DMN: Vikings need more from Favre

We'll see. Anyway, isn't Brett the single best endorser in the NFL? The guy is a multimillionaire, but he is totally believable in those Wrangler ads hanging out in the back yard, tossing the ball around with some neighborhood guys, with his pickup and retreiver. And the Sears ads are brilliant. He can't make his mind up. LOL. They needed to cast Brad Childress as the salesman.

I agree 100% as usual with you Michael. That is what I enjoy about you the most, the fact that you dont drink the kool kool that the media forces on fans.

Double up third down and red zone reps, and all the team's play selections from the four minute mark.

That's the plays the Vikes run every down.

Mike – I agree that the Vikings are not super bowl ready.

But why this article right now?

28-30 teams are not Super Bowl ready right now. Almost every team has some aspect that needs to be worked on.

Of course the Vikings are not the favorite to win the Super Bowl but I think they went from having maybe a 5% chance to win the championship before Favre to a 15% chance with him.

So it was a good move to bring him in, their chances increased but of course it is not 100%.

No surprise someone in Green Bay is trying to criticize the Favre win instead of the Packer loss.

I covered the DET-MIN game Sunday, and I think it was more of an indictment of Detroit's defense than a great performance by Favre. The Lions knew he can't throw the ball downfield, so they put nine guys in the box to beat AP. Result? They still gave Peterson 92 yards, and they let Favre nickel-and-dime them to death, even knowing there was no reason to worry about a ball over the top.

I think the VIkes suspect pass protection may have something to do with this as well......Loadholt has been getting killed on pash rushes....

the double standard is that Brees has to put that many points on the board in order to win, something that is harder to do later in the season..The Vikings on the other hand have a good defense which should get better and Childress knows you only have to win by a point in order to win. The Saints history is one of fast starts and flameouts at the end.

Phrases like "Mr. Sears" carry the undertone of derision and anti-Favreness. It seems the entire football sports media has levied against Favre an incredible "ressentment" all the while feeding off his so-called popularity. I am not a Favre fan, per se, but the ridiculousness of all the negative attention toward him is frustrating as a fan of the game.

My feeling with Favre is that at the tail end of the season we will know if the Vikings made the right move. At 2-0 against mediocre opponents no conclusion can definitively be posited. What is clear is that neither Jackson nor Rosenfels were deemed capable of the team's goals by team management - not by Favre. And with AP, a tame passing game has merit and has sufficed. If the Vikes were throwing 30 times the argument would be that they are not giving it to AP enough and that Favre is ruining what the team does best.

While I agree with the gist of the stated argument that the Vikes will need to throw more aggressively to reach the mountain-top, an anti-Favre bias is also clearly indicated and seems to unveil a different point of the article.

I also think that Favre did not have a full camp -- albeit his choice -- and so the Vikes were fortunate to have the opening 2 games they were scheduled giving Favre and the Vike receivers time to find trust and a comfort level with each other. Have they found it? Will they? Again, time will tell.

The Brady hagiography is fading, but then it is Favre's fault -- he is getting a pass and the criticism should be directed toward Mr. Sears? Please.

This site is fan of quotes and this is from Oscar Wilde and sums up the media's assault on this imperfect fella from Mississippi:

Yet each man kills the thing he loves
By each let this be heard,
Some do it with a bitter look,
Some with a flattering word,
The coward does it with a kiss,
The brave man with a sword!

You hit the nail on the head at the bottom of this piece.. it is like an extended preseason... they're 2-0, (both road victories) and he is still learning... If I was a Minnesota fan I'd be thrilled.. no Interceptions and 2-0....

Mike - definitely correct on the Favre analysis but there is another issue here that folks seem to be ignoring. The Vikes are not stopping the run very well at all. They're stopping the pass against inexperienced QBs but they're not stopping the run - for some perspective, everyone is freaking about GB not stopping the run when they're allowing 3.6ypc on average thus far whereas the Vikes are allowing 4.0ypc so far.

