Johan Santana #57
Bench Warmer
NFL.com - NFL News
(May 18, 2007) -- No doubt most fans around the NFL have heard about Green Bay quarterback Brett Favre 's alleged trade demand. Disgruntled by his team's inability to land wide receiver Randy Moss in a draft-day trade, Favre was rumored to ask the Packers for a trade. He has since denied making such a request.
"I was frustrated a couple weeks back when Randy Moss was traded to New England," Favre said on Packers.com. "I never wanted to be traded and I don't want to be traded. I want to be in Green Bay. I want to finish my career as a Packer."
Brett Favre has been clamoring for more help but hasn't got it.
Brett Favre has been clamoring for more help but hasn't got it.
At this stage of the game, it's pointless to debate whether Favre made the trade demand or not, or whether he would have even been correct in doing so. It's not something that's going to happen, and so it's not worth talking about. Brett Favre will finish his career in Green Bay, for better or worse.
What can be debated, however, is the quarterback's habit of trying to play general manager, and whether it should be applauded, tolerated or reviled by the general public.
Last I checked, the Packers actually do have a general manager (shocking, I know) in the form of executive vice president Ted Thompson. And rest assured, Thompson has made several good moves over the past couple of seasons (re-signing defensive end Aaron Kampman being chief among them). That's not to say the front office is above criticism (more on this later), but they haven't been completely asleep at the wheel either.
Like it or not, Brett Favre is not the general manager of the Packers. He has not and can not appoint himself to that position, and he will have to come to terms with that. If he thinks bringing in Randy Moss is a good idea, wants to push for the move and even wants to go so far as to attempt to rework his contract to get it done, that's all well and good. It doesn't mean Thompson or anyone else has to listen to him though.
Favre's idea that Randy Moss could be the savior of the franchise is flawed at best. Anyone who has watched tape of Moss the past two years will tell you that the enigmatic receiver will not try when things start to go poorly ... or when he doesn't get the ball ... or when the team runs the ball ... or when he gets a hangnail ... or ... well, you get the point.
But what would happen if Green Bay lost a couple of games early in the year? Or Favre missed Moss wide open on a fly route? Or any other number of scenarios that would be sure to bring Moss' sulkiness to the forefront? Moss' considerable talent aside, is this not something that should give a team pause before bringing Moss in? And if his lack of effort isn't enough of a reason, take a look at Moss' last three seasons of production:
RANDY MOSS PRODUCTION, 2004-06
Year Receptions Yards Average Touchdowns
2004 49 767 15.7 13
2005 60 1,005 16.8 8
2006 42 553 13.2 3
Average 50 775 15.5 8
Those aren't elite numbers. The fact of the matter is Thompson and the front office were justified in not trading for Moss ... even for a fourth-round pick. A person could put together a laundry list of reasons not to waste the draft pick (and admittedly, a laundry list of reasons to make the trade), but ultimately the decision was the Packers' to make. And it was probably the right call. They really should not be criticized by Favre or anyone else for steering clear of a head case (whether said head case does well in New England or not).
All that said, Favre has a point.
Not about Moss, who can create such a black hole of negativity on the field that one must avert one's eyes from looking in his direction, if only out of fear that looking at boring, disinterested play will engender boring, disinterested spectating.
Instead, Favre is correct in criticizing the front office for failing to adequately address an offense in serious need of an upgrade. Ahman Green, the team's top tailback, was allowed to leave in free agency. The team "addressed" that concern by drafting Brandon Jackson in the second round. Donald Driver is the team's top receiving threat, and he's neither big, nor especially fast, nor especially young. Tight end Bubba Franks had an awful year. The team "addressed" those concerns by drafting San Jose State wide receiver James Jones in the third round.
There were better options than Randy Moss out there for the Packers.
There were better options than Randy Moss out there for the Packers.
Don't get me wrong, Jones and Jackson may be nice players, but they're also rookies and don't exactly strike fear into the hearts of opponents. Second-year wideout Greg Jennings is still unproven. Top tailback Vernand Morency has rushed for a grand total of 618 yards in his career. Receiver Robert Ferguson has been in the league for seven years and has still yet to catch more than 40 balls in a single season.
And those are just the skill positions! The offensive line has been gutted through free agency the past several years as well.
Now, let it be known I have no real problem with what the team is trying to do with its defense. Another player or two and that unit could be something special. I think the Packers have the sort of defense a team can potentially win a championship with, especially if first-round gamble Justin Harrell can log quality minutes at defensive tackle. The front office should be commended for the defense it appears to be assembling.
But it's frankly disgusting what type of talent the Packers are choosing to surround Favre with on offense. The team could have signed or traded for such veteran running backs as Willis McGahee, Travis Henry, Jamal Lewis, Michael Turner, Thomas Jones, Reuben Droughns or Tatum Bell. The Packers also could have brought in wide receivers such as Wes Welker, Donte' Stallworth, Joe Horn, Darrell Jackson, Brandon Lloyd or Kevin Curtis. Instead, the team stood pat and then drafted Brandon Jackson and James Jones. That's not the answer.
But neither is unnecessary hand-wringing about a distraction like Moss.
My advice to Favre? Stop worrying about Randy Moss. You're very likely better off without him.
My advice to the Packers? Do something to address a crumbling offense before it reaches Raider-levels of ineptitude.
Because after all, when your quarterback is pining for a lazy receiver from the worst offense in the league (the aforementioned Raiders), it doesn't say much about the talent on hand, now does it?
