"Schism" Becomes a Punchline
by Anthony21 on Aug 27, 2009 2:15 PM CDT
in Minnesota Vikings
Email
PrintSo, that story from ESPN’s Adam Schefter yesterday about the "schism" in the Vikings locker room? The one where Schefter claimed that Brett Favre has "little support" from his teammates?
This isn’t going to surprise you, but the report is apparently bogus.
Judd Zulgad, one of the downright best beat writers around, wrote on Access Vikings that he spent a great deal of time looking into the report from Schefter and a similar one from Pro Football Talk. And this is his conclusion:
So where did my reporting get me? Nowhere close to feeling that this situation is as dire as it is being painted.
So now, "schism" has become a punchline. Just ask Chris Kluwe:
As the camera crews walked away after the open access part of practice, Kluwe yelled: "Uh-oh, there’s a schism in the camera crew."
FAN can't confirm schism over No. 4, but can certify at least 2 of following: chasm, fissure, rupture, fracture or splinter.
Just watched first 15 min of Vikes practice. A "faction" of the team was dressed as Confederates, the other dressed as the Union. More later
A schism can be treated with an over the counter ointment or for quicker results....an antibiotic.
Talking in the sports office, we think Schefter was taking his practice SAT's and "schism" was on there. He decided to use it in a sentence.
And that's just how this thing should have ended. Because there's nothing to see here. Just a couple players not yet on the Favre bandwagon – and that’s perfectly fine. I’d be stunned if every player was lined up unanimously in support of Favre. The fact that it isn’t unanimous is hardly newsworthy – but at least this mini-controversy should soon be behind this team. Keep the schism jokes coming.
105 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
seriously
4Qtr, down 6 in the NFC Championship game…
Does anybody honestly believe that there is even one player in the locker room who would prefer to look up into Jackson’s eyes and believe he has the best shot at leading this team to a game winning TD drive? If they do, show them the tape of the Eagle’s game last year and schism is over.
Talent and spry legs aside, Favre has been there and he knows how to lead an offense. Jackson’s legs would be quivering.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you
Or
Does anybody honestly believe that there is even one player in the locker room who would prefer to look up into Jackson’s eyes and believe he has the best shot at leading this team to a game winning TD drive? If they do, show them the tape of the Eagle’s game last year and schism is over.
Give them a one of these:
And kick them out of the huddle.
my god
Austin with the STUNNER STUNNER STUNNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by Cody_3_twins on Aug 27, 2009 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Here's a situation
OT, Game Tied in the NFC Championship game. Does Favre throw the ball away or make an ill-advised pass?
(Hint: 2004: Int; 2008: Int)
Favre does his WORST in the post season, under pressure.
maybe
but did you see Jackson in the playoffs last year? He was scared, the rest of the team played well enough to win but he was brutal.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you
by GopherNation on Aug 27, 2009 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions
i saw the game. are you talking about the first half when the vikings offense was very good or the second have when they tried to keep doing the same things they did in first have even though the eagles made a lot of adjustments at halftime?
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions
But the team wouldn't get to that point
with Tarvaris Jackson.
by KC Viking on Aug 27, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
So the moral victory of getting to the post season but losing is ok?
Because the vibes I get were that last year was a disappointment at best, and a failure at worse…
If losing is ok
than Tarvaris Jackson is always the better pick than Brett Favre. You are aware that Favre led the Packers to 2 Super Bowl appearances, winning one and losing one to the Denver Dynasty…right? Tarvaris Jackson would not have had the same success with the same teammates. Even if you think otherwise, it’s just a thought which may or may not play out differently in reality while Favre’s record is a matter of fact in NFL history.
You may as well hate on HoFers Fran Tarkenton and Dan Marino for not being perfect in the postseason while you’re at it. Whatever you do, though, do not confuse Tarvaris Jackson with Favre, Marino, or Tarkenton or anyone who is/was actually good.
Last year was overachievement at best and only a failure because the organization failed to upgrade the 2 major areas of weakness (QB and CB) while the stars were healthy and Pro Bowlers like Birk and Sharper were still on the team.
Yeah, TJ beat up on the worst team ever (DET), the 3rd worst passing D (ARI) and the NYG backups while losing to a below average ATL passing defense, but was predictably poor against above average defenses like GB, IND, and PHI. Despite the cushy schedule at the end of 2008, Jackson’s career best start was in 2007 against a good NYG team. If he was really improving, shouldn’t his greater knowledge of the system and better talent around him have led to a better game against one of those cream puff defenses at the end of ’08?