Obviously, it's very early in the season - too early to make any definitive judgements on ANY team but the reality is that ANY RB can be stopped if a defense doesn't have to respect the rest of the offense. Not to mention the fact that relying on a single RB to basically carry the team exposes that RB to a greater likelihood of wearing down and getting injured. For a single RB to have almost as many touches as the QB (45 vs 48) - that's an extremely risky gameplan. The RBs who carry that sort of load breakdown very quickly (Jackson, LT and LJ to name a few but the roadside is littered with these guys).

Think outside the box Mr. Lombardi, suprised you haven't on this one.

I agree, when the Vike's signed Favre I thought that just paid $11 million a year for a 40 year old to hand the ball off? Well, they did yes but it goes so much beyond that. I feel there is two factors to signing Favre:

1. Money. Instant revenue for the business known as the NFL and the Minnesota Vikings. Say the NFL sells 2 million Vikings jersey's with Favre on the back of them. What's a jersey, $80 cost to consumer? Now say of that $80, 40% is profit, that's $64 million dollars the NFL and Vikings franchise has coming to them. That's just jersey's alone, think of all the other merchandise #4 will sell!

2. Confidence. Brett Favre brings an image and reputation of a winner to the field. He plays hurt and gains the respect of his teammates and coaches. If Brett Favre can only hand the ball off or throw 20 yards downfield but the other Viking players raise there game and the team wins, then Favre is a success.

If not, Brett Favre experiment didn't work. Childress takes the blame and gets fired. The NFL and Vikings make alot of money off a $11 million investment.

Reason's for no downfield passing and low yards per completion for Farve and the Vikings:

1) Has only been on the roster for 4 to 5 weeks

2) No chemistry with primary deep threat Berrian due to injury and short offseason

3) Rookie right tackle struggling in pass protection

4) Conservative game plan of running the ball and playing defense

5) First two games on the road, even against what look to be poor defenses

Farve is getting paid to do excatly what he is doing - protecting the football, playing to the team strengths, providing veteran leadership in the huddle, and winning games. AKA Managing the game. Do you believe Jackson wouldn't have any turnovers right now? Farve has taken a lot of sacks, but that's what he is suppose to do right now. Don't turn the ball over, don't force a bad play, let the running game and defense win the game. Farve had an 85% completion percentage with 2 TDs, but we should be critical of his poor downfield passing? If this was Peyton Manning people would be heralding Manning as "Field General Manning learns to trust defense and running game to win games". Will they need to throw downfiled to win some games? Obviously. Can they do it? To be seen but there is a lot of season left to develop chemstry in the passing game if it's not there. Did they need to throw downfield to beat Browns and Lions? No.

Don't tell me that if Favre was throwing 40 times a game and the vikings were 2-0 that you wouldn't be writing about how his arm will break down. No QB is going to throw 25 time for 350 yard and 4 tds. Yet, that is the only way that you wouldn't put a negative spin on the story.

@ thersitz -
You nailed it. The quote by Oscar Wilde is dead on regarding some of the media's and some of the fan's now hate of of Brett Favre. From this article it's obvious Michael Lombardi is one of the "cowards" in Wilde's poem. I am a proud Packer Fan and I will always be a proud Brett Favre fan too. I'll never forget the energy he brought to this town and for those who have chosen to cast him aside like yesterday's trash well its your loss. Go Pack and Go Brett!

thersitz - great post.

It seems that you favre apologists are missing the whole point of the article...which is no surprise..all Mike is saying is wouldn't it be better to see what sort of deep threat favre can be against the lions or the browns rather than waiting until they actually play a pro football team..its all well and good to 'manage the game' when you are playing D1-AA opponents but is that going to cut it against the bears or packers? or what about a shoot out with the Saints? or the Giants? The Vikings have set themselves for a deep play off run so they have to be measured against the other NFC teams that look like they are going to be in the mix not the teams that will be selecting in the top 5 of next years draft.

