"Yeah, there was a heated discussion, I guess you would call it. No secret, I was getting hit a little bit. I felt the pressure on a lot of plays. We had seven points. So I think everyone in the building was like, 'They're not moving the ball, they're not getting points.' Brad wanted to go in a different direction and I wanted to stay in the game.
about 2 years ago
Anthony21
61 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
That's a problem.
It isn’t Bretts decision to make or it shouldn’t be at least.
At first I thought it was a joke.
It’s beyond dumb.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Dec 21, 2009 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
Suckin? Maybe?
He didn’t have the greatest game obviously. But no one else on the team did either. Are you going to bench the entire team?
In fact, let’s take a look at his numbers for the game:
Favre: 17-27 for 224 yards. 63% completion %. 0 TD’s 1 INT. 73.7 passer rating.
Not great numbers. At least 3 of his 10 total incompletions were the WR’s fault.
Benchable #’s? Absolutely not.
Drew Brees #’s this weekend:
29-45 for 312 yards. 64.7 completion%. 1 TD 1 INT 81.5 passer rating
Not great numbers either. Benchable #’s? Absolutely not.
I think you as well as many around here are missing the point of this. Favre wasn’t out there arguing with Childress about being benched from a performance perspective. If that was the issue at hand, then I think we’d have ourselves a bigger issue. The whole issue was about the beating that Favre was getting out there and Childress’s thoughts on maybe keeping his qb healthy. I see nothing wrong with a qb and his coach getting into a “heated” conversation regarding that. But feel free to continue to overreact regarding it if you feel its necessary.
+ gazillions
Was a bad game….
What do you do?
Look at what went wrong and fix….
Simple….
Let’s see…..
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Dec 22, 2009 2:15 AM CST up reply actions
I don't know about that comparison.
Carrying out the drama during the summer is one issue, but in-game decision making by the coaching staff is another. It’s unclear if Brett actually did disregard the coaching staff — Chilly says that wasn’t the case — but no player should be able to override a coach in the middle of a game. No, not even Brett Favre.
WHAT direction did Childress want to go in?
Pulling #4 would have helped the O-Line block HOW??
Chilly’s problem isn’t at QB.
Having said that… I think this is going to get overblown…
and this team needs the ‘schism’.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 21, 2009 12:59 PM CST reply actions
what direction? how about putting in a more mobile qb? have tj blow past him on designed qb run a couple times and i bet peppers backs off.
whatever direction would have been better than 20-0 fourth quarter.
by iseepurplepeople on Dec 21, 2009 2:03 PM CST up reply actions
I'll concede that...
but I think OLINE mobility would have been a bigger factor to achieve victory in that game.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 21, 2009 2:49 PM CST up reply actions
Only if they leave TJ in, or have Favre wear TJ's uniform.
Otherwise, once Favre’s back in, there’s really no reason for Peppers to dial it down.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Dec 21, 2009 4:03 PM CST up reply actions
I wanted to blame that INT on Favre after his admission against the Cards that he felt like he had to force the ball.
However, on the replays it looked like the receiver had some space in the corner, and that Favre’s hand was hit and not able to follow through on the pass.
by JasonAve6413 on Dec 21, 2009 2:14 PM CST up reply actions
I guess I understand.
7 to 6, Chilly probablly figured we could have pounded the rock, had T-Jack roll out a couple times. We win 17-6. Favre doesn’t get hurt. Perfect.
That didn’t happen. Favre stayed in. Risked breaking his arm, and we got pounded. Now everyone looks like a dumbass.
...add #4 to the mix and see what you get... Championship.
Well here is the beginning of the end
that the blowhards at espn have been so desperately hoping for. The schisim rares its ugly head at last. Give me a break. Let them cool down a few days and it will be back to winning ways.
by noblepete on Dec 21, 2009 1:02 PM CST via mobile reply actions
exactly....
Let’s see – still 2 games left to work on issues prior to playoffs…..
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Dec 22, 2009 2:17 AM CST up reply actions
Favre did what he should have done!
Any QB worth his salt should get rightly pissed when asked to leave a game. Seriously… Brett is a competitor. You ask him to sit, and expect him NOT to get fired up about it?
