Newt endorses...Favre?!

I love it when someone in the political arena starts spouting football advice. It usually ends up badly (see Limbaugh and McNabb). But this one takes the cake: Newt Gingrich thinks the Green Bay Packers ought to take back Brett Favre, now that he's decided to unretire after finally retiring after threatening to retire after every season since Nixon was President.

Unfortunately, Newt has as much credibility on this issue as Al "I own stock in every alternative energy company" Gore has on Global Warming. Per Newt's own letter, posted on Humanevents.com:

Paul Lubbers is my son-in-law, but we share more than family ties. He's also a fellow shareholder in the Green Bay Packers. And as responsible shareholders, we – like many of those invested in the Green & Gold - feel compelled to speak out on the turmoil surrounding the return of Brett Favre to the NFL and whether or not he should wear Packer's uniform.

Can you say "vested interest"?

Newt goes on:

Should Favre have taken some time (like he did the past few years) to rest, recover and reclaim some perspective? Yes. Did he make a bad decision to retire? Also Yes. Should Ted Thompson [the Packer's General Manager] and the Packers welcome him back to Packers family? Absolutely!!

All Newt needs here is a "Dean scream"

But Newt shows his true intentions later. He doesn't want Favre playing for one of the Packer's divisional opponents (which is about as likely as Global Warming, but I digress):

I understand that the Packers have made plans to build the offense around Aaron Rodgers, but plans are made to change. And in this case the Packers should adjust their plans quickly to bring back Favre. Can you imagine Favre as a Viking or even worse a Chicago Bear?

The best response to this was from Josh Alper over at Profootballtalk.com:

If you were unsure that a politician was writing this letter, there’s your proof. Who else would argue against a choice of action by stoking up the fear of the least likely potential outcome? I’m surprised he didn’t follow it up with a story about a strong American family he met while campaigning who told him about how they once had an opportunity to allow Brett Favre back onto their team but passed on it. Then the bank foreclosed on their house, the kids got Ricketts and Grandma ended up on food stamps.

...I just had a terrifying vision of Jimmy Carter on a plane to Green Bay to sit down between Favre and [Ted] Thompson which means I’m pretty sure we’ve reached the point of oversaturation for this story.

I should state for the record that I agree with Newt and I am personally in favor of Brett Favre coming out of retirement, and the fact that I picked up Favre on my keeper league team has absolutely NOTHING to do with it!

Favre beaned

This post is my way of giving a bloggy high five to ESPN's Sal Paolantonio. Finally, somebody in the Media gets it! Brett Favre is overrated!

In a recent column for ESPN.com, Paolantonio had this to say:

We interrupt the continued deification of Brett Favre -- a first-ballot Hall of Famer and the most durable player in NFL history -- with the following reality check.

Yes, Favre played long enough to throw the most touchdown passes and collect the most wins by an NFL quarterback. But let's examine the second half of No. 4's career. The truth is, Favre did little over the past decade to earn the gushing praise heaped upon him by our fawning brethren in the media.

Sal even goes on to point out something I have already said: Favre is NOT even the best Packers quarterback of all-time. That honor belongs to Bart Starr.

Oh, you say Starr was surrounded by a Hall of Fame roster with a legendary coach. But Starr still is the NFL record holder with a 104.8 career playoff passer rating, nearly 20 points higher than Favre's. That wasn't Vince Lombardi or Ray Nitschke throwing those passes for Starr, whose career postseason passer rating, by the way, is 38 points higher than Johnny Unitas'.

Favre's career playoff record was 12-10. Starr's was 9-1 -- without the benefit of wild-card games. Favre threw 28 interceptions in 22 playoff games. Starr threw three in 10. Think about that -- just three picks in 213 postseason attempts.

But Bart Starr gets the Ringo Starr treatment -- underappreciated and overlooked. Favre gets put on a pedestal. Yes, he had a Pro Bowl season in 2007 with the youngest roster in the NFL. But his final moment on Lambeau Field was a wildly errant pass that turned into the NFC title for the Giants.

