Favre Says Streak Won't Affect His Season

by TheViking83 on Sep 9, 2009 2:44 PM CDT

Brett Favre insists he won't let his durability streak hurt the Vikings.

Favre will make his 270th straight start when Minnesota plays at Cleveland on Sunday. That will match what the NFL considers the longest streak in history, held by former Vikings defensive lineman Jim Marshall from 1961-79.

Favre said Wednesday he "absolutely" would sit out this season if he's not healthy enough to suit up as Minnesota's quarterback. The 39-year-old also said he "may not" be able to play in all 16 regular-season games.

Favre said he was willing to sit last year with the New York Jets, and that he shared his concerns at the time with his coaches. His poor performance in December was due in part to his injured right arm.

Yeah, I'm not so sure I buy into this. It's not just the streak, but Favre CAN NOT STAND to not be "the guy". Unless something major happens to him, I would expect him to continue to try to play through injuries just like he always has. I mean, it's nice to hear him say that he won't let his stubborness to play hurt the Vikings season, but I'll believe it when I see it.

This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.

Tweet Comment 40 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

He's not the coach.

Yeah, it would be hard for a coach to sit him and break the streak, but that’s one record that’s never going to be broken anyway – certainly not by a QB.

But the bottom line is – it’s not supposed to be his decision.

by Migrant lurker on Sep 9, 2009 3:00 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs

+1

As a coach you actually DO NOT WANT players who try to “bench themselves” when you haven’t come to that decision yourself first. You WANT players who will say “yeah I’m hurt (or sick with the flu, or whatever), but if you need me, I’ll go out and do it.”

by puddnhead on Sep 9, 2009 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions

Whoops,

The comment below was meant to be in reply to you, not to myself. Darn new fangled technology.

by Migrant lurker on Sep 9, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions

Thats BS. Nobody no matter how smart can know what a player is feeling but himself. If i’m a coach, I cant “see” my player’s injured knee, arm, etc. Only he can feel it and I would MUCH rather my player (especially a pitcher in baseball) call time or whatever and tell me “I cant do it. Put in someone who can.”

Its about what is best for the team. Not best for one players pride or supposed professionalism. Its about winning and being able to contribute instead of dragging the team down.

by Hoss-Drone on Sep 9, 2009 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions

True, but in this case it is much different.

I think a guy who has played through injury for 19 years has the right to make that decision. It’s not like he is some fresh out of college primma-donna mama’s boy, it’s Brett Freaking Favre here.

I mean, if he says: “Aw Shucks coach, I don’t think my arm is where it should be here. I might could go and just sit on the bench.” I am going to take for what it is, which is a grown man who knows his body better than a trainer saying he just can’t do it anymore.

by Bjorno on Sep 9, 2009 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions

Yep, yep.

How many major league pitchers do you ever see waving to the bench for the manager to come yank them out of the game? Professionals just don’t do that.

I really think he’s just trying to take any pressure there might be off of Childress in case it ever does come to that.

by Migrant lurker on Sep 9, 2009 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions

Farve has always played through injuries

and it has always hurt his team. Why should we believe him now? Let’s just hope we can take him at his word. I mean, he’s always kept it before, right?

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 3:03 PM CDT reply actions

that is an incorrect statement

look it up.

by dsludo on Sep 9, 2009 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions

I do not feel

it IS incorrect.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions

I think

you need to look up Favre’s stats during the time his thumb was healing. Ahman Green is the reason the Pack made the playoffs that year.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions

So if Favre’s back up qb was playing instead of Favre, you’re saying GB would have done as good or better? Green had a good year, but that’s a stretch.

by dsludo on Sep 9, 2009 8:57 PM CDT up reply actions

I definitely

believe that Green Bay’s career “designated backup” Doug Pederson would have done better than Favre while his thumb healed. I still feel sorry for that guy. He never really got much of a chance to show what he had.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 9:43 PM CDT up reply actions

Are you REALLY

saying that Green’s 1880 yards rushing is a stretch?!

