What will make Brett Favre playing for the Vikings a success or failure in your opinion??

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 20, 2009 2:33 PM CDT

We all have opinions about whether Farve coming to Minnesota is a good or bad thing and frankly I'm getting a little tired of reading about it so I wanted to change the focus of the discussion to what criteria will you personally use to judge whether the Farve deal was a success or failure at the end of the Vikings' season?

For example:

Is wins the only criteria?

Is it making the Playoffs?

Going deep into the playoffs?

Winning the superbowl?

Is it his qb rating?

TD to interception ratio?

Or whatever else you think is a criteria.

As part of your answer, after you list your criteria for evaluating Farve's season give a number that in your opinion would indicate success for Farve and one that indicates failure. I am really curious to see how the Farve lover and Farve hater camps criteria will be different, so if you are definitely in one camp please identify yourself. If you're not in either camp just say Undecided

I will post my take later, but put an couple examples below (not my actual take) for use for a format:

Example 1: Farve Lover

Successful season with Farve = 12+ wins, playoffs with a bye or at least one win

Failure season = 9 or fewer wins and missing playoffs and first round loss

Example 2: Farve Hater

Successful Season with Farve = Passer rating above 100, TD to Int ratio >1.5, >3600 passing yards, pro bowl selection

Failure season = Passer rating below 88, TD to Int ration < 1.4, <3,000 passing yards, no playoffs

Let's have some fun with this.Then we can argue about how our performance criteria for evaluating Brett are not realistic.

This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.

Tweet Comment 65 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Super Bowl or bust!

I am against the signing of Favre if we cannot do better than without him. I feel that we will win the division without him.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Jul 20, 2009 2:49 PM CDT reply actions

To clarify my position...

…this is a Super Bowl WIN or bust.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Jul 20, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions

Pro T-Jack camp

If Favre isn’t the reason we win the Superbowl than it will be a failure because I think we can do it without him.

by KC612 on Jul 20, 2009 2:50 PM CDT reply actions

If Favre stinks it up,....

…but we win the SB anyway it will still be a failure because I’d rather us save the money and the roster spot and win in spite of TJ instead.

by KC612 on Jul 20, 2009 2:53 PM CDT reply actions

Super Bowl XLIV Champs!

by REVENGE4FAVRE on Jul 20, 2009 2:57 PM CDT reply actions

Question:

If Favre doesn’t win a Super Bowl this year with the Vikings, what will be your position on Favre and the Vikings? I’m not meaning this to be an “attacking” or “degrading” comment; I’m simply curious.

Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com

Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!

by Manimal on Jul 20, 2009 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions

Well I guess I get to be teh frist one to actual reply to Drullin'OverDaCards

1. “lover” I guess — so the ladies tell me ;)

Successful Season: Get to NFC championship, ideally (likely) via getting a bye, > 65% completion percentage

Failure: no playoffs and/or < 1.2:1 TD:INT ratio and/or < 60% completion percentage

Obviously, some of those metrics are dropped if there are significant injuries to AD or other key personnel (knock on wood).

by puddnhead on Jul 20, 2009 3:14 PM CDT reply actions

Thanks for the info

I was wondering if anyone was actually going to post an answer beyond “SB win or bust.” Thanks for doing so.

I agree that an injury to a major player would obviously change the expectations for the whole team so let’s not consider injuries except for those that may or may not occur based upon Farve’s age.

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 20, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions

there's no reason to answer anything other than

“Super Bowl or bust”.

Who cares what his stats are like??

V-I-K-I-N-G-S! Skol Vikings, Let's Go!!

by TheViking83 on Jul 21, 2009 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions

Favre Supporter

Successful Season – Super Bowl (Nothing Less)

Complete Failure – Lose First Game of Playoffs

by Loki The Viking God on Jul 20, 2009 3:34 PM CDT reply actions

Ok, is making the SB enough or do you need the W for Success?

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 20, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions

Of Course Only A Win Would Be A Success

I would rather us not get into the superbowl if we would lose it and bring our career superbowl record to 0-5…I don’t think I could deal with the pain

by Loki The Viking God on Jul 21, 2009 8:21 AM CDT up reply actions

I dont think im a hater

But i cheered against Brett Favre for years so i can safely say im not in love with the idea of him becoming a viking rather i have resigned myself to the fact that it will happen and we will be better (hopefully) for it.