I didn't say losing is ok
I was pointing out that just getting to the Post Season and losing, which Favre has only done since 1996, shouldn’t be the goal. Yet there are people dreaming of Favre leading the Vikings down the field to seal the deal, and he’s done everything BUT that in recent history. Favre has not been to the Super Bowl in recent history. Favre has, in general not played well in the playoffs.
I didn’t say T-Jack is the answer, but as pointed out in numerous other threads, he’s started 19 games or so. That’s not even 19 continuous games, that’s a 4 game spurt here, a 6 game spurt there. How anyone expected him to develop a rhythm with the offense like that is clearly delusional. Yes, he’s played poorly at times, but he hasn’t been given the chance to succeed at all.
But that’s neither here nor there. Favre may very well take team to the NFC Championship game- the odds are actually better. But Favre has consistently choked in those games since his last SB appearance. Is he better now than he was in the late 90’s?
This arguement that losing in postseason == bad QB is tired, mindless, silly, annoying, and has to stop.
Please do. It’s dumb. It makes you sound dumb. No one wins every game they play. By your reasoning John Elway was the god-awful worstest QB, cause he lost in posseason over, and over, and over again. Until he suddenly became BRILLIANT by winning it all twice.
And the joke is, it wasn’t even him that rally won it. It was TD and a blitz-happy D. But in your world of simple calculus, it becomes Elway I guess. Who was awful when he was young and had amazing stas, and then became a great QB when he was old and and had not very remarkable stats at all. Okiedokie.
I did not make that argument
I said that Favre plays poorly in the post season. I did not say he was a bad quarterback. Plenty of QBs play poorly in the postseason and are “good” quarterbacks- see Brees and Rivers for a couple of recent examples.
Yes, people lose games in the playoffs. Only one team has to win. This century, however, Favre’s teams didn’t lose because of luck of the draw, or because the RB fumbled at the wrong time, or because the D failed to live up to their end (although the ‘04 Eagles game they certainly didn’t help things). They lost because of Favre being wreckless. Maybe the Vikings won’t give him a reason to be wreckless. Maybe it’s always been because Packers teams were so terrible that Favre had to do it on his own. Who knows why he’s lost his mind in the playoffs. But Favre, and Favre alone, cost his team those games.
Elway had one bad superbowl loss by my calculation, unless you had him down for playing defense as well.
OK then
Calling your bluff. So Favre “played poorly” in his last playoffs in 2007.
Please tell me what packer played will in that postseason. Played better than Favre. Espeically in that last game. Grant? Nope. Harris? Nope. They both were godawful. And Grant lost the ball like 2-3 times in the first quarter of prev game. Only guy on filed who played worse was Giant placekicker, perhaps. Packer O line? Nope.
Packers shoudl dump all of them to? because, you know, they played so poorly in the playoffs. But oh yeah, that’s right, it was only Favre who did. They would have won it all if they didn’t have Favre I guess.
Why people can’t just recongize that Favre & Packers lost simply because THE GIANTS PLAYED BETTER — not any particular Packer was so awful — is beyond me. Frankly to me it was a miracle that Favre even had himself in a position to thow that game away in OT. The Packers were so badly outplayed up to that point, it should have never been that close.
Exactly. Everyone else stunk in that game. Which is EXACTLY why these claims that Favre makes everyone better instantly are full of crap. If Favre is surrounded by crap, Favre plays like crap. He’s just another QB now, he’s not superman.
A great analogy are the “top” college QBs from the middle of the decade. Leinart. Young. Harrington. Grossman. Orton (although debatable, he was in the Heisman race late into the season), Alex Smith, Russell. All of them were wildly successful when surrounded by players who knew what they were doing and did it right. But then they get into a system or team that isn’t as polished and all of a sudden they’re not little gods any longer.
The running game and defense are good, do not get me wrong. But people are expecting Favre to make up if there is any deficiency in those areas, and he’s shown that he, much like any other QB, cannot do that.
If Favre is surrounded by crap, Favre plays like crap.
Uhm … OK. No one ever suggested otherwise, did they? I confess, I can no longer figure out your point.
Is it that Favre is surrounded by crap, in your opinion? Most of us see the Vikings as a good team, and what Favre adds is NOT to make a bad team good all by himself, but as an opprotunity to upgrade a likely below-average starter, to a hopefully at least average starter. Not a “superman” like you seem to think. The only aspect of Favres’ play that I am counting on to be “above average” for sure is his ability to recognize and make adjustments to defenses.
you have to follow the entire thread here puddn. if tj’s playoff performance is indicative of his overall play then so is favre’s. the team surrounding the guy goes both ways. you can’t make arguments that say ‘tj sucks look what he did in the playoff game’ and then turn around and say favre is better when he has sucked in the playoffs too. but then your defense is that it wasn’t just favre in his playoff games, it was the team as whole that didn’t play well. well then last year it wasn’t just tj who didn’t play well it was the whole team.
you see how this works? you can’t make one arguement for one guy and not for the other. you also can’t defend one guy with another arguement and not allow the same defense for the other guy.
well i guess you can since you did, but no one is really going to take you seriously if you keep doing that.