By the way, how do you think Favre would have done playing for Vince Lombardi? Frankly, Lombardi would have benched Favre a long time ago for throwing too many interceptions. Gunslingers don't make great quarterbacks, because they don't win championships.

If you look at Favre's career numbers, you will see that after Mike Holmgren left the Packers, Favre's interceptions went up each year, and his touchdowns went down. Holmgren made Favre play within his own limitations. After Holmgren, Favre became the gunslinger, throwing way too many passes he shouldn't because none of the succeeding Packers coaches could control him. Favre became larger than life, and woe be to the coach who might criticize the almighty Favre.

Of course, the Packer fans didn't help the situation by deifying Favre, thereby making it harder on the Packer coaching staffs to try and control Favre's interceptions, which were fueled by Favre's out-of-control ego.

But that brings us back to Sal Paolantionio, who got his start as a sports reporter in Philadelphia. Try to picture what would have happened to Favre if he had been a quarterback in Philadelphia instead of Green Bay? The Eagles fans would have run Favre out of town years ago, with all those playoff interceptions.

Kudos to Sal for giving Favre the Philly treatment. Favre has been playing Santa Claus for too many Packer opponents for too long, and we all know what the Philly fans did to Santa.

Oh Glorious Happy Day!!!

Packers QB Brett Favre retiring!

I'm looking forward to next season already. I won't have to listen to announcers gushing over him any more.

Transcending Sports

I recently did a blog post which complained about Brett Favre. Specifically, I was complaining about how the Media treats him as more important than the game itself. But how many athletes have really transcended their sport?

In my opinion, here are the athletes who did:

Babe Ruth: Ruth took baseball and MADE it the American Pastime. After the 1919 "Black Sox Scandal" nearly ruined baseball, Ruth saved the game and changed it forever.

Jesse Owens: Owens is one of the best examples of transcending sport and entering international politics. His four gold medals at the 1936 Berlin Olympics showed up the Aryan supremacy message at the heart of Nazi propaganda.

Jackie Robinson: "Breaking the color barrier" is all you need to say about Robinson. Every black person who has ever played a professional sport since Robinson has him to thank for it.

Muhammad Ali: Few athletes from any sport achieve the international fame of Ali. As for transcending sport, no athlete has EVER topped Ali. From his objection to the Vietnam War (for which he ended up in prison), to his blatant braggadocio (which he always seemed to be able to bring to fruition), to his international fights ("The Rumble in the Jungle" in Zaire, and "The Thrilla in Manilla" in the Philippines), to his lighting of the torch at the 1996 Olympics (which was one of the most touching sporting moments I have ever seen), Ali was truly "The Greatest".

Vince Lombardi: Whether it is fair to include a coach in a list of athletes is arguable, but what cannot be argued is how Lombardi became the very definition of "head coach". Winning three NFL Championships and the first two Super Bowls in a span of seven years is still a significant accomplishment. But where he truly stands out from other great coaches was in the things he said. Although he is frequently, and incorrectly, credited with saying "Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing", he had many other quotes which showed how great a motivator he was. Within American culture, Lombardi symbolizes everything in coaches (and leaders) from motivation to authoritarian dictatorship.

Michael Jordan: One of the things that impresses me about Jordan is that he is one of the smartest superstars to ever play any sport. That intelligence undoubtedly helped him to dominate professional basketball, but it also gave him a marketing savvy that few athletes have. As for transcending his sport, consider Jordan's first retirement from basketball, when he went to play baseball. How many athletes would be dragging the Media around to their minor league baseball games?

There are a few others who are borderline cases, like Jim Thorpe, Red Grange, "Babe" Didrikson Zaharias, and Joe Namath, but their fame has faded over time to such an extent that it can be argued they really didn't transcend their sport that much.

Now does anyone honestly think Brett Favre belongs on that list?

Sports Media Bias: Brett Favre

We have all heard of the liberal Media bias displayed by most Media sources. But there is a Media bias far more glaring and obvious than anything the Media does related to politics. That bias is towards Brett Favre.

