NFL Week 13 LD

[TheOneBigWill]

Holy shit, KB.

I just noticed Jackson has thrown 3 INTs. 2 TDs, yes, but 3 INTs. (1 for a TD) That in and of itself should prove to you that he isn't any better of an option than Favre.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Yay! Jake Delhomme lead the Browns to a victory.

 

[klunderbunker]

Holy shit, KB.

I just noticed Jackson has thrown 3 INTs. 2 TDs, yes, but 3 INTs. (1 for a TD) That in and of itself should prove to you that he isn't any better of an option than Favre.

And the team has 38 points and will win today. I can live with INTs if you're winning which the team is today. If picks determined playing time Favre wouldn't have enough to fill up a clock.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

And the team has 38 points and will win today. I can live with INTs if you're winning which the team is today. If picks determined playing time Favre wouldn't have enough to fill up a clock.

They aren't winning because of Jackson though. Peterson has 3 TDs. He's clearly the reason they won.

 

[The Holy One]

Give the ball to Adrian Peterson and good things can happen and the Saints are driving.

 

[klunderbunker]

Jackson has two. And Peterson plays most weeks doesn't he? By not throwing it as much (Jackson threw 22 times) they can give him more carries and he'll succeed. Instead they have Favre throwing it 35 times a game and their record sucks. Last week it's the same thing: they throw 23 times and win. Favre is going to throw it a lot more often than not, which doesn't work for them, at least not this year.

Also they would have won without any of Peterson's scores.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Jackson has two. And Peterson plays most weeks doesn't he? By not throwing it as much (Jackson threw 22 times) they can give him more carries and he'll succeed. Instead they have Favre throwing it 35 times a game and their record sucks. Last week it's the same thing: they throw 23 times and win. Favre is going to throw it a lot more often than not, which doesn't work for them, at least not this year.

Also they would have won without any of Peterson's scores.

This just goes to show you, it shouldn't matter what QB is starting (or playing). Minnesota just needs to hand it off, and throw less.

Also, Peterson had 3 TDs. Jackson had 2. The Bills had 2 TDs. (one off Jackson) So, if not for the FG and Peterson - the Vikings would be heading into another OT forced by the Bills.

 

[Megatron]

Can we get a whole new secondary? They're fucking terrible.

Please get Patrick Patterson in the draft and a veteran corner in the offseason, please.

TD Saints with >30 seconds to go. Same thing like last week with them.

 

[The Holy One]

Cincinatti once again true to the Bungles name.

 

[klunderbunker]

This just goes to show you, it shouldn't matter what QB is starting (or playing). Minnesota just needs to hand it off, and throw less.

Also, Peterson had 3 TDs. Jackson had 2. The Bills had 2 TDs. (one off Jackson) So, if not for the FG and Peterson - the Vikings would be heading into another OT forced by the Bills.

Yeah, so let the young one get his experience in and go with someone that actually will hand it off rather than insisting they throw every time.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Yeah, so let the young one get his experience in and go with someone that actually will hand it off rather than insisting they throw every time.

I can agree with this, but yet still continue to say - it shouldn't matter what QB plays. Favre may be HoF bound; but the Coach needs to step up and re-explain to him (Favre) who controls the team.

I get some QBs love to play that "I didn't get the play/hear the play in the headset" crap.. but when your Coach tells you on the sidelines to hand it off 9/10 times.. and you don't, then you get benched for failing to listen.

Either way, yeah, I don't care who starts but can agree that IF they want to keep Jackson (or consider what to do with him beyond simply cutting him) then he needs playing time.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

WOOOO! Great opening KO return by Goodson, to the 40. Now Clausen needs to come out, and explode to Steve Smith early and often to get us a 1st Quarter TD and prove he deserves to lead this team.

 

[klunderbunker]

My thing with it again boils down to this: they were supposed to be a Super Bowl favorite this year. With Favre, that hasn't happened and their playoff chances are over. With Favre allegedly leaving, why should he continue to start?

 

[Slyfox696]

And remember people: even though Tavaris Jackson is playing very well today, he still doesn't have any ability at all and shouldn't have any chance at all over the old nearly crippled man.

Playing well? You're kidding right?

1) They played the Bills, who are fucking terrible.

2) Tavaris Jackson threw THREE INTERCEPTIONS, one for a TD. Isn't that the reason people always knock Favre, the Interceptions?

3) Of the paltry 187 yards Jackson threw for, 105 of them went to Sidney Rice, who has been injured almost the entire year.

4) Brad Childres is no longer there.

5) The Vikings, minus Brad Childress but plus a Brett Favre, beat the Washington Redskins last week WITHOUT Adrian Peterson, the guy who led the charge for the Vikings today.


KB, you're just being silly. I'm not denying I'm a big time Favre supporter, but to say Jackson played better than Favre would have today, because he threw 3 Ints, and over 50% of his yards to a receiver Favre hasn't had all year is just silly.

 

[klunderbunker]

Well would you look at this. When Dallas mixes up their play calling with actual RUSH ATTEMPTS the offense looks great to start.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

My thing with it again boils down to this: they were supposed to be a Super Bowl favorite this year. With Favre, that hasn't happened and their playoff chances are over. With Favre allegedly leaving, why should he continue to start?

