This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Wow.And I agree with him 100%. Trading away Rosenfels will be end of Brad Childress in MIN.
One can only hope you are correct
Are you a local Randy?If so, how many folks feel like you?Every coach / GM is loyal to "their guys". I get that. But this just seems ridiculous. An injury to Favre and handing over the reins to Jackson seems disastrous. And surely they think that without an injury even, that's happening next year, right?Just seems crazy to deal Rosenfels. Giants have to be thrilled.J
Yep, thats what i said in the Rosenfles thread yesterday.
If Favre gets hurt for any length of time it's doubtful the Vikings do much with either Rosenfels or Jackson.
Those are Mark Brunell's stats from '94, right?
As a Giants fan, I am thrilled. Eli doesn't miss games, but it's definitely good to know that if he does get hurt, there is a starter quality backup ready to take over. I really don't understand the move by the Vikings. Why they haven't drafted a legit QB over the past 2 years is beyond me. I agree Jackson has some upside, but the NFL is a league that is ruled by star QBs. Jackson doesn't seem to be that.
Only Rosenfels will still be in the league in 2 years.
So, he's saying that if Rosenfels lost to Jackson fair and square, then Rosenfels and his $2.6M salary would still be on the roster?
And the whole Childress-vs-Spielman thing might have made sense if Spielman wasn't with the team anymore -- but he's still the VP of player personnel!! If Spielman still wanted Rosenfels on the roster, he'd be on the roster! What was the point of bringing that up anyway??
The same reasoning had the Bills pushing rob johnson over Flutie.Flutie was playing in the league long after Johnson was back his couch on Sundays. It was a decison that, I believe, cost the Bills a legitimate shot for a SB win.Tavaris isn't exactly a rookie, and he really hasn't shown any progression IMO.
I think he's being coy here. There will never be a source or anyone that admits something like that. It's his take on it.
Didn't Childress just sign a 5 year, $20-25M extension last year? Is Wilf the kind of owner to just eat the money and move on?
He's definitely being coy and that's why I thought the "let's be perfectly clear" was kind of funny. The guy has covered the Vikes for years and likely has trusted sources inside the organization. If he got it from an unnamed source, fine. If not, don't play it off like it's news and not just a beat writer's take. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility, but I certainly have my doubts as to the validity of the story.
Besides Stafford and Bradford, who both were #1 picks, which rookie or second year QB looks legit to you?
Very happy to see the Rosencopter land in the Meadowlands. He's not incredible, but he is a solid backup which the Giants needed.
I dont agree.The vikings have one of the best defenses in the NFL and one of the best RB's in the NFL. They could have a monkey in there as a QB and they'd probably have a chance to win 10 games.to be a bit more serious, and someone correct me if i am wrong here, but I think the reason they didnt draft a QB is because it is my understanding that Farve said he will not will mentor a young QB to take over when he is gone. He is there to win the super bowl, not to groom his successor.I believe that was one of the unwritten agreements when he signed with Minny.so if you draft a young QB, then you dont have Farve.its a catch 22. you're damned if you do and damned if you dont.
From a fan perspective I get the impression that Childress never felt he was properly consulted with the decision to trade for Rosenfels. and while it might be Spielmans decision on who to sign, it is solely Childress' decision on who gets to play.
Not sure I agree that trading Rosenfel will be the reason but if the bold part comes true
: 
He has only one chance of saving his job and that is making the SuperBowl. As a Viking fan I ALWAYS have hope..
Bold part is a VERY VERY
and is more the reason Childress would be given the boot, rather than trading away Rosenfel.
Agree with Thayman. J > how does this end Childress's career? Will there be an outcry from Rosenfels fans? Why would anyone care which two of these subpar backups hold the #2 spot? One can easily make the case that Jackson is the better long-term option and fit MN's scheme. My last statement might be the furthest from the truth, but again who would argue the point?
You hit the nail on the head my friend. The Vikings want a game manager for their back-up, not a gun-slinger. Everyone talks about the Preseason action, but it really isn't that telling when Rosenfels underthrows a wide open WR when the DB fell down and said WR has to stop and turn around to catch the ball and was still so wide open that he was able to run it in for a score. It looks good on the stat sheets but we all know that's not going to fly against first stringers. The other half is what we don't see and that's the practices. It surprises me that an "insider" hasn't picked up on the not so quiet rumblings that Sage has very long stretches where he is just HORRIBLE in practice. Fact is that Seifert has always been "that guy" who blows a lot of things out of proportion and just flat out ignores a lot of facts if it doesn't fit into his sensationalist journalism. Some things to consider with this move. Jackson was not given a lot of series this preseason because they knew they were going to move Sage so they had to showcase him for a trade. It's called showcasing for a reason and they made sure to trot him out for long stretches against the scrubs to try and get at least a little value out of a trade. Take the San Fran game where Singletary left a lot of guys in late because of the game last year and Sage has a whopping 2-7 for 11 yards. Sure he can throw three TDs on the Rams' super scrubs, so let's crown him now! As far as Chily not wanting Sage in the first place, that's a flat out lie. Everyone who follows the Vikings knows that their is a Trifecta that makes the personel choices and Brad always has a VERY large say in them.The last piece of the puzzle is what happened with Tyler Thigpen a few years back. Chily has stated over and over again that it was like someone had killed his dog when Thigpen didn't make the practice squad and he was determined not to let that happen ever again with a raw but very promising talent. Really the day they saw Joe Webb in a few QB practices in OTAs was the day that Sage was done for. I know I saw Webb shake his hips a little at blitzers flying at him and they bounced off like gnats.