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions
My point is
AP isn’t going to rush for 100+ every game (in fact, he didn’t against the Eagles last year). The defense isn’t going to stop everyone dead in their tracks all the time. If one of those happens, Favre is going to try to “rise to the occasion” and start making risky throws, etc. That’s when he loses game. That’s when ANY QB wins games.
So, if one of the supporting members falls apart, Favre gives you nothing more than any other decent QB would. There is a school of thought of some people is that all of these “intangibles” that Favre has over T-Jack/Sage somehow allows him to overcome a miscue by one of the other factions of the team. He has no evidence of doing that in the past (in fact, lots of it on the contrary).
The moral of all of this is you don’t want Favre to feel like he has to throw it. Because when he feels like he has to throw it, he’ll throw it no matter what. And because he’s an immobile qb (and for the most part always has been), he feels like he has to throw it ALL the time. T-Jack gets you scrambling. Sage does too, although you just hope he doesn’t try to hurdle anyone. I’d take a 2 yard scramble over a throw into double/triple coverage any time, no matter how hard Favre throws the ball. Especially on a last minute drive when down by 6, which was the entire origin of this thread.
Correction
That’s when he loses the game. That’s when ANY QB wins games.
arrgh!
Favre is not capable of playing better than Tjack now. Favre did not (in his games against Pats, Cardinals, and Titans — all three good opponents) play better than TJack against good teams last year.
i give up. You have worn me down into submission.
oh don’t go out like that! look this stuff up man, it’s all out there.
no here is saying that with favre we have a 0 chance of winning a superbowl. the guy might prove me and all his other skeptics completely wrong and add another superbowl ring and another legend to his hall of fame mystique. as a viking fan i certainly hope he does! all we’re saying is that in reality, based on past performance, our chances with favre don’t look as good as everyone makes out to be.
add to that the circus from this year, and you know there’s going to be a circus next offseason as well, add to that how much favre costs, add to that what we stand to lose (booty could be the next tom brady and we might lose him).
add all that up and is favre really, really worth it? get past the hype and ‘hall of fame’ moniker and all the other crap we’ve heard about favre for 18 seasons and ask yourself that question.
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Here’s the point:
All things being equal, run game going well, defense making stops, Favre is better than the other QBs on the roster.
All things being equal, team is down by a reasonable margin, but the run game isn’t clicking, or the defense is giving up quick scores, Favre is a liability because that “gunslinger mentality” says that he has to win the game since xxx isn’t holding up their end of the bargain.
For the regular season, when you don’t necessarily play the best teams, you can get away with some of this. But in the playoffs, when you are playing (theoretically) the best of the best, that mentality kills you. Favre heaving the ball up for grabs last year against the Dolphins and coming away with a TD? Sheer luck. Favre doing that in the (theoretical) playoff game against a team like the Titans, Ravens, Colts, or Steelers? Int. That’s why I simply do not want Favre leading the team down at the end of the game down a score.
p.s
“wreckless?” lol. I’m gonna pretend you did that on prupose, it was a pun.
Re: “Elway had one bad superbowl loss by my calculation”I find it intersting that you say this, because even in that first superbowl that he won, Elway was 11 for 22, 0 TD, 1 INT. Hardly a good outing. In fact this is the perfect case to examing your point about Favre closely, since he played in the same game. Here’s teh stats fo the two in that game:
Favre 25 of 42, 257 yds., 3 TD’s, 1 INT, 91 QB rating
Elway 12 of 22, 123 yds., 0 TD’s, 1 INT, 51.9 QB rating. Desptie having best QB in league to take heat off passing game.
Doesn’t it strike you as a problem that, because you are so focused on whether the game is won or lost, that you find yourself basically saying that Elwya played great in that game, and Favre played badly?
You're right
Elway didn’t win that, the running game did.
T-Jack goes 15/35 for 164 with a pick and a fumble, running game doing well, defense allows 283 passing yards and only 67 rushing yards. Very similar stats to Elway’s game. So why didn’t the Vikings win their game last year?
If you can’t figure out on your own that
15/35, 164 yds. 4.7 ypa, 0 TD’s, 2 turnovers
is worse than
12/22, 123 yds., 5.6 ypa, 0 TD’s, 1 turnover
I’m not sure I can do much to help you. That Superbowl was one of the closest in history, you know; Denver barely pulled it out.
they both stunk. the degree of stinkiness is irrelevant.
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Very selective perceptions.
