Monday, December 29, 2008

Season in Review I: Favre Again

Shawn Lee, one of the survivors of POL S 325 and a really great guy to boot, is a passionate football fan (who has developed a pronounced interest in pan-Arabism). He popped me an e-mail the other day about, well, Brett Favre. Here’s the text:

You said that you don't see how Favre could've saved the season for the Packers, but I don't know I have to disagree. Sure Favre is having a rough go now, but he has been really good for NYJ, and in spite of what happens tomorrow, the Jets are a better team with Favre than they would've been with Pennington. You don't shove a legend out the door unless you have and absolute stud waiting in the wings (see 49'ers Montana to Young transition). Now Aaron Rogers is a good and serviceable qb, and could have a good career, will it be a Hall of Fame career? Probably not. A charismatic leader behind center, even if he is old an over the hill and overrated, forces d - coordinators, not wanting to look the fool, to overemphasize ("respect") his passing game more which of course opens up the running game. This year Grant was a bigger threat out of the Packers backfield than Rogers was, allowing defenses to key on him. The year before the opposite was true, Favre was more of a threat, which allowed Grant to emerge. Simply put the NFC North might be won by a 9 win team this year, the Jets have 9 wins, and your Packers are on the no. 1 tee box with my Seahawks.

This, of course, requires some sort of response. So, point by point, then:

You said that you don't see how Favre could've saved the season for the Packers, but I don't know I have to disagree.

You share this opinion with many of the most colorful posters to the Green Bay Press Gazette’s Packers page, home to the most vociferous of the Farve fans anywhere.

Sure Favre is having a rough go now,

Let’s compare and contrast his statistical performance for this year with that of Aaron Rodgers:

Note the gap of 566 passing yards. Favre made slightly larger number of attempts and completed 2.1 percent more of his passes. That said, Rodgers averaged 0.8 yards more per pass. As much as I may resent it as on old guy, I attribute this to the “zing” of youth. Indeed, our young gunslinger “zinged” us six more touchdowns than Favre made for the Jets. Moreover, Rodgers did it with nine fewer interceptions than Favre. I think I’d have wanted Rodgers, not Favre, on my fantasy team this year.

And as far as the Packers’ future goes, I really don’t think Rodgers has peaked yet. By the by, let's compare Rodgers with Favre's renaissance year last season:

Note here that Rodgers has nearly as many yards, an equal number of touchdowns and two fewer interceptions. Rodgers, incidentally, was sacked way more often this year than Favre was last year. Rodgers performs under pressure. Plus, the kid, like Favre, isn't made of glass. He played through a shoulder injury and started 16 times. Certainly, QB injury was every cheesehead's big worry going into the season. It turned out to be a red herring. The Kid is tough. Remember when making this comparison that 2007 was an exceptional year for Favre. We don't have enough data yet to be certain that Rodgers can keep this performance up, but you have to admit the numbers are deeply encouraging.

but he has been really good for NYJ, and in spite of what happens tomorrow, the Jets are a better team with Favre than they would've been with Pennington.

Does anyone debate this? Certainly I don’t. Favre was an excellent deal for the Jets even if he retires this coming season. Jersey sales alone probably made the deal a financial success, and I think Favre was a genuine asset for the Jets offense.

You don't shove a legend out the door unless you have and absolute stud waiting in the wings (see 49'ers Montana to Young transition).

Now, I’m not a Niners fan (far from it!), but did everyone know the year Steve Young took over that Steve Young was going to be Steve Young? I’d be interested in reading the first year rhetoric surrounding the young QB and his reception on the Niners.

Now Aaron Rogers is a good and serviceable qb, and could have a good career, will it be a Hall of Fame career? Probably not.

For what it’s worth, let’s compare the Kid’s first year with Favre’s and Young’s. Since Favre didn’t start all sixteen games in 1992, I threw in 1993 as well. Likewise, I threw in 1992 for Young.

First, note that Rodgers threw for more yards this year than either of these giants did in theirs. Of course, in Young’s case, this is an unfair comparison, as he made far fewer attempts. Young's average pass was longer than either Rodgers or Favre. Moreover, his low number of interceptions put both Favre and Rodgers to shame. But note that Rodgers is far more attractive than Favre in his opening two years. I see nothing in his cards that suggests that Rodgers can’t be one of the greats. You are correct that the odds are against him are high simply because of Favre’s exceptional talent (i.e. Favre is already exceptional and has been for a long time. In contrast, it's hard to spot an exceptional player before he has a reputation), but can you see why the Packers would risk a great deal to prevent losing Rodgers to free agency? Favre certainly didn’t start his career with better credentials than Rodgers.

A charismatic leader behind center, even if he is old an over the hill and overrated, forces d - coordinators, not wanting to look the fool, to overemphasize ("respect") his passing game more which of course opens up the running game. This year Grant was a bigger threat out of the Packers backfield than Rogers was, allowing defenses to key on him. The year before the opposite was true, Favre was more of a threat, which allowed Grant to emerge.

I would like to see you provide some sort of evidence that this process actually happened. At the very least, I’d like to see documentation of some sort of coaches arguing that they can relax on the Packers’ passing game and focus on corking up Grant. I watched every Packers game this season except the second Bears game just before Christmas. I saw little to suggest major fault on the offense other than the size of the linesmen and the injuries on the offensive line. Moreover, recall the rhetoric in 2005 and 2006. Everyone (but me, I felt) said Favre was washed up and a has-been. Fantasy guides systematically downgraded him. His reputation is far better now than it was then. No one predicted that Favre would have a blockbuster year in 2007. I need stronger evidence to be persuaded by your theory.

