… at Yankee Stadium, of course. With three games starting tonight, there’s every chance that this will be the last time the Yankees and Red Sox meet at the current incarnation of the stadium in the Bronx.

Unless ……….

Surely there are still some believers out there who hold out hope that the Yanks will make the playoffs by catching the Sox and, at the same time, the Sox will make the playoffs by catching the Rays. Another New York-Boston ALCS?

I don’t know about the rest of you, but this Yankees-Sox series feels a little different to me. There’s an air of desperation that just doesn’t seem right coming from the Yankees, and the truth is that it’s a feeling that hasn’t lingered over this franchise since 1993. They are in bad shape, very bad shape really, and it’s unfamiliar.

I’m not ready to say they’re dead yet, but it’s getting really, really close. Two of three is the absolute minimum in this series, and even if they get that it’s no guarantee they won’t be done by the end of the weekend if other games go the wrong way. A sweep is nearly a necessity.

Carp says:

This is it for Red Sox-Yankees at the Stadium, because for the Sox to win the division the Yankees would have to then catch the Rays to get the wild card, and that’s not happening. So, yeah, rock the place for one last Bosox-Yanks series.

As for the desperation, Sam, you’re right. The Yankees don’t absolutely need to sweep, but they surely can’t do anything worse than win two of three. They’re getting a bit lucky, I think, in that the Sox are throwing Tim Wakefield, whose magic against the Yankees isn’t what it once was; then Paul Byrd against Sidney Ponson.

The Yankees have truly struggled against elite pitchers, but they won’t face one in this series. Hear that, A-Rod? It’s OK to get a few hits this week.

I wonder if it’s going to cost the Red Sox more to visit the new Yankee Stadium the way it’s going to cost the rest of us.

Hey, Jordan did it. Favre did it. Clemens did it. Mario Lemieux did it. Every boxer in the world has done it.

So why can’t Michael Strahan come out of retirement?

And is that the answer for the Giants now that Umenyiora is out for the season?

I wonder if Strahan’s ego would let him NOT come back in a situation like this, where he’s needed, where he can ride in on a white horse and be a hero. On the other hand, if he un-retires and comes back and gets hurt, or if he doesn’t play well, or if the Giants have a sub-standard season (and it will be almost impossible for them to top last year), would he regret coming back instead of having rode into the sunset as a champion?

What do you think?

3 p.m., Sam says:

This is one of those situations where the solution just seems too easy, too simple: the Giants suddenly have a need for a defensive presence, a guy who can get himself ready to play quickly and step in as a leader. Michael Strahan has proven himself to be all of those things, including having the ability to get into game mode without the rigors of training camp.

So why not make this happen? I don’t buy the stuff about “riding off into the sunset.” It’s a concept that has little permenance yet gets big play. In truth, we remember what a player has done not the manner in which they left. Except in the rarest and most dramatic cases, ending a career isn’t about the moment of conclusion; it’s about all that came before it.

Strahan would be a great addition and could help fill the void Osi’s injury left behind. Bringing him back seems almost too easy an answer.

It’s still hard for me to fathom the Giants’ petty jealousy over the attention the Jets and Brett Favre have gotten since Favre landed from Green Bay.

The Jets envy the Giants for their rings and their Vince  Lombardi Trophy, the Giants envy the Jets for the hype.

That was the idea behind a column I wrote off of last night’s yawner of a preseason game at Giants Stadium, which you can read by clicking here. 

So the question today is about those things, and about which team you think will do better? And how do you define better? In other words, the Jets can improve to 10-6 or 9-7, from 4-12, and lose in the first round and it will be a huge improvement—although you can be certain that will be seen as a disaster when it happens. The Giants can go 13-3 and lose in the NFC Championship game or the Super Bowl, and they won’t match what they did last year.

So how do you quantify that?

The question this morning is simple, but the answer is extremely complicated. What would you do to fix the Mets bullpen assuming that Billy Wagner will not be back in a season in which the Mets could make the playoffs and have a shot at the World Series if they have a closer?

I don’t have the answer. There has been talk of John Maine going to the bullpen, but with his arm issues that’s not likely; and talk about moving Mike Pelfrey from the rotation. There’s talk about sticking with Aaron Heilman.

Or of trying to trade for somebody … but as someone on talk-radio said the other day, anybody who gets through waivers now either has a ludicrous contract or isn’t very good.

How about the Rocket? He could be ready to toss an inning here or there in a short time. He’d probably only need a couple of million, and a trainer who could fire some painkillers into his butt.

I put less stock in exhibition football games than anybody else walking the planet … although I will watch it over Olympic Beach Volleyball or Badminton any day … even if it means listening to Tony Kornheiser.