Elway had one ‘bad’ super bowl loss. Do you consider Favre’s one super bowl loss (31-24 to Denver) a ‘bad’ loss? Did you actually watch the game or at least look at the stats?
“Favre, and Favre alone, cost his team those games.” No one will argue the int in overtime, but they played 60 minutes of football before that. They handed the ball to Grant 13 times (and got 28 total rushing yards out of it) and passed 35 times (and this after Grant had rushed for 201 the week before). They inexplicably put that entire game on Favre’s shoulders and he got them into OT against the eventual SB champions. And all anyone remembers is the INT.
Favre is 11 and 10 in the playoffs. That’s a lot of losses, but remember, if you get into the playoffs you either win the Super Bowl or you lose exactly one game. In the postseason you’re playing the elite teams in the league. One team (and QB) is going to succeed and the other 11 are going to fail. All you can do every year is give your team a chance to get there and Favre has done that 11 times. On just the averages, 11 trips should have resulted in 4 championship games, two trips to the SB and one SB win. That’s precisely what he has.
Even the very best teams can not guarantee a win in any given game in the playoffs – ask the 2007 Patriots.
by Migrant lurker on Aug 28, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Hey puddnhead
You do realize that you just created and good arguement for Tjax right. I know you weren’t trying too, but its in print now, or rather type.
by midnightwonder on Aug 28, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions
???
I’m guessing that you think I said teams don’t lose in playoffs because of bad QB play?
If so, only problem is that I didn’t actually say that. What I said was that a tema losign in the playoffs does not automatically imply the QB played badly. Of course it could be true, the team could lose because the QB played badly (and yes, I personally would say that this is what happened with TJack last year … and, to be fair, with Favre aginst the Rams earlier in the decade), but the team losing does not prove the QB played badly (or winning prove that he played well). Which is why I brought up the Favre-Elway superbowl
what you actually said or implied doesn’t really change the fact that you created a good arguement for tjack.
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Reality check
The greatest QBs to ever play the game were not perfect in the postseason. I suppose that you think that Rex Grossman is the best QB ever for his perfect postseason record, though, right? I mean, Grossman is far more comparable to Tarvaris Jackson.
There is also a difference between being a good enough QB win playoff games before going home if they don’t win it all.
Who on Earth do you think was a good QB, other than the Mighty Tarvaris Jackson (0-1 in the postseason)? I doubt that you can answer that question without getting to Favre very quickly or mentioning someone more similar to this discussion.
Before you attempt a poor answer to that last question, familiarize yourself with some guy named John Elway. He only WON the SB in his last 2 years of his career after contemplating retirement several times before that. Was Elway better then than he had been in the 80s?
Post Season Records:
Favre: 11-9
Elway: 14-7
Both of them were good QBs. But the crucifixion of T-Jack for his 1 playoff loss, for a guy who has not been ever given a chance to succeed, is loony. The same things that are being said about T-Jack (doesn’t see the field, throws erratic passes, etc.) have been the EXACT same things said of Favre, and especially of his performances in the post season. Does that make T-Jack a good or bad quarterback? Nobody knows because nobody will give him a fair shake to answer that question. And he will eventually get that chance, but it most likely won’t be with the Vikings.
It's not just about TJ's playoff loss
That game happened to be one of only 3 vs. quality opponents, and he played poorly and lost all 3. You should look up how few QBs get to start 19 games before suggesting that TJ is being “crucified.” Will Andrew Walter get to start a 19th game? What about Tyler Thigpen, who only needs 6 more to get there? How many years will it take them to reach 19 starts? Sage has been in the NFL for 8 years and has not started 19 games, but he played well against tough competition in the last 10 in the past 2 years.
The major difference is that Favre has had some great games vs. quality opponents and almost singlehandedly won them himself. He’s played this long and held the iron man streak because he was definitely worth starting and did not need to beat out anyone for his job. Favre’s last 19 starts are better than TJ’s 19 career starts despite the fact that Favre only had half an arm for 5 of those games (and possibly the same rotator cuff tear that he has now, too). If you don’t see a clear difference between Favre and Tarvaris Jackson, then Chilly isn’t the last guy to come around on this one.
In his last season as a Packer, Favre started all 16 games with 12 quality starts (12 games with a rating of 80+, and 10 of those were 100+, about 1/2 were vs. quality opponents). The 4 bad games were against quality opponents, too, and his team still went 2-2 then. How long do youthink it will be before Tarvaris Jackson posts 100+ ratings in 10 games in a year?