As long as defenses give the Vikings the short pass they will take it and win!

thersitz - great job of sounding all deep and profound while completely ignoring the point of the entire article. How can Favre and his receivers develop the trust and comfort level you refer to without throwing the ball? The Vikes are now heading into a six game stretch that includes a tougher than expected SF, The Ravens, the Steelers and two games against the Packers. The time to develop that rapport was prior to this portion of their schedule.

All that hot air and no mention of the fact that Favre has been with the Vikings all of three weeks leading up to last week's game?

That right there proves you do have an anti-Favre agenda.

What idiot would compare a quarterback who's been with a team three weeks to quarterbacks who have been with their team YEARS?

All that hot air and no mention of the fact that Favre has been with the Vikings all of three weeks leading up to last week's game?

That right there proves you do have an anti-Favre agenda.

What idiot would compare a quarterback who's been with a team three weeks to quarterbacks who have been with their team YEARS?

What do you mean "what is Favre doing for the Vikings that Travaris Jackson can't do for 11 million less?" HE IS WINNING, that's what. TJ has never been able to make the smart throw on a consistent basis. It's not like Jacksons average per attempt is any higher than Favre's. He is infinitely better than Travaris Jackson because his reputation alone means that opponents play with their safeties deep. Something the Vikings did not see at all last year even though Berrian was statistically one of the best deep threats in the league. This, of course, leads to easy completions underneath.

I don't understand the criticism... The Vikings have not yet needed to go down the field to win, so why would they? Why should Favre show the deep ball to a team he does not need to use it against?? Why give other opponents tape to see? I can understand the criticism if you are watching practices and there are no deep throws going on there, but to criticize the organization for two fairly decisive wins that were played close to the vest is odd. If there comes a time when the Vikings are down by 2 scores in the second half, I am sure we will see plenty of deep attempts.

I have a lot of respect for Dorsey Levins and the other Packers RB's that Favre has played with, but I think everyone agrees that he has never even come close to playing with a ground game of this caliber. Why not lean on it until he masters the offense? As long as it's a "W" at the end of the day, It's all good, right?

We'll find out this week if good old " 4'ce them in" is a game manager or not, the Niners dee is certainly much better than the Lions or Browns. Willis and Co will shut down Peterson (they've done it before) and it will be up to the old man. I say Harralson and Smith get two sacks a piece.

This article is right on the money. Mike is saying Favre will be able to 'manage' games but he won't be able to win them. At some point, AP will be shut down or the Vikings will be ehind. In that situation do you think Favre can come out and win the game.

The 2009 Vikings will be able to beat bad teams and some decent teams, maybe even win the division, but come playoff they won't be able to beat tough competition, exactly like 2008 Vikings.

Favre has lost a lot over the past few seasons and over the next 6 games when he plays GB twice, PIT and BAL we'll see if Minnesota can win with a one-dimensional offense.

I agree with mcgarnicle79. Keep Favre healthy for the stretch and the playoffs.

For 11 Million less, Tavares would have allowed the Browns or Lions to stack the line even more against Peterson and probably coughed up the ball a couple times. A couple of comfortable wins wouldn't have been so comfortable.

From what I can see Lombardi, you're in the minority on Viking hatred...most people see past the 40yr old QB.

It's all part of Chilly's genious plan...he's holding the poker cards with a sly grin on his face...we won't show the deep ball till we need the deep ball. We'll catch 'em sneaking up 9 in the box and air it out...Actually, that's probably giving Chilly way to much credit.

Joking aside, I think OrangeCrush has it right, it wasn't 11 Million wasted. They're packing the dome and selling jersey's, all while garnering national attention to Peterson and the rest of the team. It's a money making machine. If they win this year, it'll also look better for Ziggy and the stadium effort. The fan base here is riled up and excited and if it were Jackson at the helm, eh, not so much.

