ESPN Columnist : MIN traded Rosenfels because... (1 Viewer)

[Das Boot]

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.

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

I'd call it more like being barely fortunate enough to preserve the day if Jackson is at the helm if the Vikes make the playoffs - I don't expect him to be any part of the reason at all other than as a game manager.But who knows, maybe we'll be surprised.Either way I think odds are very high we get to find out how Jackson does this year - I don't think Favre's health, nor his heart will be in it once the Vikings start struggling.

 

[Joe Bryant]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

That's not the question for a #2 QB. The question here is whether Rosenfels or Jackson gives you a better chance.J

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't think Favre's health, nor his heart will be in it once the Vikings start struggling.

This is exactly what I've been feeling about Favre of late.J

 

[Joe Summer]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

Because Rosenfels can play the Trent Dilfer role; Jackson can't.

 

[Das Boot]

I don't think Favre's health, nor his heart will be in it once the Vikings start struggling.

This is exactly what I've been feeling about Favre of late.J

My honest personal, admittedly completely subjective feeling is that Favre's heart is already not in it... you can just sense it this year.And while I'm not a fan of Favre's treatment of his teams off the field, I'm a huge fan of his on the field play.But this just feels like the year it all crashes and burns.

 

[griff321]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

Because Rosenfels can play the Trent Dilfer role; Jackson can't.

I understand the argument and most of the homers I know feel that neither gives us a chance in hell and the team/Chilly feels the same way. That's why we had Longwell, Allen, and Hutch dispatched to Hattisburg to get the guy that they feel gives us the chance. So it comes down to who will turn the ball over less and who can be a warm body to run out the clock on the cheap. Sage is a walking turnover and he made more.

 

[Das Boot]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

Because Rosenfels can play the Trent Dilfer role; Jackson can't.

I understand the argument and most of the homers I know feel that neither gives us a chance in hell and the team/Chilly feels the same way. That's why we had Longwell, Allen, and Hutch dispatched to Hattisburg to get the guy that they feel gives us the chance. So it comes down to who will turn the ball over less and who can be a warm body to run out the clock on the cheap. Sage is a walking turnover and he made more.

A team should never give up if their starting QB goes down, even if neither backup is awe inspiring.The Vikings in particular are playing to win it all this year.So they should have made the best decision possible for a backup.My impression without knowing a ton about the how the 2 backup QBs have looked there over the past 2 seasons on the bench is that Sage would have been the better bet to get the Vikings to the playoffs if Favre goes down.But there is a lot to be said if the Viking players' support really is behind Jackson.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

That's not the question for a #2 QB. The question here is whether Rosenfels or Jackson gives you a better chance.J

Exactly, and the team feels Jackson gives them a better chance, so why can't you accept that.

 

[Donnybrook]

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.

All things considered this trade could not have worked out any better. It makes sense that Sage must be an awful practice player otherwise I can't see why the Dolphins and the Texans parted ways with him as well. I guess it is the media and fans job to second guess their teams front office decisions but there really isn't anything to complain about here.

Also, Sage was a class act with the Favre media circus in Minnesota and I will wish him well in NY.

 

[Bojang0301]

If they like Webb that much, and maybe they should, why not cut/trade Jackson and keep Rosenfels in case something happens to Favre? Just doesn't seem like a smart move for a playoff caliber team. More the move a rebuilding team would make.

Because Rosenfels isn't that great either.

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.

WHEN has Farve gone down. Seriously. Rosenfels wouldn't save them if that disaster happened and he costs more than TJack. The Rosenturd love in here is absurd. 32, never played a whole season, 30/29 TD/INT ratio and hasn't looked that great when given an opportunity. Give me a break and let it go or back up these ridiculous claims that Rosenfels will get Childress fired. I can't believe that something like that would even get speculated on this board.

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

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 remember that. That was great.The only way this blows up in Childress' face is if T-Joke has to play. Otherwise they grab a FA in the offseason or even better, McNabb after his 1 and done disaster in Washington.