Just continues to make me believe they have no real interest in Jackson, and don't want to give other teams the chance to see if he can be good or not - assuming he's a FA and thus MN can get NOTHING out of him.

Why would you want to advertise players to other teams?

 

[Slyfox696]

It's not that I "hate" or "dislike" Jackson. It's simply the fact that he isn't AS young as he once was, and on top of that the team has redirected themselves away from Jackson on not one, but two different times.

He (Jackson) did not lead them to a Wild Card spot. Gus came in throughout most of the season and won them games. Jackson finished the season off with a few wins to help get them there, but certainly wasn't the savior that came in to "save" the season.

And let us not forget; they actually went TO Gus at the beginning of the season, over Jackson. Then again, traded for LAWLZenfels, only to pick-up Favre.

Good point.

 

[klunderbunker]

Playing well? You're kidding right?

1) They played the Bills, who are fucking terrible.

2) Tavaris Jackson threw THREE INTERCEPTIONS, one for a TD. Isn't that the reason people always knock Favre, the Interceptions?

3) Of the paltry 187 yards Jackson threw for, 105 of them went to Sidney Rice, who has been injured almost the entire year.

4) Brad Childres is no longer there.

5) The Vikings, minus Brad Childress but plus a Brett Favre, beat the Washington Redskins last week WITHOUT Adrian Peterson, the guy who led the charge for the Vikings today.


KB, you're just being silly. I'm not denying I'm a big time Favre supporter, but to say Jackson played better than Favre would have today, because he threw 3 Ints, and over 50% of his yards to a receiver Favre hasn't had all year is just silly.

All true, but one thing: Jackson did this, not Favre. Yeah Favre probably would have gotten them a win today too. That's not what I'm arguing for the most part. I'm saying that these arguments that Jackson can't play at this level and doesn't even deserve a chance are bogus.

 

[Slyfox696]

My thing with it again boils down to this: they were supposed to be a Super Bowl favorite this year. With Favre, that hasn't happened and their playoff chances are over. With Favre allegedly leaving, why should he continue to start?

Because he's still the best option at QB? Because he's a Hall of Famer, supposedly in his last season, and has earned the right to finish his career the way he played it.

By the way, did someone say Tavaris Jackson's contract was up after this season? I thought I read that, and if true, why would you start him, when like Will said, it's obvious the Vikings don't see him as the answer to the QB position?

 

[The Holy One]

Atlanta needs a good long scoring drive to set the tempo of the game.

 

[klunderbunker]

Because he's still the best option at QB? Because he's a Hall of Famer, supposedly in his last season, and has earned the right to finish his career the way he played it.

By the way, did someone say Tavaris Jackson's contract was up after this season? I thought I read that, and if true, why would you start him, when like Will said, it's obvious the Vikings don't see him as the answer to the QB position?

How can you know he's the best option if the other guy never gets a chance? Favre is a hall of fame player, but this season he's not getting it done. And yes, there are other factors to it, but how can you know Jackson couldn't do better if he's not given a chance?

 

[Slyfox696]

Ahh, here it is:

Tarvaris Jackson Signs One-Year Contract with Vikings
by Playerpress Wire Service / April 18, 2010

Quarterback Tarvaris Jackson (www.tarvarisjackson7.com) has signed a one-year tender to stay with the Minnesota Vikings.

Jackson, who was a restricted free agent, will earn $1.176 million.

http://www.tarvarisjackson7.com/news.html

So, wouldn't you think you have just as much of a chance to have Favre as your quarterback next year as Jackson? And in case you didn't notice, that's Tavaris Jackson's official webpage.

 

[klunderbunker]

I'm not entirely seeing why that means anything. If it's his last year, shouldn't you see if he's worth re-signing?

 

[TheOneBigWill]

I'm saying that these arguments that Jackson can't play at this level and doesn't even deserve a chance are bogus.

I don't think anyone is saying Jackson can't play at "this level" (whatever that level is); so much more that Jackson simply hasn't done, and never will meet even half of what Favre has through career stand-points.

Again, it isn't that Jackson doesn't deserve a chance - it's simply that when you're a Head Coach you go with the best percentage chance of winning. Favre is that guy. He's lead Green Bay to a Superbowl, he lead Minnesota to a Championship game.

Jackson had his opportunity a couple years ago, as you pointed out, and all he could manage to do was lose his starting job to Gus (a lesser talented, yet basically equally aged QB) only to get his job back - due to injury ONLY - and lose to the Eagles in the Playoffs.

 

[Slyfox696]

How can you know he's the best option if the other guy never gets a chance? Favre is a hall of fame player, but this season he's not getting it done. And yes, there are other factors to it, but how can you know Jackson couldn't do better if he's not given a chance?

He had his chance years ago, as you have mentioned constantly. And the Vikings, the people who watch Jackson every single day, thought he was not the answer at QB. Those same people watch Jackson every day in practice, and think he's not the answer at QB.

As far as not getting it done, have you not been paying attention to what I've been saying all year? You know, about not having his receivers healthy, last week not having Peterson, having a coach everyone seemed to dislike, etc.? Since Rice has been back and Childress has been gone, the Vikings have won 2 games in a row.

Perhaps the problem isn't Favre, but the loss of their best receiver and a coach no one liked?