To sum up my thoughts, I think you're correct Lombardi, the Vikings do need a downfield passing game to win the SB, but that'll come and it's hard to argue that what they have now will garner them the division and most likely a first round bye. Sidney Rice and Bernard Berrian have flashed a little bit in the first two games and will come around if we can get the protection scheme figured out, so I'm not worried.

@thersitz, great post!

@Nate

I notice you said deep attempts and not deep completions..) Its all speculation at the moment, who knows maybe there havent been any deep pass plays because from practice the vikings have discovered that you know favre can't throw deep anymore..maybe he still throws a gorgeous deep ball and they want to keep it under wraps..maybe its a chemistry thing.. but we will find out in the next 6 weeks what favre brings to the table

John Elway was worshiped by fawning media types like Lombardi for playing like crap in Super Bowl XXXII (12 comp / 22 att – 123 yds – 5.59 yds / att - 0 TD - 1 INT ) and handing the ball off to Terrell Davis for Elway’s first Super Bowl win.

Favre’s current 5.52 yards per attempt over two games is indistinguishable from Saint Elway’s 5.59 yards per attempt in Super Bowl XXXII.

And Elway won that game, despite Favre totally outplaying Elway.

For the record, Favre’s numbers in that game compared to Elway:

FAVRE: 25 comp /42 att – 256 yds – 6.09 yds / att – 3 TD – 1 INT

ELWAY: 12 comp / 22 att – 123 yds – 5.59 yds / att - 0 TD - 1 INT

Thus, Favre played much better than Elway, had more yards per pass than Elway, and Elway still won. Why? Denver’s running game, which was able to mount a winning 13:50 (yes, 13 minutes and 50 seconds) drive in the fourth quarter for the winning touchdown.

"Mike is saying Favre will be able to 'manage' games but he won't be able to win them."

Oh. I thought they were 2-0.

"Favre has lost a lot over the past few seasons"

That must be why he's ranked 3 of all NFL quarterbacks:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/year/2009/seasontype/2

Geez, if he hadn't "lost so much" he'd be off the charts!

I would say that Bernard Berrians hamstring has something to do with the fact that he isn't throwing down field in addition to the fact that he missed a huge portion of the offseason, in which he was coming off surgery. The funny part about articles like this is that if Favre had the stats that Brees had, I am sure there would be a column blasting Chilly for not saving Favre and how his arm is sure to falter when it "really" matters.

For the Vikings fans that still don't get it - you don't prepare for a marathon by running the 400meter hurdles. Similarly, you don't prepare yourself to complete long passes by throwing screens and dump-offs.

And pc_oz, in order to "still" throw a "gorgeous deep ball", one would have to have done so previously. The fact of the matter is that Favre has NEVER thrown the deep ball well - everything else, he was one of the best but he's never been good throwing deep his entire career. It may have LOOKED pretty but he never had an accuracy with it. I loved Favre but that was never his strength.

To throw it down-field you need to be standing upright....You made the point yourself, 7 sacks...let's not count the hurries & touches. To be calling for Favre to air it out at this point in the season is stupid and to imply that people just don't understand is completely condescending. "Hey everybody--- NEWSFLASH --- Favre & the Vikes can't keep playing this way & win the Super Bowl!"...as if any team can keep playing how they are in week 2 & win. Waste of space. BTW, think back a couple years with Favre & the Pack getting to the Championship game...review the year, take a look at how they got there with the youngest team in the NFL...Short pass (blame the loss on Favre all ya want in that game but his pass didn't finish the Packers-they couldn't stop or perform the run. The combination of experience, poise, short passes and Peterson...a weapon of mass destruction...on the offense with a D that can actually help...the recipe is there to make a Super Bowl whether Favre goes long or not. The Packers...good luck. They've got Driver & the gang making the plays with Rodgers throwing the ball so high each reception is a leaping miracle, he'll be lucky to have any healthy receivers left at the end of the year..

thersitz,

Great post, couldn't agree more.

@Jon

"What idiot would compare a quarterback who's been with a team three weeks to quarterbacks who have been with their team YEARS?"