I am local, I am a Vikings fan and a reluctant Twins fan (how can you not like a sports team that always seems to be in the hunt and has taken the prize a couple of times), I have never watched a complete Timberwolves game or any teams hockey game.Childress' legacy will forever be tied to TJack, and I think he knows that. If it was not for Childress' inability to admit he was wrong about TJack, the Vikes may not have spent two years chasing Favre. Don't get me wrong I love having Favre here. But, if we had a more reliable starter than "Chillys Chosen" Chilly would not have put up with the whole Favre episode. I am of the belief that if there was no interest in Rosefels, Childress would have out right cut Rosenfels rather than cutting TJack and seeing that no other team would even sign him.
Because Rosenfels isn't that great either.
He used to be the Vikings reporter from the local paper hear for years before he left to join ESPN. He probably has a good feel for the team/players etc than the possibly some other reporter.That being said. Not really sure what they are doing with this move. If they really wanted to keep Webb then don't keep a kickoff specialist. But if the offensive line doesn't improve once the regular season starts & Favre does somehow miss a game or get hurt. I would venture to guess that Sage would get killed playing behind the same crappy line. At least Jackson has some mobility. Not saying I agree with it but there is that. I've heard from numerous sources the Vikings really like Webb & neither Jackson or Rosefels is the QB of the future. They will hope Farve makes it this year & most likely go the free agent route until they feel Webb may be the guy..
Turnovers, many many terrible practices, and more turnovers. The bottom line is you have turd 1-A and 1-B and it just so happened that 1-B was set to make about 1.5m more then 1-A. Even with either of them this is a playoff caliber team, but neither would have or can make it a Superbowl caliber team.They're ALL Chilly guys. Anyone who thinks otherwise just doesn't follow the Vikings very close and forgets that Chilly played a large role in recruiting Sage to sign that contract.
My thoughts exactly. The guy is far from proven. He's played less than 1 season worth of games, and he's been very average.It's always been my feel that Tavaris' teammates really like him, and if they just don't like Sage as well, for whatever reason, then this is a good (and understandable) move.
I remember that. That was great.
I don't understand it either. I know it's not fair to look at one game and make judgement on a player but everytime I think of Rosenfels I think about the Colts/Texans game.
Again, it's not really a "story" as much as it is an op/ed piece. It's not like the guy has uncovered a fact or something. It's an opinion.Buffaloes said:
Just my opinion but I think at some point be it this season or next, Favre won't be the QB. I tend to think it'll be from an injury this season. When he's not there, they look to the #2 guy. When that #2 guy is Jackson and not Rosenfels and the appearance is they traded away Rosenfels because it made Childress' guy look bad, that'll be an ugly scene in MIN and the reason Childress will be let go.But that's all just a guess.Arizona Ron said:Agree with Thayman. J > how does this end Childress's career? Will there be an outcry from Rosenfels fans? Why would anyone care which two of these subpar backups hold the #2 spot? One can easily make the case that Jackson is the better long-term option and fit MN's scheme. My last statement might be the furthest from the truth, but again who would argue the point?thayman said:Joe Bryant said:
Yes, and I get that...My thought is that at first blush, it comes off as more than an opinion piece though. That's my biggest problem with the piece. I know it's nitpicking, but I think it was a poorly framed piece. I suppose we can probably agree to disagree though.
I agree with your scenarios...but he could also be saved if Jackson comes in and is an effective enough game manager to get them a couple games into the playoffs... Childress will get credit for still doing well enough after Favre got injured and with the QB he was "smart" enough to keep.Just my opinion but I think at some point be it this season or next, Favre won't be the QB. I tend to think it'll be from an injury this season. When he's not there, they look to the #2 guy. When that #2 guy is Jackson and not Rosenfels and the appearance is they traded away Rosenfels because it made Childress' guy look bad, that'll be an ugly scene in MIN and the reason Childress will be let go.But that's all just a guess.Arizona Ron said:Agree with Thayman. J > how does this end Childress's career? Will there be an outcry from Rosenfels fans? Why would anyone care which two of these subpar backups hold the #2 spot? One can easily make the case that Jackson is the better long-term option and fit MN's scheme. My last statement might be the furthest from the truth, but again who would argue the point?thayman said:Joe Bryant said:
His only saving chance I think is if Favre wins them a SB this year.
J
But he is better than Tarvaris Jackson. Rosenfels is nothing better than a backup QB in this league, but Jackson is a CFL QB playing in the NFL. Minnesota needs to win now, and if Favre goes down, they just set themselves up for failure.Bojang0301 said:
Oh for sure, Das Boot. He's golden if Jackson saves the day. I just don't think that will happen. But that's the great thing about Fantasy Football, we get to predict and then see what happens.J
Why? Rosenfels is at/past his celing whereas Jackson has some upside.
for Rosenfels.. He is what he is.. a Backup QB.
for Rosenfels.. He is what he is.. a Backup QB.
