Will T-Jack Seek Trade if Favre Signs?
by Anthony21 on Jul 14, 2009 10:16 AM CDT
in Vikings
84 comments
According to NFL Network's Michael Lombardi, Tarvaris Jackson may seek a trade if Brett Favre inks a deal to become the Vikings' starting quarterback. Here's a link to the video, in which Lombardi says he's been "hearing talk" of the possibility that T-Jack will demand a trade and look to continue his development outside of Minnesota.
If Tarvaris goes through with that, he'd be making a terrible mistake.
Asking for a trade would be ignoring a couple key facts: Brad Childress remains solid in his support of Jackson, and the Vikings will likely be heading back to the drawing board at quarterback after this season. If T-Jack wants to continue his development as a possible starting quarterback in the NFL, Minnesota is as good of a place as any.
The team's pursuit of Favre isn't any horrible insult to Jackson or Rosenfels -- these are just unusual circumstances, and it would be an error in judgment for T-Jack or Sage to take this personally. The bottom line is that neither quarterback has the body of work to be insulted that the team is looking at replacing them with a future Hall of Famer. If they want to leave, fine, but they shouldn't pretend to be outraged that the Vikings are considering Favre over them.
Minnesota remains T-Jack's best hope, and he'd be foolish to leave. Where else will he find a coaching staff willing to commit so much to him? And where else will he find such a good chance to start in 2010?
Who knows if Lombardi's even hitting the mark with this report -- we've seen more than enough of these gossipy reports proved wrong over the last several months. I'd like to think that T-Jack is smart enough to hold a clipboard for a season if Favre starts for the Vikings, because if he sticks it out, he'll probably have some good opportunities in 2010. But if he does demand a trade, he'll be making by far the biggest mistake of his career. Don't do it, T-Jack.
0 recs |
84 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Strange.
Maybe just posturing to secure the starting gig next year? He’s at the end of his contract, so that’s really strange. Whatever. I don’t care. If Tarvaris left, the Vikings still have Sage to bridge the gap to whoever is next in line.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 10:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
TJack in his final year ...maybe
If there is a new CBA, then yes, Tarvaris is in his final year of his contract. If next year is a no cap year, Tavaris is then under contract for another year, his 5th, and only a restricted free agent after that. He won’t be an unrestricted free agent until after his 6th season.
It may take a village to raise a child, but it takes a Viking to raze a village.
by Luft Krigare on Jul 14, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe just posturing to secure the starting gig next year?
For his sake, that’s what I hope he is doing. Seriously, he can’t be as shortsighted as Lombardi’s report is suggesting, can he?
by Anthony21 on Jul 14, 2009 10:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I would hope not.
If he is, would you even want him if he’s that naive?
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WHATS THE PROBLEM
Let him go that Chilly mistake has killed us for too long. Good bye, do not let the door hit you on the way out.
by bleedingpurplesince74 on Jul 14, 2009 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would the Vikes carry 4 Qbs on their final 53 man roster?
I know it has been discussed here previously, but this could handcuff the VIkes. They signed Rosenfels for a reason (3 years, $9mil), and I don’t see them getting rid of Booty (who still has 3 years on his contract) simply based on getting Favre for a year or two. How much could they get for a trade in Booty? He was a 5th round pick who is still an unknown on the NFL level.
LSU Tigers Baseball... NCAA National Champions- 2009.
by Dane Noble on Jul 14, 2009 10:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My hope...
Was for them to get Booty to the practice squad. He would mean jack in trade fodder, as would Tarvaris, and trading Sage would be absolutely insane.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If JDB gets relegated to the practice squad,
he’ll be up for grabs for any other team to pick up. Someone would grab him.
LSU Tigers Baseball... NCAA National Champions- 2009.
by Dane Noble on Jul 14, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know it's a possibility.
What with the Thigpen fiasco of yesteryear. I was hoping for him to get to the practice squad; didn’t mean it’ll happen. Hopefully, they could do it at a time when someone wouldn’t be looking for a third or fourth quarterback.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like Andersklassen said a few comments down.
It wouldn’t be much of a benefit because we probably wouldn’t get much more for Tarvaris than we would for Booty.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So keep all 4 on the roster then?