He's comparing Farve, a QB people expect to contend for a Super Bowl, to other QBs who have won Super Bowls. The fact that he doesn't know his receivers well is one of the reasons why he think Farve won't win. Seems to make complete sense.


"Favre’s current 5.52 yards per attempt over two games is indistinguishable from Saint Elway’s 5.59 yards per attempt in Super Bowl XXXII. "

Are you really comparing games against the Browns and Lions to Elway's play in a Super Bowl?


"Oh. I thought they were 2-0."

This was in reference to me saying "Mike is saying Favre will be able to 'manage' games but he won't be able to win them." Obviously I didn't mean he would go winless. I meant he isn't going to win any games for you against good competition with his arm.


"That must be why he's ranked 3 of all NFL quarterbacks,Geez, if he hadn't "lost so much" he'd be off the charts!"

Yes, obviously based on how he played last season with the Jets, he hasn't lost a step at all. Plus as we all know QB rating is a perfect indicator of how good a QB is, the statistics has never been considered flawed. Especially against 2 of the worst defenses in the league. Looking at 2008, it's obvious that Chad Pennington is the 2nd best QB in the league. Also Seneca Wallace, Shaun Hill, and Jason Campbell are all superior QBs to Ben Roethlisberger. (Also Favre I might add but who needs last years stats when we clearly have 2 perfect games to judge him by.


Tarvaris Jackson, as awful as he was, was able to win the division last year with this team because they have outstanding running and defense. The question is can Favre take them to that next level. The next 6 games will answer a lot of questions in that area.

Lombardi,

You may not be anti-Favre, but I am! Thanks for this scintillating commentary! Everyone wonders why Peyton Manning is so solid in the pocket and adept in the passing game. Obviously, it's due to preparation. Favre cannot hold Manning's jock, now more than ever. Yes, even Kyle Orton has made big plays in the passing game for my Broncos, especially to Stokley and Jabar Gaffney. As always, Lombardi, I look forward to your commentary on the NFL in any way I can get it.

Scott M. - to say that Farve has NEVER thrown the deep ball well in his career is absolutely insane. Have you ever watched Brett Farve play once before the last 5 years? Actually, have you ever watched football? Farve probably had one of the hardest throws and strongest arms in the history of the game and if you don't believe me go call Antonio Freeman and his 10 dislocated fingers. As for accuracy, has has always been streaky in that regard but when he was on he was tough to stop.

To the point of the article is that Lombardi doesn't think Favre will be able to create enough of a passing game to win the Super Bowl. A lot of responses keep making excuses and say that the Vikings have plenty of time to put things together. Of course they have time and could add that dimension to their offense but Lombardi is giving you his opinion that he doesn't think they'll be abel to. Most commentators won't commit to anything, remain wishy-washy on subjects, and change their comments each week based on hwo the previous games went. At least we know where Lombardi stands and we'll see at the end of the year if he was right or not.

This post is solely for you, Mike Lombardi, and your personal health. Did you have a stroke, seixure, heart attack, or near death experience while watching Sparano handle the final 3 minutes last night? I hope you are ok.

@Dan

couldnt agree with you more..here we have a columist who is prepared to call it like he sees it and generate healthy debate amongst the readers isn't that the point of writing something in the first place? Its refreshing to actually have a writer who doesn't fawn over mr favre and is prepared to back up his opnions..the article isn't anti-favre its just a commentary on where he sees favre and the vikings at this point in the season..so people like Jon need to just take a deep breath and have a lie down..

@ pc_oz
You sound like a liberal - as long as people agree with YOUR point of view they are okay but if they don't then they need a "lie down" - what a childish response.