If you took Cal Ripken's durability and work ethic and combined it with John Kruk's wit and love of the game, and put it into a football player, you would have Brett Favre, who is without question one of the great quarterbacks playing, as well as one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time.

But the media treatment of Favre would lead you to think he transcends the game itself. Last night's Cowboys-Packers game was a disgusting example of Favre bias on full display.

Favre got injured in the second quarter. Mind you, the game was still being played, but you might not know it from the coverage. While Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth were droning on about Favre's injury, we got to see repeated replays of the play where Favre got hurt. While Aaron Rodgers led the Packers on a touchdown drive at the end of the second quarter (something Favre had not accomplished while he was in there, and I don't count Ryan Grant's 62 yard touchdown run as Favre's accomplishment), you would think Islamic terrorists had flown an airplane into Brett Favre's arm based on the amount of coverage it was getting.

But it was clear from the replay that Favre hit his arm on a defender's helmet as he was trying to throw. Worst case scenario was that Favre broke his arm, but it didn't even look that serious from the replay. Considering Favre is hoping to play next week, it is safe to say it is a minor injury.

The halftime show was even worse. At one point, Rich Eisen nailed the bias when he called the score of the game "secondary" to Favre's injury. I might buy that if Favre had broken his neck, or sustained some other life-threatening injury. But was it really necessary to have the camera on the locker room door when the Packers came out for the second half, with the constant "we don't see Favre coming out with the team" comments?

Just when you think the "Favre love-in" cannot get any worse, the third quarter started. Or did it? Forget the game! Forget replays of the action on the field! Favre is leaving the locker room! Favre is returning to the field!

Thank God the Packers announced Favre would not be returning to the game. Otherwise, Gumbel and Collinsworth might have spent the entire second half wondering if Favre would be returning. As it was, we got treated to plenty of camera shots of Favre standing on the sidelines in the second half, as if just the mere presence of Favre on the sidelines added to the game somehow.

While the announcers were busy gushing over Brett Favre, his replacement was actually having a better game than Favre. The final stat line for both:

Brett Favre: 5/14, 56 passing yards, 2 interceptions
Aaron Rodgers: 18/26, 201 passing yards, 1 td, 5 rush attempts, 30 rushing yards

During the second half, Bryant Gumbel noted how there would be "no quarterback controversy in Green Bay". Probably because the Media would skewer Green Bay's management if they even hinted at benching Favre.

Don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying the Packers should bench Favre. But the Media will not even consider the possibility, which is a dereliction of the Media's duty. When a public figure is not performing as well as they should, the Media has a responsibility to question whether that public figure is worthy of their position. For the Media to place a public figure above scrutiny is the definition of bias.

Any politician would kill to get the kind of Media bias that Brett Favre enjoys. The drinking problems from early in his career? Forgotten. The fact he has thrown more interceptions than any other quarterback in the history of the NFL? No biggie.

If it wasn't for the Media genuflecting before Favre at every oppurtunity, I might enjoy watching the end of Favre's career. As it is, I will be glad when he retires.

The Best NFL Quarterback Playing

Over a year ago, I did a post rating the best quarterbacks of all-time. In that post, I excluded quarterbacks currently playing.

With apologies to all the Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson fans out there, there are only four Super Bowl-winning quarterbacks worthy of consideration as the best still playing: Brett Favre, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Kurt Warner. However, I also have to exclude Warner for the simple reason he has only started 78 games in his career, and he is clearly nearing the end, whereas Brady and Manning have both started over 100 games and will undoubtedly play for many more years. (Of course, Favre is the all-time champ with 246 games started.)

While there are certainly young quarterbacks who may yet win a Super Bowl, they have not played long enough to be rated with these three quarterbacks.

I will use the same criteria as I used in my "all-time best" post to rate these three quarterbacks, with a look at percentages since the three have clearly played careers of different lengths. The stats are taken from their career statistics through last weekend:

GAME MANAGEMENT
The first quality all rookie quarterbacks must learn is game management. By this I mean the ability to avoid interceptions and fumbles.