Sure, but when you have a QB who is 40 years old and a team that is built and at the career arc that aiming for the Superbowl is the only goal you can have in mind going into the season. To place those goals, and the salaries of all of the other players you have in order to put yourself into this position, into jeopardy like this is beyond reckless. If the Vikings were coming into the season expected to be a 5-11 or 7-9 team then fine. But to roll the dice just because a 5th-year QB who has never really shown much is the pet project of the coach.... that's terrible.

I disagree. Rosenfels is solid, but he's not that good. Tarvaris can game manage, and childress obviously likes the potential of Webb. They were facing a roster crunch and couldn't keep all four.Childress may get canned but it won't be because of this.

 

[Bojang0301]

I don't even understand the hate for Childress. Ya he's come up short but perhaps the Vikings would like to have Mike Tice and crew back drafting Troy Williamson and a number of DE's that can't hack it. The talent level has gone up exponentially under Childress.

Yet a ####ty backup QB is going to get him canned.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

I don't even understand the hate for Childress. Ya he's come up short but perhaps the Vikings would like to have Mike Tice and crew back drafting Troy Williamson and a number of DE's that can't hack it. The talent level has gone up exponentially under Childress.Yet a ####ty backup QB is going to get him canned.

Very !

 

[Avery]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

That's not the question for a #2 QB. The question here is whether Rosenfels or Jackson gives you a better chance.J

Exactly, and the team feels Jackson gives them a better chance, so why can't you accept that.

According to the article the #2 wasn't selected on who gave the Viking the best chance. Jackson was selected because he was Childress' "guy".Whether that recounting is accurate is another story.

 

[Joe Bryant]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

That's not the question for a #2 QB. The question here is whether Rosenfels or Jackson gives you a better chance.J

Exactly, and the team feels Jackson gives them a better chance, so why can't you accept that.

That's exactly the point. The writer of the story (who I agree with) holds the opinion that the team (Childress) made a decision based on something other than who would give them the better chance. That's what makes it a story.J

 

[FunkyPlutos]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

That's not the question for a #2 QB. The question here is whether Rosenfels or Jackson gives you a better chance.J

Exactly, and the team feels Jackson gives them a better chance, so why can't you accept that.

That's exactly the point. The writer of the story (who I agree with) holds the opinion that the team (Childress) made a decision based on something other than who would give them the better chance. That's what makes it a story.J

This is also the reason that I am confused. The article clearly states that Childress believes Jackson is a long term starting prospect - what makes it so hard to understand? The author's opinion seems to imply that Childress believes that Sage was better so he cut him - that was never stated.

 

[Joe Bryant]

This is also the reason that I am confused. The article clearly states that Childress believes Jackson is a long term starting prospect - what makes it so hard to understand? The author's opinion seems to imply that Childress believes that Sage was better so he cut him - that was never stated.

The author wrote:

Let's be perfectly clear: Rosenfels was traded Friday night to the New York Giants because he beat out Jackson for the No. 2 job. As crazy as it sounds, that's what happened. The problem was that coach Brad Childress long ago chose Jackson as his No. 2 quarterback and still hasn't given up on his prospects as a long-term starter. Childress never embraced Rosenfels' acquisition in March 2009, a move orchestrated not by him but by vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman, and inexplicably banished him to the bottom of the depth chart.

I think he clearly stated it. And didn't imply anything.J

 

[FunkyPlutos]

This is also the reason that I am confused. The article clearly states that Childress believes Jackson is a long term starting prospect - what makes it so hard to understand? The author's opinion seems to imply that Childress believes that Sage was better so he cut him - that was never stated.

The author wrote:

Let's be perfectly clear: Rosenfels was traded Friday night to the New York Giants because he beat out Jackson for the No. 2 job. As crazy as it sounds, that's what happened. The problem was that coach Brad Childress long ago chose Jackson as his No. 2 quarterback and still hasn't given up on his prospects as a long-term starter. Childress never embraced Rosenfels' acquisition in March 2009, a move orchestrated not by him but by vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman, and inexplicably banished him to the bottom of the depth chart.

