Editorial: Quiet Time

by abender20 on May 28, 2009 8:36 AM PDT in Seahawks News & Rumors

Hall of Famer Fran Tarkenton went on a radio show in Atlanta on Tuesday and offered his thoughts on Brett Favre. Ordinarily, players and former players alike think of themselves as part of a fraternity, manifesting itself as a mutual respect and understanding. As Favre will almost assuredly be inducted into the Hall of Fame down the road, it would stand to reason that Tarkenton would have even more reason to speak respectfully. Instead, we got this:

"I think it’s despicable. What he put the Packers through last year was not good. Here’s an organization that was loyal to him for 17, 18 years, provided stability of organization, provided players. It just wasn’t about Brett Favre. In this day and time, we have glorified the Brett Favre’s of the world so much, they think it’s about them. He goes to New York and bombs. He’s 39 years old. How would you like Ray Nitschke in his last year (playing for) the Vikings, or I retire, and go play for the Packers. I kind of hope it happens, so he can fail."

Tarkenton aimed some of his anger at what he feels to be Favre sullying the image of the Vikings by taking on a washed-up egomaniac. If Tarkenton believes that Favre is both finished and arrogant (he may be, but it's not really relevant here), that's fine; there are no shortage of others sitting in the same boat as Fran. However, the responsibility falls on Tarkenton to swallow his tongue in public. If someone like Skip Bayless wants to go marauding around an ESPN morning show in his tinfoil hat spouting the exact same sentiment, fine.That's what people like Skip Bayless do for a living.

Every now and then, a former player makes a statement of this color. It never reflects well and usually serves to ruffle the feathers of other members of the fraternity. No matter how strongly you may feel that Favre is going about his business with a less-than-desirable level of class or respect for the game, there is no reason to make a statement of this sort. This only reflects poorly on Fran Tarkenton. One person walked away from this exchange looking like an arrogant old man, and it isn't Brett Favre.

Tweet Comment 55 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I disagree.

Let Frank speak his mind. Shoot, he’s just being self-interested like Favre and every other human on this planet. I like people speaking their mind and stirring up controversy.

As for Skip Bayless; he’s one of my favorite sports writers / tv personalities. Must be the contrarian in me. Whitlock is also up there at times for me for ESPN / former ESPN writers.

I don’t see how Favre was being disloyal to the Packers though. He though he wanted to retire then changed his mind. The Packers then said we’re set at QB with Rodgers, thanks but no thanks. So he demanded a trade. This seems like the normal course of business to me. I’m not sure if Favre really wanted to play for the Jets, and I think Favre is a bit washed up, but I think last year might have had to do more with his bicep problem than anything else. It could’ve just been his head, but I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Would I ever leave this company? Look, I’m all about loyalty. In fact, I feel like part of what I’m being paid for here is my loyalty. But if there were somewhere else that valued loyalty more highly, I’m going wherever they value loyalty the most.

- Dwight Schrute

2010 Seahawks Mock: 1A: Eric Berry S, 1B: Ndamukong Suh DT, 2: Charles Brown OT, 4:Zac Robinson QB, 5: Stafon Johnson RB 6: Will Tukuafu DE, 7: Kerry Meier WR
Also acceptable, trade for Patrick Chung and draft Ed Wang so everyone can Wang Chung tonight.

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 8:57 AM PDT reply actions

It's not about what opinion he has, but whether or not he should go on a radio show and express it publicly.

Nothing good comes from it, and it only serves to make Tarkenton look like an ass.

by abender20 on May 28, 2009 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions

I wouldn't say no good comes from it.

If football is indeed a fraternity, and some may have voiced their opinions to Favre in private and he’s still headstrong, perhaps Frank felt he had to do it in a public forum to ‘shame’ Favre into stop being so selfish. I personally don’t think Favre is being selfish, but if Frank thinks Favre is giving a black eye to NFL players by being a prima donna, I thin he just did what he felt he had to do to protect the group as a whole.

This is an environment of welcoming, and you should just get the hell outta here!

- Michael Scott

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions

Favre wasn't exactly covert with his own actions

So why should criticism be covert?

