Last night, during halftime of the Monday night preseason game in Baltimore — after Jets rookie Mark Sanchez was reminded by the Ravens defense that he isn’t playing UCLA anymore — ESPN’s Adam Schefter came on and reported that there are some players in the Vikings locker room who want to see Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback for the team.
APJackson will be the player's choice until Favre shows he can win.
I’m not shocked at all, but I’m here to tell you that it won’t last if new Vikings QB Brett Favre can win.
There’s a pretty simple dynamic going on here that should be discussed from my perspective as an ex-player.
You see, Brett — no matter what his Hall of Fame career says — just, well, showed up one day. Driven to the facility by the head coach, of all things. And players, especially players who have been with the Vikings for some time under Childress, don’t like that stuff.
Think about it. You’re a Vikings player, you’ve been at the facility since late March — minus that four-week break before camp when you’re still training — and you think you’ve paid your dues. And Tarvaris has been one of those players, too. But in comes Favre — along with the media circus behind him.
You want to talk about special treatment? Well, there it is.
But for every player in the NFL, including the Vikings, this is part of the job, part of the league and part of realizing that you’re always replaceable — at any moment. Even if it was played out like a daytime soap — secret plane flights and all.
Sure, the Vikings players should stand behind Tarvaris, just as they did when Sage Rosenfels was brought in. These guys, these “new guys” who show up in the offseason, always have to prove themselves, and that was going to happen with Jackson and Rosenfels. Players can live with that. They can agree to let it play out on the field and for these guys to earn it.
No issues there at all because that’s competition. And every player knows that if he doesn’t show up every day in camp and compete with the guy next to him on the depth chart, he’ll fall down the ladder and maybe even end up on the street.
But Favre? A guy who’s been hanging out at home riding a tractor and throwing fade routes to 16-year-old high school kids? He’s our quarterback? But what about the competition?
Sorry, folks. That isn’t going to happen. And because of that, I expected to hear that some of the Vikings wanted “their guy” in the lineup. Hey, good teams in this league will stand behind each other both on and off the field.
APCan Favre swing the Minnesota locker room in his favor?
However, it will change if Brett wins, and wins early in the month of September. Yes, there will be guys talking in the locker room, or on the field, every time Favre throws a bad ball during practice, and especially when he’s expected to see an entire half of action against my Texans.
Those same guys will talk, just as senior cheerleaders talk in the hallways of your local high school.
Hey, I know. I did the same thing when my head coach, Joe Gibbs, brought in Mark Brunell to take Patrick Ramsey’s job in 2004 in Washington. I stood behind Patrick because he was our quarterback the year before when the Old Ball Coach was calling 60 passing plays a game. Every day was a competition, and every day we would gather and talk about who we thought should be our starting QB.
It happens, but it will end — soon. I’m still confident that Favre is a better quarterback than Jackson and a better quarterback for this football team. But he’s going to have to prove it on the field before he can swing the locker room in his favor.
Because this league is still about winning, and when Favre wins, this story will go away for good.
Follow me on Twitter: MattBowen41
"I don’t think anyone has played the game with as much passion and has loved it, and loved his teammates as much as me." - Brett Favre 8/18/09
Obviously once Brett tells his teammates how much more he loves them and the game of football than Tavaris Jackson does, they will warm up to him.
Being a loyal Packer fan for 30+ years, I feel that Matt's column hits it right on the head. By coming in late, Favrenstein tips his hat to the truth of the matter that he feels more important than the rest of the team... and THAT would rub me the wrong way if I was a Viking that was practicing and putting in my time in the offseason. As for Childress, well, I am glad that Minnesota signed him before he got on to the plane for GB.
I enjoyed the thrills that Brett gave the fans while in GB, but too often in the last 5-6 years, it became more about what the Packers would do for Favrenstein than visa versa...( I refer to him as Favrenstein b/c as fans we "buiilt a monster" by keep telling him how great he is and not keeping him grounded... Professor Sherman oversaw most of the transformation from NFL hero to media monster, but big media helped fuel the growth of Favrenstein.)
The interesting thing, though, is that Chilli is absolutely Tarvaris' biggest fan. He loves loves loves him. (Think of the way he pulled Frerotte out of their playoff game for no reason - except that love makes a guy do crazy things sometimes) So, if Favre doesn't win quick (like Matt says), it's not going to be just the veterans who want T-Jack back. Chilli will be secretly pining for him too.
I mean, if Favre were secretly a double-agent, sent to infiltrate the Vikes and destroy them from within, he would've been hard pressed to do it more efficiently. ...not saying he IS a double-agent, just that, if he WERE... ah, nevermind.
I always wondered about those bolts coming out of the sides of Brett's head.........