I think he clearly stated it. And didn't imply anything.J

I meant that Childress never stated it, so it is nothing other than a conjecture.If people would have been following training camp - and not just the preseason games - Jackson was outplaying Rosenfels on a daily basis. That is the reason Jackson stayed as the #2, but I guess everyone is allowed an opinion.

 

[Arizona Ron]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id...-sage-rosenfels

Let's be perfectly clear: Rosenfels was traded Friday night to the New York Giants because he beat out Jackson for the No. 2 job. As crazy as it sounds, that's what happened. The problem was that coach Brad Childress long ago chose Jackson as his No. 2 quarterback and still hasn't given up on his prospects as a long-term starter. Childress never embraced Rosenfels' acquisition in March 2009, a move orchestrated not by him but by vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman, and inexplicably banished him to the bottom of the depth chart.

Wow.And I agree with him 100%. Trading away Rosenfels will be end of Brad Childress in MIN.

J

Why? Rosenfels is at/past his celing whereas Jackson has some upside.

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?

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.

His only saving chance I think is if Favre wins them a SB this year.

J

If Favre makes it the whole year and didn't come back next year, they're not handing the lead job over to Rosenfels or Jackson anyway. They'll go after a vet with a contract lined up to make a move in 2011 (i.e. McNabb). If Favre goes down this year, they're screwed with Rosenfels or Jackson - so why not trade the guy you can actually get something in return for right now?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Why? Rosenfels is at/past his celing whereas Jackson has some upside.

Let's just stop this now. Tarvaris Jackson has about as much upside as Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Drew Stanton, or any other flunkout NFL QB. Minnesota would be much better off with a good backup/mediocre starter in Rosenfels than they are with a completely useless Tarvaris Jackson.We know Sage's ceiling, and we know he will never be a star QB. But everyone outside of Childress knows the same thing about Tarvaris as well, and at least Rosenfels can hold the ship afloat while you try to find that guy who is the next star.

 

[Ghost Rider]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

Because Rosenfels can play the Trent Dilfer role; Jackson can't.

I don't know about that. Those two horrible turnovers Rosenfels made against the Colts a few years back, giving a sure Texans win to the Colts, were as bad as any turnover I ever saw Dilfer make, including his awful INT that he threw across his body while running out of bounds to the left (vs. the Giants). Man, that was awful.

 

[snogger]

I'm not sold on TJ ..

But then again he hasn't played a meaning full game in close to two years, when he was very green...

No one, be it writers, coaches or us couch coaches have any idea if he is better than he was two years ago or not.

I for one wouldn't mind Childress getting the boot as he has made some brain dead decisions but, IMO, this isn't one of them.

 

[Matt Waldman]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id...-sage-rosenfels

Let's be perfectly clear: Rosenfels was traded Friday night to the New York Giants because he beat out Jackson for the No. 2 job. As crazy as it sounds, that's what happened. The problem was that coach Brad Childress long ago chose Jackson as his No. 2 quarterback and still hasn't given up on his prospects as a long-term starter. Childress never embraced Rosenfels' acquisition in March 2009, a move orchestrated not by him but by vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman, and inexplicably banished him to the bottom of the depth chart.

Wow.And I agree with him 100%. Trading away Rosenfels will be end of Brad Childress in MIN.

J

It has been very clear from the beginning that Jackson was Childress' ego that picked Jackson. He was brought to Minny on the basis of his skill as a coordinator and guy that helped Donovan McNabb become the player he is, but I think Childress read his own headlines a bit too much. He thought he could make Jackson the next McNabb to his detriment.

There's some smoke around Minnesota concerning Childress and his issues as an offensive mind that include rumors of Favre thinking poorly of Childress' capabilities as a play caller and now this.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

That's not the question for a #2 QB. The question here is whether Rosenfels or Jackson gives you a better chance.J

That's not the only question. Let's make a couple assumptions, that a lot of folks are/were making. Assume Sage is better, but neither can win you a championship.Then you're left with:1 - Keep both, gain nothing2 - Trade the better for something.