Really a tough one to call. I think Lombardi does have an "axe to grind" against the Vikings. Not sure if he was turned down for a job at some point or if he just doesnt care for the franchise or what the deal is, BUT he is correct about my squad. At some point the Vikings WILL have to make plays in the passing game. I think that much is obvious. The real debate is can the Vikings do it? I believe the weapons and the potential are there, but that is no guarantee of future sucess. As a fan of the team I am hoping to see things gradually come along. For the passing game to improve the following things need to happen 1) Pass prtection must improve 2) Play calling open up 3) Favre exectue the throw when the opportunities are there. Can all these things happen? OF COURSE. It is 2 games into a new season w/ a qb thats been with his team a month. The real tests are coming up. Have the vikes been conservative on purpose? Maybe. Can they open things up? Maybe Will we know alot more in 2-4 weeks about the Vikes? YES. It just seems way too soon to write this article. Favre could hit big plays next weekend that make this article look foolish and biased. Time will tell. I hope things open soon. As some previsou posters commented the beauty of the article is that it sparks debate and an opinion. I think the Vikings offense will be a good, well rounded one by week 8. Lombardi does not. All teams have some warts after week 2, its the teams that improve and evolve that are the ones that are dangerous in December and beyond.

@ Dan

["What idiot would compare a quarterback who's been with a team three weeks to quarterbacks who have been with their team YEARS?"

He's comparing Farve, a QB people expect to contend for a Super Bowl, to other QBs who have won Super Bowls. The fact that he doesn't know his receivers well is one of the reasons why he think Farve won't win. Seems to make complete sense.”]

First, he didn’t say anything about Favre not winning (that’s your subconscious desire coming through).

Second, if it makes perfect sense for Favre to be playing the way he is, why write an article reeking with disdain for the man?

["Favre’s current 5.52 yards per attempt over two games is indistinguishable from Saint Elway’s 5.59 yards per attempt in Super Bowl XXXII. "

Are you really comparing games against the Browns and Lions to Elway's play in a Super Bowl?]

Yes. My point is to disprove the premise of the article – that a high average-yards-per-attempt is necessary to win the Super Bowl. Elway proved otherwise in SB XXXII, playing like crap and having a low average-yards-per-attempt.

["Oh. I thought they were 2-0."

This was in reference to me saying "Mike is saying Favre will be able to 'manage' games but he won't be able to win them." Obviously I didn't mean he would go winless. I meant he isn't going to win any games for you against good competition with his arm.]

Oh, so you meant he’ll go 2-14. Smart!

In any event, by all accounts Favre’s arm is as strong as ever. By ALL accounts.

In fact, only an idiot would think Favre would return to the NFL, or the Vikings (or any other NFL team) would allow him to return, if he couldn’t throw the ball down field. That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

["That must be why he's ranked 3 of all NFL quarterbacks. Geez, if he hadn't "lost so much" he'd be off the charts!"

Yes, obviously based on how he played last season with the Jets, he hasn't lost a step at all. Plus as we all know QB rating is a perfect indicator of how good a QB is, the statistics has never been considered flawed. Especially against 2 of the worst defenses in the league. Looking at 2008, it's obvious that Chad Pennington is the 2nd best QB in the league.]

First, he’s third ranked among all QBs in the NFL. But you can’t accept that (you expected him to be ranked 32 by now), so you say he’s playing like last season? LOL. You’re just a Favre hater who can’t think through your emotions. Face it, seeing Favre at the top of the QB rankings riles you to no end, especially since it deprives you of your plan to use the same QB ranking – had it been low – to criticise him!

Second, yes, QB ratings are meaningless, that’s why all NFL quarterbacks seek a LOW rating. Gotcha.

Third, Favre has won two straight games on the road, in the NFL, COMING FROM BEHIND. That’s no small feat, I don’t care who the opponent is. Ask you fellow Favre haters in Green Bay how lucky they were to “get to play” the Bungles at HOME! LOL.

Face it. Guys like you and Lombardi are just not happy that Favre and the Vikings are doing well, so you have to find something to criticise.