LSU Tigers Baseball... NCAA National Champions- 2009.
by Dane Noble on Jul 14, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would try to get Booty on the practice squad, and if he gets picked up I’d say “Oh well” and move on.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
i don’t know what all the fuss is over a 5th round qb with no experience. those guys are all over the place.
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 14, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope this is false, because it would only hurt both parties. I doubt many teams would want Tarvaris to start for their team, and I honestly believe he would fail anywhere else, with trying to learn a new system, new teammates, and all that jazz.. Also, if we did trade him we’d be left with only the 31 year old Sage Rosencopter and the rather uninspiring John David Booty.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 10:36 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thinking this through...
I can’t help but laugh. Seriously, what could the Vikings receive in return for T-Jack?
Viking Vigil - The 2nd greatest Vikings community on the internet!
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Twins Fix
http://www.twinsfix.com
by Andersklasen on Jul 14, 2009 10:42 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
A can of Pepsi?
Not even worth the Mighty Mountain Dew.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+Hahahahahahahahahahahaha (deep breath) Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha (wipe tears from eyes)
Let me start by saying I’m not a TJ guy.
Not only could you not get anything for him (nothing), but:
Which team would want him? (who besides Chili thinks he has something?)
Why would a team want him? (One year left on his deal or are they going to sign him long term backup $$)
Why would TJ want to go to this other mythical team???? (To be the sole back up rather than fighting with Sage for the back-up)
If TJ’s agent called me and asked for a trade I would tell him, “You can talk to any team you want. Bring me the best deal you can get.”
Then, when he came back with hat in hand I’d sign him to a long term back-up deal for peanuts.
by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 14, 2009 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he is honestly acting like this...
Just cut him. Tell him that he can go play for whichever team will have him. Let him know that he is welcome to come back, but there might not be room for him then.
‘And the wild things roared their terrible roars and gnashed their terrible teeth and rolled their terrible eyes and showed their terrible claws’.
by SippyCup on Jul 14, 2009 10:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
this can't be right
you’d think that as long as this whole saga has gone on that we would have heard something about this before now.
people have only been talking about it for four months now and the vikings have been up front about for almost two months.
i would think that if a thing like this were true it would have come out before now.
i can see why he might do something like that but i don’t believe it’s true.
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 14, 2009 11:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’d be surprised if Favre makes it through the season healthy. Elway missed 4 games his last season so he would be healthy come playoff time.
Jackson will get his chance next season and will have a chance to shine during the regular season a few games. The real question is what happens to Sage if he’s relegated to 3rd string coming out of camp? He’ll ask for his release.
by Cobra312004 on Jul 14, 2009 11:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Sage could then whine all he wants. It won’t matter. He doesn’t have enough merit with the league, let alone the team, to demand a trade or release. He’s under contract and he can pout on the bench all he wants.
‘And the wild things roared their terrible roars and gnashed their terrible teeth and rolled their terrible eyes and showed their terrible claws’.
by SippyCup on Jul 14, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sage just got a 3 year extension.
The dude is getting paid pretty good money to ride the pine if Favre shows up. Hell, he might not have started WITHOUT Favre. He was brought in for competition. I have a feeling Sage will act professionally and not say anything too morose. He should realize he’ll have his shot, like Tavaris (assuming he’s re-signed) next year.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You make a good point.
I wonder if Chilly and Favre are smart enough to consider that option? Though it would be three games in this scenario, because Favre would want to play against the Pack.
The first three games of the season are relatively easy, let Tjack or Sage play those first three games giving Favre more time to develop a rhythm with our offense. Then let him loose against the team wants revenge against.
It would be a win-win, but Favre probably would not agree to the terms.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He would lose his consecutive games started streak, so I’m not sure if he’d do it. I’m not sure how much that record means to him.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know anyone would consider that an option.
Switching QBs is almost never good for an offense. It would be a novel idea, for sure, but even if it’s Favre, you have to let the offense get into a groove and a rhythm with the main signal caller. Practicing all week with one guy, then switching out to another for games would be silly and really hamper the offense’s ability.