Maybe Tarvaris Jackson will go elsewhere and have a decent year or two like Steve Bono (a 6th round pick) or Elvis Grbac (8th round pick), but still fall short of being consistent…or perhaps he will be more like Kordell Stewart (a similarly raw 2nd rounder who made the Steelers suffer through 4 below average seasons before finally being an above average passer for 1.5 seasons before falling on his face at his next stop and not managing to beat someone like Kyle Boller for a starting job after that. TJ’s no Randall Cunningham, though. Randall was a good passer in his time in PHI before arriving here and was productive despite being sacked as often in one season than TJ has been in his career. Stats-wise, TJ is similar to Andrew Walter or Charlie Frye in the sense that all 3 threw more INTs than TDs in their first years as starters and failed to keep their starting roles with their first teams. Or maybe he’ll be like Tony Banks and have 1 decent year with a new team only to disappoint and lose his job the following year. But the Vikings have 2 better options right now, and there will probably be 2 better options next year, so if a team offers a 4th for him, the Vikings should take it.
(Links courtesy of pro-football-reference.com. All QBs are 2nd round picks unless otherwise noted.)
this is about the playoffs. if we can get to the playoffs with tj and gus last year, then we can get to the playoffs with tj and sage this year.
we don’t need a qb to get us to the playoffs. we can do that. so why bring in favre? to go farther in the playoffs? since losing to denver in the 98 superbowl, favre is 3-6 in the playoffs. is that what you consider an upgrade? is that what’s going to get us over the hump in the playoffs?
or should we actually be more realistic and look at just the last 5 seasons since he began his yearly end of the season slide. in those 5 years his teams have made the playoffs 2 times (same as the vikings in that same time frame) and he’s gone 1-2.
you’re argument is that in favre’s case it’s the teams fault but in tj’s case it’s tj’s fault.
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions
No
Last year the Vikings had the benefit of a post-8-8 schedule. This year, they do not and both CHI and GB should be better (better and with an easy schedule in GB’s case). DET probably can’t lose 16 again. The “easy” portion of the Vikings’ schedule may not have the benefit of the Williams Wall.
A good QB would have been able to start last year at least 1-1 if not 2-0 and therefore earned a better 1st round matchup in the playoffs.
The difference between TJ fans and the rest of us is that TJ apologists who think the world should revolve around his fragile self-esteem are happy to eek into the playoffs by winning a weak division or via a wild card berth while the real Vikings fans want to dominate and earn a first round bye and only have 3 postseason games to the Super Bowl.
TJ doesn’t have those excuses because his team was winning despite him. He was not asked to win games in the 4th as often.
I see that all facts regarding Favre’s last year as a Packer were lost on you. They were 2-1 in the postseason that year (and look how the team fell apart without him last year!) and the great games even against tougher opponents. Even your own stat which had SOME postseason wins as opposed to none was totally lost on you because, again, no amount of factual data can change your mind. You and you alone are the supreme know-it-all as to why Tarvaris Jackson is SO much better than future Hall of Famer Brett Favre, and the rest of us will just have to enjoy the next 1-2 seasons of having a much better QB while you get angry with each win and blather on about how TJ could have managed that game with a 60-something rating and provided a more exciting experience for you or something.
How you can agonize over a 3-6 record (for a time frame which you picked to frame the record in the worst possible manner), and yet dismiss 0-1 as nothing to worry about … … how you can ignore KC Viking’s pointing out that Favre’s last X starts are still better statistically than Tjack’s last X starts, even though that includes Favre’s worst stretch of his career, and a period in which he was injured, and then say it doesn’t matter at all because “it’s just the regular season and we got to the playoffs anyway” … how you can how you can do this without feeling hypocritical, misleading and employing a double standard … is beyond my powers of comprehension.
I mean, seriously dude, “we don’t need a qb to get us to the playoffs”?!? Have you really never heard of the concepts of bye weeks and home field advantage? You really don’t think the Vikings wouldn’t have been better off if they’d won two more games & secured the #1 or #2 seed? Really? (and before you throw the example of teh 07 Giants and 08 Cardianls at me, please do your research and realize that getting to the superbowl playing on wildcard weekend is VERY much the exception, not the rule)
Insisting that “as long as we get to the playoffs anyway, it doesn’t matter how many games we win” just makes you look … foolish.
i’ll answer both kc and puddn here.
you may read a lot into strength of scedule, speculation about the williams etc.. i don’t care about that. a win is a win. we don’t get 1 1/2 wins for beating new england and we don’t get 3/4 wins for beating detroit. we get 1 win for 1 win. and your arguement about us eeking into the playoffs by winning a week division? well favre played in this division for 16 years. apply your arguement equally please.
lot’s of good qb’s have started out 0-2. favre himself has done it a few times. if you’re going to throw this stuff out there, then it’s out and it applies to everyone.