The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.

by Nick Andron on May 28, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions

First of all, it's "Fran" and not "Frank".

What Favre does reflects on Favre and no one else. If he walks up to Al Davis and signs a 50 year deal, that has nothing to do with any former player.

I personally don’t think Favre is being selfish, but if Frank thinks Favre is giving a black eye to NFL players by being a prima donna, I thin he just did what he felt he had to do to protect the group as a whole.

Do you think that Dan Marino is lying in bed at night seething because the world will now look at all Hall of Fame quarterbacks as prima donnas? I don’t. What Tarkenton did was petty and misguided. Also, how does his coming out and behaving like an 8th grader in any way help preserve the image he is supposedly trying to protect?

by abender20 on May 28, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Damn you for making me laugh out loud at work on the Fran thing.

I agree, it’s not the best way to go about it, but to get ratings people usually ‘speak their mind’. Fran, like Favre, is probably not used to be told what to do (unless it’s a head coach), so I guess he has the same problems as Favre. When this thing blows over, they’ll probably man up and hug it out.

Hug it out, bitch. That is what men say to each other after a fight. They hug it out, and in doing so they just let it go, and walk away, and they’re done. Not a good idea to say that to a woman, however, I have found. It doesn’t translate.

- Michael Scott

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions

Holy crap it is Fran, not Frank.

I thought you were quoting ‘Anger Management’.

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions

I actually completely disagree

If anyone has the right to call Favre out for his actions, it’s a former player like Tarkenton.

I’d also wager a guess that Tarkenton’s views mirror those of the majority of players, both retired and active; he had the guts to speak out, publicly. This is just a gut feeling of mine. I don’t know anyone that’s reacted favorably when asked about Favre’s actions.

Could he have spoken out a bit more tactfully? Probably, yes. But the fire behind the words sent a very clear message: being a part of “the fraternity” has it’s rules, violate them at your own risk. Favre did and decades of respect vanished.

The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.

by Nick Andron on May 28, 2009 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Tarkenton doesn't have the right to decide when Favre's career is over any more than you or I do.

If he takes umbrage with how Brett has gone about his business, he should speak to him privately or be diplomatic.

by abender20 on May 28, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Agree with the former, still disagree with the latter

Agree to disagree. 1 outta 2 ain’t bad! :)

The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.

by Nick Andron on May 28, 2009 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions

I pretty much agree with this.

Sure, Fran doesn’t have a right to decide when Brett’s career is over, but he has a right to say it in any forum he wants, and saying it in a place that Favre maniacs may hear it from a credible (NFL hall of famer) source may make them realize Favre is not so infallible, and is actually kind of a douche, as his actions have demonstrated to anyone without Favre blinders on.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Favre retired, changed his mind, and the Packers were going to announce he was coming back.

Then when they were all set to do this, he said he had changed his mind again and wanted to stay retired. About two weeks into training camp, he said he had changed his mind and wanted to play again, then whined to everyone in the media when they wouldn’t just take him back.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions

I disagree.

I respect Fran Tarkenton’s honesty and candor. He’s a Hall of Fame quarterback who conducted his career and his retirement with dignity and with respect for the game and his team. It’s fully appropriate for him to call Favre out for his childish, self-indulgent antics.
If NFL players, past and present, do constitute a fraternity of sorts, then it’s certainly acceptable for one of the respected elders of the fraternity to speak out as Tarkenton did. Favre’s actions reflect poorly not only on himself, but on the NFL and on his peers and forebears. And if guys like Tarkenton remain silent, that can be perceived as tacit approval of those actions.

by Furious Blue on May 28, 2009 10:07 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs

I disagree also

We all have the right to say what is on our mind, as long as it is not slander.

A radio show host asked what he thought and he answered a question, I wish that happened more. I really do not like “canned” answers, and am thankfull that he gave an honest one instead of “Favre played hard his whole career and was an amazing QB”.

by germpod on May 28, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions

Triply disagree.

I don’t see what’s so wrong about stating your opinion, especially when asked.

by djafrot on May 28, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions

Quadruply disagree.