Sure, Favre might develop a rhythm, but the entire offense would suffer when it counted the most: game day.
Quarterbacks all play differently, have different timing, different tendancies, etc, etc, so there’s no good reason to swtich between them freely barring injury.
As the saying goes, “If you have two quarterbacks, you have none.”
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True
But we have to look at this realistically.
Which would you rather have happen:
Disrupt the rhythm early in the season, likely losing 3 out of 5 games due to the switch in QB?
Or Disrupt the rhythm late in the season when Favre’s body gives out on him and lose in the first round of the playoffs?
Granted, those are not the only two possible scenarios, but they are two probable scenarios.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Favre comes...
He needs to play all 16 games, barring injury. The only game(s) that should be sat out are any games leading up to the playoffs with everything necessary already clinched.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why are they the "prbable scenarios"
I dispute your assertion that, if Favre plays the whole season, the “probable sceenario” for the Vikings is tht they lose in the first round of the playoffs. I strongly dispute that. there is no reason to say the Vikings losing in the first round is “probable” if Faver plays. His team did not lose in the first round of the playoffs two years ago.
by puddnhead on Jul 14, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are misunderstanding my claim. I was talking in hypotheticals, as in if we had to bench Favre late in the season due to poor play.
In other words, I meant that if Favre were to sit out the first few games trying to save himself for later in the year, then we would likely lose a few games during the transition.
If Favre did not sit out the first few games, and come the last game of the season Favres body gives up on him, we would likely lose the first playoff game during the transition.
I was in no way saying that if Favre was on the team, and healthy come the first week of the playoffs, that we would lose in the first round. As a matter of fact, I believe that a healthy Favre is fully capable of leading us to our first Super Bowl win.
The key word in that statement is “healthy”.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I guess, like Chilly and Bevell, I would not be “smart enough” to think that was a good idea either.
I think it is a very bad idea, in fact, for the reasons Manimal says, plus on top of those, LOL, I think it is a BIG “if” that those first three games are somehow cakewalks. With the parity in the league and all the swings in fortune we see every year … “on any given sunday” is not just some cliche.
by puddnhead on Jul 14, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t say smart enough to think it was a good idea.
I said smart enough to consider it as an option, and “smart” may have been the wrong word to use. It was a veiled jab at their coaching inabilities.
As far as the first three games go, I said they are “Relatively” easy. I never said they were a cakewalk. I think Tarvaris, as much as people think he sucks, is fully capable of winning those games for us. That is not saying he will, only that he is capable.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no way favre misses a game. if he signs he will start all 16 games for good or ill.
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 14, 2009 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see Tjack as that kind of guy.
I don’t know him personally, but everything I have seen of him is that he is the type of guy who keeps things to himself.
I also don’t think he is stupid enough to make this kind of request at a time like this. I mean, he knows that next year Favre will not be a Viking and the starting job is his to win.
Where else does he have a legitimate opportunity to start? Nowhere.
There are rumblings of him going to the Pack, but he would not start over Rodgers.
I think these are all just rumors based on how everyone else would feel were they in TJacks shoes.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 11:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I can’t think of a single NFL team that would want this…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4UvKrdafqY&feature=channel_page
by dsludo on Jul 14, 2009 12:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
DO IT!
Do it Tjack, do it! Go somewhere else and take Favre with you. You are both unbearable to watch.
by Heech on Jul 14, 2009 12:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
leaving us with Sage backed up JDB
Oh boyoh boy. Maybe we can resing Gus too, I don’t think anyone else has snapped him up.
by puddnhead on Jul 14, 2009 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
IR or PUP Lists??
Anybody seeing JDB having an injury that would keep him out of service either for the season or for at least the first 6 weeks when rosters are established and we could slip him onto the practice squad then? I still say that there’s a good chance that we carry 4 QB’s this year…
by ctowner35 on Jul 14, 2009 12:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point, putting someone (preferably Booty) on IR would be a good idea. Sounds like something Belicheck would cook up. Which means this probably hasn’t ever occurred to Chilly.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is that this whole story is to see if anyone will call Minnesota and see what it’s gonna take to get Jackson. Hopefully it was pushed out by Jackson’s agent and not the Vikings front office. Kinda like what Cook did in Denver; stir up the pot, create interest, and cash in on the new contract.