To rate this ability, I will use the interception percentage:

1. Tom Brady: 2.4%
2. Peyton Manning: 2.9%
3. Brett Favre: 3.3%

The key to Brady's success in this category is that he knows how to throw it away instead of making risky throws. Favre may be fun to watch, but he also throws where he shouldn't way too often.

TOUCHDOWNS
In order to throw a lot of touchdowns, you have to be able to throw the ball in the red zone. You won't make a career out of only lobbing 70 yard bombs. You also have to be able to
toss the little two yard pass to the tackle eligible in the end zone.

A simple look at touchdowns per pass attempt for the three quarterbacks:

1. Peyton Manning: 291/5205= 0.056
2. Tom Brady: 180/3363= 0.054
3. Brett Favre: 430/8577= 0.050

I would consider this category a wash. The statistical difference between these three is insignificant. They can all throw touchdowns quite well, and an easy argument can be made that the differences are due to the quality of teams they have played on over the years. In addition, when you consider Favre has played twice as long as the other two, and an argument can be made that Brady and Manning's touchdown percentages may drop over the remainder of their careers.

RELEASE
A quick release is not necessary to be a great quarterback, but it seems the great ones tend to have quicker releases than most quarterbacks.

The quickest release of all-time belonged to Dan Marino. As a pure pocket passer, it is easy to see how fast he got rid of the ball: In 8,358 pass attempts, he fumbled the ball only 57 times, for a 0.68% rating.

While it is tougher to rate scrambling quarterbacks using this statistic, none of the three quarterbacks we are looking at would be considered a significant scrambler.

Here is how they rate:

1. Peyton Manning: 49/5205= 0.94%
2. Brett Favre: 144/8577= 1.68%
3. Tom Brady: 63/3363= 1.87%

Even though Manning is no Marino, he still gets the ball away faster than anyone today.

ARM STRENGTH/AVERAGE GAIN
By itself, arm strength is nice, but it won't win games.

Early in his career, Doug Williams had the strongest arm I have ever seen. Unfortunately, when he threw little passes into the flat, the ball would bounce off the receiver because it was uncatchable.

For arm strength to be effective, it has to be combined with touch on shorter passes.

In this category, average gain per pass attempted tells us the quarterback is using his arm strength to its ultimate advantage:

1. Peyton Manning: 7.7
2. Tom Brady: 7.2
3. Brett Favre: 7.0

Manning would not rate among the best of all-time in this category, but he is clearly better at getting the most out of his arm strength of these three quarterbacks.

ACCURACY
A strong arm needs accuracy to be effective. This is where completion percentage is important, and where Manning rates a slight edge:

1. Peyton Manning: 64.0%
2. Tom Brady: 62.9%
3. Brett Favre: 61.3%

CHAMPIONSHIPS
In a team sport, the championship stands out as the ultimate test of how much a quarterback is helping his team. In Super Bowl victories, this is where Tom Brady stands out from the crowd:

1. Tom Brady: 3
2t. Peyton Manning: 1
2t. Brett Favre: 1

RUSHING
None of these three quarterbacks is a great scrambler, like a Mike Vick or a Randall Cunningham. With rushing averages ranging from 1.9 (Brady) to 3.3 (Favre), they won't be winning games by running for 70 yard touchdowns.

Where we can make a comparison is in rushing touchdowns/rushing attempts:

1. Peyton Manning: 16/279= 5.7%
2. Brett Favre: 13/543= 2.39%
3. Tom Brady: 5/256= 2.0%

Manning doesn't run often, but he does make it count more often than the other two. That is good running judgement.

For the record, Manning's percentage is even better than LaDainian Tomlinson's percentage (5.7% vs. 4.9%).

