Who is the best option at QB for the Vikings this season? (1 Viewer)

[FunkyPlutos]

I thought this would be a good question since everyone is talking about it. I asked it in one of the other Favre topics but it got lost in the Vikings/Packers bickering.

As a Vikings' fan, I honestly don't know how I feel about them adding Favre. I still believe that Tarvaris is the guy that could lead them, but only if they let him make plays.

Anyway, I was just curious as to what people thought. Not about Favre, but about the best move for the Vikings for this season.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

It's either Favre or Rosenfels. I'm leaning toward Sage.

Jackson is not and never will be the answer.

 

[Bankerguy]

More Favre threads please!!!

 

[omahabrad]

I have to say Rosenfels. I believe in chemistry and don't think the other players will accept playing for a guy that 's there just for 2 games and not the whole season. The teams goal is to get to the super bowl while Farve just wants to stick it to G-Bay and the Super Bowl would be a nice bonus. This is a bad move for the Vikings. Didn't work for the Jets and isn't going to work for the Vikes.

 

[Crippler]

I have to say Rosenfels. I believe in chemistry and don't think the other players will accept playing for a guy that 's there just for 2 games and not the whole season. The teams goal is to get to the super bowl while Farve just wants to stick it to G-Bay and the Super Bowl would be a nice bonus. This is a bad move for the Vikings. Didn't work for the Jets and isn't going to work for the Vikes.

Chemistry. This is Rosenfals first year. How would he have anymore chemistry. I would take Brett if his arm is healthy but I hope he stays retired as a Packers fan. As he did for Thomas Jones last year, I think he would open things up for the Minny running game big time. Before he hurt his arm you forget he was 8-3 with completing 70% of passes. If his arm is healthy I think he can lead the Vikings to the SB for fun.

 

[Phurfur]

Mike Vick will be the QB.

 

[burd]

I have to say Rosenfels. I believe in chemistry and don't think the other players will accept playing for a guy that 's there just for 2 games and not the whole season. The teams goal is to get to the super bowl while Farve just wants to stick it to G-Bay and the Super Bowl would be a nice bonus. This is a bad move for the Vikings. Didn't work for the Jets and isn't going to work for the Vikes.

Devil's Advocate ....Who do you think will have an easier time learning a new offense? Favre, who'll be in an offense very similar to the one he ran in GB or Sage? Unless Sage is some kind of playbook sponge, it's going to take him a year to become familiar and comfortable w/ the offense. Who's got the more impressive resume? Actually, other than a good game or two, what exactly has Sage done to show that he's not Rob Johnson, Scott Mitchell etc? I really don't understand people who think that Sage will beat out (or is better) than Favre when they have nothing to back it up with.

... im just saying.

 

[Liquid Tension]

It's either Favre or Rosenfels. I'm leaning toward Sage.Jackson is not and never will be the answer.

I know there are issues with Tarvaris, but he is a 26 year old mobile QB who is young and showed improvement last year. In December he had 8 TD's with 1 pick and a 115.4 rating. He also rushed for 80 yards in those 4 December games. He did have a bad playoff game against the Eagles so people are holding that against him a lot, but Jim Johnson's defense in a playoff setting could make a lot of young QB's look bad.I am not saying he is a great QB, but I think Minnesota is making a mistake going to Favre with the headaches he brings. I would let Sage and Jackson battle it out.

 

[omahabrad]

I think Farve is the better talent. But he is a year older and coming off an injury. I'm thinking about the other players. Who would you rather have on your team a guy that's only there for his personal agenda or a guy that has the same goal as you? I'ld rather play for TJax or Rosenfels before I'ld play for Favre. In my mind Favre has gone from one of my favorite players to approaching being a player that I think is annoying.

 

[Phurfur]

It's either Favre or Rosenfels. I'm leaning toward Sage.

Jackson is not and never will be the answer.

I know there are issues with Tarvaris, but he is a 26 year old mobile QB who is young and showed improvement last year. In December he had 8 TD's with 1 pick and a 115.4 rating. He also rushed for 80 yards in those 4 December games. He did have a bad playoff game against the Eagles so people are holding that against him a lot, but Jim Johnson's defense in a playoff setting could make a lot of young QB's look bad.I am not saying he is a great QB, but I think Minnesota is making a mistake going to Favre with the headaches he brings. I would let Sage and Jackson battle it out.