I just don’t see anyone giving up anything better than a 4th for him. At that rate, you keep him around, who care’s if he’s happy. I still think he has a role in Minnesota, for both the short and long term.
I think you release Booty, if no one picks him up, then you put him on the practice squad. That’s only if you can afford the spot. How many QBs do you need?
by newmexvike on Jul 14, 2009 12:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
..
I think your can carry 4 QBs..Id rather trust Booty then Jackson in our future right now
by clones21 on Jul 14, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What have you seen from Booty that would lead you to that conclusion?
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
no doubt. i’m seeing this opinion a lot and i just don’t get it.
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 14, 2009 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
likewise,
what have you seen from Jackson that would make you believe he’s better than Booty?
by SammyG on Jul 14, 2009 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a lot of good play on the field. a steady progression in his maturity and level of play.
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 14, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I ‘ll admit that I have a higher opinion of Tarvaris than many other people. That being said, I don’t see how we can throw away Tarvaris, who is average or streaky at worst, for a fifth rounder who hasn’t really shown he can do anything yet. Yeah, Tom Brady was a first rounder. But most quarterbacks aren’t Tom Brady, and I don’t want to drop a guy who could at least be a decent backup for a relative unknown who doesn’t seem to have a whole lot going for him just because he might be “The Guy.”
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be a hell of a gamble, like playing roulette and betting on the zero.
I am more of a poker guy myself, think long and hard then make your decision once you know you have a good hand.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 10:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I personally love blackjack. Still have t try poker, but right now I’m all about blackjack. Not sure how to relate that to this situation, but there it is.
Actually, I’m going to Soaring Eagle with my friends in two weeks to celebrate a couple birthdays. So excited.
No I don’t have a problem. Why do you ask?
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 11:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of all the games in a casino
Poker is one where you are not betting against the house.
In all the other games, the odds are in the casino’s favor. Sit there long enough, and the casino wins.
The casino always wins with poker, considering the rake, but with solid play your odds can be more like 60-40 that you will walk out with more than you started with.
by Bjorno on Jul 15, 2009 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know.
But I love blackjack.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 15, 2009 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
>> I ‘ll admit that I have a higher opinion of Tarvaris than many other people.
Is this why you dislike Favre so much? Because he’s preventing Jackson from getting another shot? Well, Favre coming to Minnesota is the best thing that ever happened to Jackson.
I like T-Jack. I think he has the skills and talent to be a very dangerous QB in the NFL.
Do I think he would produce this year? I think he’d do well, but would inevitably make mistakes from time to time, some of which might cost the team a couple losses on the year. And if the Vikings needed a game late in the year, it might be a bad idea to put too much of the game on Jackson to win. As the games get bigger, he gets stiffer in style.
If Favre does not show, Jackson starting over Sage has a familiar ring to it. I think you have to sit Jackson to start the year and give Sage a try. It’s a great team, an average QB should win frequently with this team. Jackson had a shot last year, over-thought everything and fell flat. Had he not been pulled after week 2, I don’t think the Vikes would have gone 8-3 like Gus did. Best move for Jackson at that time was to be benched.
When Jackson came back late in the year, it was due to injury. I doubt he knew he’d be playing the week before, and you what? He looked pretty damn good out there – no pressure. Over the next few games, the team was winning, but the games were not won or lost based on his performance. The game in Philly was a set back. His play was back to the beginning of the year. He didn’t make big mistakes (for the most part), but he didn’t do anything either. Just like at the beginning of the year.
I’m not saying get rid of him. But whatever happens, don’t start the year with him. Give him at least one year off. If he has to come off the bench due to injury, roll the dice, but it would be best if he didn’t. Let him watch Favre for a couple years. There have been many QBs that spent the first 5 years not really playing much and still had great careers. I just don’t think that time is now and this is a “NOW” team.