That said, Eli Manning looked pretty darn good against the Browns Monday night. Again, you don’t want to overblow that as, for example, all of New York did Saturday night and Sunday morning (when one paper actually put it on the front and back pages: Oooh! Brett threw a touchdown! Brett threw a touchdown!). Side question: Can this big city look any more small town than when we get caught up in something that stupid? I mean, doesn’t every quarterback who’s ever played eventually throw a touchdown?

Getting back to Eli, the question is, do you expect him to be the Eli of last winter, the one who won all those road games and the Super Bowl MVP, or the one who threw 20 interceptions and was being questioned as the Giants fought tooth-and-nail just to get a wild card? Do you expect that the real Eli is closer to Peyton, or to the inconsistent kid who was searching for the poise to go with that golden arm?

Are you still in wait-and-see mode? Or are you a full believer in Eli now?

Just back from vacation again (got one more week to go in mid-September).

OK, so let’s say for the moment that the Yankees aren’t dead in the water. Let’s say that they might be able to start hitting and get the wild card. Let’s say that Hideki Matsui and Joba Chamberlain somehow get back (will Joba start or relieve? Here we go again).

Here’s the question: If the Yankees somehow believe that he can help them win even one game, would you forgive Carl “American Idle” Pavano and root for him? Could you possibly put aside all the animosity over all the injuries and the wasted money and the apparent lack of caring or effort, and cheer for him?

Or would you boo him from the moment he walked into the Stadium and only get louder once he falls behind the first hitter 1-0?

And would you be terribly frightened that he might actually pitch well enough to earn a contract for next season?

2 p.m., Sam says:

Hey everybody, look! It’s Carp! Remember him?

Glad to have you back, Carp, and good decision to return with a question about Carl Pavano, the guy who has been pretty much on vacation with the Yankees from the moment he signed his contract.

I don’t think there’s any chance at all that Pavano will actually pitch for the Yankees this year, but if he does end up taking the mound, I’m pretty sure that everyone – players, management and fans – will be willing to offer a temporary reprieve for sins already committed so long as he’s able to get through five solid innings.

Will the Yankees (and their fans) forget what a joke Pavano has been? No way. Anyone who has spent time in the Yankees clubhouse knows that bridges have been burned that won’t get repaired, but this is a business and the bottom line is that if Pavano is able to contribute in any small way, he’ll be well-received.

And then, when the season is over, he’ll be gone.

Just read this.

Best for “national interest?” We’re talking about 9-year-olds right?

Jeez …

That’s what they call the PGA Championship, which is a distant fourth among the four majors.

So, who had Jeev Milhka Singh, Robert Karlsson and Jonathan Byrd to win it?

Nobody. OK, some people mentioned Karlsson as a contender. He’s been in the top 10 in each of the first three majors of the year. The Other Singh is a world-class player, too.

The point is, all these predictions which preceed every major are silly and frivolous. You don’t know who in the entire field will win, even if Tiger’s in it. He only wins one, two or three majors in any given season.

The point is, the PGA is always up for grabs, even though Woods (twice) and Mickelson have won the last three. Shaun Micheel and Rich Beem have also won them this decade. And in case you haven’t noticed, Zach Johnson, Trevor Immelman, Michael Campbell and Angel Cabrera are among the recent major champions.

So let’s stop all the stupid predictions: It’s Mickelson’s turn? C’mon. The guy, great as he is, has won three majors in 65 starts. Vijay? Why, because he won last week, his first win in a year? Please. Ernie Els? What is this, 2003?

And you can immediately rule out all the Euros, who haven’t won a PGA in, what, 73 years? As a matter of fact, no Euro has won the US Open since Tony Jacklin, and the PGA courses now tend to be the same courses in the US Open rotation, so don’t count on any of them to break through at Oakland Hills. (although we must remember that Padraig Harrington, now a two-time major champ, could have won the Open at Winged Foot had he not bombed out moments before Mickelson did on the 72nd hole).

Today’s cut day, weather permitting, and the only things we know are that Colin Montgomerie won’t win, and John Daly will probably shoot 80-something today and miss the cut.

So, one day after Carp and I discuss Brett Favre’s legacy, we’re now faced with a different question: Did the Jets make the right move?

To me, this was a no-brainer. The Jets are the longtime “other team” in this town, and never more so than this year when the Giants are defending champs. Favre is a significant upgrade over either Chad Pennington or Kellen Clemens, and the compensation (a conditional draft pick) was hardly overwhelming. The Jets had the chance to make a big move and they made it, giving themselves a quality quarterback and a legitimate star that will help make them a more visible team.