I think it is easy to define both areas

Success – Better than 10-6 and get past the first round

Failure – Worse than 10-6 and another first round loss or no playoffs

(I would also consider losing to the packers twice as a complete loss)

sugar + water + purple

by Grape Drank on Jul 20, 2009 3:45 PM CDT reply actions

lol. I agree 2 losses to the Packers would be a total loss.

I also agree with your success/failure.

by dsludo on Jul 20, 2009 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions

First of all, why do we have to divide ourselves like this? Now we have to be Favre haters or lovers? What about those of us who have neither opinion on him? I didn’t like him in GB simply because he was in GB. Still had respect for the guy, but now he career is at the end (40 years old), he had surgery on his throwing shoulder, and in my eyes he doesn’t have the same ability he had as a younger player and time is catching up to him. I don’t mean that as a knock on him or say it to “hate” on him. Its something that happens to all players: Marvin Harrison, Derrick Brooks, hell it happened to the late, great Steve McNair). We are all Vikings fans (for the most part) and we all want them to succeed. It shouldn’t be whether we are haters/lovers, but what we see as a successful season as Vikings fans with him on the roster.
That being said, the only successful season with Farve at the helm is one that ends with a Super Bowl win. This team is ready, without Farve, to win a playoff game or two. With the circus and attention that Favre is getting, he had better be enough of an increase in play at the QB position to take the next step up. Anything less is a failure because they aren’t making this move to just win a playoff game. I don’t care what his stat line is as long as its a Vikings Super Bowl win.

by Josh_D on Jul 20, 2009 4:05 PM CDT reply actions

Ok, point taken on the hater/lover tags

Although I did say you could list yourself as undecided on the move to have Farve as a viking. The reason I put the tag in is to determine if the pro farve and anti farve groups were setting vastly different standards for success.

The super bowl win or failure criteria is setting the bar pretty high (unreasonably high in the current NFL in my opinion), but I understand your point about wanting to improve from last year. However, even the pats that went 16-0 regular season still lost the SB.

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 20, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions

Never said they had to go 16-0 and clearly am not undecided on the move to have Favre as a Vikings ;). Call it unreasonable if you want, but bringing in Farve means they need to improve more than expectations were without him there. Personally, without Farve has a Vikings, I think they could have gotten a bye and at least the NFC Championship game. He’d have to take it farther.

by Josh_D on Jul 20, 2009 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions

I Agree

I’m a supporter of Favre coming to the Vikings, but we’re only going to have him for a year or two. Bringing him in says to me that we’re ready for the superbowl now, and I would agree. If we don’t win a superbowl with Favre, then we took away opportunities for TJack or Sage to grow as QB’s.

The reason we’re bringing in Favre is to win a superbowl now. If we don’t win a superbowl with Favre, then it was a bad idea to get him. That is why I say anything less than a superbowl win while we have Favre is a failure.

by Loki The Viking God on Jul 21, 2009 8:29 AM CDT up reply actions

Interesting

So you are saying, even if Favre demostrably iomproves the team enough that they go further than you yourself think they could get without him, that would still be a failure?

Wow, tough crowd. Why not demand he go 19-0 while you’re at it.

by puddnhead on Jul 20, 2009 6:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Come on Puddn. Are you always going to be putting words in my mouth? Even you had a successful season as just getting farther than what they did this past season. I happen to see the Vikings as better than they were last year (without Favre) and would expect them to improve record wise, i.e. win a playoff game or two if they don’t get a bye.
I see signing Favre as signing a top flight QB in FA (which is how the Vikings seem to view it) and if that signing can only get the Vikings to where they were without him, then yeah its not a success. That’s not asking alot, that’s what you ask of guys when you sign them like this. People expected big things from Jared Allen after the Vikings spent so much to get him in draft picks and new contract. Why would it be so crazy, or “tough” as you say, to have just as high expectations for Farve after an off season of courting him and all the attention that has brought?

by Josh_D on Jul 20, 2009 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions

all i'm saying is, stop expecting the man to be superman

Saying that the Vikings should not sign a skill player because he “only” makes the team “measurably” better, not “super duper hugely greatly” better … is not the way you win the championship.

by puddnhead on Jul 21, 2009 9:13 AM CDT up reply actions

Here's my take:

Farve Lover

Successfule Season – Farve as league MVP, or team makes nfc championship game, or qb rating above 100, or 13+ regular season wins, or AD league MVP and Farve qb rating over 95, or Farve 4000yd and td to Int ratio >2