Like the Joke about the 2 bulls looking down on the cows. T-Jack needs to sit back and learn. When he’s ready, walk down there and do it up. For now, go with a low risk option that you don’t have to hope will improve enough to allow this team to win.
by newmexvike on Jul 14, 2009 11:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, that’s not why I hate Favre. I would honestly not have a problem with Sage starting over Tarvaris, and if we get Favre he should definitely start.
I know this may sound confusing, what with my hating Favre and all, but bear with me. I don’t want Favre, but if we get him, he obviously has to be the starter.
Really, what I’m trying to say is that I really don’t mind if Tarvaris doesn’t start this year. I just think that dropping him so we could hold onto Booty would be a really bad move.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 14, 2009 11:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
unbelievable
>> and if we get Favre he should definitely start.
I’m speechless. This isn’t Farva’s roommate playing a joke?
That my friend is a real breakthrough. The 5th stage is upon us and in time for training camp. Let’s hope Favre is too, eh?
What’s scarier yet? I agree with everything else you’re saying. About T-Jack, about Booty, about Sage. Weird.
Although, it does sound like you might not be against Jackson getting another shot THIS year. In that regard, we might disagree. Not only do I like Sage’s potential, but I think it’s best for Jackson’s development that he watch for a while. Watch him come back 3 years from now and light it up.
I was happy when the Vikes got Sage. They wanted him for a while, so that says something. But when you read about him, you’ll find he’s not just another “vs. T-Jack” QB. There’s real good reasons to think he’ld be the type of QB to thrive with this Viking team. He should be the #2 guy this year.
It’s too bad about Booty. But I think he is the logical odd man out. Of course you never know what’s gonna happen once camp starts.
by newmexvike on Jul 15, 2009 12:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s me. Although I wouldn’t put it past my roommates though, they’re mischevious bastards.
It’s just such so hard to keep up that fight for so long, and with the passing of time, it becomes more and more obvious that this is going to happen. Brett Favre is going to lead the Vikings.
You have no idea how much it hurt typing those words.
Anyways, I have decided to move on and focus on the greater good, the whole Viking’s team itself, rather than the unsavory player who will likely lead them.
I also was happy we got Sage. While I would not be entirely opposed to Tarvaris getting another chance this year, I definitely would prefer if Sage started. If our starter, whoever that may be, gets injured, I would kind of like to see him get some action. Other than in that situation though, I’d like to see Tarvaris holding a clipboard this season.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 15, 2009 12:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 15, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry man. I’m raising the white flag.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 15, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anthony21, I agree 100% with everything you said. Hopefully someone with TJack’s ear will also say that (if indeed any of this is really going on).
There may be something to newmexvike’s last comment as well, it’s just someone “fishing” to see if something appealing turns up, it’s maybe not being driven by any decision something has to be done.
by puddnhead on Jul 14, 2009 1:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It's so nice to see...
A different team in the NFC North worry about who their starting QB will be…even though we all know Favre will be in purple and won’t sign unless he is the starter. Too bad Rex signed with Houston, you’all could use him if TJack leaves too. ;)
by Bearsguy34 on Jul 14, 2009 1:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Rex Grossman?
I would rather have JDB than Grossman, and I have never seen JDB throw a football in the NFL.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
>> A different team in the NFC North worry about who their starting QB will be…
Uhh, actually this all has to do with the Backup QB. Favre will be the starter for the Vikes this year. I really can’t see the Vikes letting down the fan base.
“Rex Grossman is our starting quarterback”, said Lovey week after week, was there ever worry?
What are you guys gonna do when Cutler folds up mid season? We’ve seen the effort he makes for 2nd place.
by newmexvike on Jul 14, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh...
Imagine having TWO former NFC North outcasts on our team.
‘And the wild things roared their terrible roars and gnashed their terrible teeth and rolled their terrible eyes and showed their terrible claws’.
by SippyCup on Jul 14, 2009 1:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
T Jack forever???
There is no way T Jack would be looking elsewhere. He can’t possibly believe anyone would want him. He’s had 3 years in Minnesota, and still doesn’t know the offense; it had to be dumbed down for him last year.
And don’t give me the last year’s 94.5 rating argument either. He still has never had a 300 yard passing game, few 200 yard passing games, can run but seldom ever shows it, is consistently off the mark, etc… Just isn’t worth the effort.