Nobody has mentioned that Darrell Bevel was Favre's QB coach during his terrible 2005 season. Favre played out of control that year while Mike Sherman and Bevell let him. Does anyone really thing Childress/Bevell can control him? This could get real interesting.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

is favre really going to be happy just handing off to AP? I doubt it. And next year, the Vikings go thru the whole QB sage once again. Sage is their best bet for this year and the future.

 

[millertyme1]

Favre.

 

[TheFanatic]

The Vikings had a hard time selling out a playoff game last year. The new owner wants a new stadium. The answer here is Favre. But the answer is just financial.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

An interesting twist from Jets beat writer Rich Cimini (particularly regarding the biceps injury):

Favre might Jet to Minnesota

May 5, 2009

I suppose Brad Childress will promise Brett Favre that he'll name his next son after him. I don't even know if Childress has kids or is planning to have kids, but the mere fact that he's willing to have a sit-down meeting with Favre, as ESPN reported today, shows how desperate he is. Shades of the Jets and Eric Mangini, who gave his son, born last October, the middle name "Brett."

If Favre returns and plays for the Vikings - and it's starting to look like he will - it just shows that his decision to retire in February was a Jets thing, not a Brett thing.

Favre was totally unfulfilled by his Jets experience, and I think this apparent comeback was premeditated. He didn't want to quit football in February, he just wanted to quit the Jets.

He never wanted to be here in the first place; he made that quite clear, admitting he found out about the trade from watching ESPN. By then, he figured it would cause too much damage to turn back, so he re-located his family to New Jersey and tried to make it work.

It didn't. He never felt comfortable in New Jersey, many of his close friends told me late in the season. Then his legendary arm fizzled out and a couple of teammates took shots at him in the papers, criticizing the Great Favre. After the season, he leaked a story about a torn right bicep tendon, a great reason for retiring, he figured. Someone with intimate knowledge of the injury told me it wasn't as bad as he made it out to be. But, hey, it gave him a convenient "out."

Favre never wanted to return to the Jets, and new coach Rex Ryan never picked up the phone to get him to change his mind. When he retired, his agent asked the Jets for a release. We should've known back then he was plotting this apparent comeback.

Part of me thinks the QB-needy Jets were holding out some crazy hope that, if they still had an unsettled QB situation in June, they'd be able to convince Favre to return. Is it a coincidence that they didn't pursue a veteran the entire offseason? Hmm.

I think Favre told the Jets throughout the offseason that he had no intention of coming back to play for them, and you wonder (and you hope this isn't true) if they got hot for Mark Sanchez when they realized Favre, Part II was a pipe dream.

Favre said last summer, and whenever he was subsequently asked, that Minnesota was his No. 1 choice last summer. Ahead of the Bucs and certainly ahead of the Jets. This obsession for playing in the Packers' division, haunting his old team, hasn't waned. It looks like the Jets became a pawn in the latest Favre soap opera.

He was a great quarterback, but Jets fans will remember him as two faced and disingenuous - a total phony.

 

[SteevieG]

The circus surrounding Favre will tear down the Vikes. He needs to just keep cutting grass and fade into the pre-HOF sunset. In 5 years he can have the spotlight again when he gets his gold jacket.

 

[millertyme1]

Stephania (sp?) Bell of ESPN talked about his injury and stated he could play with it (stated Elway did so over a decade ago & led them to the Super Bowl) or he could elect to have the surgery. Light throwing within 4 weeks and heavy throwing 6-8 weeks.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Setting the Over/Under at 50, on how many posts before the Packer and Viking fans start going at each other.

 

[Birdie048]

Stephania (sp?) Bell of ESPN talked about his injury and stated he could play with it (stated Elway did so over a decade ago & led them to the Super Bowl) or he could elect to have the surgery. Light throwing within 4 weeks and heavy throwing 6-8 weeks.