Failure Season >11 wins, or no playoffs wins, or QB rating under 85

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 20, 2009 4:08 PM CDT reply actions

Failure was supposed to be

< 11 wins

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 20, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions

You realize

that each of those requirements for success:

MVP
makes NFC championship
qb rating > 100
13+ wins
teammate as MVP
4000 yards + 2:1 INT ratio

you are asking for Favre to have a season that would be in his (respectively for each category):

top 4
top 5
best ever (has never happened for him)
top 4
best ever (has never happened for him)
top 2

seasons of his career for him in each of those respectively categories. Don’t you think those are kinda high expectations? realistically, the only ones he probably even has a chance of making is the 13 wins or the NFC championship. If you used those same standards for his sixteen years in green bay, I think you’d end up with 12 of them as “failures.” Only the three MVP years and 2007 would be successes?

I really think people are getting really carried away here with shat they expect ot get out of Favre. Isn’t it enough now for Favre just to be good and careful, does he really need to be “gaudy?” Do we really want to be seeing him lighting it up when we have AP? Brett Favre should nto be expected to carry this team. We don’t even WANT Brett Favre to be trying to get 4,000 yards. There is something very wrong with our offensive game plans if he gets anywhere close to that.

by puddnhead on Jul 20, 2009 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions

I agree I'm holding Brett to what I thought was a pretty high standard,

but that is based upon my belief that he has never had the supporting cast he will have in Minn this year. This supporting cast is much better than he had at the Jets last year on both sides of the ball. I am expecting an amazing season with him and AD. If they get the play action going, and I can’t see why they wouldn’t, defenses are going to have to decide whether to try and slow down (not stop AD) and go to man coverage on all the receivers or let AD average 7 yds a carry. Either way it means a lot of points for the vikings. Then after the points start coming, put the defense on the field and let them tee off on opposing qb’s. It could get real ugly at the end of a lot of games for opposing teams.

Admittedly, I’m a Farve guy, but the Jets went from 4-12 well below average to almost playoff contenders @ 9-7. What will he do for the Vikings? I think it could be special.

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jul 20, 2009 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions

favre despiser here

my nightmare scenario: Vikes make Super Bowl but favre gets all the credit. Madden comes out of retirement to call the Super Bowl.

Failure: favre continues to have a TD/INT ratio at about 1. We don’t make playoffs or early exit.

Success: Vikes win Super Bowl and credit given to team. (or we make conf. title game=mild success)

my dream scenario: favre look’s at Jared Allen in the teams first scrimage, pisses his pants, and re-retires. Jackson/Rosenfels lead us to Valhalla and our first Super Bowl win.

by Odin on Jul 20, 2009 4:25 PM CDT reply actions

Well if you call the Vikigns winning the superbowl a "nightmare"

then you have issues we can’t help you with

by puddnhead on Jul 20, 2009 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions

I agree

My favre-a-phobia is beyond help. : {

by Odin on Jul 20, 2009 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions

+1

by iseepurplepeople on Jul 21, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions

Any Deal Ever Made is Never the Sole Cause of Whatever Happened Next

Success: Favre prevents opposing defenses from betting the house on eight in the box, and the Vikings sell out all their home games, including the two playoff games, allowing them to stay in Minnesota for at least another decade.

Failure: Ray Edwards gets drunk after practice and challenges Favre to a duel with broad swords in a bar in Mankato.

by Elgar on Jul 20, 2009 5:36 PM CDT reply actions

“There are two ways to slice easily through life; to believe everything or to doubt everything. Both ways save us from thinking.”

LSU Tigers Baseball... NCAA National Champions- 2009.

by Dane Noble on Jul 20, 2009 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions

cool

which bar in mankato has the swords? ;)

by puddnhead on Jul 20, 2009 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions

Favre Hater

It’s Super Bowl champs or bust.

I absolutely hate this QB move, and I have since the beginning. If Favre comes in, has a good year, and we win the whole thing, then maybe it will be justified in my mind finally. But then, of course, will come the eternity of Packer fans telling us our only SB victory is “tainted” and “not really ours” because it took their savior to finally get it. And I’ll have to have the same argument a million times for the rest of my life.

He’s the ultimate scum to me… the man I’ve spent most of my life completely and totally loathing. Why would I want him to come use our beloved franchise as a way to “ride of into the sunset”? I hope we win with him, for the sake of all the other Vikings fans that just want more than anything to win… but to me, its about more than that when it comes to this. And I’d be completely content with trying to win with what we have now.