What other quarterback has gotten the chances he has?
We will be stuck with him as long as we have Childress.
by vikes since 68 on Jul 14, 2009 2:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the fact that he didn’t work in Childress’ “Kick-Ass Offense” is exactly why he should look elsewhere. He may have better luck elsewhere, but being the Vikings 3rd-string QB isn’t really helping his career either.
by SammyG on Jul 14, 2009 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will admit,
With better coaching and playcalling, Tjack might be a serviceable starter for some of the lower-tier teams in this league.
The problem is, that most of those lower-tier teams are there because of bad coaching and playcalling.
by Bjorno on Jul 14, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Imagine
If there was some way the Vikings could offer him up to the league as a punishment for coaches that get caught cheating.
Imagine if they told Bellicheat that he had to use Tarvaris as his quarterback for the rest of the season after he got caught cheating.
‘And the wild things roared their terrible roars and gnashed their terrible teeth and rolled their terrible eyes and showed their terrible claws’.
by SippyCup on Jul 14, 2009 3:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ha ha ha ha.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jul 14, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
t-jackson
Mr. Jackson is to football what Danny Ainge was to baseball (Tried out for Toronto Bluejays, 3rd base, but couldn’t make the throw from 3rd to 1st with out hitting the ground first.!!! at 6’5" ) I doubt if Mr. Jackson could hit a barn with a football, even if he was standing inside!! I say ask for the trade!!! keep Rosenfels, and JDBooty, no doubt the vikings want favre, this is the last contract year for Mr. Jackson, Move On!!! Mr. Jackson!!! you have NOT shown anything since childress made the mistake of drafting you!! I’m sure there is a team looking for a backup, 3rd stringer!!! If childress is smart, (and wants to save his job) he will move t. jackson!!!!!!!
by The Dark Side on Jul 14, 2009 4:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Bjorno, That consecutive streak record is one of the main reasons Farve is coming back! No, he will not sit out first 3 or 4 games! (This is assuming he comes in the first place).
by rollerball on Jul 14, 2009 6:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
News has turned into Rumors
and its a shame. News is supposed to be clarified facts. It should be illegal to bring up pre-mature gossip in news reporting. It affects the outlook on players and organizations and all the way down the line. Unless it was quoted, then can it.
Don’t bring up Jacksons QB rating from last year?..I don’t base my opinions on stats. I believe he played great at the end of the year when he filled in for Gus. He completed first downs consistently and scored often. He’s made mistakes and bad decisions but that comes with the territory. I’d rather have Jackson as the back-up this year to Favre, as he’s shown he can come in off the bench and compete and win games.
You want your back-up to be as fluent with the system as possible, and Sage will be the 3rd string, because he won’t be as up to par. Sorry booty, I think you will be plucked by oakland.
SKOL
by PurpleJesuZ on Jul 14, 2009 9:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
When a qb has played for 3 seasons and seldom throws over 200 yds, he should not be a starter. He’s had a few games where he hasn’t even passed for 100 yds. Pathetic. Also pathetic is the fact that they have to simplify the offense for him. People blame Childress for the simplistic offense, but it is because Jackson doesn’t have the capacity to deal with anything more complex. He throws too many stupid passes. He doesn’t have a clue on how to scan the field, for defenses or his own receivers.
Another problem is Jackson can’t keep the offense on the field. Since the opposing defenses don’t fear him, they can keep 8 men in the box, which hurts the running game. And since he can’t keep the offense on the field, he hurts the defense. The defense is better than it gets credit for, but plays exhausted.
by vikes since 68 on Jul 15, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jackson is certainly not where we need him to be, but what do you expect from a Div 2-AA QB? Wasn’t he supposed to be a 3-4 year project at best? He should never have taken a snap until this year.
His YPA is steadily increasing, but we are a run first offense, so ANY QB we have is going to be averaging 150-200 YPG. Put Favre in the mix, give him the same amount of attempts per game, and we will see roughly the same stats. Granted, he will complete a higher percentage of his passes, but that is what 19 years of experience will do for a guy.