Any other QB would do the same…
Would other coaches have let the a player override them?
That’s fine if Brett doesn’t want to come out of the game. But it’s really not up to a player, is it? If Chili can’t even decide what personnel goes out onto the field, he should be fired immediately, contract extension or no, because he does not have control over his team.
by Princely Frank on Dec 21, 2009 3:48 PM CST up reply actions
Do you really think this is the first time a QB has said "screw you, I'm playing" when the coach tried to bench him?
Hell, Matt Stafford did it in his 10th game in the league.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Dec 21, 2009 4:04 PM CST up reply actions
how many of those coaches are still head coaches?
by iseepurplepeople on Dec 21, 2009 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
Well, Detroit hasn't fired their coach since Stafford ran out onto the field against orders...
Of the rest, probably none, but that’s largely because EVERYONE gets fired eventually in the NFL.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Dec 21, 2009 7:34 PM CST up reply actions
The coach lacks the power to determine who goes into a game?
That’s odd, when I played, I only got to go on the field when the coaches told me to. Maybe I should just put on my Tarkenton jersey and run out on the field for the Vikes next week, throw a couple of passes. What’s the coach gonna say? “No, you can’t play”? Apparently that doesn’t work.
by Princely Frank on Dec 21, 2009 4:59 PM CST up reply actions
Did you play at the pro level?
Honest question. Maybe you did. I’m not saying it’s right, but this isn’t the first time this has happened in the NFL, particularly with QBs. As to the event itself, it didn’t seem like that big of a deal to me. Now that it’s become clear that this isn’t the first time it’s happened it’s a little more troubling, but overall I’d be more worried about his decision to take the issue public and refer to his coach as “Brad” than the actual moment when he said he was playing. That was unnecessary, disrespectful and hardly likely to be productive.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Dec 21, 2009 7:39 PM CST up reply actions
name another time this has happened.
by iseepurplepeople on Dec 22, 2009 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
Off the top of my head...
… both Steven Jackson and Cedric Benson refused to come out of games in October. Jackson did it when the Rams were getting killed by the Niners. Benson did it when the Bengals were killing the Bears.
Jim McMahon refused to come off the field at BYU back in 1980 when they sent the punting team out. He ordered them back off the field, argued with his coach when he called a timeout, and then converted the 4th down when the coach gave in. A quick google search reveals that Johnny Unitas refused to come out of games according to his former teammates.
Seems like a silly thing to freak out about if you ask me. Though I’d be more upset by Favre’s decision to discuss it with the press. But it’s not like it’s news that Favre will answer any question he’s asked, and is willing to air dirty laundry in the press.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Dec 22, 2009 9:47 PM CST up reply actions
No.
If coach tells you to get off the field you get off the field. I don’t know if Brad told him to hit the bench, but if he did and Brett refused he should be sentenced to 50 lashes. No one is bigger than the team.
I got blasted hardcore on here in the beginning of the year
But I said “Favre starts playing like HELL @ the end of the season.” When you guys start playing some defenses that can get after the QB in the playoffs , that’s really when the fun starts happening for Brett. Saw it in every p layoff game since 03.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!
Your team
should just worry about the Broncos and Cowboys. Brett will be fine playing in domes all playoff long.
by Jepp The Viking on Dec 21, 2009 2:09 PM CST up reply actions
This isn't Favre's fault
He can’t block for himself. This is an O-Line problem.
The Colorado Rockies aren't a team, they're an armada.
I must have not been around last night during the game to see the exchange go down
Is there a video of it anywhere that you guys know of?
by dolphinsinbuffalo on Dec 21, 2009 2:49 PM CST reply actions
Back to the Original Point
Back to the first posts made regarding the possibility that Favre over-ruled his head coach:
I find this a little worrisome, if in fact Favre is able to veto Childress, and it sounds like Favre can do just that. This is regardless of whether Childress was right to try and bench Favre, and I don’t think Childress should have done so.
But, if the story about Childress being over-ruled by his quarterback is true, it is just part of the Favre deal. Hopefully this is all over and forgtotten in three weeks, and we can go back to where we were three weeks ago, when no one, myself included, was complaining about Favre’s ego when the Vikings were 10-1.
by Midnight Rambler on Dec 21, 2009 3:36 PM CST reply actions
I would've yanked Favre and was musing about it out loud to my girlfriend.
