Williams (WR) play? It is a shame that Brett Farve has to go out this way, he is a classy man and a classy player. Now i guess he can hand the torch to Aaron Rogers for the annual Lions asskicking. As for Marshall Faulk, I'll never forgive the Rams for beating the Titans in 99, if only that Titans guy had arms one yard longer...

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 05:31 PM on December 29, 2005

Farve sucks and faulk cant do that much good. they should defenley both retire.

posted by Barry-from-H-town at 05:54 PM on December 29, 2005

Farve sucks No he doesn't and this is coming from a Bears fan. He should have retired last year. He doesn't have the receivers who can catch his risky throws this year and I believe that is what causes all the interceptions. He is a risky player and usually it comes to bite the opponant in the butt. This year he doesn't have the backup so it makes him look bad. He was an outstanding quarterback (it really pains my to say that). I only wish when he left the Atlanta rooster he had come to Chicago. This is not the case though so good riddence you Green Bay Packer may you never torment the Chicago Bears again!

posted by skydivemom at 06:18 PM on December 29, 2005

Barry-from-H-town: You are the one who should retire.... from this site. Do people actually refer to Houston as H-town? How effing stupid a nick name is that.

posted by scully at 06:22 PM on December 29, 2005

defenley ? ? ?

posted by dyams at 06:59 PM on December 29, 2005

Farve is the best of his generation Favre's generation includes Montana, Young, Elway and Marino just to name some. As for Faulk, if I can draft either Faulk, Sanders or Smith in their prime, I would pick Faulk mostly because he gave you another receiver as well his incredible rushing talents.

posted by STLCardinalfan at 07:15 PM on December 29, 2005

Farve is a class act, speaking as a Bears fan, I can't wait for him to retire. Anybody who would say he sucks should be at home watching Sponge Bob. Faulk was good but misused by two teams during his prime years. No way to know now how good he could have been. I worry that the Bears now have their own version of Farve (Grossman) only with just as many mistakes and not enough arm or receiver talent to overcome.

posted by tdheiland at 07:35 PM on December 29, 2005

Farve is one of the greatest QB's to play the game and his numbers prove it. His yardage, touchdowns, starts puts him either number one or two all time in the NFL. It can be said that the packers problems are the players that where hurt but its really not the truth. Perhaps Walker could have had another year like the last but who knows if he would have or will ever have again now that he has been hurt and out for a whole year. Green played the first 5-6 games and didnt do a thing before hye was hurt. The reason the Packers are where they are is because of the Coach, Mike Sherman. He was fired as Gm last year after 5 seasons and the team shows it. Now he has to go as Coach as well. He may be a great week day coach, but on game day he is not. Farve can stay, Sherman, Walker and Green can go. Faulk Should play as long as he likes, How would you like being told you are washed up in your 30's

posted by GBFan at 07:43 PM on December 29, 2005

Favre's generation includes Montana, Young, Elway and Marino just to name some I'm sorry I was under the impression that 2 of these examples were part of the imfamous QB draft of '83, and that Montana had played in the '81 Super Bowl. That is why I don't include them in Favre's generation. I discount Steve Young as greater than Favre as a Quarterback (not an athlete) because of the talent of the 49ers when Young took the reigns. Now if I were to argue with myself (and the article), I would say that Troy Aikman was the greatest QB of Favre's generation.

posted by sumokenobi at 07:54 PM on December 29, 2005

Stephen Jackson can't carry Faulk's jock OR cup. He thinks 1000 yards (a 16 game average of 63 yards) is a major accomplishment! St. Louis fans cheer what the young pups call, "the old dude", when he hits the field. "Dude" gives 105%, doesn't bitch when he only gets 8-10 touches(primarily passes) and STILL adds class AND integrity to a program run by the people whom employed the "greatest schmo on turf", Mike Martz. Faulk may not be Brown, Simpson, Sanders or Smith, but he's STILL someone to worry about EVERY time he gets a touch...

posted by Thumper at 08:12 PM on December 29, 2005

As for Faulk, if I can draft either Faulk, Sanders or Smith in their prime, I would pick Faulk mostly because he gave you another receiver as well his incredible rushing talents You draft Faulk, I'll take Emmitt Smith for the block.

posted by sumokenobi at 08:19 PM on December 29, 2005

I gotta go with Faulk there too, even though I love Barry Sanders. What he showed in those couple of years with the Rams was frightening.

posted by yerfatma at 08:47 PM on December 29, 2005

Mooch was screwed in Detroit? How so? He was a horrible coach who had no confidence in any of his players and couldn't motivate them enough to care. The only way the organization was screwed by not firing Matt Millen with Mooch. Why they resigned Millen to another 5 year contact is beyond belief.

posted by SportsChick1719 at 09:41 PM on December 29, 2005

The belief that Marriucci was screwed is DUE to the fact that Millen was retained and he was kicked out. The failure was Millen, not Mariucci.

posted by mrhockey at 09:52 PM on December 29, 2005

I hope Bret DOES play for a few more years. I am a Bears fan and it would be better to have Bret in there than some new guy 1st round draft pick that may end up being the next Joe Montana!!

posted by boat4000 at 11:07 PM on December 29, 2005

Neither should retire. Favre still has the gun. With the right coach and a healthy team, he is still one of the best at his craft. He may be reckless, but he is a fierce competitor and knows how to win. He has had one bad year and everyone is jumping ship. Get off his back. As for Faulk, he is doing well in his role and is still very helpful to the Rams. When Jackson is off, Faulk can pick up the slack. Also, like it was said earlier, Faulk also gives the Rams another reciever. There is also the fact that they are invaluable in training the guys that will take over for them in the future. Play on I say.

posted by mcstan13 at 12:17 AM on December 30, 2005

all of you morons need to learn it's BRETT FAVRE!!

