Favre talking to Vikings...here we go again

[tower912]

As a Lions fan, let me just say the Randy Moss mooning thing was hysterical. 

[reinko]

I find it hysterical that Lions fans exist

[tower912]

So do we.

[MU B2002]

Looks like this story is not dead.  Granted once again this is all unconfirmed but according to ESPN if his shoulder checks out he is coming back.

[ATWizJr]

Favre?  Fear and loathing in Hattiesburg.  Hamlet in shoulder pads.

[wadesworld]

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/102232-vikings-plan-b-vick-or-anderson?eref=fromSI

Haha really?  So not only would they want the old, washed up Favre, who has historically been terrible in the Hump Dome (although if he had it as his home field that may change rather than just once a year), but if that doesn't work they're willing to look into taking a thug who is exiting from jail after 2 years.  This is also a guy who wasn't even a good quarterback when he had been playing every day, and now he's coming back after 2 years away from the game.

That's the Vikings for you, folks.  And why as a Packers fan, why I will never be afraid of them.  Phenomenal.

Just for clarification, there is no source here, and they're probably just saying this is the best option, so the Vikings may not be looking into this at all.  I just thought I'd throw it out there.

[Jay Bee]

Wadesworld:

Vick and Vikings (and other teams) have been mentioned together a fair amount over the past several months.  Think nothing of it.  As for the little link, no, not 'really'.  A writer in the St. Paul paper simply said Vick and Anderson are the only potential upgrade options besides Favre... nothing about Minnesota's interest in either of them.  The article said nothing and was worthless.

You may not be afraid of the Vikings, but as you noted, Favre's performance may indicate that he was afraid of playing in Minnesota... maybe it was our loud, exciting and knowledgable crowd that scared him.  Or, perhaps he was intimidated by slim, good looking girls.  After all, most females at Lambeau resemble nose tackles.  I'm sure Brett has dreamed of playing for us since the mid-90s... this whole scenario is similar to a Make-a-Wish opportunity... medically and mentally ill guy has had a dream for over a decade of being in purple.. now may have an opportunity to help win a Super Bowl and, at a minimum, would win a division championship, since Minnesota is the class of the North by far and yet another division championship is already locked up.

[ATWizJr]

Q-why is the Vikings field made of synthetic turf?

A-so the cheerleaders won't graze.

[Moonboots]

Wadesworld:

Vick and Vikings (and other teams) have been mentioned together a fair amount over the past several months.  Think nothing of it.  As for the little link, no, not 'really'.  A writer in the St. Paul paper simply said Vick and Anderson are the only potential upgrade options besides Favre... nothing about Minnesota's interest in either of them.  The article said nothing and was worthless.

You may not be afraid of the Vikings, but as you noted, Favre's performance may indicate that he was afraid of playing in Minnesota... maybe it was our loud, exciting and knowledgable crowd that scared him.  Or, perhaps he was intimidated by slim, good looking girls.  After all, most females at Lambeau resemble nose tackles.  I'm sure Brett has dreamed of playing for us since the mid-90s... this whole scenario is similar to a Make-a-Wish opportunity... medically and mentally ill guy has had a dream for over a decade of being in purple.. now may have an opportunity to help win a Super Bowl and, at a minimum, would win a division championship, since Minnesota is the class of the North by far and yet another division championship is already locked up.

Speaking of mentally ill, I'm not sure I've ever seen someone caught in an alternate reality as much as you, sir. 

You realize you likely won't even HAVE a team in Minnesota in about three years.

And as far as a "loud, exciting, knowledgeable fan base"... please.  Brett may not be acting like the smartest guy right now, but I think he knows the difference between real noise (Lambeau) and manufactured noise (Metrodome).  And knowledgeable? Please explain yourself. I don't even plan on attacking it.  I'm really, genuinely curious as to what makes you feel that your fan base is any more knowledgeable than the Packers' fan base, especially given your display in the NFC North thread during most of last football season.

Granted, I don't expect you to respond to this post, just as you didn't to the one earlier in this thread where I called you out AND backed it up with research.  Apparently that research thing just isn't your style.


