Talk:Brett Favre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brett Favre article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4
Good article Brett Favre has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
January 28, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
Archive
Archives
  1. Dec. 2004 - Dec. 2006
  2. Dec. 2006 - March 2007
  3. March 2007 - Sept. 2007
  4. Sept. 2007 - Dec. 2007

Contents


[edit] About his name (pronounciation)

I really don't think "Miss-Pronounciation" is a credible source for the pronounciation of his name. The correct pronounciation of his French/Cajun name is with the V before the R, as it is spelled. A relative of Brett (a newspaper editor) has argued this case online ( http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=71&aid=124160 )

"Yes, there is another pronunciation. The right one. Favre, the "v" before the "r." This version rhymes with suave.

How do I know? I have been saying my name from the time I could first talk until now, and I have passed my 72nd birthday.

But Golic ignored the Kenny error and got it right. After all, it is only five letters and he did graduate from Notre Dame.

And I really can't blame Kenny. People were struggling with Favre long before Brett turned it into a household name, including many in the family. As a kid you learned to answer to almost any way it was pronounced. I will always remember our son, Jeff, calling with glee the day Brett was drafted by the Atlanta Falcons. "Dad," he exclaimed, "at long last, everyone will know how to pronounce our name." Little did we know." 154.20.52.37 (talk) 11:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)Comment added March 7th, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.52.37 (talk) 11:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Time to break apart the "Recent Years" section?

The section called "Recent Years" covers the period following the 2003 Oakland Raiders game through the present. In my opinion, the 2007 season represents a new chapter in the Brett Favre story, and as a result it should be a new section in the Brett Favre article. I think the "Recent Years" section should be broken into two sections: "Tragedies & Talk of Retirement" and "Return To Old Form" or something to that effect. Perhaps the titles of those two sections could be improved from what I have initially put forth. One thing that is clear though is that the times of tragedies and the back and forth retirement talk "era" has concluded. Stylteralmaldo (talk) 20:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree they should be broken up, and while I don't have any better suggestions at the moment I do feel the proposed titles might not be totally neutral.►Chris NelsonHolla! 20:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, I'd say "Tragedies & Talk of Retirement" (or maybe Personal Tragedy & Talk of Retirement) is fairly neutral and suiting, but a name for the section starting with the '07 season might be a little more carefully worded? Maybe "Resurgence"? It seems apt, considering Favre's 4000+ passing yards, the best season completion rate of his career, and his best QB rating since 1996. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.9.249.203 (talk) 15:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, somebody should get on that. I would, but bad things happen when I try to edit wikipedia. -FreebirdTuesdaysGone (talk) 01:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. QBs have up and down years, Favre had a couple bad ones and now he's having a couple nice ones. There is really no point in dissecting a QB's playing career until it is OVER completely. In 2009, the Wiki would look pretty silly calling 2007 a "resurgence" if Favre were to fall apart again in 2008. If someone wants to summarize each year, that's sounds fine, but labeling particular parts seems rather foolish at this point. i4 (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I feel that personally, "Resurgence" or "Return to Old Form" would both be very apt descriptions. Something that I feel is an interesting tidbit, is on the play he broke the TD record, it was designed as a run play. There was no audible and he nodded his head to Greg Jennings signaling the pass was going to him. Grant ran the play like normal, as he was out of the loop and you could clearly tell from watching the replays that it(the touchdown) was a Favre to Jennings production. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.168.12.29 (talk) 08:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Headings such as "resurgence" or "return to old form" are inherently POV and should be avoided. We should simply provide dates and relevant facts (ie, a particular game or achievement). --ZimZalaBim talk 13:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 6 attempts behind marino

"He is currently six passing attempts behind Dan Marino for second in playoff passing yards as well." This sentence doesn't make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.175.58 (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that too. I can't remember my password or I'd fix that (page protection, etc...), along a 2007 heading to the playoffs section and tossing the stats from the Seahawks game in there. EDIT: Errr, nevermind, looks like someone did it while I was reading the talk page.

[edit] Featured as himself in movie There's Something About Mary (1998)

Shouldn't this be on the page somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.29.67.172 (talk) 23:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Is it really a big deal? Not about football or his personal life, really, and that's the focus here. -FreebirdTuesdaysGone (talk) 01:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Uh yes, it's relevant. I'm adding it.►Chris NelsonHolla! 01:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Consecutive Starts or Total Starts?

Favre also continues to close in on the NFL career record for starts by a player at any position. After completion of the 2007 NFL regular season, Favre stands at 253, behind only Jim Marshall, who started 270 straight games.[1]

Is Favre closing in on the record for number of starts or record number of *consecutive* starts? What about all of These guys? I know they didn't all start all of these games but, for example, Darrell Green had 258 total starts for the Redskins.