 

[Joe Bryant]

This is also the reason that I am confused. The article clearly states that Childress believes Jackson is a long term starting prospect - what makes it so hard to understand? The author's opinion seems to imply that Childress believes that Sage was better so he cut him - that was never stated.

The author wrote:

Let's be perfectly clear: Rosenfels was traded Friday night to the New York Giants because he beat out Jackson for the No. 2 job. As crazy as it sounds, that's what happened. The problem was that coach Brad Childress long ago chose Jackson as his No. 2 quarterback and still hasn't given up on his prospects as a long-term starter. Childress never embraced Rosenfels' acquisition in March 2009, a move orchestrated not by him but by vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman, and inexplicably banished him to the bottom of the depth chart.

I think he clearly stated it. And didn't imply anything.J

I meant that Childress never stated it, so it is nothing other than a conjecture.If people would have been following training camp - and not just the preseason games - Jackson was outplaying Rosenfels on a daily basis. That is the reason Jackson stayed as the #2, but I guess everyone is allowed an opinion.

Of course it's conjecture. It's an opinion piece. And like you said, everyone is allowed their opinion. That's pretty much what we do here.J

 

[Joe Bryant]

What makes people ignore the tape/arguments and feel that Sage can win us a Superbowl?

That's not the question for a #2 QB. The question here is whether Rosenfels or Jackson gives you a better chance.J

That's not the only question. Let's make a couple assumptions, that a lot of folks are/were making. Assume Sage is better, but neither can win you a championship.Then you're left with:1 - Keep both, gain nothing2 - Trade the better for something.

I hear you Grigs. I guess where I'm coming from is some people wouldn't agree you can't win a championship without Favre. Sure, chances are a lot better with him. But I think this team is pretty good even without him. And if you're forced to be without him, I'd much rather have Rosenfels for a short time.J

 

[Joe Bryant]

If Favre makes it the whole year and didn't come back next year, they're not handing the lead job over to Rosenfels or Jackson anyway. They'll go after a vet with a contract lined up to make a move in 2011 (i.e. McNabb). If Favre goes down this year, they're screwed with Rosenfels or Jackson - so why not trade the guy you can actually get something in return for right now?

That's a really risky route to go for a good team to be thinking they'll try and find their starting QB after the season. I'd be sort of surprised to see McNabb not sign an extension http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...onovan-mcn.html You really think this was about getting a 5th round pick in 2011 and a conditional in 2012?J

 

[ConstruxBoy]

If they like Webb that much, and maybe they should, why not cut/trade Jackson and keep Rosenfels in case something happens to Favre? Just doesn't seem like a smart move for a playoff caliber team. More the move a rebuilding team would make.

Because Rosenfels isn't that great either.

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.

yeah, that was sort of my point. Sage is a backup QB who has shown he can have some flashes as a backup. When he has to start a bunch of games, he starts looking worse and worse. Pretty much the definition of a backup QB. Jackson is a project. He may end up as a starting QB, although I doubt it. But I don't think someone like him fits the profile of a backup QB very well, especially on a team with Super bowl aspirations. So if I was GM, I would have kept someone like Rosenfels as the QB2 knowing that he could probably do OK in spot duty if needed. Jackson strikes me as a guy who needs the week to prepare and the whole game to get ready.

 

[griff321]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id...-sage-rosenfels

Let's be perfectly clear: Rosenfels was traded Friday night to the New York Giants because he beat out Jackson for the No. 2 job. As crazy as it sounds, that's what happened. The problem was that coach Brad Childress long ago chose Jackson as his No. 2 quarterback and still hasn't given up on his prospects as a long-term starter. Childress never embraced Rosenfels' acquisition in March 2009, a move orchestrated not by him but by vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman, and inexplicably banished him to the bottom of the depth chart.

Wow.And I agree with him 100%. Trading away Rosenfels will be end of Brad Childress in MIN.