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 10, 2009 12:37 AM CDT up reply actions

No. I think its a stretch to say that Favre’s backup would have made the team better. And obviously the coach dind’t feel that way either.

Either way, I just don’t care any more. All I care about right now is the upcoming season.

Plus, I’ve reached my maximum capacity of Packers posts (for a week we’re not playing them) Any more, and I will start getting nauseous.

by dsludo on Sep 10, 2009 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions

You're right

I’m feeling a little nuaseous myself.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 10, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions

Favre busted the thumb on his throwing hand,

in the 7th game of the 2003 season. He finished that game, and played the rest of the season and two playoff games, much of the time with the thumb in a splint. He threw 19 more TD’s that season (out of his total of 32) and finished with a 90+ QB rating. So how much did he hurt his team that season?

by Migrant lurker on Sep 9, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions

Until his thumb was healed,

6 weeks after the injury, Favre hurt the team at the QB position by playing. No one can tell me different. It is a good thing that Ahman Green had his best career year in rushing that year. He is a bigger reason for the Pack’s success.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions

Ummm, no -

The first game Favre played that year (after the injury) without anything on the thumb was the first playoff game. One of the games during that time, by the way, was the Monday night game against Oakland the day after his father died, when he threw for 399 yards and four touchdowns.

But, as you say, no one can tell you different.

by Migrant lurker on Sep 9, 2009 7:24 PM CDT up reply actions

OK

You just proved my point, “without anything on his thumb”. The average time for a bone to heal is 6 weeks. During that time, he did not play well. He should have been sat and I hope that if a similar situation occurs this year, he will not play.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 9:47 PM CDT up reply actions

Actually, Favre has NOT “always hurt his team” when he played injured. In fact, that is very, very, very far from the truth. Some of Favre’s most spectacular play has come immediately following injuries that most people expected would keep him out.

by puddnhead on Sep 9, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions

Well,

these spectacular plays did not come while his thumb was healing. Just the opposite.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions

HOW DARE YOU

speak anything but showers of praise when it comes to Brett, NobleSavage?? Don’t you know that having a negative opinion of our starting QB is not allowed here, much like it was with T-Jax, Gus, and Sage??

/end sarcasm

Replace his word “always” with “usually” and he makes a very valid point. And I find it very convenient that everyone ignored his “take him at his word” comment due to its extreme truth.

If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal

by TheViking83 on Sep 9, 2009 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions

No he does NOT still have a point

Did you even read the replies to him?!?

by puddnhead on Sep 9, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions

one example

turns “always” into “never”.

I gotcha.

Also, do you really have pudding on your head?

If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal

by TheViking83 on Sep 9, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions

Sometimes

I wonder if some of these folks are talking about the same guy I was watching all those years.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions

Actually.....

Replace “always” with “last year” and he has a valid point.

by dsludo on Sep 9, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions

’03, ’06, & ’08 in the weeks following his injuries.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions

Maybe I’m weird, but … you know, if you don’t “want to be the guy” then you probably aren’t cut out to be an NFL quarterback, be your name Brett Favre or Sage Rosenfels. Just ACCEPT that he does, and don’t get on the guy for wanting and feeling the same desires that every quarterback (or any position player) on our roster, and every other roster in the league, feels. Or get on every player in the whole league then, for wanting to play, and believing in themselves.

by puddnhead on Sep 9, 2009 3:32 PM CDT reply actions

Shouldn't we be HAPPY?

Finally, in what was an absence of several years, we have a guy at QB who KNOWS he can do it, will tell you he can do it, and then goes out and actually does it. I for one am sick of “I just have to get better” and “Oh I though I played OK except for that one play”.

by Jepp The Viking on Sep 9, 2009 3:38 PM CDT reply actions

Your quote:

we have a guy at QB who KNOWS he can do it, will tell you he can do it, and then goes out and actually does it.