WHO IS THE BEST QUARTERBACK PLAYING?
If we throw out the touchdowns as a consideration (for the reason stated earlier), then total their rankings (with lowest total being better), here is how they rank:

1. Peyton Manning: 8
2. Tom Brady: 12
3. Brett Favre: 15

Is this a fair comparison? Absolutely not, when you consider that Manning has had the luxury of playing with an elite receiver (Marvin Harrison) for his entire career. Brady has only had an elite receiver this year (Randy Moss), and it can be argued that Favre has NEVER played with an elite receiver.

To make a fair comparison, let's start with Brady's career numbers prior to this season, against Favre's overall numbers (using the same criteria from above):

Tom Brady: 2.5% interception pct., 4.8% td pct., 1.93% fumble pct., 7.0 yds./attempt, 61.9% completed, 3 championships, 1.26% rush td's/attempts
Brett Favre: 3.3% interception pct., 5.0% td pct., 1.68% fumble pct., 7.0 yds./attempt, 61.3% completed, 1 championship, 2.39% rush td's/attempts

Brady and Favre are virtually identical, with each of them only rating a significant edge in two categories.

Assuming Brady and Favre are comparable, how do we draw a fair comparison to Manning? The best way might be to take Brady's stats from this year, prorate them to a full season, and then compare them to Manning's best season (2004):

Tom Brady: 1.3% interception pct., 11.0% td pct., 1.34% fumble pct., 9.0 yds./attempt, 73.2% completed, 11.8% rush td's/attempt
Peyton Manning: 2.0% interception pct., 9.9% td pct., 1.01% fumble pct., 9.2 yds./attempt, 67.6% completed, 0% rush td's/attempt

Brady rates a slight edge in four categories. But with fewer games completed in this sample, it is hard to call this definitive. However, IF Brady finishes this season with approximately the same stats, then we can conclude that Brady AND Favre (since Favre is comparable to Brady) are better quarterbacks than Manning. But that has yet to be determined.

Since the statistics don't show us a truly objective "best quarterback" among these three quarterbacks, then it comes down to a subjective choice. Assuming Brady continues at his current pace, and I think he will, then it comes down to a choice between Favre and Brady. If you look at the quality of receivers that both of them have had over the years, in my opinion Favre has had better (even if they were not elite) receivers overall, yet has only managed comparable numbers to years when Brady's best receivers were Troy Brown or Deion Branch. Therefore, Tom Brady would be the best quarterback playing now, depending on how he finishes this year.

The Best Packer Quarterback

When I did my post about "The Best Quarterback of All Time" back in September, I was not expecting to still be getting comments on it in December, but I am.

One thing that struck me in the comments was people claiming Brett Favre as the best of all time. But I don't even consider him the best Green Bay Packer quarterback. That would be Bart Starr.

Using the same criteria I used to determine the best quarterback of all time, Starr is very close to Favre, even considering the different eras in which they each played. Starr's numbers are on the left, with Favre's numbers as of last season:

Completion Percentage: 57.4% vs. 61.5%
Average Gain per Attempt: 7.85 vs. 7.04
Touchdown Percentage: 4.8% vs. 5.2%
Interception Percentage: 4.4% vs. 3.4%
NFL/Super Bowl Championships: 5 vs. 1
Average Rushing Yards per Carry: 5.3 vs. 3.5
Passer Rating: 80.5 vs. 86.0

Those are similar numbers considering the different passing nature of the eras involved. The yards per pass attempt explain a lot. In Starr's era, the passes were generally thrown farther than in the "west coast" era of Favre. This also explains why Favre's completion percentage was higher, although Starr's 57% completion percentage was the NFL career record when Starr retired. Finally, with Starr typically throwing the ball farther than Favre, Starr naturally threw more interceptions per attempt.

But for a true comparison on game management, let's add fumbles to interceptions per game. Favre turned the ball over 1.57 times per game. Starr turned the ball over 0.93 times per game.

But the number that stands out is the championships, where Starr holds a 5-1 advantage. Adding in the facts that Starr was a better runner and game manager than Favre, and Starr is clearly the better Packer quarterback.