Maybe that would be stupid and it would be better to stick with Favre. However, whether or not to yank him isn’t really the discussion. It’s whether or not the coach has the ability to decide who plays QB for this team. If the coach does not have that power, just fire him today.
Favre’s a player. That’s not his decision. Chili’s weakness is the problem.
by Princely Frank on Dec 21, 2009 3:51 PM CST up reply actions
It's only a weakness...
If the Coach had his mind made up about pulling him and let Favre talk him out of it.
It doesn’t sound like that to me… it was one option.
Favre claimed the coach wanted to take him out of the game to avoid taking any more hits from Julius Peppers and the Carolina defensive line.
Favre convinced the Coach that Pepper’s hit weren’t that bad and that he was tough enough to play.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 21, 2009 4:29 PM CST up reply actions
The controversy is now over
Brad Childress: I never ordered Favre to come out of the game.
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/7731/transcript-childress-on-favre
This controversy is NOT over
That statement is just Chilly doing damage control. Do you think a head coach would ADMIT he was vetoed by a player? “Yeah, I wanted to take Favre out, but he said no, and I guess you saw who has the power by who played (read: FAVRE)”. NO. He is trying to save face. But it does not change the fact that Chilly was pissed at Favre’s play and Favre said “screw you.”
Also, everyone is missing another crucial point. THE VIKINGS ARE NOT RUNNING THE BALL AND FAVRE IS AUDIBLING OUT OF RUNS. He (and his butt-boy Bevell) are subjecting the offense to Favre’s EGO and his desire to throw. For example:
“The Vikings had a 30-20 lead and were running their four-minute offense. The Packers were out of timeouts, and the Vikings called a run play on 3rd and 10 with 3:27 left. Favre changed the play at the line of scrimmage and took a shot downfield that fell incomplete, stopping the clock.”
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4761127
Now Favre is trying to prove that he is not declining in December like all the critics said he would, and ironically, IS declining precisely because he has destroyed the Vikings offensive strength (RUNNING AD) which thus takes away the reason he was having success early on (threat of the run).
I love the Vikings and I know they probably can’t win in the postseason without Favre, but this is the double-edged sword with him. His talent gives you a chance, but his ego can destroy you.
not for you apparantly...
this is your 3rd post with the same drivel… keep on speculating and feeding the controversy, though…
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 21, 2009 6:05 PM CST up reply actions
+1000s
That is what many feed on….
Me, I will wait to see what they have addressed this week in our next game….
It’s not like they do not see what we saw on Sunday…..
Let’s see…..
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Dec 22, 2009 2:22 AM CST up reply actions
ace991 gives his opinion and backs it up with references and you simply dismiss it as drivel with no counter points or anything at all to back up your position.
perhaps we should refer to you as arizonafavrefan instead.
by iseepurplepeople on Dec 22, 2009 1:54 PM CST up reply actions
... and except Chris Mortensen, Trent Dilfer, Tom Powers, etc.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4761127
http://www.twincities.com/ci_14043094?nclick_check=1
But I guess you will say that they are just trying to create “drama”. Of course you all know so much more about the Vikings than these guys at ESPN who talk to players and coaches FROM THE ACTUAL NFL everyday.
Look, believe whatever will make you happy. Believe that Favre has no ego, that it’s just other teams D that are stuffing the box against AD, etc. But the truth is the Vikings are loosing their identity (RUNNING THE BALL WITH AD) and Favre wants to be the hero, and he doesn’t think handing off and winning games 17-13 will make him the hero.
I hope I am wrong because I love the Vikings. But unlike you all, I don’t love Favre more than the Vikings. So one more time, someone please explain why the Vikes didn’t run the ball ONCE in their first two 2nd half possessions when winning 7-6.
Blame the O-line (I agree somewhat) but it’s hard to establish the run when you only do it 1 out of 3 possessions
Sh$t happens....
Get over it and wait to see what happens next game…..
Will anything you say make a difference?
If you think it will you are dreaming….