Article’s quote:

The 39-year-old also said he “may not” be able to play in all 16 regular-season games.

Contradiction, much?

If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal

by TheViking83 on Sep 9, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions

So Viking83, are you pissed because he might try to play all the games even if not playing well, or are you giving him crap because he just said he won’t try to play to if he’s not playing well?

Please pick one side or the other and stick with it. You’re making us dizzy.

In the meantime, what migrant lurker said makes a lot more sense than what you are saying (then contradicting in your next post):

I really think he’s just trying to take any pressure there might be off of Childress in case it ever does come to that.

Please, do tell us how that is a bad thing too.

by puddnhead on Sep 9, 2009 4:09 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm not pissed at Jepp's post

just pointing out his blatant contradiction to the report.

If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal

by TheViking83 on Sep 9, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions

also

do you really have pudding on your head?

If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal

by TheViking83 on Sep 9, 2009 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions

Not on,

but in. :D Just messin’ w/ ya puddn.

by KC612 on Sep 10, 2009 8:00 AM CDT up reply actions

I also think that it is pretty naive to think that after the way Chilly handled the Favre situation this summer, that he will publicly embarass good ol’ Brett by being the first and only NFL coach to ever put Brett on the bench.

If Brett sits this season, it will be him that makes that choice (which I have a hard time believing he will). However, Brett will probably go ahead and tell everyone that it was the coach’s decision. Thus, covering both of their asses.

If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal

by TheViking83 on Sep 9, 2009 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions

Favre saying he “may not” be able to play in all 16 regular- season games, is just Favre doing what he always tries to do, lower expectations.

by dsludo on Sep 9, 2009 9:09 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

We want him to want to be "The Guy"

It’s up to Chilly and the Trainers along with some input from the Athlete to determine whether or not that player will play. With 2 competant backups, I hope that the burden of poor play or injury is not too high for BF this year, but this is also a first for him. Sure, Aaron Rogers was around for the last few years, but it seemed like he’d get nicked up way too easily when he came in… I love our depth, both CHI and GB are one QB injury away from a terrible season… We could have the worst QB injury season in NFL history and still be competitive. We also have depth at just about every other position this year, which makes us pretty damn scary!!

by ctowner35 on Sep 9, 2009 3:59 PM CDT reply actions

Favre is the man.........................

Favre will start and finish all 19 games in the 2009 campaign.

End of story.

Favre is the Greatest QB in NFL History, and once he leads the mighty Minnesota Vikings to a Victory in Super Bowl XLIV then no one and I mean no one can question that point again.

by REVENGE4FAVRE on Sep 9, 2009 4:38 PM CDT reply actions

I do not understand

how fans can defend a QB that plays with an injury, and his coaches that allow it, if it may affect his play, simply because of a stigma placed on him by the fans and the media. Every team Favre has played for has had a capable QB on their roster to replace him while he recovers. It makes no sense to me. I’ve seen it so many times. Favre gets hurt and comes back the next game and all the announcers annoint him as “The Iron Man”. While this may be OK for a defensive lineman, it does not hold true for a QB. Sure, there are some minor injuries that all QB’s suffer during the course of a season that they can play through, but an injury to the throwing appendage is not one of them. The broken thumb in 2003, the throwing arm injury in 2006, and the throwing arm injury in 2008 are prime examples. Favre did not perform well while nursing these injuries. TheViking83 is right to question if the right decision to sit out an injured QB would be made, as any true Viking fan should be.

I am a life long Viking fan. I will always bleed purple and I will always cheer for my team, and yes, that also means cheering for a QB that I have hated for many years. But I will not stand for my team to be turned into just a way for an aging QB to extend a streak that to me means nothing. I do believe Favre to be an upgrade at QB…while he is healthy.

SKOL!!

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Sep 9, 2009 10:35 PM CDT reply actions