The Vikings players have spoken about the schism in the locker room. There seems to be a mixture of irritation and amusement among them about it.
I don’t know if they’re amused and irritated because they’ve been outed and there actually is a division within the team over who should be the quarterback. Or that they’re amused and irritated because there is no division and the ESPN story has forced them to answer a bunch of unnecessary questions.
Pacifist Viking’s blog presented some theories today on how this might affect the Vikings.
I was never all that keen on the Vikings signing Favre. But one area where I definitely thought the move would pay off was during the Vikings first four games of the season.
I could easily see Jackson or Rosenfels (who’s never been a starter anywhere) getting the yips, playing poorly and causing the Vikings to lose games they should win against the likes of Cleveland, Detroit, St. Louis or San Francisco. But I would have felt good about having an experienced guy like Favre – sharp, in tune with his receivers and in shape with a full training camp behind him – starting those games.
But Favre hasn’t done any of that. He can’t possibly be in shape, he isn’t sharp and he’s still trying to learn the nuances of his offensive teammates. And in his first game he faces the Browns, coached by Eric Mangini, who got to watch Favre all last season. I think Mangini will have some idea how to attack a rusty Favre. I need Favre to play well against Houston so I can really believe in what the Vikings are doing here.
The Childress factor
And I might feel better about the move if not for Brad Childress. You'll recall he came to Minnesota with a reputation for knowing quarterbacks. But in three years as head coach of the Vikings, he’s been wrong thinking Brad Johnson had something left. Wrong that Mike McMahon could play. Wrong that Brooks Bollinger and Kelly Holcomb could play. Wrong about Tyler Thigpen. Wrong about Gus Frerotte. Looking wrong about Jackson and apparently now thinks he was wrong to acquire Rosenfels – after all, why else does Childress think bringing in a 39-year-old quarterback who skipped training camp to be the starter somehow makes the Vikings a better team?
The Favre signing could turn out well. But based on Childress’ track record in Minnesota with quarterbacks, what are the odds he's wrong again?
Brief thoughts on Tyler Thigpen
Mike Lombardi assesses the talents of Thigpen, who appears to be on his way out of Kansas City. With the Vikings debating whether to keep or cut loose Jackson or John David Booty, wouldn’t it be nice to have this guy around?
Non-Viking, non-football thought
Everytime I visit Pacifist Viking’s blog, I always notice the flashing PETA anti-seal hunt ad showing the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics official symbol – Ilanaaq – clubbing a cute little seal.
The seal hunt and seal ban are pretty big issues in Canada’s North, where I live. The seals aren't getting much sympathy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
These things go away with wins, and become louder and more real with losses. Take 3 out of 4 out of the gate and nobody will question Favre.
We don't have room for Thigpen... and the Chiefs apparently want a fourth rounder for him, which is a bit steep in my opinion. Certainly was a mistake to release the guy in the first place, though.
The false "QB Guru" label that Childress brought here will probably be his undoing in the end. Classic tale of mistakes in leadership: micromanaging and claiming expertise in an area that you truly do not have expertise in.
I could not picture any worse outcome in the past 3 years than what Childress has produced... he's essentially batting .000 with his QB picks at a 0-6 or so record.
Dana:
A couple of wins off the bat will make this all go away. But if he doesn't look good against Houston, I'm going to get quite worried about our "easy" first four games.
Post a Comment