Asked a question, answered it honestly. Just because he’s a former player doesn’t mean he should have to keep quiet about his opinions, especially when they mirror what plenty of other fans think. Sports is entertainment, and reading responses like this is entertaining.

by jteckmann on May 28, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions

There's anwsering a question honestly

then there’s using the media to air out your grievances.

It’s one thing to say “I’m not fond of how Brett Farve handled himself” during a radio interview, but it’s quite another to go on a rant while on the air. What Tarkenton did, while honest, was somewhat classless and rather petty. If he’s got a beef with Farve, he’s in a position where he can take it up with him directly and privately.

The professional thing to do isn’t to go on the radio and bash Farve. If Tarkenton is really concerned and bothered by this, he needs to talk to actually speak with Farve.

by BrianL on May 28, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions

Who cares if it's professional?

People spend way too much time being politically correct and BSing people. We hide what we really think far too much in this society. I believe people need to grow a thicker skin and be honest and straightforward with people, and expect the same thing in return, no matter how painful the truth might be. I would much rather someone call me out as a douchebag and an asshole than say “I think he is disrespectful sometimes” and then leave it at that. We are too coddled as a society and do not confront our flaws and are not accountable for our actions. You can believe Fran will be accountable for the words he has said. But no one holds Favre accountable for his child-like actions. Fran was just being honest and straightforward about Favre, instead of pussy-footing and being passive-aggressive like most people in today’s society are.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Definitely agree with this.

My philosophy is, I may be a jerk, but at least you know where you stand with me. There’s no hidden agendas or mixed signals. I feel something is out of line, I’ll say so, and I expect the same back.

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions

I think you need to divorce Brett Farve from this issue for a moment.

Remember how annoyed we were when Carlos Silva used the media to declare that he was upset with his teammates and wanted to throw one or more of them into a wall? Or perhaps Jarrod Washburn complaining about his catcher to the media? The general consensus at the time was that if Carlos or Jarrod had a problem with someone, he should actually take it up with that person rather than use the media as his mouthpiece.

It seems a tad hypocritical that we can slam one person for being brutally honest with their feelings while talking with the media, but we can applaud someone else for doing the same thing.

I hold the opinion that if you’re upset at someone, you’re going to have more luck ironing things out if you actually bother to talk to that person. I don’t care if you’re an athlete or a desk jockey. If you have an issue with someone, take it up with that person. Doing anything else reeks of high school pettiness.

by BrianL on May 28, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't fault them for being honest, I fault them for being wrong.

That’s how they felt, they were just wrong, because they were stupid and didn’t understand that Kenji and Ichiro were not the problems with the team. (Well, at least not in a pitch calling sense.)

Yeah, I agree that Fran should talk to Favre. I just don’t think it reflects that badly on him to say this in the media. Part of that is probably because what he said is pretty much true.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions

Has it occured to you that perhaps Fran is wrong?

I used to be on the Bash Favre bandwagon, then I realized that retiring from something you love is a big deal. I can’t fault him too much for going back and forth on whether to retire or not.

As far as the situation in Green Bay goes, I think it was handled poorly by both parties involved. Fran puts the entirety of the blame on Favre, but the Packers organization itself bears a good amount of responsibility for the circus that happened as well. It shouldn’t have taken the Packers nearly a month to either release him or put him on the trading block.

Ignoring these things and blindly going on the radio to rant does reflect poorly on Fran.

by BrianL on May 28, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions

I think Fran is wrong,

(though I’m not sure what is right and wrong when it comes to an opinion) but I don’t care because I think he can voice his opinion however he likes. If he thinks Favre is wrong, go ahead and say it. Nothing wrong with stirring up a little controversy and adding a different opinion, or at least a different opinion from a respectable football source.
If Willie Mays and Yogi Berra have two opposing viewpoints on whether or not Pete Rose should go to the HOF and they are asked about it by the media and they give their honest opinions does anyone care? No, I wouldn’t say that this matter needs to be talked about with Bud Selig and the players’ union, even if Rose himself were very private about it (which of course he isn’t)

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions

You seem to be missing the finer point of the argument here.