Will it work out? That I’m not so sure about. I think the Jets will see a big boost in media attention and attendance, but don’t necessarily feel like they’re suddenly a playoff lock. They still play in a tough division, still have the Pats sitting ahead of them and still have to wait and see whether a) Favre is in shape and ready to play; and b) whether he’ll be compatible with Eric Mangini and coordinator Brian Schottenheimer, two coaches Favre has never met before, let alone worked with.

That’s a lot of questions. Was it the right move for the Jets? Absolutely. Will it pay off the way they hope? Not so sure.

Carp says:

I agree that this is a move the Jets had to make. They gave up nothing. Now Favre can attempt to become the first quarterback in NFL history to put both New York teams in the Super Bowl in back-to-back years (he put the Giants in the Supe last winter, remember?).

Seriously, I doubt that Favre makes the Jets a serious contender for the Lombardi, but he makes them a playoff-potential team. Let’s not forget that in the seasons in which Chad Pennington was healthy—limited as he may have been—he got the Jets to the postseason. Favre right now is probably as good as Pennington ever was, and better than Kellen Clemens may ever be.

A lot of what happens depends on Favre—whether he really, really wants to win again, or if he’s just continuing his sad, pathetic unretiring act that’s been so sickening the last month or so. Does he really want to be a leader on a team that needs one; a veteran presence on a team that’s still rebuilding; a guy who goes along with the plan rather than forcing the Jets to re-do a plan around him?

Can he continue to pour his heart into it if the Jets get off to a bad start and head toward oblivion again? Can he really be a Gang Greener instead of a Green Bayer?

One thing’s for certain. He’ll get a hero’s welcome in the Meadowlands, and more media attention than he ever dreamed of getting in Wisconsin. He’ll be front and center, and that’s sure where he seems to want to be.

But he will also be a quick goat if he starts heaving up passes for grabs, or if the Jets struggle early. And he’s never been that in Green Bay. That will be pretty interesting.

And, no, I’m not going back on what I said yesterday. I don’t like the guy after what he did to the Packers. Don’t like the way he handled himself at all. I think there’s a lot of I in Favre. That said, going to Jets games just got a lot more intriguing.

This, of course, is assuming that you were like most of the rest of the football fans in the world, who seemed to revere good ol’ blue collar Brett.

I always thought Favre was sort of cool, probably for the same reasons everyone else did – he seemed pretty normal, down-to-earth, didn’t shave much and had no problem just throwing the ball down the field a lot. These were all good things.

But Favre’s latest saga and his waffling on retirement, puts him in a different light for me. One of the things I dislike most about professional athletes is when they believe that contracts – signed, binding contracts – do not apply to them. In the same way that I hope the Bengals will simply keep Chad Johnson on the sidelines (telling him, essentially, either you play for us like it says in your contract or you don’t play), I had been hoping the Packers would give Favre a similar response.

When Favre began trying to dictate the terms of his new home – saying he didn’t WANNA play for the Jets and didn’t WANNA play for the Bucs – that made me even more irritated with him. Fortunately, it looks like the Packers stood firm and a trade to the Bucs may be in the offing, but has Favre’s mishandling of the situation changed your opinion of him?

In the long run, it probably won’t. If he plays a few years in Tampa (or even just one), then retires again for good, I doubt it’ll change the perspectives of those who loved him for so long. But it will, at least a little bit, for me. Stringing the Packers along and acting childish for a month or so doesn’t make Favre a bad guy; it does, however, make him a little less of a good one than he was before.

Carp says:

This, sadly, will be my lasting impression of Favre. That of a selfish, me-me-me, doesn’t-know-when-to-quit phony who cries when he retires and whines when he unretires.

Personally, I always thought he was somewhat overrated. He’s a Hall of Famer, no doubt, with a rocket arm and a gambler of a fling-it attitude, who will own all sorts of records when (if?) he ever does retire.

But he’s not in the top 10 QBs of all time, while some with short memories or recent birth certificates place him as the greatest of all. Sorry. He ain’t.

And when he acts like this, it makes me think of his weaknesses more than his strengths—his addiction to pain killers at one point in his career; his ugly gift of the NFL sack record to Michael Strahan; his heaving up interceptions on ill-conceived prayers of passes such as the one that supposedly ended his career against the Giants on that frigid day in Lambeau last winter.

I was at that game and thought I was seeing a Canton-bound icon playing his final game. Instead he will play for the Bucs or somebody else and he will do it by abusing his popularity in Green Bay and turning the Lambeau faithful against an organization that has done nothing but deify him. Now they’re the bad guys.

Nice going, Brett. Now get out.