i’ve never apologized for tj. in fact i’ve said many times the guy needs to show us something more. i think he’s been given a raw deal by the coaching staff and i think too much has been expected of him (i’ll get to that in a bit) but i’ve never apologized for the guy.
i know the qb is the one who gets thrown under the bus by fans and i also know that a lot of the time it’s not his fault. when a wr drops the ball or runs the wrong route it’s the qb’s stats who take the hit. this goes to favre and tj as well. i don’t apply one set of standards to one qb. i apply the same standards to all. i’m not blinded by a 12 yr old superbowl ring or dusty mvp trophy.
favre’s last year as a packer he was 1-1 in the playoffs. he threw the int to lose the game in ot (he holds the record for most game losing ints in ot playoff games). the receiver didn’t drop the ball or run the wrong route, favre threw to the wrong guy.
no amount of factual data can change your mind
because there isn’t any factual data that can back your claims! show me some! don’t just tell me that ‘favre wins agains more quality opponents blah blah blah’ prove it! prove that he does it late the in season or in the playoffs when we need it. i have no doubt that he can do it the first 10 weeks. brett favre is better than tjack. i never said he wasn’t. i’ve said that favre fades at the end of the season. he becomes a bad qb by playoff time. i’ve proved it. (if you care to look at actual game stats just go to favres stats on nfl.com and you’ll see the numbers) i have posted many stats. all i get from kc is a bunch of made up stuff about ‘quality opponents’ decided by kc. all i get from puddn is how i skew stats for my own purposes.
which leads me to my next point:
a 3-6 record (for a time frame which you picked to frame the record in the worst possible manner)
i didn’t just pick this time frame to suit my purposes. why would include statistics prior to 10 years ago. do you honestly think that favre (or any player in any sport ever) plays the same when they are 39 as they did when they were 29? do you honestly think that we are getting a brett favre capable of playing like he did 10 years ago? why would i included stats from an era that no longer exists? believe me it could be worse. if i shorten it to 5 years, it’s much worse.
i didn’t pick and chose and add a bunch of bad stats together. these are favres stats that are relevant that himself has earned over the last 10 years
and yes i do dismiss 0-1 as irrelevant. for every qb you can name me that started out 1-0 in the playoffs, i’ll name you 10 that went 0-1 and i’ll make at least 3 of them either hall of famers or current ‘elite’ qbs.
you should probably look up the meaning of hypocritical, misleading and double standard before you start waving them around. or maybe you could actually read a post, understand it, and then comment on it. i’ll repeat. we don’t need favre to get to the playoffs. wild card, home field advantage whatever. we can get to the playoffs without favre. we did it last year. we could do it this year if need to. if you disagree with that then i don’t know what team you’ve been watching but you’re on the wrong team’s blog.
now if you’ve read thus far in my current post you’ll know that i think favre is a better qb than tjack. you’ll also know that i think that at the end of the season and in the playoffs, that favre’s skill set will be diminished to the point that he isn’t any more and maybe less efffective than tjack (or sage for that matter). you’ll also know if you’ve read other posts of mine and others who actually show stats and facts to support our opinions (yes this is my opinion) that favre does indeed deteriorate at the end of the season and make bad decisions in crucial situations (either from a failing body or actual mental errors is irrelevant).
to answer your question about winning 2 more games last year puddn i’d have to point to our special teams. you know, the unit that was responsible for our offense having such ugly starting position all year, the unit that set the dubious record of allowing the most touchdowns in league history, the unit that single handedly cost us 2 games last year? yeah i’d take those 2 wins and a bye or home field sure.
the wildcard was introduced in 1970. the current playoff format was adopted in 2002. between 1970 and 2002 (32 years) 7 wildcard teams made the superbowl (3 won it). that’s 1 team every 4.6 years. since 2002 (7 years) 3 wildcard teams made the superbowl (2 won it). that’s 1 team every 2.3 years. all 3 of those teams have come in the last 4 years.
so, is it VERY much the exception? doesn’t sound like it to me. so yeah as long as we get to the playoff, it doesn’t matter how many games we win. look some stuff up man, open your mind and you won’t feel so…foolish
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Ha ha.
That’s awesome. Chris Kluwe is the man. Glad everyone is simply poking fun at it.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
He is, however, a guitar hero expert and a pro athlete with a sense of humor.
In AP I trust
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
Charles Woodson is the happiest person on earth right now.
by FarvaForTheVikings on Aug 27, 2009 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions
I was at Winter Park today...
Fell right in the schism… Good thing maintanance had a ladder…
Goin' Blue
Schefter can drink a pint of Favre’s schism.
by Midnight Rambler on Aug 27, 2009 2:37 PM CDT reply actions
.... and if he shared some with Schlereth ....