According to the cited reference, it's total *consecutive* starts.Originalname37 (talk) 21:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I made the change. Originalname37 (talk) 16:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Wait!! I take it back. The real record is, unbelievably, ... unknown. Originalname37 (talk) 16:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I pretty sure it's consecutive starts. Burner0718 (talk) 22:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
The record is for CONSECUTIVE REGULAR SEASON STARTS, Jim Marshall currently holds that at 270, though he played some 300+ games in total in his career & started in 283??? of them.

The kicker, Jeff Feagles, has 320 consecutive games PLAYED, as a kicker, but who cares if a kicker starts or not? I mean there are some games where the PUNTER, which is the type of kicker Feagles is, never sets a foot on the field. i4 (talk) 23:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll make the change here and in the below-mentioned Favre Achievements section.Originalname37 (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of career achievements by Brett Favre

I just wanted to let everyone know that List of career achievements by Brett Favre is now created. It's basically just his stats copied over there, and it needs a lot of work, but I just wanted to let everyone know that it is now created and needs some work!! Thanks.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 04:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't Brett also be listed under "Cajuns" and "Cajun-Americans"?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.114.58.46 (talk) 19:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Right or wrong, he is listed under List of Cajuns. Kermit814 (talk) 19:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Retirement

Before we go and make any drastic changes to the page, I suggest we wait for Favre, the Packers or at least the NFL to announce his retirement. So far all we have is the FOX News report. I've made a note of it in the "2007 season" section, but let's hold off on making the changes to the intro, infobox, etc. faithless (speak) 14:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, well NFL.com is reporting it now, but it seems that they're just reporting what Glazer reported. faithless (speak) 14:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Article should be reverted to show him as a current player until we have more than just rumors. Currently, no one who would legitimately have a right to announce this has. Therefore, it is original research and/or speculation. Morte42 (talk) 16:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen the reference? Check out the Green Bay website. BlueAg09 (Talk) 16:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
ESPN and many others announcing it, I think we can consider it official. Wizardman 16:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the guy's own agent is even announcing it. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 18:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
The thing is, a guy is not officially retired until he files retirement papers with the league. Favre probably won't do this any time soon. Jake Plummer, for example, technically has yet to retire. He's still a Buccaneer. So really, Favre should not have a retire infobox. But most people don't understand this, so I'm not going to bother.►Chris NelsonHolla! 19:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Exactly my point. Thank you. Morte42 (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, he could a vinny and come out of it every year. Then what do we do? RC-0722 communicator/kills 19:36, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Well the only difference is Favre is property of the Packers and will continue to be until he plays out his contract. Vinny's been a free agent each time.►Chris NelsonHolla! 21:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Three Time MVP

Why do people keep saying Brett Favre is the only 3 time MVP? Jim Brown won it 3 times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.106.13.14 (talk) 15:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

There are conflicting reports, due (IMO) to the fact that there have been several different awards given over the years. The one usually discussed is the AP award, which Brown won in '56, '57 and '65. The Pro Football Hall of Fame recognizes Brown as a three-time AP NFL MVP. Usually, however, Favre is called the only three-time MVP. Indeed, even this article from the AP calls Favre the only three-time winner. My theory (and this is totally off-the-cuff, mind you) is that the year that Brown won one of his AP in a year in which the NFL considered one of the other awards as "official." Whether this is actually the case, I don't know. But again, while Brown won three awards, both the NFL and the AP recognize Favre as the only three-time winner. faithless (speak) 23:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Affiliation

Nobody cares about affiliation. Next you'll have a tick box for 'circumcised'. This is a big site for everyone on the planet. Most people think you are being ridiculous - and oppressive. Time to stop and grow up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.136.204 (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Does this make sense to anyone? faithless (speak) 22:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Idk but I am thinking about creating Category:People who are circumcised, anyone wanna help me find sources and populate the category?</sarcasm> :P « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 23:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Well quite frankly it's about time! faithless (speak) 17:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
=D Hahahah « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Former" quarterback?

He's not technically retired as he has yet to fill out the paperwork. I believe the opening paragraph should say he is still a current quarterback until the time he files the papers. While he's likely 90% retired, he's still not officially retired. crassic![talk] 21:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

That's really more of a technicality; few players file their papers immediately upon retiring. After all, since nearly every one of them retire as multi-millionaires, why would they bother with annoying paper work? :-P Barry Sanders, for instance, waited several years after his retirement. Favre says he's retired, and he's pretty much the ultimate authority. faithless (speak) 03:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
But for now, Favre still counts against the Packers' cap. He is very much not retired. The only difference between his current state and say, Peyton Manning's, is that Favre has said he doesn't intend to play in 2008. But both are equally not retired.►Chris NelsonHolla! 17:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External Link to Current News, Videos, Photos, Blogs for Brett Favre

In addition to the links for Brett Favre to NFL.com and ESPN we should add a link to PlayerSearch.com. PlayerSearch includes recent news, videos, blog commentary, photos, stats, etc. from around the web (major media, local newspapers, top sports bloggers, AOL Video, YouTube, Flickr, etc.) focused on professional athletes. The video links are great as they link users to properly copyrighted material of game clips from the NFL Network, press conferences from local TV stations, SportsCenter highlights on ESPN and user tribute videos for Favre from YouTube (some great tributes!). It is an excellent supplement to the content on Wikipedia as it includes current news and stats that are updated frequently but may not be groundbreaking enough to keep permanently in this Wiki.