The issue isn’t what Tarkenton thinks about Favre, but rather how he chose to express those thoughts.

by abender20 on May 28, 2009 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions

He didn't actively choose to go on the radio and spout off on Favre.

He was on the radio like he is every week, and was asked a question about a popular NFL topic and gave his opinion on it. He didn’t sugarcoat his thoughts or feeling.
Could he have said ‘no comment’ or ‘I diagree with how Favre is going about his business, and we’ll leave it at that?’ Yes. But I respect him more for giving his honest opinion on the matter.

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Why does it matter?

He’s just a person like anyone else. If he says it in a harsh way, he has harsh feelings about Brett Favre and thinks it’s despicable. I’d rather he say he thinks it’s despicable and that he wants Favre to fail if that’s what he believes than spin some stupid BS because it’s more friendly for the airwaves.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Why would they release him? They were waiting for him to file retirement papers.

It’s possible that Fran is wrong, but unlikely.

I guess I just fail to see how the Packers handled the situation poorly. They waited until Favre made his decision to proclaim anything about their QB situation. Favre retired. They were planning to make Rodgers the QB, then Favre called them and said he wanted to come back. When Green Bay’s officials got off the plane, he said he’d changed his mind and wanted to stay retired. Then, he said he wanted to come back, and threw a national hissy fit about not getting his job back after they had already started making the transition. How is Brett Favre in the right in any way with Green Bay?

Brett Favre said he was retiring after the Jets, and failed to file any retirement papers. They released him, leaving him free to sign with any team. I have to agree with Kissing Suzy Kolber on this. He knew what he was doing. He knew that he would get his release and he’d be free to sign with any team he wanted. Otherwise, he would’ve filed retirement papers.

It’s possible that Fran is in the wrong. But the evidence supports that Favre is a whiny and manipulative bastard. Fran’s just saying what we’re all thinking. So yeah, all that evidence could mean nothing, but I doubt it.

I used to love Favre for not being a primadonna QB….but I don’t think there’s any reason to believe he is not anymore.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 3:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Would it change your mind if Tarkington was a member of the media?

Because IMO he basically is. He lives in Atlanta, and I don’t know how much stuff he does nationally, but when I lived there and listened to the radio, he is a frequent guest on that show. A few times a week, and he talks about the NFL in general, and during the season he gives analysis of the Falcons games. He’s like their version of what Dave Wyman or Ray Roberts are on the radio up here.

And I think that fact has been lost in translation now that the national media has picked up the story. They give the impression that Fran is just some retired guy sitting around the house and he picked up the phone to gripe about Favre. And that’s not the case.

In this exact same interview, he spent just as much time talking about Mike Vick, and how he thought Vick was overrated as a QB, has too many mechanical flaws, and would not be worth the distraction for some team to sign. How is that any different? Should he have had a face-to-face with Vick before offering his opinion?

To take your M’s example further – this isn’t teammates bickering and throwing each other under the bus. This is a color commentator providing “color”. It’d be like now that Bloomquist’s gone, if Rizz or Blowers suddenly said, “You know, Willie couldn’t hit and he hurt the team by demanding to be a starter, rather than just embracing his job as a Utility guy …”

by jteckmann on May 28, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions

You are way too hung up on the Skip Bayless thing

and if you can’t see the difference between Tarkenson’s comments about Vick and his comments about Favre, I can’t help you.

by BrianL on May 28, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions

where did I mention Bayless in this post?

And saying “if you can’t see the difference between X and Z, I can’t help you” is an easy way to self-righteously end the debate without having to defend your own position.

I don’t think I’m hung up on the “media aspect” of it. IMO, that’s a finer point of the argument. I do agree with you that if Fran is just sitting around and all of a sudden calls up to chew Favre out, then that’s a little petty. But that’s not what happened. He is paid to give his opinion and commentary on a radio show, and that’s exactly what he did.

by jteckmann on May 28, 2009 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions

Further

I would prefer it if the color guy in any media situation was allowed to say “This guy sucks ass, he shouldn’t be on the roster.” It’s what we all think, it’s what we all post online, and it would be nice to hear it said by someone but our small little club from time to time. It’s rude, but rude honestly is better than polite lies.