.
would that be a ‘schism in the ji…’
[I think there’s a good name for a rock band in there somewhere…]
by Sonic on Aug 27, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Glad to hear this is now a joking matter. However, the bottom line is, just like Favre said when he joined the team, he still must earn the players respect as a leader of the team. Once that happens it shouldn’t be an issue or a topic of discussion. What he did means nothing for the Vikings.
fo' schismle my nhismle
If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal
"Schism" originally referred to a division within a church
Therefore, it’s really about a few players who insist on worshipping a false god.
Of course, there is always the choice of worshipping neither and simply being a professional.
Why wouldn't this be true?
I know most of you find this hard to believe but Brett Favre is a grade “A” douche. Top of the line. Not hard to believe some teammates can see this.
Ok
First tjoke can’t even beat out Rosencopter. Second if he did beat out rosencopter than our qb situation is in a bad shape. We know what we have in tjoke. flash of talent. A lots of inconsistency. Let face it If Ferrot did not save our season we would not even smell the playoff, less than compete. So in the end i like to see tjoke gone so we can start a new. Stop teasing me and the fan of Minnesota. True there isn’t any guarantee that Favre will help us win the superbowl. But we have a better chance. As for the hate toward Favre. Just the thought of the packer fan getting upset make me feel i am alive everyday.
you can’t have flashes of talent and lots of inconsistency in only 19 starts. there simply isn’t enough time for that.
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions
It’s true that some probably prefer T-Jack — and I can neither confirm nor deny that Favre is a douche.
Not liking I can understand
but actually preferring Tarvaris Jackson? Don’t they want to win and make a ton of money?
Really, we’re talking about Ray Edwards and a couple other guys. I don’t understand it either, but there were bound to be a handful reluctant to accept Favre.
Say no more
Ray Edwards…ok, I get it now. What would he know about making the wise move? It’s really too bad that he was rewarded with an NFL career after being benched in college, so of course it seems to him like he can do no wrong and the wrongliest wrongwrongwrongiestest move may actually seem like the right one to him. This is the guy who predicted 20 sacks for himself and fell way short. Even as a joke, that’s a dumb thing to tell the media. We’re not talking about an academic All-American here.
and a douche…
I believe the 'push off' cost us 'our' SuperBowl...
I believe you 'go for the win'... instead of 'taking a knee'...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Aug 27, 2009 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions
What?!
Giant Douche is way better than Turd Sandwich.
In AP I trust
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
Charles Woodson is the happiest person on earth right now.
by FarvaForTheVikings on Aug 27, 2009 8:33 PM CDT up reply actions
A schism amidst douches? Hmmm … that almost makes sense. First thing in this entire story.
Maybe Schecter shoudl try gynocological writing. Probalby lots more chances to excercise that fancy vocabulary, and not have it so obvious that he’s making quotes up, since maybe doctors talk that way.
I wonder if “schism” and “douche” ard words in Ted Thompson’s everyday vocabulary?
Besides, are you really going to stick up for Brett Favre? C’mon, it’s Favre. Have you forgotten? It’s Brett Favre! Geez, the guy puts a viking helmet on and all of a sudden he’s a good guy and team player!
He is...
a Viking.
I believe the 'push off' cost us 'our' SuperBowl...
I believe you 'go for the win'... instead of 'taking a knee'...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Aug 27, 2009 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed on that.
I hate him, but he’s a Viking now. I can no longer express outright hatred until he screws us over. I can, however, be extremely sarcastic and passively aggresive.
In AP I trust
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
Charles Woodson is the happiest person on earth right now.
by FarvaForTheVikings on Aug 27, 2009 8:34 PM CDT up reply actions
That is pretty much what I have been doing....
ever since they let him waltz into the role of TEAM LEADER with only a little over 3 weeks until the start of the season.
I have just about got it out of my system now (by pretty much saying the same basic thing 20 different ways…well… now make it… 21)— which is a good thing because it’s only 17 days until the start of the season and at that point I will have to just suck it up and forget about the way Favre handed all of his “friends” on the coaching staff and management a little ziplock baggie with their balls in it and a note written with a sharpie on the side of the bag that said, “From Your Daddy, BF”…. They guy is my QB now. Period.
And as a 34-year veteran of of pulling for the Vikings I do at least have to admit that going into the season with a lot on the line (fly high or crash and burn) and lofty expectations sure does beat going into the season with more mundane questions like, 7-9 or 8-8 …. does the rest of the league even notice?
by Sonic on Aug 27, 2009 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions
And as a 34-year veteran of of pulling for the Vikings I do at least have to admit that going into the season with a lot on the line (fly high or crash and burn) and lofty expectations sure does beat going into the season with more mundane questions like, 7-9 or 8-8 …. does the rest of the league even notice?