posted by packerfan4ever at 12:18 AM on December 30, 2005

Last weeks Bears-Packers game was pretty scary at the end. Thank God Favre didn't have any time outs left on that final drive. As a Bears fan, I wouldn't mind seeing Aaron Rodgers back there next year and beyond because I doubt he has the heart Favre does. That guy just keeps coming at you and keeps slinging til he's out of bullets. When he has his full supporting cast, there are none better in my opinion.

posted by wdminott at 04:17 AM on December 30, 2005

While I think Favre(gosh, I hope I spelled it right) is far from "sucking". He had the kind of injury riddled team that only an Eagles fan could envy. They did win the divison just last year. The level of skill in the NFL is so close that even a minor drop off in skill, can make a big difference. I remember this with Dan Marino. He and Favre "were" the kind of guys who's instinct and arm strenth , allowed them to throw into double even triple coverage with great success. Just a slight mistake and you have an interception. Sugar Ray Robinson used to say that as he aged he could still see the opening in his opponents defense, but by the time he pulled the trigger on a punch the opening was closed. This is what I see with Favre, he's just a hair off, but doesn't realise it until its too late. That's a gunslinger mentality. Who is gonna have balls to tell him? Marshall Faulk is a curiosity. He went from the best player in the NFL(and Madden) to not even playing in two short years I have no explanation. Did he piss somebody off, like Marcus Allen in Oakland? I can't tell if he still has the "goods" because he has not played. It seems kind of sad.

posted by at 06:18 AM on December 30, 2005

Favre may be one of the top five regular season QBs of all time, yet he's *still* easily the most overrated. I will be happy to see him retire just so I don't have to listen to the constant media genuflection. As Dr. Z on recently said, "When I die and go to hell, hell will be a Brett Favre game called by the ESPN Sunday Night crew for all eternity." Favre's been great in the regular season (until this year), but is there a QB (or player for that matter) who has singlehandedly lost more games for his team in the playoffs the past few years? Yes, he has won a Super Bowl, but so have Mark Rypien and Trent Dilfer (not suggesting that either is better than Favre...I'm just saying). But check his playoff stats since the Super Bowl years. P-U. As for Faulk, it's hard to say. He voluntarily took the backup role, which might say something about how he feels physically. Only he knows what he's got left. He'll step aside when it's time for him to do so. Favre will probably hang on and keep holding the Packers down.

posted by TheQatarian at 08:47 AM on December 30, 2005

...than some new guy 1st round draft pick that may end up being the next Joe Montana!! Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th round. FYI

posted by grabofsky74 at 08:54 AM on December 30, 2005

One other thing for those Bears fans who were worried that Favre could have pulled out the game for the Packers on Sunday: You won both games against Favre this year because he threw some incredibly terrible interceptions that were returned for TDs or blew potential Packer scoring drives. The Pack might have won either game if not for Favre's decision-making. As Randy Hill at Fox Sports once said, Favre has all of the talent and arm-strength and toughness, but it's "tempered by the decision-making skills of the people who used to dress Cher."

posted by TheQatarian at 08:54 AM on December 30, 2005

You won both games against Favre this year because he threw some incredibly terrible interceptions that were returned for TDs or blew potential Packer scoring drives. That kind of sums up much of Favre's career, doesn't it? Great arm, many good games, but many games where he threw way, WAY too many interceptions, often a crucial times. A few of his playoff performances were borderline-embarrassing. He's a class guy, and I admire him for his consecutive game-played streak, but outside of a Super Bowl years ago, his heroics in (often) meaningless regular season games tend to outshine his playoff blunders. With the current state of NFL quarterbacking, though, I'd still never say he HAS to retire. Good grief, just look at some of the horrible quarterbacks playing around the league.

posted by dyams at 09:05 AM on December 30, 2005

When are you yahoo's gonna wake up, The Redskins are trading Patrick Ramsey to Houston for the rights to Reggie Bush and Bret Favre is going to Washington where he will be traded to N.Y.Giants for Eli Manning and Michael Strahan.

posted by Daddy-O at 09:34 AM on December 30, 2005

Thanks for the wake-up call. I didn't think any of us were aware Patrick Ramsey was as valuable a puzzle piece as Reggie Bush. /dozes

posted by yerfatma at 09:42 AM on December 30, 2005

Good grief, just look at some of the horrible quarterbacks playing around the league. What do you have against Joey Harrington and Jeff Garcia! Lol

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 11:26 AM on December 30, 2005

What do you have against Joey Harrington and Jeff Garcia; LOL!! You're kidding right? :)

posted by SportsChick1719 at 03:25 PM on December 30, 2005

Good grief, just look at some of the horrible quarterbacks playing around the league. What do you have against Joey Harrington and Jeff Garcia! Lol Yes, Where I would agree that Joey Harrington does not deserve to be 'Lionised"(sorry, it was there and I took it) Apparently, The "hype-machine" needs to crank out superlatives for every completed pass or else the viewing public might change the channel to a 24hr"the Wedding" marathon. The announcers are paid to "pile on" the credit no matter who is playing. ESPN is the buisness model for this strategy. That said; it is not easy to play QB in the NFL. Statistically only 32 men in the world are talented enough to start at QB for an NFL team. A little over half of them win more games then they lose. Only 12 will start a playoff game. Only 1 will hold the Superbowl trophy. There are only 5 starting QBs in the league who have won a ring as a starting QB( Favre, Warner, Dilfer, Johnson and Brady) only 2 stlll play for the same team. 39 superbowls have only 19 different winning QBs. Some where Mark Ripien laughs a mans laugh!...and Brett Favre is a Hall of Famer!

posted by at 05:47 PM on December 30, 2005

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.