J

It has been very clear from the beginning that Jackson was Childress' ego that picked Jackson. He was brought to Minny on the basis of his skill as a coordinator and guy that helped Donovan McNabb become the player he is, but I think Childress read his own headlines a bit too much. He thought he could make Jackson the next McNabb to his detriment.

There's some smoke around Minnesota concerning Childress and his issues as an offensive mind that include rumors of Favre thinking poorly of Childress' capabilities as a play caller and now this.

I think that's also a piece of the puzzle. Childress along with the rest of the Triumvirate have a pretty good eye for talent. He's had a lot better track record in the first round then many of us have seen for YEARS in MN, but we call him Secret Squirrel for a reason. His play calling, along with DB, can flat out be so uninspiring it's sickening. We really don't want to see another swing pass to Tahi on third and long with the talent this team has on O.

Not very long ago a story was released from Yahoo about Childress having zero credit in the locker room and with Favre. (link) Some excerpts:

That little bit of misdirection didn’t get much attention, but it raised a lot of eyebrows inside the Vikings’ locker room.

“Chilly can’t even tell the truth about that,” the player said. “I mean, how ridiculous is that? What’s the big deal that he has to lie? Worse, he has to tell other guys to lie for him?”

“Brett thinks Childress has no clue about offense,” a Vikings player said.

One of the biggest problems in this situation is that Childress is allowed to run free within the organization. Because owner Zygi Wilf and team president Mark Wilf both live in New York, Childress doesn’t have to answer to anyone on a day-to-day basis. In the power structure between Childress, vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman and vice president of football operations Rob Brzezinski, Childress has the final say. He has taken that final say to mean that he can basically act as he pleases.

Pretty much everyone I know and everyone calling into the PA show was like, "Oh, hi Sage!!!" In every interview throughout the summer, and then even more so when Textgate had Brett not returning, the stars and leaders of this team wanted Brett back with a passion and felt the team without him could not reach their only goal. Two guys didn't want Favre back and it's clear who Childress felt the report came from. The article shows from a true "insider"(in quotes because the Vikings brass/players ever since the days of Denny Green has restricted/denied access to even hometown beat guys) how the team and Favre felt about that report.(Source)

Favre told ESPN that one of the points he and other team leaders made was that players needed to keep certain things within the team. "If something is being said in here -- by whoever, it's got to stop," Favre said. "It's hard enough to win as it is. Success does crazy things. So we had a good meeting. That article, like the schism thing, brought us together last year. It really did because it wasn't true. I don't know if someone out there is planting seeds or what but we wanted to nip it in the bud."

"I did feel -- more so than last year, believe it or not -- I needed them to know I'm all in. Not that they didn't know. I think they did just from me being there. And that was kind of the mantra from all of those guys: 'We knew if we got you here, we were going to get you and you'd be all in. It was getting your [butt] here that is the problem.' The hardest part for me is leaving Hattiesburg and the tranquility and that stuff, leaving that. But when I left it, I knew it was nose to the grindstone for five months now." Favre, who said that after the second practice it was like he nevr left, told ESPN he is 11 pounds heavier than last year but his waist size is smaller and he is not eating red meat or desserts and drinks only water.

So much for feelings that this year his heart is not in it.

 

[Arizona Ron]

If Favre makes it the whole year and didn't come back next year, they're not handing the lead job over to Rosenfels or Jackson anyway. They'll go after a vet with a contract lined up to make a move in 2011 (i.e. McNabb). If Favre goes down this year, they're screwed with Rosenfels or Jackson - so why not trade the guy you can actually get something in return for right now?

That's a really risky route to go for a good team to be thinking they'll try and find their starting QB after the season. I'd be sort of surprised to see McNabb not sign an extension http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...onovan-mcn.html You really think this was about getting a 5th round pick in 2011 and a conditional in 2012?J

I think it's about a coach who knows what he has today - an old QB that fans love and two serviceable back ups. That's why he's getting whatever he can get from one of the serviceable backsup and positioning himself for moves next year. Also, McNabb in MIN 2011. Book it.