So, if he chooses to have the surgery, this would get him out of the OTA's and some of the brutal summer Mini-Camp workouts. He does not want to participate in these as his age will really catch up to him here and he will breakdown sooner rather than later. But, the team will not support him unless he is there with them sweating and busting butts all summer. He can not walk into camp in August and expect to be leader. He has not served his time with THIS TEAM. He served it with a hated rival, but that does not excuse him from not being part of the team all season if he wants to return. I don't want him to return. He is a loose cannon who makes it up as he goes along. Great arm and love the character he brought to the game, but his time has passed. If he returns again, he will only further injure his stature as a HOF'er. I doubt he would ever lose that distinction, but it sure does not help him to waffle about his decisions all summer. I don't like his spotlight glamour. As for the QB who provides Minn the best chance for making the playoffs & winning, I like Sage. He has experience and ball control. Nothing against Tarv Jackson. He has talent, but he needs more time to develop and grow into the NFL QB role. 2 yrs from now, he will be the QB caliber they envisioned him to be. Sage for 2009 and 2010.

 

[Crippler]

Talking about the injury. It was on the Network last week that did an example of how he threw the ball during the Arizona game and how it looked in games near end of season. The zip was not there and he was floating it more. I think the injury did affect him instead of what that article wrote. Of course that was a scientific comparison and not say so. If he can return to the first 11 games last year, I think he is huge for Minny. If the arm is hurt and he throws with no as much zip and more air than he is good for no one and should retire. I think a great move by Minny. The QB's they have now wont lead them to a SB IMO. And even if for only one year. If you get that far it is worth any price

 

[Donnybrook]

I have to say Rosenfels. I believe in chemistry and don't think the other players will accept playing for a guy that 's there just for 2 games and not the whole season. The teams goal is to get to the super bowl while Farve just wants to stick it to G-Bay and the Super Bowl would be a nice bonus. This is a bad move for the Vikings. Didn't work for the Jets and isn't going to work for the Vikes.

Devil's Advocate ....Who do you think will have an easier time learning a new offense? Favre, who'll be in an offense very similar to the one he ran in GB or Sage? Unless Sage is some kind of playbook sponge, it's going to take him a year to become familiar and comfortable w/ the offense. Who's got the more impressive resume? Actually, other than a good game or two, what exactly has Sage done to show that he's not Rob Johnson, Scott Mitchell etc? I really don't understand people who think that Sage will beat out (or is better) than Favre when they have nothing to back it up with.

... im just saying.

Did Packers management have anything to back up supporting Rodgers over Favre? Did San Diego have any evidence to suggest that Rivers would be able to replace Brees? How about Romo over Drew Bledsoe? Watch this and then tell me that you know Favre is better than Sage right now.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlig...hins-24-Jets-17

 

[Gopher State]

Favre and it's not even close when you look at QB's on MN's roster.

Favre will not have to throw 30 times a game in MN, with AP, it's a match that will work

 

[Tau837]

I have to say Rosenfels. I believe in chemistry and don't think the other players will accept playing for a guy that 's there just for 2 games and not the whole season. The teams goal is to get to the super bowl while Farve just wants to stick it to G-Bay and the Super Bowl would be a nice bonus. This is a bad move for the Vikings. Didn't work for the Jets and isn't going to work for the Vikes.

Devil's Advocate ....Who do you think will have an easier time learning a new offense? Favre, who'll be in an offense very similar to the one he ran in GB or Sage? Unless Sage is some kind of playbook sponge, it's going to take him a year to become familiar and comfortable w/ the offense. Who's got the more impressive resume? Actually, other than a good game or two, what exactly has Sage done to show that he's not Rob Johnson, Scott Mitchell etc? I really don't understand people who think that Sage will beat out (or is better) than Favre when they have nothing to back it up with.

... im just saying.

Did Packers management have anything to back up supporting Rodgers over Favre? Did San Diego have any evidence to suggest that Rivers would be able to replace Brees? How about Romo over Drew Bledsoe? Watch this and then tell me that you know Favre is better than Sage right now.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlig...hins-24-Jets-17

IMO you chose bad comparisons.Yes, the Chargers had evidence about Rivers - two years of practice. But in that case, he didn't have to be better - Brees was a free agent who would command a huge contract and was coming off a serious injury.

Yes, the Packers had evidence about Rodgers - three years of practice.

The Vikings don't have any such evidence about Rosenfels, since he is new to their team. However, unlike Rivers and Rodgers, they do have a fair amount of game film of Rosenfels playing for other teams, and none of it is particularly impressive.

If Favre is healthy, the answer is Favre, and it's not close IMO.

