SB Nation User Blog: Mitchell_M

The latest

Mitchell_M — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:56:47 -0000

Unretired. Reinstated. No. 4 is back in Green Bay for a 17th season. Brett Favre will be in Packers camp Monday, competing for his old job.

This is the front page news on ESPN.com. Favre is back. And the team is going...to let him play?

To quote Luke Wilson in 'Anchorman', "I did not see that coming!"

Needless to say, this certainly serves as resolution of the conflict. I think it's safe to say that Favre is likely going to get his old job back. So what does this mean?

It means a number of things. First off, Brett Favre > Green Bay Packers. No matter how hard the organization tried, they were utterly defeated by one man. This is not good precedent for the league; never should a team be overruled by one of its players, especially a retired one. Even if it is Brett Favre.

Secondly, Aaron Rodgers must be pissed. I fully expect him to demand a trade sometime within the next calendar year. I mean, sure, he gets to "compete" for his job. But is it really a competition? It's "Brett freakin' Favre", as some of my esteemed fellow posters call him. (No offense, honest.) He won't lose. He's too good. And that makes me sad, because I feel much better about Favre leaving the team to Rodgers than to Brian Brohm.

Thirdly, even though this makes him look bad, Ted Thompson will probably save his job by allowing this competition to happen. Yes, it completely undermines his authority as GM, but he can hopefully learn from his mistakes and get the team back on track. He can't be happy either, but he didn't set himself up to win this in the first place.

Fourthly, for the 2008-09 season, the team is in good shape. The only starter the 2007 squad lost was Corey Williams. I'm not worried about the short term future. It's the long term that troubles me.

Fifthly...well, I guess I'll leave it to you guys and gals to fill in the cracks. There's all sorts of other angles to consider, like Mike McCarthy, the whole Minnesota Vikings tampering issue, the fans at large, etc, etc. Have at it.

I guess I'll close with a "HOORAY!" I mean, Brett Favre came back. Brett Favre. This whole saga has been awful, but as long as the team can get it together, it can't be a bad thing...right?

A conspiracy theory for the ages

Mitchell_M — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 22:13:27 -0000

First off, let me emphasize how much of a conspiracy theorist I am not. I am the furthest thing from the wacked-out burned-out psycho-hippie that is convinced that the Lincoln assassination and the Hindenberg were connected.

But conspiracy theories sure are fun, aren't they? I mean, nothing beats giving endless amounts of time and effort in order to come up with some bizzare idea that's just crazy enough to be true. After all, the whole "9/11 was an inside job" thing is still popular across the internets.

But I'm here to talk about something much more serious: the Brett Favre Saga (I feel this has gone on long enough to deserve capitalization when talking to other sports followers). The BFS has gone on since March, but one could argue that its conception was years ago, when Favre retirement talk first began. I won't recap the whole thing; the other message threads on this site alone handle that task admirably.

But (there's always a but!), what if this is all according to some sort of master plan? What if this Saga was premeditaded to reach some overarching goal? What if Brett Favre, Ted Thompson, and the Packers organization is putting on a big show to gain an advantage? What if Brett's whole unretirement is a ploy?

First, let's get a few things straightened out. Brett Favre is loved by Packer Nation. No matter how far this thing goes, the vast majority of us will still revere him, and rightly so. Brett Favre also loves the Packer Nation. Face it, despite his 'down-to-earth-ness', the man has a sizeable ego, and there's nothing like throngs of adoring fans to massage said ego. Not to mention the fact that the franchise gave him his first shot at a starting job and essentially made it possible for him to be the Brett Favre we know and love.

Now that we've gone over the love, let's go across the spectrum: who does Packer Nation hate? The automatic answer is the Chicago Bears. While they are the longest-standing rival, the last fifteen or so years have been so favorable to the Pack and so unfavorable to the Bears that the rivalry has lost a little something. Having one HOF QB while the other team goes through 27,841 possible starters can do that.

But the real answer to the question? The Minnesota Vikings. Even with Brett, the Vikings were one of the few teams to give the Packers a run for their money. The Metrodome is one of the most reviled stadiums in all of sports, Randy Moss put on an extra-special show for the GB fans, the overall douchebaggery of Vikings fans, all of these things accumulate to an overall hatred of everything Minnesota.