V-I-K-I-N-G-S! Skol Vikings, Let's Go!!

by TheViking83 on Jul 20, 2009 6:35 PM CDT reply actions

Here Here TheViking83!

I just don’t understand the people who can just forget the past. Football is about more than just winning or losing. It is about the passion. It is about the rivalry. It is about the feeling you get when you are jumping up and down and screaming til you’re hoarse. That feeling when you lose a sure shot at a Super Bowl appearance or the feeling when you totally annihilate the Pack to knock them out of the playoffs. The emotional rollercoaster a fan feels is what separates football from most other sports. Brett Favre has been a part of this heated rivalry for so long that to just switch it off is like suddenly slamming on the brakes of the rollercoaster….it’s just not gonna happen. I feel that the fans that can just accept Favre as a Viking because he is in purple are not on the same passionate plane as us.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Jul 21, 2009 9:02 AM CDT up reply actions

Thats A Ridiculous Statement

“I feel that the fans that can just accept Favre as a Viking because he is in purple are not on the same passionate plane as us.”

I’ve lost a girlfriend because of my passion for the Vikings. If the Vikings lose on Sunday, you do not want to be around me for the rest of the day and she hated that I got that upset about a game. Well it’s not just a game to me. It’s an outlet, an escape, a community…it’s pride….it’s love. And I resent your statement that just because I would accept Favre as a Viking, that i’m not as passionate as people that don’t accept him. I want to see my team win and be as successful as it can be, and you must be out of your mind crazy if you think TJack or Sage could be a better QB for this team then Brett Favre. So what if Favre used to be a Packer – He will make the Vikings better. And you don’t want to your team to be better because he used to play against us in the past? That’s utterly ridiculous.

by Loki The Viking God on Jul 21, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions

Woah woah Loki

Definitely didn’t mean to offend anyone. Just saying I don’t understand it. Your passion for the Vikings just differs from mine.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Jul 21, 2009 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions

i get the feeling you're rather young

the old timers love of the vikings is different. just as the game has changed over time, so have the fans and how they follow their teams.

by iseepurplepeople on Jul 21, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions

I was thinking the same thing

I’d like to see a poll showing age difference in how fans feel about the Favre signing. I’d also bet that there is a difference in locations of fans.

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Jul 21, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions

That’s utterly ridiculous.

We have COMPLETELY different definitions of this statement as it pertains to this topic.

V-I-K-I-N-G-S! Skol Vikings, Let's Go!!

by TheViking83 on Jul 21, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions

Successful season with Favre = Super Bowl

Anything less is failure.

In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E

by FarvaForTheVikings on Jul 20, 2009 6:53 PM CDT reply actions

Super Bowl or Bust

Anything less than a Super Bowl would be bad considering we would have the best QB in franchise history leading us.

by multi-lakes on Jul 20, 2009 7:09 PM CDT reply actions

Fran Tarkington...

Please appologize for not saying favre would be number 2 on our all time list

by Vikingsfan17 on Jul 20, 2009 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions

Frans a jealous idiot, because he knows Favre could take this team to where he never could

by clones21 on Jul 20, 2009 7:41 PM CDT up reply actions

You Didn't Even Spell TARKENTON'S Name Right

You need to pray for forgiveness to the Viking Gods for your insolence!

Just Kidding, But Not Really

by Loki The Viking God on Jul 21, 2009 8:48 AM CDT up reply actions

I already did...

but i disagree with his opinions, he is just a jealous idiot

by Vikingsfan17 on Jul 21, 2009 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions

Tarkenton was overrated

Fran Tarkenton was a very overrated QB who played on some very good Viking teams. He choked in every Super Bowl he played in and constantly butted heads with Bud Grant over his habit of scrambling out of the pocket and throwing ill advised passes. Favre is so superior to Tarkenton in every category.

by multi-lakes on Jul 20, 2009 8:10 PM CDT reply actions

I have heard teammates say the same thing

He was in it for himself no doubt but thats old news and we already knew that

sugar + water + purple

by Grape Drank on Jul 20, 2009 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions

Tarkenton was one of the GREATEST QBs

Ever to trod the turf. Period. And arguably THE GREATEST.

Overrated? You, who think that the last time the Vikes went to the Super Bowl was in the “stone ages”?! I must be a Cro-Magnon then, because I watched every one of the Viking’s Super Bowl games, from Kapp through Tarkenton, and I can tell you flat out, Tark was absolutely not overrated. If anything, he never got the credit for being as good as he really was, and STILL hasn’t.