@mr jolly

no not a liberal just frustrating that people like yourself missed the whole point of the article its not anti-favre its just a commentary on the first 2 games that have been played..and if you read my entire post I did say that it encourages healthy debate which is one of the best things about this site..but thanks for resorting to putting labels on people when you have nothing worthwhile to say

@ VikesGuy

I agree with most of one you said except for the part about writing this article in 2-4 weeks. At that point we'll see this offense against great defenses and we'll know whether or not Favre can get the job done. This article is basically a prediction by Lombardi that he doesn't think Favre will be able to get the job done and why. It would be much easier to make that prediction after the fact.

mcgarnicle79 - actually, in Brett's entire career with the Packers, there's a total of about 20 games that I had to listen to on the radio instead of watching the games. There's a pretty distinct difference between throwing the ball quickly and with great velocity (which Favre has always done very well) and putting the proper arc on a long pass and placing it in the proper location for a receiver to make the catch at distances greater than 25-30yds (which Favre has NEVER done well).

If you go back and watch his games and actually pay attention, you'll find that on deep crossing routes, where the defender is trailing and he doesn't have to arc the ball, those he does reasonably well but that's also where a lot of his picks came because of safety help in the middle of the field. Go routes down the sideline, he has always missed far more often than not, usually by overthrowing the receiver or putting the ball out of bounds.

Favre's strength has ALWAYS been passes 30yds or less - you can want it to be different, but that doesn't make it true. Inside that range, he's arguably the best there's ever been but not beyond it.

Just to clarify my earlier comment- I do agree with Mr. Lombardi that Favre will need to show that he can throw an effective deep ball for the Vikings to contend for the Super Bowl. I disagree that the 2 previous games are evidence of his ability to successfully do so. For ANY quarterback, the deep ball is the riskiest throw, so why do it when you don't have to?

With Minnesota's defense and running game, Favre might get through the season with fewer deep throws than any other QB in the league- and that's a good thing.

It may be entirely possible that Favre is unable to throw an effective deep ball, but criticizing his performance in the last 2 games for making high percentage plays instead of risky ones makes no sense.

As I recall, he was always criticized for taking too many risks with the ball. Scott M makes a great point in his most recent post that Favre has never been in the upper echelon of accurate QB's on deep throws. Now that he is taking virtually no risks, we are supposed to criticize him for this, too? Sounds to me like he will be criticized either way. The nature of the position, I suppose...

Also, I love debate, but hate arguments- some variance on opinion is what makes conversation fun. It disappoints me to see people called "stupid" or "morons" simply because they don't agree with someone else. A small minority of posters need some etiquette lessons!

You've really went out of your way to criticize Favre this year. Seems like every column or two has a rip on him. But how about the Vikings pass protection? They can't pick people up.

Mike,
Love your work. As a lifelong Giants fan and Manning family enthuiast, I've got a column idea for you. I'm listening to Mike Francesa and he keeps hammering on the point that Peyton is an immortal and Eli isn't close to his league BUT he's better than Peyton in the two minute drill. I happen to agree with him. Can you go back and chart this and see if it bears out? Thanks!

Perhaps Thersitz, the poster who correctly discerned Lombardi's thinly-veiled anti-Favre bias, has not followed some of Lombardi's earlier offerings.

Nary a week goes bye in which Michael doesn't drop some gratuitous anti-Favre slur. One example:

"The more he [Favre] lies to us -- or maybe in his mind he’s not lying, just changing his mind -- the respect and trust between fan and player begin to disappear." [Lombardi in "Diner Morning News: The Favre Saga" May 6, 2009].

Of course, an unspoken component of Favre derangement is a disturbing, jihadic devotion to the Packer GM, Ted The Ken Doll Thompson.

No doubt Lombardi is a TedHead, i.e., a cult-like follower of Ted Thompson whose fanaticism is not unlike that of the DeadHeads who followed late Jerry Garcia and his band "The Grateful Dead." Perhaps he would be well advised to keep in mind Garcia's famous lyrics:

"A friend of the devil is a friend of mine."