 

[encaitar]

I'm sorry, but that's a terrible article by Seifort. Unless he attended every Vikings practice this preseason, then his claim doesn't hold water. I've heard many other beat reporters talking about how poorly Sage played in practice. Plus, Tavaris is well liked by the team whereas Sage really wasn't. That makes a big difference in deciding who should be the team leader if Favre goes down.

Also, let's quit with the "Sage would be a great game manager" bs. He's never played like that in his career and wouldn't start to in Minnesota. He's a gunslinger in the Favre mold with a third of the talent. He looks great at times and will snatch defeat from the clutches of victory at others(Indianapolis game anyone?) Jackson, meanwhile has been a game manager in the past and I fully expect he would be adequate at it again.

Finally, as a Vikings fan it angers me to hear other Vikings fans call for Chilly's dismissal. Has the offense been elementary in his time here? Yes, no doubt. However, he also took one of the least talented rosters in the league and turned it into one of the most talented in the league in 4 years. The drafting has been exceptional in his time here and while he can't be given all the credit(Spielman and Bryzinski), he deserves a good part of it. There hasn't been too many games in his tenure where I felt the team was unprepared for the game. If he could admit his shortcomings and hand the play calling over to someone else, he could be a very good head coach, he already might be their best since Grant and he deserves to be noticed for it.

 

[griff321]

To further illustrate my point here are a few excerpts about Rosenfels from training camp courtesy of KFAN (Link):

Backup QB Sage Rosenfels had a terrible night in Mankato. He was picked off four times throughout 7-on-7 and 11-on-11 passing drills. Amidst the interceptions he did drop in a few beauties, including a 25-yard pass that he dropped over a defender and into the arms of Jeff Dugan.

Sage Rosenfels struggled for the second consecutive day. He was intercepted three times today giving him a total of seven in the last two practices.

Tarvaris Jackson completed 14-18 passes between 7-on-7 and 11-on-11 workouts. He was so sharp that he drew some positive remarks from the teams leading WR, "I think Tarvaris is doing a great job at this point, I seen him earlier make a lot of throws that I haven't seen him make in the past couple of years. He's doing a great job out there, he's handling the situation well, and we'll see where it goes from here", Sidney Rice said. Two of Jackson's first three passes went for touchdowns during the full-team portion of practice. He hooked up with Bernard Berrian deep to the left and then hit Jaymar Johnson on a free play (Jayme Mitchell jumped offside on a hard count) down the right side.

 

[Nipsey]

Rosenfels makes something like 4x what Jackson makes. If the opinion was they were close and the organization is high on Joe Webb, why not deal the more expensive guy and get something back in return? Not sure how Reynaud figured into the trade but from Minni's standpoint dealing Rosenfels makes sense. Not like the guy's a world beater or anything. If Favre goes down they were screwed anyway.

 

[Todem]

It in the big picture if it were Rosenfels or Jackson, the Vikings aren't going anywhere with either. They are both not good enough to lead this team through the post season and into the Super Bowl.

Watching Rosenfelds with the Dolphins for years it was apparent he has a great arm but awful decision making skills. Just dreadful really.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Jackson played pretty well up until a playoff game against a seasoned Eagles team with Andy Reid at the helm. I agree with what some have said that Sage is horrible in practice and he was showcased in preseason to get him out.

I've been a big anti-Chilly and anti-Jackson guy in the past but I think this is much ado about nothing.

 

[Clifford]

Clausen looks legit - and as a Vike fan I dont understand what they have been waiting for over the last 2+ years.

This years' draft was set up perfectly for Minny to grab Clausen and they decide to keep waiting on T Jax?! Crazy.

Favre goes down and the Vikes dont even sniff the playoffs.

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.

Wow started to refute this but realize you are right. They haven't had a shot at a legit NFL QB prospect in the draft for the past two years.

 

[cstu]

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.

We should ask timschochet why he thinks this is.