Chicago Sun-Times

Vikings source on Favre: "Nothing is definite"

| 9 Comments | No TrackBacks

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune and Fox Sports are reporting that Brett Favre has been informing teammates and team officials that he's retiring.

A high-ranking Minnesota Vikings official just told me in a text message that "nothing is definite" and that it's still a work in progress.

But, that may be wishful thinking on the team's part, especially since they've invested so much in the Pro Bowl and future Hall of Fame quarterback to return.

Currently, Tarvaris Jackson and Sage Rosenfels are the veteran quarterbacks on the roster. The Vikings without Favre would definitely change the landscape of the NFC North.

The Vikings are still a very talented team, loaded with Pro Bowl players, but they could go from having arguably the best player in the division at the most important position -- certainly the best credentials -- to the worst starter in the division at the most important position.

The Vikings reached the NFC Championship game last season.

Since this would be Favre's third retirement, it's hard to believe it until he actually issues a statement or grants interviews. But, then again, would that suffice?

Now, I can see where that Vikings official is coming from...

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL:


Eh, we've heard this before. I'll believe it only when he's not under center in the Vikes' season opener. Until then, it's just conversation.

Yeah! Yeah Yeah! Blah! Blah! Blah! Who really cares at this stage in the dork's career? I guess I'd like to see him come back so Peppers can pound him into the ground a few times, but to be sure, I'm sick of hearing anything about this prima donna.

Sean...seriously..."The best player in the division at the most important position"?...come on. Even though I consider myself the world's biggest Bear's fan, I think you can tell from my posts here that I am, by no means, a "homer." I think I can seperate myself enough to make an educated, rational statement.
Give Favre his due with respect to longevity, physical conditioning, and having some God given talent, but let's not confuse him with Manning, Brady, Brees, or guys from the past who were true "gamers." Here is a guy who will go down as the all time interception leader and before you blame that on longevity, he broke that record going on 3 years ago. It took him several years to "overcome" the Dallas Cowboys back in the mid 90's, and for all of his accomplishments, has been to 2 Super Bowls. He has also cost 2 teams {07 Packers and 09 Vikings} chances at Super Bowls with idiotic throws that a 16 year + veteran should have known better to throw.
Manning will break every one of his records in less time {except, of course, for games played}, but won't come close to the INT record.
And Sean, at this point in their careers, Rodgers is a better QB and going into last season, I would have said Cutler was a better QB. But one year of Lovie, Pep, & Turner {sounds like a bad 30's vaudeville act..} might have set his development back 5 years. Back in April/May I stated on this blog that I wanted Favre to come back. If they couldn't win {even get to} the Super Bowl with the "magical" year he had last year, they def. wouldn't have made it this year. A Favre return would have been 1 more year that the Viking's window would have gotten a little bit smaller. I also mentioned the Vikings schedule back then. Take a look at it. Open at Saints, home against Miami {not a cake walk}, then home for the Lions. Bye week then at Jets, Home vs. Cowboys, then at Packers, & Patriots. With Favre they could have been 2-5 or 3-4. Good work Brett, you've messed with 3 teams in 3 years. But don't worry, Chris Bermann, and Cowherd will sing your praises.

This could be his re-re-retirement. Maybe all the Vicodin he did back in the day caused some st-st-stuttering.

The only thing newsworthy about this whole thing is the Chester Taylor quote on the Twitter updates...
Chester Taylor on Favre retirement news: "Brett did those Sears commercials where he was confused. He might still be confused."

Now that is funny....

Gearhead usually we agree but your being a bit of a Homer. Sure he is the all time Drama Queen, but he is the best QB in the Division, second best in the confrence.

Interceptions don't me jack in terms of who is the overall career leader, games played and passes attempted totally curve the chance of a guy in a passing offense with a long career being at the top. The only thing that matters is interception percentage.

Favre's int% is better than Moon and Roethlisburger and tied with Warner and Elway. It's also just 2/10 of a percent below Dan Marino. His 5.1% TD percentage is better than Joe Montana's. He is top 5 among all QB's in passing yards per game. He holds just about every major QB record.

Favre never played on a 90's Cowboy team or 80's 49ers team. His teams never had that level of talent. Last I checked the Vikings offense was not very good and nobody new who Rice was until Favre joined that team they where pretty much AP and a bunch of players nobody realy cared about.