 

[Donnybrook]

I have to say Rosenfels. I believe in chemistry and don't think the other players will accept playing for a guy that 's there just for 2 games and not the whole season. The teams goal is to get to the super bowl while Farve just wants to stick it to G-Bay and the Super Bowl would be a nice bonus. This is a bad move for the Vikings. Didn't work for the Jets and isn't going to work for the Vikes.

Devil's Advocate ....Who do you think will have an easier time learning a new offense? Favre, who'll be in an offense very similar to the one he ran in GB or Sage? Unless Sage is some kind of playbook sponge, it's going to take him a year to become familiar and comfortable w/ the offense. Who's got the more impressive resume? Actually, other than a good game or two, what exactly has Sage done to show that he's not Rob Johnson, Scott Mitchell etc? I really don't understand people who think that Sage will beat out (or is better) than Favre when they have nothing to back it up with.

... im just saying.

Did Packers management have anything to back up supporting Rodgers over Favre? Did San Diego have any evidence to suggest that Rivers would be able to replace Brees? How about Romo over Drew Bledsoe? Watch this and then tell me that you know Favre is better than Sage right now.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlig...hins-24-Jets-17

IMO you chose bad comparisons.Yes, the Chargers had evidence about Rivers - two years of practice. But in that case, he didn't have to be better - Brees was a free agent who would command a huge contract and was coming off a serious injury.

Yes, the Packers had evidence about Rodgers - three years of practice.

The Vikings don't have any such evidence about Rosenfels, since he is new to their team. However, unlike Rivers and Rodgers, they do have a fair amount of game film of Rosenfels playing for other teams, and none of it is particularly impressive.

If Favre is healthy, the answer is Favre, and it's not close IMO.

You are entitled to your own opinion. Just remember that Favre's December swoon is not a new thing. In the last 4 years, December has consistently been his worst month statistically. It makes me wonder if he no longer has the endurance to lead a team into the playoffs. Vikings will have to find out the hard way.

 

[Jason Wood]

Here's what I don't understand.

If the Vikes are going to sign Favre, I'm going to assume they have vetted his biceps completely. Otherwise he's not, nor will he have ever been, a viable alternative.

So signing Favre [implicit that his arm is OK] is the way to go in "win now" mode. You wouldn't want to do this IF you felt there was a QB on the roster who could carry the franchise for years to come.

But they don't.

For those who argue Sage Rosenfels in lieu of a HEALTHY Favre; I'm just not seeing it. Rosenfels is a walking turnover. He's got the same kind of gunslinger mentality Favre does, with a fraction of the physical skill or improvisational ability. Even last year when Favre threw all those picks HE HAD A LOWER INT% THAN ROSENFELS. If Sage starts all 16 games in Minnesota, and they actually let him throw the ball more than 15 times a game, he would have to be the odds on favorite to lead the league in turnovers.

And that's not how the Vikings are going to win. With that running game and that run defense, the only thing they can't really have are turnovers killing their field position.

 

[Tau837]

Here's what I don't understand.If the Vikes are going to sign Favre, I'm going to assume they have vetted his biceps completely. Otherwise he's not, nor will he have ever been, a viable alternative.So signing Favre [implicit that his arm is OK] is the way to go in "win now" mode. You wouldn't want to do this IF you felt there was a QB on the roster who could carry the franchise for years to come. But they don't.For those who argue Sage Rosenfels in lieu of a HEALTHY Favre; I'm just not seeing it. Rosenfels is a walking turnover. He's got the same kind of gunslinger mentality Favre does, with a fraction of the physical skill or improvisational ability. Even last year when Favre threw all those picks HE HAD A LOWER INT% THAN ROSENFELS. If Sage starts all 16 games in Minnesota, and they actually let him throw the ball more than 15 times a game, he would have to be the odds on favorite to lead the league in turnovers.And that's not how the Vikings are going to win. With that running game and that run defense, the only thing they can't really have are turnovers killing their field position.

 

[sho nuff]

If healthy...for just this year. Favre is probably the right choice. But in the back of your mind remember how he has done down the stretch the past few years.

But also they better get his head on straight and not just thinking about the revenge factor...do their best to do what McCarthy did in 2007 with him and don't just let him get away with anything he wants.

 

[trader jake]

Brett Favre - Yes he's old and can toss the rock when you wish he held it, but...