And Favre, as a member of that rivalry, feels some of that hatred. Not as much as us fans, for sure. But he gets a little extra pleasure out of beating the Vikings. It might not even be conscious. But when you're a part of something for so long, you're inevitably going to be affected by it.

Another important factor is Minnesota's general non-suckitude as a team except at quarterback. Only a handful of teams would trade their QB situation for that of the Purple and...whatever else the Vikings call their other color. Even Chicago would rather let Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton duke it out for the starting spot than hand the keys to Tavaris Jackson.

So let's explore this for a little bit. Favre is God in Cheeseland. The hated rivals from the north would love to have a QB like Favre. But they know there's no way for them to get him.

Or is there?

Let's say that Favre's retirement in March was final. The guy was done; he didn't want to go through the grind of a season even though he could still play. No comeback talk, no release so he could go somewhere else, no nothing: he was finished. Later, someone in the Packers organization notices the looming threat that is the Minnesota Vikings and wonders "How could we find a way to weaken this team?" Then, a craaaaazy idea is born.

What if we stage a Brett Favre comeback drama to try to lure the Vikings into a trap that will cost them draft picks?

Yes, it's crazy, but it fits. Favre retires, but then he wants to come back. Green Bay has already moved on, so Brett has nowhere to go. But he still wants to play, going so far as to request his release from the team. Naturally, a team with QB issues like Minnesota will be interested. Especially when the offensive coordinator of the team happens to be a personal friend of Favre. Some conversations are made, some phone calls are placed, and all of a sudden, the Packers find out that the Vikings could be *gasp* illegally pursuing the services of one Brett Favre!

Why else would Favre still be using a phone provided to him by the Green Bay Packers? He's a smart guy, he knows the rules and he knows how he could get caught breaking them. Plus, he can act, as I'm sure everyone has seen his breathtaking performance in "There's Something About Mary". Maybe...just maybe...

But what's the payoff of all this? Only Ted Thompson's favorite currency: draft picks. If the league finds Minnesota guilty of tampering, they are forced to forfeit a draft pick or two. And correct me if I'm wrong, but don't those picks go to the team that filed the grievance, in this case the Packers? Even if they don't, Minnesota still loses them, and therefore loses a chance to establish depth on their team, which therefore weakens the team as a whole and could give Green Bay just a bit of an edge.

Obviously this is a bit far-fetched, as it would take an enormous amount of cooperation between Favre and the organization, not to mention an incredible act of douchebaggery on Favre's part by both betraying a close friend and using his status to decieve the public. Also throw in the enormous amount of incompetence required by the Vikings for this to work.

But, hey, crazier things have happened...right?

Poll

But the real question is: do you buy it?

I want to make sure this is heard

Mitchell_M — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 19:02:57 -0000

I posted a response over on the "GB FANS.....??" thread that got longer than I intended. I didn't plan for it to get so in depth, so I'll repost it here. Enjoy.

I have no problem sticking to my decision to support the team over Favre. If Favre stays retired or goes elsewhere and A-Rodg struggles next season, I will not join the chorus of cheeseheads wailing to the heavens for the return of Brett Favre, Lord of Wisconsin.

However, I want to know what you mean when you mention the “conditions” that amounted to Brett’s emotional exhaustion. If it’s the fact that the team did not acquire the players he wanted, i.e. Randy Moss, then I refer to the earlier post about Thompson being the GM and therefore rightfully making the judgements on what makes the team better in BOTH the present and the future.

Brett was given multiple chances to say what he wanted to say, and in the end the team went a different direction. The fact that Brett was (and still is, even in quasi-retirement) that important to not just be allowed, but encouraged by fans and media to speak on the matter is almost unheard of. So it’s not like he didn’t have enough influence over the team.

If the conditions then refer to Thompson’s creation of an environment of “untruth”, I respond with this: the guy is a GM in the NFL. Lying is part of the job description, but there’s a fine line between this and the lying that Brett accuses the team of.

Rumors abound from everywhere, both within the league and outside it, and they’re just one of the many tools that GMs use to manipulate their teams and their counterparts. One of the abilities required of GMs nowadays is the ability to mask your true intentions, and Thompson is very skilled at that. If Favre misinterpreted that and consequently felt almost betrayed by the team, then it’s a mistake on his part. An honest mistake, but a mistake nonetheless.

