What to do about Brett

For the third straight season, Brett Favre has toyed with the emotions of Packer fans everywhere. Oh, Brett. I don't know how to quit you!

So, what to do in 2008? Frankly, I don't understand this argument that the Packers "owe" the starting job to Aaron Rodgers. Why do we owe anything to A-Rodge? He made a hell of a lot more money than I have since 2005, and we've started the same number of games. As I recall, some people thought Rodgers might go No. 1 in the 2005 draft, other mock drafts had him going anywhere from No. 3 to No. 5 to No. 8. Instead, after a few awkward hours of standing there like the kid picked last in kickball, he went 24th to the Packers. After three years of standing around in a baseball cap (when he wasn't on the trainer's table) and one good relief appearance in a blowout against the Cowboys last year, and now we owe him... what, exactly? Somehow more than we owe Favre?

Also, Aaron's comment about Packer fans -- "I don't think I need to sell myself to the fans. They need to get on board now or keep their mouths shut" -- didn't earn him a lot of points, either.

But then there's Favre. He obviously wants to play in the NFL for one more season (at least). But does he really want to be in Green Bay? Or has this been his plan all along, to retire and then unretire as a free agent?

There's two possibilities:

1) Brett wants out of Green Bay and nothing the Packers will do or say will get him to stay and be happy.

2) Brett will come back to the Packers, in which case you have to say screw Aaron Rodgers.

Let's explore Option 1. Can we all agree that in a Favre-less NFL, the Packers are the favorites to repeat as NFC North champs? Yes, we don't know what we have with Rodgers as our QB, but we know the Lions have Jon Kitna, the Bears have Rex Grossman and the Vikings have Tarvaris Jackson. All three of those guys had more INTs than TDs last year.

But if you put Favre on the Bears -- with Devin Hester and their defense -- and they're the division champs. Put him on the Vikings with Adrian Peterson, and they are. (You'd have to get the 1996 version of Favre to help the Lions.)

So I don't see how you let Favre just walk. He's a valuable commodity, first off, and secondly if you let him walk he very likely walks to a rival and maybe takes the NFC North title with him. If it's Option 1 and Brett won't come back, you have to trade him -- the Jets, the Texans, the Panthers, wherever. Favre has a no-trade clause, but the Packers have the hammer -- either agree to the trade, report to Packer camp, or stay retired.

If it's Option 2, and Favre can be convinced to stay in Green Bay for one more season, the answer is obvious: You trade Rodgers.

He's in the fourth year of a five-year contract, so if you bench him in 2008 to sit behind Favre, you figure he's going to be pissed -- and will walk after the 2009 season.

On the other hand, the Packers just drafted Brian Brohm, a guy some people thought would have been the first pick overall if he came out as a junior in 2007. Instead he stays an extra year in college and goes in the second round to the Pack. Now he gets a year of sitting behind Brett and gets thrown into the fire in 2009. Is there any evidence to suggest he'll be that much worse than Rodgers anyway?

Option 2: Favre starts, Brohm learns, Rodgers goes.

Here's hoping.

I don't care about George Mitchell

I don't care about George Mitchell. I don't care about the Mitchell Report (PDF Download). I don't care about steroids and I don't care who used them and when. I don't care that Andy Pettitte used HGH and I don't care that Brendan Donnelly hasn't slept since the report's release. I don't care.

There really isn't anything I am going to hear that will surprise me when it comes to performance enhancing drugs. I know doping happens. I know it is widespread and I am certain it will continue. There is too much at stake for it not to. The middling player will always try to gain an advantage to get ahead. This is why a LOT of the names linked to doping are guys you probably aren't familiar with unless you follow baseball very closely. They are guys that were clawing and scratching for any advantage they could find to either make the big leagues or stay in the big leagues.

Why?

It is really a very simple equation and can be traced very neatly back to the basic economic principle of supply and demand. Each major league baseball team has 25 major league roster spots and that is all. In order to qualify for one of these roster spots you have to be special. You have to be able to throw the ball faster than 99.9% of the global population or hit a ball harder than 99.9% of the global population or be faster, or throw farther, or be able to strike out a left handed batter in a crucial spot with your crafty veteran guile. You have to be special. Many players who make the major leagues have done very little but play baseball their entire lives. When finally reaching the pinnacle of their life's work it is very possible they will find they cannot cut it at the highest level. Then what happens? Desperation. Desperate people clinging to dreams of greatness or aging greats clinging to their years of glory will take whatever measures they can, legal or otherwise to stay in the game.

In some ways it is sad to see. In some ways it is the inevitable spawn of a business that takes in billions in revenue every year. Money drives behavior in our world and a lot of that behavior isn't good.

I also hate the hypocrisy that is found between baseball and football. Football has always had a "If you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'," attitude towards performance enhancers. Baseball is supposed to be above the same kind of behavior? Kind of a silly argument. I don't remember ever seeing Paul Tagliabue or Roger Goodell in front of a congressional subcommittee.

All that was achieved by the Mitchell Report was to catalog something that isn't terribly important and the report truly changes nothing. I was a huge baseball fan before the Mitchell Report, I am a huge baseball fan now, and I will be a huge baseball fan in the future. I believe most baseball fans would say the same.

D. Isaac