At 40
He had an MVP Season 4200 yards, 69% pass completion, 33 TD's and 7 Int's, 107 passer rating, Y/A 7.9

Manning who is not in the Div by the way.
4500 yards, 69% completion percentage, 33 td's and 16 int's, 99.9 passer rating, Y/A 7.9

Favre had the better year and he is 40. Mannig nahd a better O-Line, a star reciever and star TE. Favre had a better running game wit hRB who fumbles a lot.

Drew Brees who is not in the division either
4388 yards 34 td's and 11 ints, 109.6 Passer Rating, he just managed to beat out a 40 year old QB. On a team with one of the Best O-Lines in football, with better recievers in a better offensive system, with a better coach.

As for Rodgers, Favre is in the same division, he Beat the Packers twice and out played Rodgers in both games. He also had a better statistical season than Rodgers so saying he was the best QB in the North division last year is accurate.

You can hate the Drama Queen all you want, he deserves it. But that will not change the fact that he is one of the all time greats and was the best QB in the division last year.

I really think he will be back, but it may not be until after the season starts. His ankle may need more time.

Creighton, sorry my friend, but I have to disagree with quite a few of your points there. Don't give into the PR bull crap that started last year about how the Packer teams of the 90's were so under talented and it was Favre that put them over the top. He had a fairly good running game throughout the 90's into the early 2000's with Bennett, Levens, and then Green {fullback Henderson}. He also had plenty of help at OL with guys like Timmerman, Verba, Clifton, Tauscher, Winters, Aaron Taylor, Dotson, just to name a few. His receivers weren't bad either over the years and he seemed to always have a pro-bowl caliber TE at his disposal. {Chmura (17 year old babysitters aside) Keith Jackson, and Bubba Franks. And then on defense there was more talent over the years than people like to give credit for.
As for last year, as I said it was a magical year, but let's not start diluting the facts. Minnesota has a decent OL. It's better than both the Bear's and the Packers. And lets not forget the Packer/Viking game in MN where Jared Allen had 4.5 sacks. If my memory serves me, the Vikes won the game by only 1 TD. The Packer line was dismal the first 10 games of the year and adequate the last 6. It usually takes 2-3 years for WR's to be dominate and last year was Rice's 3rd year. Plus you had 1 out of this world back {taking away the fumbles} and another potential 1100-1200 yard back as his understudy. Plus there was Harvin and Shiancoe as emerging stars. And just like in the past, Favre played on a team last year with a dominate defense, but couldn't get the job done. So, yes, I would say that at this point in their respective careers {even going back to last year} Rodgers is the better QB. Your argument about pass attempts and longevity don't hold water when it comes to comparing him to say Manning. Manning's int% is lower by .4% and his TD% is higher. And in my opinion Favre has had better coaching {especially on the Head Coaching and QB development levels} than Manning has. Dungy is over rated. On top of that, Manning didn't wait until the Pats got old to beat them. Unlike Favre and the Cowboys of the mid 90's. And as I stated above, the blown chances to go to a Super Bowl fall primarily on his shoulders. Both in 07 and last year.
As i said, give the man props for the longevity, the rocket arm, and his God given talent. But he's far from the "poor ole Favre with no talent teams" he''s portrayed out to be.
{dang, two guys on this blog CAN have a discussion without idiotic name calling and garbage like} Did you or are you going to camp this year?}


Would you name me one Great QB in the NFL that did not have some great talent around them, I cannot think of many?


That, sir, was my point. Sports media types like to allow athletes to re-write history. Last year you had this big "bruhaha" {mainly fueled by idiots like Bermann, Cowherd, Werner, etc.} about how Favre really didn't have much talent around him when he was in GB. I was like...WTF?...Go google the rosters from the mid 90's on. Those teams were well stocked and also drafted fairly well too.
And Creighton was right about the Drama Queen title. There's not a Kardashian or Lohan who could even come close. Have a great day gentlemen.

Leave a comment

Twitter updates


About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Sean Jensen published on August 3, 2010 9:50 AM.

Need your help on a new blog idea was the previous entry in this blog.

Bears skeptical or unfazed by Favre "news" is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.