Simply put the NFC North might be won by a 9 win team this year, the Jets have 9 wins, and your Packers are on the no. 1 tee box with my Seahawks.

Compare QB performance on the Packers this year with Rodgers to our even more disastrous year under Favre in 2005, when the O-line collapsed after Wahle and Rivera were lost to free agency. I feel these years are quite comparable:

Rodgers had eight more touchdowns and sixteen fewer interceptions. Favre’s reputation didn’t keep us from going 4-12 in 2005, the last time the O-line collapsed. This time we’re 6-10. Why not admit that Rodgers did a better job than Favre under the real pressure of a no-win situation? It never matters who is behind the O-line when the O-line sucks. Tip steak or filet mignion, once the meat goes through the grinder, it's all hamburger. For what it's worth though, Rodgers, at face value at least, is a greater asset when the O-line falls apart completely. Among other things, this is due to Rodgers' exceptional mobility, an attribute he has in common with Young, not Favre.

I’m so sick of everyone dumping on Aaron Rodgers. The decision at QB this year was probably the most sound decision undertaken by Ted Thompson (I sure wish he could pick a punter). Sorry, Shawn, I just don’t miss Favre. Who needs a freaking prima donna who makes you go through this "will he/won’t he" routine about retirement every fucking year? Who needs a guy who basically comes out and says, "Well, yeah, I retired. But you were supposed to come after me for the next six months, wooing me into coming back, because I'm God's gift to football. I need to feel more special than this!" To be honest, I miss Mike Wahle and Marco Rivera more than I miss Favre. When they left, our O-line died. Favre should have retired. 2007 was an excellent ending. Everything after has been pure ego.

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Sorrow as a Reminder of Joy

Back in August, I read a novel and it gave me, almost by accident, words that I’ve been searching for. The words were, “It was a condition he’d need to get used to, or to tolerate never getting used to—not exactly the same thing, more’s the pity.” Gregory Maguire wrote them about Liir, the son of Elphaba, the Wicked Witch of the West and his loneliness, something I haven’t had to deal with in years. That freedom is a sublime joy that I’ve gotten very used to. The words apply to me when it comes to the brain damage and chronic fatigue that come along with MS.

The words express my problem. The reason why this is hard is that I keep expecting that I’m going to get used to it—that I’ll get over the loss. That’s the trick. You don’t get over it. That’s what makes it real loss. My difficulty in adapting has resulted from the fact that my goal for psychological healing has been too ambitious. This year of progress results from the fact I am learning to tolerate that I’ll never get over the loss.

Anthony Swofford said, “There is a wreck in your head, part of the aftermath, and you must dismantle the wreck, so you move it around and bury it. It took years for you to understand that the most complex and dangerous conflicts, the most harrowing operations, and the most deadly wars, occur in the head.” I didn’t understand it when I first read Jarhead, but I get it now.

This sense of loss will always be my companion. I will never be able to reflexively imagine myself as I am, to curb my ambition to my present capacity for achievement. I will always need to scale back and control as best I can for the disappointment entailed in always falling short of my ambition. I will do this for the remainder of my life. The pain and the shame are gone. But the sorrow will always linger. This is now my psychological baseline, my normal. Whatever else I will feel (and I will feel much, make no mistake, I am not giving up on life), this sorrow will underlie the texture of my emotional life. It is by no means all of me. But it will always be part of me. Though I did not choose it, it has become a fundamental part of my identity. So much for Schmitt’s assumption of existential identity—it turns out choice hasn’t much to do with it—at least not as much as we might like to think.

I now understand that those things that give meaning to our lives must perforce one day bring us to sorrow, for life is ultimately a matter of loss. Nonetheless, I am no longer depressed or dejected. To remain in such a state would be an immature response to life. Rather, I now understand that sorrow serves a purpose in the divine economy of our emotional lives. It brings awareness and vitality to our joy. I did not know to cherish the experience of power while I had it, while I could change the world around me and be productive, creative. I was too young to know loss yet. Yet the sorrow I feel for this loss, if I am committed to life, awakens me to my present joy. It reminds me to cherish what I have while I have it. It reminds me above all to cherish Craig while he is mine to love, before Death comes, for Death is coming.

When I was younger, this thought would have filled me with fear and desperation. It does no longer. For if I can fill my senses with love for him and truly cherish what God has given me in my partner, then, I know I will have sucked the very marrow out of life (even Henry David Thoreau has his uses, apparently). And my memory of him will be as full as possible and it will lend me comfort in my waning years. For if I am Christian yet, I know that love never dies. And if I have fallen from grace, the fullness of this memory of life lived in love remains the greatest thing I can achieve. My sorrow awakens me to what is most glorious in life. And whether my soul is immortal or not, it will have been beautiful. And mortal that I am, I cannot ask for more and so am content.

Because of the brain damage, my life is always accompanied by alarms set on the stove or my cell phone to remind my poor wandering mind to do things like take the laundry out of the washer and place it into the dryer, to take my medicines, turn on the broccoli streamer just before dinner. The alarm bells drive poor Craig crazy. It makes good thematic sense that God would give me another alarm bell. This sorrow, when it swells in my soul, is one more reminder to cherish Craig while he is mine to love. I who was once so distracted by the future needed this reminder to cherish my present and my partner. I have lost my formidable sense of focus so that I would focus on what was truly important before it is too late.

And so I am grateful. I hope I can carry this feeling with me as well. This must be my discipline.