If Favre actually was looking over his shoulder because he felt the organization was trying to push him out, then he was being oversensitive. In 2005, the heir to Brett Favre was selected 24th overall in the NFL Draft. It was widely regarded as a move for the future after Brett Favre. Rodgers was the next quarterback of the team.

Maybe he felt that Aaron Rodgers was a threat to his spot on the team, and that was why he didn’t mentor Rodgers as much as we wanted him to. You could argue that currently Rodgers IS a threat to Favre’s spot on the team, but that’s a shaky argument at best considering the fact that Favre got on TV and retired in March.

And besides, would Brett Favre really be afraid of Aaron Rodgers? Unless there was some sort of deal made that nobody has mentioned yet (a highly unlikely scenario, given how ugly this situation has gotten, because somebody would have used it as ammo by now), the setup was this: Brett Favre is the starter, Rodgers is the backup, and this changes ONLY if Brett gets hurt or when he retires. Since Favre has a titanium alloy skeleton, the second outcome is the only valid one.

The point is, Favre was guaranteed to start for as long as he played. How many players, past and present, have that kind of comfort? But, once he retired, that guarantee was void. Why fault the team for doing what it had agreed to when Aaron came on board?

Finally, I also thought it was crazy of him to retire, especially after the year he had. The man was fantastic. But one thing sticks out in my mind about his retirement, and I actually can make a personal analogy that might help explain my position.

I am a recently retired figure skater. I wasn’t a hack , either. I’ve won national titles four times in my nine-year career. I was aiming for the Olympics in 2012. I won’t bore you with the rest of the details, but all in all, I had a successful career. However, last January, I reached a point where all the time and effort I was putting in didn’t seem worth it. To paraphrase, “I can still play, but I’m not sure I want to.”

Favre manifests the notion that players get paid for practice during the week and they play the games for free. He played the game that way his entire career; nobody worked harder than him Monday through Saturday, and nobody had more fun on Sundays. But it inevitably comes to a point where Monday through Saturday gets to be too much, and Sunday isn’t worth it anymore.

I know what it feels like to retire when you’ve still got it. It’s a bittersweet mixture of relief and regret. You’re happy that you don’t have to put up with practice anymore, but you know that the next time a season rolls around, you want to be out there and you want to win it.

The point is, once you reach that point where you want to play but you don’t want to practice, there’s no coming back. I could be the greatest skater in the world, but if I didn’t practice, I wouldn’t be at the same level. Same goes for Favre. I’m not saying that he wouldn’t put the work in, but it wouldn’t be the same. It wouldn’t be Brett Favre.

And that’s why I want him to stay retired.

Wanted: Fantasy footballers

Mitchell_M — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 22:18:13 -0000

So one of my annual fantasy football leagues closed down yesterday. Because I am a FFL addict, I'm planning on starting another league, and I decided than to look to the blogosphere for other players.

Since the two SB Nation sites I visit the most are BrewHoop and Acme Packing Company, it seemed natural to invite people from those sites first.

It's going to be a very casual, ESPN.com-based, 10-team, FREE football league with an online draft sometime in the next few weeks. The only requirement is that people have fun and can take a joke.

If you're interested, either respond in the comments section or e-mail me at mamaurer47@gmail.com. The sooner the better.

Hope I can find 9 other people with a similar obsession with football!

Wanted: Fantasy footballers

Mitchell_M — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 22:06:48 -0000

Since the two SB Nation sites I visit the most are BrewHoop and Acme Packing Company, it seemed natural to invite people from those sites first.

It's going to be a very casual, ESPN.com-based, 10-team, FREE football league with an online draft sometime in the next few weeks. The only requirement is that people have fun and can take a joke.

If you're interested, either respond in the comments section or e-mail me at mamaurer47@gmail.com. The sooner the better.

Hope I can find 9 other people with a similar obsession with football!

Does Aaron Rodgers hate us?

Mitchell_M — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:25:04 -0000

No.

I'm sure Rodgers isn't mad at the fans, he's mad at all the media types that insist that the fans will turn on him because he isn't Brett Favre. I'll bet that on draft day in 2005, ESPN started working on its "Brett Favre retirement/Aaron Rodgers scrutinization" programming.

Seriously, look at how many times Brett Favre has been mentioned on Sportscenter or PTI. "Brett Favre hasn't filed his retirement paperwork!" "Brett Favre dropped out of his celebrity golf tournament!" "Brett Favre bought a bottle of Advil at the grocery store!" All of these quotes inevitably lead to the same tired question: Is Favre coming back?