Niehaus once said “watch this big fucker come in and walk the world” in regards to Putz on opening day 2006 when MLB.tv hadn’t cut away yet. I’d much rather hear that than “Putz has good stuff, but occasionally battles with control issues. The velocity is there, however”

I’d much rather hear a commentator let me know that he thinks this guy coming in is a crappy player than sugarcoat it.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes but...

Perhaps some do have blinders because it’s Brett Favre and not Carlos Silva.

But Silva was talking about his own teammates. That’s a betrayal of the concept of team. I think a team is a much stronger fraternity than the “fraternity of all men who every played in the NFL.”

In fact, remembering the team aspect further exonerates Tarkenton. Who is most pissed off at Favre right now? Packers fans or Vikings fans? I don’t think anyone in Minnesota really wants to have to “cheer” for Brett Favre for one season, especially because it’s almost certainly not going to bring them a championship, just make them feel dirty. Tarkenton is the archetypal Minnesota Viking, and a symbol of both the excellence and the frustrating lack of championships they have had down the years. He was great and never won the big one, just like today that’s generally a good organization and they still can’t seem to manage to get over the hump. Instead of “betraying the NFL fraternity,” it’s possible to see this as “standing up for the sh**-upon Minnesota Vikings fraternity.”

by nucleard on May 28, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions

Yup, because I'm sure if Favre's secretary told him "Mr. Tarkington on Line 1"

he would’ve been rushing to pick up the phone and schedule a lunch date.

Tarkington didn’t “use the media to air his grievances”. I suggest you listen to the whole interview instead of the 1-2 paragraphs that have been recycled as a national story. He works as a talking head now and was a guest to talk about the NFL and QBs in general. He talked about a bunch of other stuff in that clip besides just Favre. Someone said above that it’d be okay if Skip Bayless did this … well, that’s what Fran’s job is now. He’s moved into the media side of things and he is paid to give his opinion.

The only thing more annoying, IMO, than the whole “will he/won’t he” debate around Favre is the whole “we have to be respectful of his feelings & legacy” thing. I think that’s BS. Favre has made it a national debate more than anyone else, and for too long he’s been treated with kid gloves and portrayed as a Wrangler-wearing, salt-of-the-earth everyman who is the greatest QB in history in his spare time. I’m glad that at least one member of the media (even if he happens to be a former player) has the stones to call him out for what he is – a wild QB that’s coasting off his early success, is just as likely to hurt his team with a boneheaded decision, and causes distractions in the locker room because he expects to be treated differently than everyone else.

by jteckmann on May 28, 2009 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions

I imagine Farve would have been more significantly more inclined to talk to Fran before he went on the radio.

by BrianL on May 28, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions

When asked I think is the key word there. That's why I find it really hard to fault Fran for giving a truthful answer.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions

I can't fault Fran for being honest, but I do think he crossed the line while giving his answer.

How would you like Ray Nitschke in his last year (playing for) the Vikings, or I retire, and go play for the Packers. I kind of hope it happens, so he can fail."

by BrianL on May 28, 2009 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Well, to be honest, I feel the exact same way.

I actually really want to see Favre come back and lead the Vikes to a 2-12 season. I’ve made no secret about this. Many, many people want to see Favre come back and throw 40 picks this year. I don’t see why it’s any more wrong when an NFL hall of famer says it. Yeah, he’s in the hall of fame, but he’s a human being just like the rest of us.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions

What happened to the last two games?

by LantermanC on May 28, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions

So he can have an honest opinion

As long as it’s not too opinionated?

by jteckmann on May 28, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Going on the radio to complain about Farve without speaking to him personally will surely lead to a constructive debate between both parties.

At this point I’m indifferent to the entire Farve saga, but I have to say that I find it a little annoying that Tarkenton is stirring the pot like this.

If you have a problem with Farve and are in a position to actually discuss the matter with him, have a private conversation. I’d imagine that would be a tad more effective than speaking to Farve via media proxy.

by BrianL on May 28, 2009 10:48 AM PDT reply actions

I thought this was a Seahawks blog...

Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200

by Misfit74 on May 28, 2009 12:21 PM PDT reply actions

I applaud Tarkenton for saying what every other member of the player community must be thinking.

If he scheduled the appearance himself, it’s a little more rude of him, I guess, but I still think the NFL community was waiting for a player to say this. The franchise that he loves might be making this move, and he’s not happy with it. Last I checked, hall of famer or not, he’s a human being with feelings too. Considering that almost no one in the mainstream takes this perspective, it’s refreshing to hear. I don’t care if he’s supposed to be a “professional”, it’s what he felt, and there’s nothing wrong with saying it. About time someone said what is (most likely) the truth about Favre in a very public way.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 28, 2009 1:13 PM PDT reply actions

Favre's just buying time...

So he doesn’t have to show up for OTA’s and training camp. He’ll join the Vikings when he’s ready. It’s this “will he or won’t he” that pisses Tark off. I think he knows what Favre’s doing and doesn’t want it to affect the focus of the up coming season for the Vikes. Tark does have a point regarding his style of play, but shouldn’t put it in derogatory terms, there’s definitely better way of saying it publicly.

I just hope when the press conference is announced, there will only be three people there to cover it: Madden, Berman, and Costas. Three of his biggest cheerleaders/apologists.

by PoolNinja on May 28, 2009 2:14 PM PDT reply actions

Fran is RIGHT to say what he did

Farve is jerking off the team and the fan base and you all know it. I will come back, I won’t come back, I will stay retired, I won’t stay retired… It screws with the team and fans. That decision will have a major impact on the team. It effects the existing QBs/roster, the offensive scheme, the cap…

Sometimes an average fan wants to hear an opinion from someone with some credibility rather than someone like Bayless. Tark is saying what needs to be said, and in a way he’s protecting the Vikings.

by Kryten on May 28, 2009 3:40 PM PDT reply actions

Couldn't disagree with the OP more

which seems to be endorsing a “line of scrimmage silence” amongst players and ex-players to always support, encourage and sugar coat any actions of any member of their fraternity. This would be complete and utter BS on it’s own, but the fact that many ex-players go on to comprise a good percentage of sports media makes it even more reprehensible. Do we really need any more fawning and circle-jerking for these guys? Hell no.

As players like Favre actively court the media and public for publicity which in turn will sell their jerseys and video-games and add to their cachet on the endorsement and speaking set they also open themselves up to scrutiny and criticism. Tarkenton’s points are valid and do represent a legitimate concern about Favre’s antics and how they might affect his legacy. Should he remain silent? No. For that matter, should players not speak their mind about Michael Vick torturing dogs or Plaxico Burress shooting himself in the leg?

Anyway, the whole article is built on a false premise anyway. Players, particularly those who are in the media, criticize other players all the time. I saw Deion Sanders (a hall of famer too btw) actively lampooning Shaun Alexander’s playing style for example.

Then there’s the hypocricy. It’s apparently ok for Field Gulls journalists to take shots at players: Brian Russell, Jerramy Stevens, and Charlie Frye come to mind but not ok for ex-player journalists to do the same. Convenient double standard….

by Keasley on May 29, 2009 8:20 AM PDT reply actions

Read through the comments. The general idea is that Tarkenton is entitled to feel whatever he wants about Favre.

I don’t even care if he comes out and politely chides Favre. However, the manner in which he did so was completely out of line.

by abender20 on May 29, 2009 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions

That's a matter of opinion.

There’s no way how I feel about Tarkenton’s comments, or how you feel about them, are fact. Just opinions.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on May 29, 2009 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions

Tarkenton's comments were limited to football and perfectly reasonable

Tarkenton didn’t call Favre ‘Fart’, discuss his personal life, or say Favre should retire. He questioned the specific situation of Favre potentially signing with one of the Packer’s arch-rivals and division opponents. I think Favre’s reputation and legacy in Green Bay remains unsullied by his foray with the Jets. If he signs with the Vikes then all bets are off. Favre’s motivations may be less than pure here. And Tarkenton is totally justified in calling him on it.

by Keasley on May 29, 2009 9:15 AM PDT reply actions