Your wise words make me feel tremendously better.
In AP I trust
F-A-R-V-A =/= F-A-V-R-E
Charles Woodson is the happiest person on earth right now.
by FarvaForTheVikings on Aug 27, 2009 9:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Take it back. Favre didn’t waltz into the role of team leader. You take it back now. That’s just ESPN spinning things again. We’re all a bunch of Favre lovers on this site. I for one will not tolerate such talk! He is our quarterback now so it doesn’t matter how much he shits on us and his teammates.
Just let the hatred flow, man. Nobody can stand him or the idea he is our QB. Just some of us are willing to latch onto anything that might take us to the top. This is about as desperate as it gets. Trust me, if we win it all, there will be a shallow hollow feeling to it. Not what I’ve waited my whole life for. I do not want the Brett Favre version of a championship. Grow some balls and some dignity and realize I am right about this.
Favre as a Viking
“Besides, are you really going to stick up for Brett Favre? C’mon, it’s Favre. Have you forgotten? It’s Brett Favre! Geez, the guy puts a viking helmet on and all of a sudden he’s a good guy and team player!”
I still harbor a deep hatred, nurtured for fifteen years, of Brett Favre, but I put all that in check (for now) because he is a Viking. Loyalty to my team transcends my loyalty, or hatred, for any one player and his on-field actions in the past. The corollary to this team-over-individual view is that, if Favre flames out in purple, my hatred for him will increase exponentially.
Professional athletes change loyalties like they change agents or groupies—that is the nature of pro sports. If you cannot handle that fact, and the schisms it creates in your sports world view, then you should stick to college sports, where it is harder for athletes to transfer from one program to another.
by Midnight Rambler on Aug 28, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions
+1
nice use of our new favorite word!
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
+100
+1 for using Schism and +99 for pointing out the obvious – Favre IS A VIKING!!
and I’m loathe to bring it up…
but none of our previous QBs have brought us a SUPERBOWL win… not even Fran…
there will be no ‘hollow feeling’ IF we win it all… and I won’t expect you to rave on Favre even IF we do.
It will be a team victory (as they all will be)… IF Brett leads us to it, he will win it as a VIKING. And we will cheer them ALL.
I believe the 'push off' cost us 'our' SuperBowl...
I believe you 'go for the win'... instead of 'taking a knee'...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Aug 28, 2009 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Michael Strahan has a legitimate schism.
I wonder why Schefter never wrote about that one?
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
For one
all of this critischism of the Vikings lockerroom is getting old
But
I know it won’t stop. I can’t wait til Monday night, maybe he will have a good half and this nonsense will die down and there will be more enthuischism for the Vikings.
by Vikingeric2001 on Aug 27, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Wouldn't it be awesome
if the players made jokes like this during their press conferences? Through out the whole season.
I'm with
ya on that one. It would really piss off the reporters.
by Vikingeric2001 on Aug 27, 2009 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Schefter has gone to the dark side
He’s become another tool in the MSM trying to find controversy where there isn’t any. However, we shouldn’t underestimate the volatile nature of locker room chemistry and how it can be disrupted by even one player. I can’t imagine that TJ or SR are totally thrilled with Farve being thrust ahead of them. They will have some players on their side, whether they’re vocal about it or not. Good teams are able to set aside these differences and play great for the team, not the individual.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. A. Einstein
I heard Schefter saw some pretty colors on the floor of the Vikes locker room
He realized it was caused by a schism hanging in the window.
if things get too out of hand
I hope Chilly has the cajones to pull off an exorschism
If you can't laugh at yourself... Who can you laugh at?
The Packers, that’s who.
-- The almighty Manimal
unfortunately i think chili has a schism in his cajones.
by iseepurplepeople on Aug 28, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions
I think it would be cool if Favre came out on Monday night...
with the name ‘Schism’ written on a piece of duct tape covering ‘Favre’ on his jersey….
Or hell, maybe the whole offense.
They would play that on NFL Network for the rest of our lives…. especially if we get to the end.
by Sonic on Aug 27, 2009 7:16 PM CDT reply actions
That’s a great idea! It will be much easier pretending Favre is not our QB if we don’t have to read the name on the jersey.
Well, maybe that is not...
the exact effect I was going for (mine was more the ‘team unity’ with a sense of humor’ angle), but now that you mention it that could be another benefit…. :-)
I feel your pain in all of this, Heech, I really do. But what’s the alternative come Sept. 13— root against our own team?? There have been a few other Vikings players that I wasn’t too crazy about throughout the years. And according to the purple helmet squeezed onto his inflated noggin— Favre is now a Viking.
by Sonic on Aug 29, 2009 6:04 AM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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.