(May 18, 2007) -- No doubt most fans around the NFL have heard about Green Bay quarterback Brett Favre 's alleged trade demand. Disgruntled by his team's inability to land wide receiver Randy Moss in a draft-day trade, Favre was rumored to ask the Packers for a trade. He has since denied making such a request.
"I was frustrated a couple weeks back when Randy Moss was traded to New England," Favre said on Packers.com. "I never wanted to be traded and I don't want to be traded. I want to be in Green Bay. I want to finish my career as a Packer."
Brett Favre has been clamoring for more help but hasn't got it.
Brett Favre has been clamoring for more help but hasn't got it.
At this stage of the game, it's pointless to debate whether Favre made the trade demand or not, or whether he would have even been correct in doing so. It's not something that's going to happen, and so it's not worth talking about. Brett Favre will finish his career in Green Bay, for better or worse.
What can be debated, however, is the quarterback's habit of trying to play general manager, and whether it should be applauded, tolerated or reviled by the general public.
Last I checked, the Packers actually do have a general manager (shocking, I know) in the form of executive vice president Ted Thompson. And rest assured, Thompson has made several good moves over the past couple of seasons (re-signing defensive end Aaron Kampman being chief among them). That's not to say the front office is above criticism (more on this later), but they haven't been completely asleep at the wheel either.
Like it or not, Brett Favre is not the general manager of the Packers. He has not and can not appoint himself to that position, and he will have to come to terms with that. If he thinks bringing in Randy Moss is a good idea, wants to push for the move and even wants to go so far as to attempt to rework his contract to get it done, that's all well and good. It doesn't mean Thompson or anyone else has to listen to him though.
Favre's idea that Randy Moss could be the savior of the franchise is flawed at best. Anyone who has watched tape of Moss the past two years will tell you that the enigmatic receiver will not try when things start to go poorly ... or when he doesn't get the ball ... or when the team runs the ball ... or when he gets a hangnail ... or ... well, you get the point.
But what would happen if Green Bay lost a couple of games early in the year? Or Favre missed Moss wide open on a fly route? Or any other number of scenarios that would be sure to bring Moss' sulkiness to the forefront? Moss' considerable talent aside, is this not something that should give a team pause before bringing Moss in? And if his lack of effort isn't enough of a reason, take a look at Moss' last three seasons of production:
RANDY MOSS PRODUCTION, 2004-06
Year Receptions Yards Average Touchdowns
2004 49 767 15.7 13
2005 60 1,005 16.8 8
2006 42 553 13.2 3
Average 50 775 15.5 8
Those aren't elite numbers. The fact of the matter is Thompson and the front office were justified in not trading for Moss ... even for a fourth-round pick. A person could put together a laundry list of reasons not to waste the draft pick (and admittedly, a laundry list of reasons to make the trade), but ultimately the decision was the Packers' to make. And it was probably the right call. They really should not be criticized by Favre or anyone else for steering clear of a head case (whether said head case does well in New England or not).
All that said, Favre has a point.
Not about Moss, who can create such a black hole of negativity on the field that one must avert one's eyes from looking in his direction, if only out of fear that looking at boring, disinterested play will engender boring, disinterested spectating.
Instead, Favre is correct in criticizing the front office for failing to adequately address an offense in serious need of an upgrade. Ahman Green, the team's top tailback, was allowed to leave in free agency. The team "addressed" that concern by drafting Brandon Jackson in the second round. Donald Driver is the team's top receiving threat, and he's neither big, nor especially fast, nor especially young. Tight end Bubba Franks had an awful year. The team "addressed" those concerns by drafting San Jose State wide receiver James Jones in the third round.
There were better options than Randy Moss out there for the Packers.
There were better options than Randy Moss out there for the Packers.
Don't get me wrong, Jones and Jackson may be nice players, but they're also rookies and don't exactly strike fear into the hearts of opponents. Second-year wideout Greg Jennings is still unproven. Top tailback Vernand Morency has rushed for a grand total of 618 yards in his career. Receiver Robert Ferguson has been in the league for seven years and has still yet to catch more than 40 balls in a single season.
And those are just the skill positions! The offensive line has been gutted through free agency the past several years as well.
Now, let it be known I have no real problem with what the team is trying to do with its defense. Another player or two and that unit could be something special. I think the Packers have the sort of defense a team can potentially win a championship with, especially if first-round gamble Justin Harrell can log quality minutes at defensive tackle. The front office should be commended for the defense it appears to be assembling.
But it's frankly disgusting what type of talent the Packers are choosing to surround Favre with on offense. The team could have signed or traded for such veteran running backs as Willis McGahee, Travis Henry, Jamal Lewis, Michael Turner, Thomas Jones, Reuben Droughns or Tatum Bell. The Packers also could have brought in wide receivers such as Wes Welker, Donte' Stallworth, Joe Horn, Darrell Jackson, Brandon Lloyd or Kevin Curtis. Instead, the team stood pat and then drafted Brandon Jackson and James Jones. That's not the answer.
But neither is unnecessary hand-wringing about a distraction like Moss.
My advice to Favre? Stop worrying about Randy Moss. You're very likely better off without him.
My advice to the Packers? Do something to address a crumbling offense before it reaches Raider-levels of ineptitude.
Because after all, when your quarterback is pining for a lazy receiver from the worst offense in the league (the aforementioned Raiders), it doesn't say much about the talent on hand, now does it?