You want a valid knocks on Tark, I’ll give one to you. Tark had a weak arm, I could throw the ball further than he could, on a consistent basis. But having the deep ball doesn’t define a great QB… Tark turned his weakness into a strength by creating the original “West Coast Offense”, he would pick a defense apart by nicking and diming his way down field.

He created the entire scrambling paradigm, in fact the word “scramble” was introduced to the NFL expressly to describe the Tarkenton Phenomena. He would wear out the defense by making them run their asses off, back and forth across the field chasing him, only to dump the ball off to a receiver that finally got open after Tark managed to keep the play alive for 20 or 30 seconds. He had an absolute will to not only survive, but to succeed, that wouldn’t let him just eat the ball and blame mediocre O-lines or crap WRs. He wasn’t running around back there out of fear, he was running to buy time to find a way to turn a busted play into victory. When Tark had all the time in the world, he didn’t scramble at all! He stood there in the pocket, took his time, like any other QB in the NFL. When he retired, he owned just about every passing record worth holding, and he did it at a time before the rules were changed to give more protection to QBs and WRs so that their numbers and scoring would go up.

As for butting heads with Grant, you just betray your lack of knowledge of Viking history; Tark butted heads with the first coach of the Vikings, Norm Van Brocklin, and eventually that classic argument reach the point where both he and Van Brocklin left the team. Only Tark returned and took the Vikings back to the Super Bowl three more times.

Favre is a pampered poodle compared to Tarkenton, one who never had to really gut out the game without the special protection that came later. Sure, Favre has better numbers, so does every long-standing QB in the modern era, but it’s not because they’re better QBs…

I’d take a Tarkenton any day of the week over a Favre, and twice on Sundays :)

Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!

by DCPurple on Jul 21, 2009 8:02 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Amen

V-I-K-I-N-G-S! Skol Vikings, Let's Go!!

by TheViking83 on Jul 21, 2009 8:40 AM CDT up reply actions

+1

great post!

by iseepurplepeople on Jul 21, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions

-100

by REVENGE4FAVRE on Jul 21, 2009 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions

Are you serious?

Favre holds all the alltime passing records and you think Tarkenton was better? Put away your pipe pilgrim.

by multi-lakes on Jul 21, 2009 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions

I do not like Brett Favre

But I do think he would be the best QB available for the Vikings. I do not see any other option at this point.

Success = more wins than last year, and at least 1 playoff win.
Failure = anything less than success. Lol

If you think about it, the Vikings have not really done a whole lot to improve from last year’s squad. They have replaced intellect with athletic ability (both Birk and Sharper’s play had slipped dramatically). They also had a fairly successful draft. And they should be getting some key injuries back. But bottom line is that this will be basically the same team that went 10-6 and one and done last season. If Brett Favre comes in and doesn’t improve over what this team achieved last year without him, it will be a complete and utter mistake to bring him in.

by PurplePeopleEaters09 on Jul 20, 2009 9:03 PM CDT reply actions

Super Bowl

Without Favre, the Vikings can easily go 12-4, no question. I don’t think that Favre would appreciably improve that, and I don’t think the Vikings need to improve that. Where Favre is needed is for the playoffs and the Super Bowl…

So. Favre=Super Bowl. I might forgive if we don’t win the Super Bowl, but if he comes, we’d better be in the Big Game.

If we don’t get to the Super Bowl.. then, IMO, Favre=Fire Childress/Bevel/Favre.

Because that Troika will have wasted away changes to bring in a franchise-level QB this past off-season, and will have blown T-Jack’s chance to grow into the Big-Boy-Shoes this coming season.

by DCPurple on Jul 21, 2009 7:48 AM CDT reply actions

12-4

is never “easy” If it is, why didn’t we do it last year.

by puddnhead on Jul 21, 2009 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions

Special Teams

by DCPurple on Jul 21, 2009 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions

+1

by iseepurplepeople on Jul 21, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions

+1

The Special teams were easily the biggest thing holding the team back last year. It for sure lost two games (GB, @Chi-town) and almost lost a 3rd ( NO) and gave up a record 7 TDs total. And that is just the punt/kickoff coverage teams, which speaks nothing to how bad the Vikings were at returning. Those 2 losses could have made the Vikings 12-4 last year and with wins over Carolina and the Giants that would have made them the #1 overall seed and a bye in the playoffs.

by Josh_D on Jul 21, 2009 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions

Favre's Success

I am in the Favre supporter camp. (Sorry, but I cannot bring myself to the point of stating I am a Favre lover. I have gone through the five stages of greif with this ordeal and am finally at acceptance. It will take a season like none of us have ever experienced before I could even think of moving beyond that. However, that is not how I would measure the Favre affair as a success or failure.)

