In the Clutch With Artem Altman
For the Love of the Game?
Artem Altman
Issue date: 2/25/09 Section: Sports
When I sat down to write this column, I kept trying to come up with a catchy title that would sum up this week's subject. A Final Favre-well. Favre's Do Me a Favre!?! Favre's Final Farewell. Obviously you can see that I wanted to write about Brett Favre. I kept on writing, but the final product ended up going to a place that was far away from where I imagined it would be.
For fear of sounding redundant and summarizing Favre's many accomplishments throughout his illustrious playing career and discussing the circumstances surrounding the not-so-perfect ending that encompassed Favre's tenure with the Green Bay Packers and his exodus that led to his arrival in New York, I have chosen instead to focus on why things ended up as they did.
Favre is arguably one the best quarterbacks in the history of the NFL, but what will his legacy be? In an era of sports where free agency dictates everything, you can probably count the amount of athletes in team sports that have spent their entire careers with just a single team (on a technicality, it is even hard to allow Favre into that category given that he was originally drafted and played for the Atlanta Falcons). And this trend doesn't only apply to football. Just look into any other league, and you will surely find the same pattern.
Given the circumstances, I think it's important to discern the transformation that sports, in general has gone through, in order to predict what the future will hold for athletes like Favre, who ended his career in a manner not befitting a player of his stature. For football fans in Green Bay, should it matter that Favre played for the NY Jets? Did they root for the Jets with Favre at quarterback? Should they have? What would have happened if the Packers played against the Jets?
Let's look to LeBron James in the near future. James is poised to hit the NBA free-agent marker in 2010, unless the Cleveland Cavaliers are able to sign him to an extension before then. What is the probability that he will re-sign with the Cav's instead of signing up for the bright lights of Broadway? As a consequence, those who end up hurting are your average die-hard sports fans. Cleveland fans will serve as just another example of how sports and athletes have changed in the present era.
How can even the most rabid fans be expected to invest effort and passion into a team when the players on the team keep changing? Where should fan loyalties lie? With the team or with the player?
Would Cleveland cheer or jeer LeBron James if he were to ever leave? Would the prodigal son be as welcome in his home state if he ever left for greener pastures or the bright lights of another city? Perhaps we can find the answer up north. Let's look to Canada to answer the question of what might happen when athletes leave places that have once welcomed them with open arms.
The Toronto Raptors once pinned their future hopes on the dynamic duo of Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady. But, where are they now? Long gone. Where were their loyalties? (Let's try not to disrespect Canada!) On that note, where were the loyalties of Alex Rodriguez when he moved from team to team before arriving in New York? What is the cause of these infidelities? Who is to blame?
For the former, you could say that it's Canada for crying out loud. Nevertheless, this serves as a perfect example for what cities, teams, and athletes go through when players come and go. Vince Carter migrated south to New Jersey. McGrady, to sunny Florida.
Certainly, it's possible to find fault in one of the parties involved, but the cause of it all has transcended sports altogether. The key here is an ideology that bypasses sports and permeates our society on the whole. The lessons that most American history classes teach is that we are in the land of opportunity. Isn't it fact that this nation has been built on the backs of immigrants who mustered enough courage to start anew and build on nothing? Haven't men such as John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie captivated the latter part of our nation's history? Then it should serve us to notice that athletes are not selfish, they are simply following the tenets that serve as the building blocks of America.
If you believe in this, then athletes are simply players in this extension of capitalism that sports have become. Athletes of our generation have become the new robber barons who are set on gaining an advantage over their competition by what ever means necessary. Not letting them pursue their enterprise simply ignores everything that we as a nation stand for.
What does this have to do with Favre? He serves as a starting point for questions that should be asked of athletes who are iconic figures in our age, just like the aforementioned Rockefeller and Carnegie. As they were probably viewed with reverence in their times, today it is athletes who are admired to no less degree.
With Favre lies the question of when do we stop? When is it enough? And at what point you can just say no? More importantly, we should ask, at what point does money no longer matter and when do you just play for the love of the game?
For fear of sounding redundant and summarizing Favre's many accomplishments throughout his illustrious playing career and discussing the circumstances surrounding the not-so-perfect ending that encompassed Favre's tenure with the Green Bay Packers and his exodus that led to his arrival in New York, I have chosen instead to focus on why things ended up as they did.
Favre is arguably one the best quarterbacks in the history of the NFL, but what will his legacy be? In an era of sports where free agency dictates everything, you can probably count the amount of athletes in team sports that have spent their entire careers with just a single team (on a technicality, it is even hard to allow Favre into that category given that he was originally drafted and played for the Atlanta Falcons). And this trend doesn't only apply to football. Just look into any other league, and you will surely find the same pattern.
Given the circumstances, I think it's important to discern the transformation that sports, in general has gone through, in order to predict what the future will hold for athletes like Favre, who ended his career in a manner not befitting a player of his stature. For football fans in Green Bay, should it matter that Favre played for the NY Jets? Did they root for the Jets with Favre at quarterback? Should they have? What would have happened if the Packers played against the Jets?
Let's look to LeBron James in the near future. James is poised to hit the NBA free-agent marker in 2010, unless the Cleveland Cavaliers are able to sign him to an extension before then. What is the probability that he will re-sign with the Cav's instead of signing up for the bright lights of Broadway? As a consequence, those who end up hurting are your average die-hard sports fans. Cleveland fans will serve as just another example of how sports and athletes have changed in the present era.
How can even the most rabid fans be expected to invest effort and passion into a team when the players on the team keep changing? Where should fan loyalties lie? With the team or with the player?
Would Cleveland cheer or jeer LeBron James if he were to ever leave? Would the prodigal son be as welcome in his home state if he ever left for greener pastures or the bright lights of another city? Perhaps we can find the answer up north. Let's look to Canada to answer the question of what might happen when athletes leave places that have once welcomed them with open arms.
The Toronto Raptors once pinned their future hopes on the dynamic duo of Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady. But, where are they now? Long gone. Where were their loyalties? (Let's try not to disrespect Canada!) On that note, where were the loyalties of Alex Rodriguez when he moved from team to team before arriving in New York? What is the cause of these infidelities? Who is to blame?
For the former, you could say that it's Canada for crying out loud. Nevertheless, this serves as a perfect example for what cities, teams, and athletes go through when players come and go. Vince Carter migrated south to New Jersey. McGrady, to sunny Florida.
Certainly, it's possible to find fault in one of the parties involved, but the cause of it all has transcended sports altogether. The key here is an ideology that bypasses sports and permeates our society on the whole. The lessons that most American history classes teach is that we are in the land of opportunity. Isn't it fact that this nation has been built on the backs of immigrants who mustered enough courage to start anew and build on nothing? Haven't men such as John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie captivated the latter part of our nation's history? Then it should serve us to notice that athletes are not selfish, they are simply following the tenets that serve as the building blocks of America.
If you believe in this, then athletes are simply players in this extension of capitalism that sports have become. Athletes of our generation have become the new robber barons who are set on gaining an advantage over their competition by what ever means necessary. Not letting them pursue their enterprise simply ignores everything that we as a nation stand for.
What does this have to do with Favre? He serves as a starting point for questions that should be asked of athletes who are iconic figures in our age, just like the aforementioned Rockefeller and Carnegie. As they were probably viewed with reverence in their times, today it is athletes who are admired to no less degree.
With Favre lies the question of when do we stop? When is it enough? And at what point you can just say no? More importantly, we should ask, at what point does money no longer matter and when do you just play for the love of the game?
Be the first to comment on this story