Brett's Hall of Fame status aside, put yourself in Aaron's shoes; wouldn't you simply hate being constantly subjegated to this kind of treatment? Thank God that McCarthy has committed to Rodgers as the starter already, otherwise this guy's confidence would be in jeopardy.

So no, he's not mad at the fans. Most of the real fans (fans who miss Brett but understand he had to go sometime and will continue following the team) are behind Rodgers, he knows that. It's the media types that keep asking Favre-related questions and making outrageous statements on television, radio, or the Internets.

I vote that we, the fans, set up a petition to act as a 'vote of confidence' for our new QB. In fact, I just might start that myself (although the site admins would be more knowledgeable on such matters.)

Keep your chin up, Aaron. We've got your back.

Poll

Do you support Aaron Rodgers?

Premature speculation...

Mitchell_M — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:36:17 -0000

So the Milwaukee Bucks' roster, as of 8:30 EST on Tuesday, 6/24, looks like this:

First string: C - Andrew Bogut, F - Richard Jefferson, F - Charlie Villanueva, G - Michael Redd, G - Mo Williams

Bench: G - Ramon Sessions, F - Desmond Mason, F - Joe Alexander, C - Dan Gadzuric, G - Charlie Bell, G - Royal Ivey

And this is even before their 2nd round pick that will be taken sometime this evening.

Not too shabby, all things considered.

The Bucks are on the clock...

Mitchell_M — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:15:30 -0000

And I am praying to every deity I've ever heard of that they don't take Brook Lopez. Please please pleasepleaseplease don't take Brook Lopez.

Unless Hammond plans on trading the pick, Lopez is NOT a good fit for the team, IMO.

Oh jeez, there's a minute left on the clock. I am nervous.

I really hope I never see Lopez in a Bucks jersey.

...

Whew.

The only thing that concerns me is that now we have Alexander AND Jefferson at the 3 spot. I trust Hammond and Skiles to figure it out.

Packers interested in Jason Taylor?

Mitchell_M — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:07:17 -0000

According to ESPN.com, Green Bay has inquired about availability of star defensive end and dancing fiend Jason Taylor. Taylor, who will turn 34 in September, was the NFL Defensive Player of the Year last season (on the worst team in the league) and deservedly so.

Green Bay sure could use a defensive lineman of Taylor's skill level after trading Corey Williams to Cleveland and KGB's offseason knee surgery. It's not like Ted Thompson to trade for a player using draft picks, but it seems that the Dolphins are looking for a 2nd rounder as compensation.

ESPN.com's Chris Mortensen writes that the deal has Ron Wolf's prints all over it. Wolf, of course, was responsible for putting the 1996 championship team together, and also he served as a mentor for current GM Ted Thompson.

In the event this trade does happen, Green Bay would be putting out a defensive front of Taylor and Kampman at the ends, Pickett and Cullen Jenkins at the tackles, with KGB, Justin Harrell, Johnny Jolly, et cetera filling out the rotation.

Wow. Sure seems like it'd be worth a second round pick to me.

Assorted Finals thoughts with Milwaukee-related tangents

Mitchell_M — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:12:54 -0000

When the Finals first started, I made a big deal about how overly complicated everyone was making the game and used a very simple method to determine my own prediction. I took the Lakers in six. And I was oh, so wrong. So very wrong.

I think its safe to say that if you're reading this, you watched Game 6 of the Finals last night. Here's some thoughts:

Holy macaroni, what a smackdown. The Celts took Kobe and Co. and beat the Lakers like they stole their cookies. A 39-point victory isn't totally unheard of...in the regular season. In a do-or-die game in the championship round, it kinda is.
Former Buck Jesus Shuttlesworth was on fire. Ray-Ray hit seven 3-pointers in the game, which tied a Finals record, and his 22 bombs from distance were a new record. Yikes.
Is it just me, or is Mike Breen's commentary for three pointers strangely satisfying? "Ray Allen for three...BANG!" I don't know, but it seems to work. If only he could get Mark Jackson and Van Gundy to get that divorce they so sorely need.
Holy Rajon Rondo. He needs a nickname along the lines of 'Cat Burglar', but more witty and preferably non-cat related. So much thievery, I thought I was watching Ocean's 11.
Kendrick Perkins coming back wasn't big on the stat sheet, but it was HUGE in the game. I'm pretty sure he only scored a few points and went to sit after getting his 5th foul, but his presence on the defensive end of the court was enormous. Games 5 and 6 were night and day because of him.
The Celtic's bench stepped up big time. Eddie House, James Posey, P.J. Brown, Tony Allen (!), and even Big Baby Davis got in the action. All of them played great defense (especially Posey on Bryant) and put on a show in the final minutes of the 4th quarter.
Speaking of the final minutes of the 4th quarter, it looked like an intramural game that had gotten completely out of hand. The Lakers weren't even close to trying. Tony Allen's reverse dunk off an alley-oop was proof enough of that.
The crowd was great. I refer you to Bill Simmons if you want to learn how important a home crowd is in a playoff ball game.
Even though they were thoroughly handled in the Finals, I don't expect the Lakers to fall apart. They've got Kobe, obviously. Pau Gasol is still young and extremely talented. Andrew Bynum is coming back, and their bench is young and talented (Farmar, Vujacic, Ariza, etc.).
However, one thing I expect to happen is Lamar Odom's trade and/or release. Look at the frontcourt for next season: with Bynum's return from injury, Gasol can move back to his natural PF position. And unless the Lakers plan to unload Radmonovic (who played pretty much the worst defense ever this series), Lamar Odom is suddenly looking at reduced PT and possibly coming off the bench. Throw in the fact that he sucked for the entire Finals (except Game 5), we can expect Lamar to be elsewhere next season.
I sure hope Paul Pierce's knee isn't too badly hurt. The guy put on a great performance and earned his championship without ever letting on just how hurt he actually was.
Kevin Garnett. Wow. First of all, dude flat-out played some ball tonight. That circus shot in the first half was un-be-liev-a-ble. He came back in a big way in Game 6. But more than anything, I was moved by his emotion in the aftermath of the win. He wasn't overjoyed, he was happy to the point of losing control. He was literally twitching with delight. I implore you to find his post-game interview with Michelle Tafoya on YouTube; it's as raw of human emotion as you'll find not only in sports, but pretty much anywhere. I am incredibly happy for him.

But, this is a Milwaukee Bucks blog, and I am a Milwaukee Bucks fan. So what did we learn from these here Finals?

First of all, it proves that you can negate opposing offense with defense. Between the Spurs' titles, the Pistons' run in 2004, and the 2008 Boston Celtics, there is undeniable proof that building a team with a defensive mindset can win you a ring. John Hammond and Scott Skiles know this, I'm sure. I am very excited to see what they're going to do to bring Milwaukee out of sub-mediocrity and into contention.

Secondly, we learned that one great offensive player can't prevail against solid team defense. Kobe was "Old Kobe" for the Finals, the version of Kobe where his offensive mindset is "mememememememememememeeeeeeeeee" and not much else. I hope that other offensively-gifted players learn from this example and continue making concentrated efforts on involving teammates in the offense.

More than anything, we learned that the 2008 Celtics were an aberration. Boston built itself through two major trades and veteran pickups instead of through the draft and player development. Teams are not usually built like this, and I doubt we'll see a team built like this again in the future. Allow me to explain myself.

Last season, the Celtics had the worst record in the East. They had one good player (Pierce), one emerging good player (Al Jefferson), and a collection of young and skilled but inexperienced players or older players who had hit their ceiling (Rondo personifying the former, Delonte West representing the latter). This team was not going anywhere.

Then the Ray Allen trade came along. This was a fair trade, in my opinion: essentially it gave Seattle a chance at a young prospect in return for a quality veteran who was just starting to slip. Teams make trades like these all the time.

But the KG trade was ridiculous. Am I happy it happened? Absolutely. Do I believe it was fair? Absolutely not. I don't care how you spin it, trading Kevin freaking Garnett for Al Jefferson, etc. and a side of fries is not even. That would be like Milwaukee trading Andrew Bogut, Charlie Bell, Bobby Simmons, Dan Gadzuric, and Jake Voshkul for Dwight Howard. One good player (Bogut) and a bunch of anti-good players for a g-r-e-a-t player. Except for salaries, how is that an even trade? (Note to self: if the Bucks ever get a chance to pull the trigger on this trade, I'm all for it.)

In any case, I'm happy Boston won. I just hope Milwaukee doesn't follow their example.