Either they fix or they don’t….
Let’s see…
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Dec 22, 2009 2:24 AM CST up reply actions
I thought your head was up your @$$?
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?" -Joe Kapp
by less cowbell, more 'neau on Dec 23, 2009 12:27 AM CST up reply actions
Heated Discussion taken outta context.
And Favre probably should have kept his mouth shut about it., or worded it differently. The media feeds off of crap-comments like that and Favre should know better than that by now.
Trust me, If Chilly wants Favre out of the game, Favre will be out of the game. Chilly thrives on having that kinda power. Chilly’s contract is secured for the for the next few years, Favre’s can be ripped-up at the end of the season.
I actually believe that Chilly was looking out for Favres health last night. Peppers & Co were bringing a lot pressure, and putting some big hits on Favre. The Vikes need Favre in the post season, so they probably should pull him when he’s getting beat-up weak after weak.
For playoffs agree....
He needs to be on his game….
Def was a danger of injury – O line was not able to provide protection….
Hope Chilly is open to criticism/feedback from team members, because the solution was there….provide extra man against Peppers…..
That may happen again in the playoffs, hope he (Chilly) reacts better next time….
Let’s see?
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Dec 22, 2009 2:27 AM CST up reply actions
If Chili was trying to pull Favre
out of concern for his physical well being and Brett said I’m fine, I want to continue playing. That is a whole lot different than Chili wanting to bench Brett for his performance and Brett saying no I’m playing and just staying on the field. This whole thing was probably blown way out of proportion and Favre shouldn’t have provided the fuel for this fire.
Agreed, KC.
Manufactured BS…
It’s hard to win in the NFL, even harder on the road, in less than ideal conditions.
Our OLine lost their 1:1 battles with the Panthers Defense and it disrupted our game plan.
Now let’s go sweep the Bears.
GO VIKES!!
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 22, 2009 10:34 AM CST up reply actions
then why are all these other stories popping up now about favre not doing what he’s supposed to?
i’ts made up to feed the drama right?
of course it is. there’s nothing wrong with this team at all! we’ve played great football the last 3 weeks!
by iseepurplepeople on Dec 22, 2009 2:48 PM CST up reply actions
I've been pointing...
to the area I see as a weakness. The OLine.
I don’t need ESPN, FOX, NBC, or USAToday to tell me our OLine is playing like crap.
and guess what… they’re not writing about it… because they have DRAMA… juicy DRAMA.
real… or not.
right now, we won’t run or pass (audible or not) unless our OLine starts playing football again.
Ace is entitled to his opinion… my beef with him is – spamming.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 23, 2009 12:12 AM CST up reply actions
Looks like I was right.
"But all is not well between Brad and Brett, and the primary difference centers on the quarterback’s penchant to check out of runs and into passes."
http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_14038891?source=rss
Man, you guys are so desperate to believe everything is all good, Favre will save the say, blah, blah. READ MY EARLIER POSTS WHEN I SAID THIS IS WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS. AND NOW TODAY IT IS CONFIRMED.
THE VIKINGS NO LONGER ESTABLISH THE RUN BECAUSE FAVRE CHECKS OUT OF RUNS!!!
ArizonaVikingsFan:
"Carolina Defense…won the battle early and took away our running game. Props to them."
—→ Are you kidding me?!? NO FAVRE JUST STOPPED LETTING THE VIKINGS RUN!
Don’t believe me? This is the sequence of AD’s runs from 8 min in the 2nd quarter on:
(see http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=291220029&period=2)
- A.Peterson left tackle 7 yards
- A.Peterson left end for 10 yards
- A.Peterson up the middle for 4 yards, TOUCHDOWN (sick run, if you watched the game)
THEN PETERSON DOES NOT GET ANOTHER CARRY UNTIL OUR THIRD OFFENSIVE SERIES OF THE 3RD QUARTER! Why? Because Favre checked out of runs on the first two 2nd half possessions (READ THE ARTICLE ABOVE). So tell me again how Carolina "took away our running game."
Seriously guys, do you even watch the games?!? Can you not tell that Favre is audibling out of runs? Well now it has been confirmed by people who cover the team.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