Matt - winning would indeed enable Favre to win over the locker room but from your perspective, how long does Favre get before things head south on him? Everyone is betting on the Vikings to start hot but they BARELY beat Detroit in both games last year and barely beat GB once. Will Favre be able enough to win their opener, a road game against his last coach, when many teams struggle out of the gate normally? I wouldn't PREDICT them opening 2-3 but it wouldn't shock me in the least. And then it's three weeks of pure hell - home vs Ravens, road against Pitt and then it's Lambeau. Even in his hey-day, Favre has ALWAYS struggled against good 3-4 defenses.
What happens here if they lose to the Lions? The last game the Lions played in Minny was the infamous game where Orlovsky ran out the back of the end zone for a safety and that was the margin of victory. Of their first 8 games, the Vikes are likely going to lose at least four no matter who is QB - nearly every team loses a game they shouldn't early in the year, they aren't better than the Ravens, they aren't better than Pitt, and they aren't sweeping GB. Is 4-4 at the bye week going to be enough to win over the team? Because from where I'm sitting, that's about the best they're going to do at this point.
IF Favre wins is a bigger "IF" than most people admit.
I don't see how many people, particularly those in the media, can ignore how much Brett has slipped these last few years. Factor that in with his current lack of off-season prep, his lack of rapport/chemistry with his receivers, and the pressure of new surroundings & wary teammates. Wow. It's a lot to overcome. I think this experiment fails, big time.
I predict the Vikings are 2-3 after 5 games, beating only the Browns and Rams, while losing to the Packers, Lions and 49ers. Very quickly, Minnesota will fall into chaos.
IF Favre wins is a bigger "IF" than most people admit.
I don't see how many people, particularly those in the media, can ignore how much Brett has slipped these last few years. Factor that in with his current lack of off-season prep, his lack of rapport/chemistry with his receivers, and the pressure of new surroundings & wary teammates. Wow. It's a lot to overcome. I think this experiment fails, big time.
I predict the Vikings are 2-3 after 5 games, beating only the Browns and Rams, while losing to the Packers, Lions and 49ers. Very quickly, Minnesota will fall into chaos.
Scott,
I don't think we can evaluate Favre and the Vikes until the quarter mark.... Teams in the NFL self-scout themselves every four games, so we have to wait and see with Favre.
As for the Lions game, if they lose that (the media will go nuts), but win the next three, does it really matter?
For every team we have to look at them in 4 game blocks.
In the last four years, Favre has thrown more TDs than INTs only once.
Matt - exactly what I'm getting at. The Browns are a coin toss - the Vikes SHOULD win that game but being on the road on grass, plus first game of the season and Favre with limited reps, no guarantees here. Lions on the road - I could easily see them losing this one; both games were close last season, Detroit's made some major overhauls on both sides of the ball and they are a dome team built accordingly; again, no guarantees here. SF I think they can handle but I don't see Minny taking GB even at home this year - unless GB has a MAJOR rash of injuries, I don't see it happening; even with all the crap GB went through last year, Minny needed a missed last second field goal to win that game.
My question is what happens in that locker room if they start 1-3?
The Skins might have turned out better if they had just kept Ramsey and let him develop. Jason Campbell, who cost them a number one pick, really hasn't proved to be much if any of an upgrade over Ramsey.
The difference though is the Vikes are a much better team than that Skins squad, the Vikes have clearly been held back by poor QB play and Favre is a lot better than Mark Brunell, even now. They are ready to win, right now, and they don't have the luxury of waiting around three or four years for Jackson to blossom. It's the coach's job to get the players to accept the new guy.
I'd always wondered what the 'Skins players thought about Brunell v Ramsey back then. Thanks for another insightful post, Matt.
There is an amazing disconnect in regards to Favre. The Jets and the Vikings thought they were getting Brett circa 1997, the MVP that was one of the team. He isn't that player anymore. He is old, slow, weaker in arm and even less disciplined in mind. I don't understand how they don't realize that he isn't what he used to be.
Favre is the Vikings version of Leo Farnsworth.
Hey, Matt.
I'll reserve my judgment on Favre himself until after I've seen him actually play this year.
However, I'm not at all convinced that bringing him in actually helps the team achieve its goals. Absent a court decision that ends up with the Williams Wall suspended for the first four games, I expected the Vikes to go deep in the playoffs with a decent shot at the NFC Championship and at least a chance of making it to the Superbowl - with Rosenfels as the starter. I don't see any net gain with Favre. The disruption his presence is creating may cost them as much in wins as his play may bring them - IF he's good. If Favre doesn't play well, especially at the outset, it maybe even costs them a playoff berth.
Bottom line for me is that the Vikes have taken a big and >unnecessary< risk.
| powered by TheSeats.com |
How Brees won the MVP, plus more...
How the Saints and Colts can hoist...
Age, hard hits not kind to RB...
Giants defensive end says he'll...
Breaking down Brees to Meachem...
Aug 25, 2009
10:27 AM
If the players actually prefer Jackson that may explain why the Vikings never really win anything. This isn't Pee Wee football. You play the best players not just the ones you like. Jackson will NEVER be a great quarterback. You seldom win with average QB's.