1) He makes players around him better, even at 40

2) He will help Zigi sell some tickets

3) He will only help the team with their stadium push

4) He only has to play one bad weather game

5) He will make teams pay if they stack 8 in the box

As long as the Vikings get him to fix his bicep ASAP and he shows up for a full training camp he'll be fine.

 

[Tau837]

You are entitled to your own opinion. Just remember that Favre's December swoon is not a new thing. In the last 4 years, December has consistently been his worst month statistically. It makes me wonder if he no longer has the endurance to lead a team into the playoffs. Vikings will have to find out the hard way.

Well, he didn't swoon in 2007, just two seasons ago, and last year's late season decline has been attributed at least in part to injury. So really the substance of your statement is based on 2005-2006 IMO.But I have also seen people suggest that he no longer plays well in cold weather games. Consider:2005 - Last 6 games: @PHI, @CHI, DET, @BAL, CHI, SEA2006 - Last 5 games: NYJ, @SF, DET, MIN, @CHI. The only one Favre played particularly well in was @SF.2007 - He played better in December than he did in October, at least based on QB rating. He only had one bad December game: @CHI.2008 - Last 5 games: DEN, @SF, BUF, @SEA, MIA. New York is no Green Bay, but I still assume 4 of those 5 games were cold weather games. More importantly, he was hurt.So... how much of a factor was the cold weather as he aged? If that was a factor, he won't have to deal with it much in Minnesota this year - they play only one cold weather game, at Chicago in week 16.

 

[Phurfur]

Stephania (sp?) Bell of ESPN talked about his injury and stated he could play with it (stated Elway did so over a decade ago & led them to the Super Bowl) or he could elect to have the surgery. Light throwing within 4 weeks and heavy throwing 6-8 weeks.

Here is the clip. The Elway reference was not included but I believe he had the surgery to rupture the tendon. http://videos.espn.com/m/video/22234512/ca...tm?pageid=14030

 

[Banger]

Favre easily if healthy.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

is favre really going to be happy just handing off to AP?

I can see them losing some games with Favre because they don't hand off to AP as much. They've already made this baffling error a few times. I think there was a GB game in which he only had a couple carries in the 2nd half.re: a late-season fade, there's no guarantee that Favre has to play the whole season. If Sage gets hurt or Minn's offense isn't playing well against that "easy" schedule after 6 weeks, maybe Favre gets the call and only plays 3 months instead of 4. Plus he gets to miss the offseason stuff he hates.

 

[Phurfur]

I think they would be better off picking up Mike Vick.

 

[Donnybrook]

You are entitled to your own opinion. Just remember that Favre's December swoon is not a new thing. In the last 4 years, December has consistently been his worst month statistically. It makes me wonder if he no longer has the endurance to lead a team into the playoffs. Vikings will have to find out the hard way.

Well, he didn't swoon in 2007, just two seasons ago, and last year's late season decline has been attributed at least in part to injury. So really the substance of your statement is based on 2005-2006 IMO.But I have also seen people suggest that he no longer plays well in cold weather games. Consider:2005 - Last 6 games: @PHI, @CHI, DET, @BAL, CHI, SEA2006 - Last 5 games: NYJ, @SF, DET, MIN, @CHI. The only one Favre played particularly well in was @SF.2007 - He played better in December than he did in October, at least based on QB rating. He only had one bad December game: @CHI.2008 - Last 5 games: DEN, @SF, BUF, @SEA, MIA. New York is no Green Bay, but I still assume 4 of those 5 games were cold weather games. More importantly, he was hurt.So... how much of a factor was the cold weather as he aged? If that was a factor, he won't have to deal with it much in Minnesota this year - they play only one cold weather game, at Chicago in week 16.

In the last 4 years, Favre has thrown 12 TDs and 30 Ints in the month of December. All I hear is people make every conceivable excuse for Favre play but none for Sage. I will concede that Sage does throw a lot of interceptions but he has never played for a team that could protect him or could protect a lead.

 

[Jason Wood]

It's all kind of moot now. They go from a Hall of Fame legend who turns the ball over too much to a spot starter who REALLY loves to turn the ball over.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

It's all kind of moot now. They go from a Hall of Fame legend who turns the ball over too much to a spot starter who REALLY loves to turn the ball over.

I wouldn't call this over yet. Favre is just getting warmed up. The Jets were wise to release him when they did.