Here is the link to Brett Favre on PlayerSearch.com: http://www.playersearch.com/Search.aspx?q=Brett%20Favre


Full Disclosure: I am the founder of playersearch.com... I am also from Wisconsin and a huge Brett Favre and Packers fan!

Please take a look at the link above and consider adding it to the external links at the bottom of Favre's page.

Lets hope he comes back for one more year!! At least!!

Thank you,

TedKasten (talk) 19:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Link used in Note #54 is dead...

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8006630?MSNHPHMA

This link is used in note #54 but the article is no longer live. I am surprised that MSNBC has already taken the article down as it was posted to this site on April 10th...but the article may have been in reference to the April 1st Fools joke about Favre coming back to the Packers or another team? TedKasten (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure why that link no longer works, but I've replaced it with another. The story broke more than a week after April Fools' Day, so it certainly wasn't a joke. Cheers, faithless (speak) 18:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Not retired

I've re-added the current player infobox because Favre is no more retired than any other player on the Packers. It's true. Favre is no more retired than Aaron Rodgers, Ryan Grant, Aaron Kampman or any of them. He is still on the Packers' active roster (and counting MILLIONS toward the cap). The only difference between him and Rodgers is Favre has said he's not going to play in 2008. But this is not technically retirement, and until he files paperwork with the league he is not a retired football player - he's an active one who has said he's not going to play this year.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Favre is retired. The fact that he hasn't filed retirement papers is a inconsequential. The only reason to file retirement papers is so that he can draw his pension; needless to say, Favre has done quite well for himself financially, and is in no great rush as far as his pension goes. He is not on the Packers' roster and the NFL lists him as a 'historical' rather than a 'current' player. faithless (speak) 00:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Well he's also not on the reserve/retired list. He IS on the active roster in real life, and he IS counting millions of dollars toward their cap. Until he is off the roster and not counting toward the cap, he is NOT retired whether he intends to play or not.►Chris NelsonHolla! 00:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
The most important thing here, regardless of who is right, is to not let ourselves get hung up on technicalities. When someone comes to this article and sees that Wikipedia still lists him as a current player, it only reflects poorly on our reputation and makes us look either out-of-date, incompetent or both. He's announced his retirement, the Packers and NFL refer to him as being retired, every media outlet in the country ran a story about his retirement, Green Bay is retiring his jersey during the first game of the season - he's retired. When Green Bay needs his cap space they'll move him to the reserved/retired list. Deion Sanders was in the CBS booth for a few years and still counting against Washington's cap, but I can't imagine you would say he wasn't retired. Even if he is technically on the active roster, insisting on describing him as active when everyone know he's retired is counterintuitive and only does damage to the encyclopedia, which makes this a prime example of when to invoke WP:IAR. faithless (speak) 01:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but how the official website and NFl.com do it (both run by non-football people) is quite irrelevant. It is a complete and undeniable fact that Favre is not retired in ANY way except for the fact that he said he was. As I've said repeatedly, he is no more retired than Aaron Rodgers. So we should be inaccurate on purpose for the ignorant people out there? I'm not saying we should just make it look like he's a current player and leave it at that. We should tell the WHOLE story. That he has announced his retirement, but that he is still on the active roster.
And there is a difference between a player causing a cap penalty and a player counting toward the cap because he's on the ACTIVE roster. Once Favre is moved to the Reserve/Retired list, he won't be counting ANY toward the cap. So the situations have no similarities.
It's just a simple fact - he's not retired. You know what happens if Favre decides he wants to play tomorrow? Nothing. Nothing changed when he announced his retirement and nothing would change if he wanted to come back. He is an active roster player today and he would be tomorrow if he felt like playing. He is not retired, but rather an active NFL player, and that's all there is to it.►Chris NelsonHolla! 02:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

►Chris NelsonHolla! 02:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Call him Semi-retired? idk, sounds like a good idea to me >.> 72.74.232.198 (talk) 03:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Green Bay has put him on the reserved/retired list, so no need for that; but thanks for the suggestion! faithless (speak) 03:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
This all sounds like Original Research to me. Our interpretations of his status vis a vis the various roster regulations are quite irrelvant. Calling him an active player is unacceptable unless we can find a reliable source to back it up, i.e. a newspaper article that says he's not really retired. Wikipedia is not a forum for advancing novel theories or interpretations. --Beaker342 (talk) 05:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Well it's not a really an issue anymore, but you are 100% wrong.►Chris NelsonHolla! 05:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Brett should also be listed under "Cajuns"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.114.58.46 (talk) 18:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)