I think we would have to label Favre a success if AD averages 5.3 ypc and Favre’s QB rating is 93+. This would strongly indicate that the team is taking advantage of the situations defenses are presenting them with. (Presuming Favre is allowed to audible.) I would also like to see a turnover margin of +15. Maybe the defense is willing to take a few more risks per game with Favre under center. (And of course we aren’t turning the ball over too frequently then either.) As far as the playoffs go, I think we have to reach the NFC Championship game.

I would deem any Favre signing a failure if the Vikings fail to advance in the playoffs, or if our offense doesn’t show marked improvement in it’s overall scoring and efficiency. I would also view any Favre signing as a failure if we release/trade for peanuts T-Jack and he becomes a solid starting QB elsewhere down the line.

It's good to be King!

by The King on Jul 21, 2009 8:31 AM CDT reply actions

I like the idea of measuring Favre's impact

based upon AP’s YPC. That is something I would add to my list of criteria if I were doing it now.

I think you are being a little too stringent on the 93+ rating — after all, that is something tom Brady has done only once in his career (guess which year!), also moon and cunningham did it only once — but otherwise your criteria seem reasonable.

by puddnhead on Jul 21, 2009 9:23 AM CDT up reply actions

i think i'm obvious

i bet you think i’m going to say superbowl or bust? well i’m not (surprise!).

success: favre throws < 15 ints (playoffs included) and helps us win in the playoffs.

i think tj or sage can get < 15 ints and i think they can not lose in the playoffs (meaning it wouldn’t be their fault if we lost) so favre has to be better.

failure: obviously the opposite of above.

by iseepurplepeople on Jul 21, 2009 11:30 AM CDT reply actions

2008 NFC Championship game Giants@ Packers = 2010 NFC Championship Eagles@ Vikings

Lets not forget that the Packers defense has sucked for years. That’s why they are switching to the 3-4 defense. I think this is going to be like the Packers in the NFC Championship game except BETTER. I mean their defense can’t handle turnovers. The Vikings defense can. The vikings have so many better tools then the Packers did 2 years ago and they made the NFC Championship game.

by Kingofvikes on Jul 21, 2009 7:12 PM CDT reply actions

Packers defense

We hardly “sucked” in 07’. We were 11th in total yards, and 6th in scoring.

“The vikings have so many better tools then the Packers did 2 years ago and they made the NFC Championship game.”

I’m also going to have to disagree with that. It seems like people wanna discredit our 07’ season because of our poor one in 08’. We had a very, very dangerous offense that year (2nd in the NFL in total yards, and scoring. Only behind the Pats who put up ridiculous numbers in both those categories). Could your offense be as deadly? Ya, maybe. I don’t think you have the wr’s though, and your offense isn’t set up to be one that gets you big numbers. I think if Favre comes he’ll throw the ball only 17-25 times a game, which is how it should be because of AP. With him only throwing it that much, he won’t be able to put up those big numbers, and if he does put up big numbers then AP’s numbers likely won’t be as big. (Which is something I don’t think most Vikings fans would want)

by packallday555 on Jul 22, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions

Favre would be a great fit.

Those who disdain Favre should realize he is our best bet to get to the Super Bowl. I am a realist and don’t get caught up in childish emotion. I could care less that he once payed for the Packers & the Jets and used to beat us like a drum. Once he puts on the Viking uniform he will be one of us and all the doubters will realize this is a great thing.

by multi-lakes on Jul 21, 2009 8:50 PM CDT reply actions

1. I was a Favre-hater but now I’ve accepted that he will play for us, and no long-time cheesehead is going to keep me from watching the Purple People Eaters.

Success: Very simply the Vikes must make the second round of the playoffs and not get blown out when/if they finally lose.

Failure: No playoffs, a 44-0 loss in the NFC Championship game, kneeling on the ball to go to overtime instead of trying to win.

I expect to see a much better passing team and AP should get fewer carries (keeps him fresh for the playoffs).

by zebano on Jul 22, 2009 8:48 AM CDT reply actions