I think it is the other way around. Jackson’s development has been hindered by Chilly’s poor play calling. It does not take a Field Genius to run a play-action pass. We have the best RB in the league and we run play-action the least. That makes no sense.
Jackson is not a Peyton Manning, and it is unfair to expect that type of Quarterback play out of him. The longer we expect him to throw 50 times a game for 300+ yards and 3 TD’s, the longer we will be disappointed in his play.
We don’t need an elite QB to win, we just need a guy who can complete some passes, rush for some first downs and not give the ball up too often. These are things that Jackson is fully capable of, but like any other inexperienced QB he is struggling to adjust to the NFL.
Give the guy a chance to develop before you give up on him. That is not saying we should rely on Jackson to lead us, we should certainly have a solid veteran backup, but we should not give up on him already.
by Bjorno on Jul 15, 2009 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are a run first offense because of Jackson. Even being run first, you should still average 200/game, not 150.
Thigpen came from a small school, has been around less time than Jackson, has been in 2 different offenses, yet played much better.
Jackson isn’t worth it. Spend this much time on Booty and the Vikes will be much better off.
by vikes since 68 on Jul 15, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are wrong sir
We are a run first offense because of two reasons, neither of which have anything to do with TJack.
1) Childress runs his “version” of the west-coast offense. usually, a WCO will pass to set up the run. Childress’ version runs to set up the pass.
2) We have the best RB in the NFL.
by PurplePeopleEaters09 on Jul 16, 2009 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, 8 in the box happened too often.
but Jackson only averaged 16 attempts a game last year. It actually came out to be closer to 20 because of the one game where he only threw the ball twice. Jackson hasn’t come close to playing 3 full seasons. he’s played in 25 games, and a full 3 seasons would be 48. Thats not even close to 3 seasons of play. Not to mention he came from a division 2 school. Game time experience is what this kid needed. Is that his fault? We run the ball too often, and I don’t believe thats Jacksons fault. 8 in the box didn’t occur because Jackson couldn’t make the throws, it was because they knew 70% of the time we were running the ball. In 2007 its hard to say he really had much to throw to besides Wade or Chester Taylor. It wasn’t exactly the best a quarterback could ask for.
No pass is stupid. Whether or not it was completed, it will have an affect on the game in the long run. The fact that a safety or DB knows that you will and have thrown certain routes, they will have to respect it and it ends up helping the run game. Also, the last game he played in before he was injured was against the colts, in which a potential TD thrown to Shincaoe was dropped, and cost us assurance and the game (not to mention terrible special teams play). Childress blames Jackson, and benches him for 9 games. He came back in and performed well, atleast in my eyes.
by PurpleJesuZ on Jul 15, 2009 11:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
our defense was also bad those first two games. they started to gel in the colts game but hadn’t really come together for the packers game. if shank catches that ball, jackson goes on to play the full season and we do better than 10-6 and who knows what happens after that.
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 15, 2009 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He performs well in a very limited capacity. If he has so much potential, surely others see it and we should get a nice draft pick for him. Since he was a 2nd rounder, we should at least get that, but since he is so improved, he is obviously worth a 1st. Put him on the market. Lets cash in on this.
I don’t see getting even a 5th round for him. I don’t think anyone could honestly say he is worth more than that.
by vikes since 68 on Jul 16, 2009 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who Cares
this kid is a POS and doesnt deserve to be in the NFL. Get rid of childress and his baby. Send him to canada or bring back the xfl or put him in arena ball but get him the hell outta Minne!
by Hurley_999 on Jul 15, 2009 12:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ok.
So was that your best Hitler speach. Soon you’ll have the whole SB nation supporting you.
by PurpleJesuZ on Jul 16, 2009 1:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hitler?
What’s a speach?
‘And the wild things roared their terrible roars and gnashed their terrible teeth and rolled their terrible eyes and showed their terrible claws’.
by SippyCup on Jul 16, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it’s like a peach but it’s spanish i think.
by iseepurplepeople on Jul 16, 2009 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hahahaha
it’s like a peach but it’s spanish i think.
Just hilarious
by PurplePeopleEaters09 on Jul 16, 2009 11:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