EDIT: Allow me to take my lack of knowledge as a Packer fan a bit further for you, Jay Bee.

Let's dissect this quote for a moment.

Favre's performance may indicate that he was afraid of playing in Minnesota... maybe it was our loud, exciting and knowledgable crowd that scared him.

While it is true that Favre struggled at the Dome early in his career, his last five appearances at the Dome netted a 4-1 record with QB ratings of 105.4, 109.2, 121.6 (Loss), 100.0, and 108.0.  Sure is a far cry from the "intimidation" at the hands of your "loud, knowledgeable crowd."  (Note: Also recall that one of these games is the infamous Christmas Eve game where Favre single handedly stole the division crown from the Vikings' hands.)

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FavrBr00_games.htm


Now let's discuss this one for a moment:

...now may have an opportunity to help win a Super Bowl and, at a minimum, would win a division championship, since Minnesota is the class of the North by far and yet another division championship is already locked up.

If you are familiar with the concept of pythagorean wins (and, being a member of the Vikings' fan base, I should surely venture a guess that you are) then you would be familiar with the ability of this index to single out important stats from one year (namely 3rd down%, yards per carry, yards per passing attempt, yards per passing attempt allowed, and a handful more) to assemble a prediction that balances out the bounces that go one way or another during the NFL season.  The prediction is almost uncanny at determining whether a team will improve on its record or outperformed its expectations in a given season.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2008/12/2008-luckiest-teams.html

As you can see, Minnesota was the 6th "luckiest" team in the NFL, while the Packers were the 5th unluckiest team in the NFL (and, consequently, became the 4th team since the merger to have a losing record and outscore their opponents). 

Granted, the Vikings do have the best player in the division by a decent margin (though Calvin Johnson isn't as far behind as most people think - he's just stuck on an irrelevant team).  They will be without half of their defensive line for the first four games. And most important of all, they don't have a quarterback yet.  Now, seeing as you're a Vikings fan, and you're unquestionably more knowledgeable than I am, you should know that only two of the last 25 Super Bowl champions have not had an all-pro quarterback, and both those teams had top-5-all-time defenses.

Meanwhile, the Bears seemed to fill that hole (though at a large cost) and the Packers already have that taken care of as well.  This is going to be a really interesting division this year, especially given the fact that Detroit, more talented or not, will look different which presents the problem of them stealing a division game or two from the other three teams. 

The Packers are two players removed from the team that went to the NFC championship, and added one of the best defensive coordinators in NFL history, one who historically has made his transition to new teams work extremely well (see: Pittsburgh, Jacksonville), but I'm sure you already knew all about that.

I think this is going to be a very, very interesting division this year and I'm excited to have a competitive NFC North for the first time in awhile. 

I think it's ignorant for you to proclaim the Vikings as "the class of the division" at this point.  But maybe it's not. 

After all, I am just an ignorant Packer fan who stands in the shadow of the greatness of the Vikings' fan base...

[IAmMarquette]

Something just dawned on me, and it upsets me, as a Brewers fan, to say it:

Cubs:Cardinals:Brewers::Packers:Bears:Vikings

Follow me?

[Moonboots]

Something just dawned on me, and it upsets me, as a Brewers fan, to say it:

Cubs:Cardinals:Brewers::Packers:Bears:Vikings

Follow me?

I absolutely agree.  As far as size of the fan base and die hard dedication, there's no way the Brewers are in the same league as the Cubs.  Heck, they fill 20-30% of our stadium as it is, and we don't come in droves down to Wrigley.  They consider their main rivals the Cards and the Sox, and we salivate at the idea of the Cubs series.  The analogy makes total sense, and I'm not happy about it, but as a Brewers fan there's nothing we can do but keep fighting away and winning games until we earn some respect. 

[Jay Bee]

>You realize you likely won't even HAVE a team in Minnesota in about three years.
 
   I've heard this every year for the last 20 years.  Let's talk about reality... for example, the Packers 'leaving' Milwaukee. 

>... given your display in the NFC North thread during most of last football season.

  I didn't join this site until mid-November 2008.  You're confused.  I think the fact that nearly everyone on the thread believed the Packers or Bears would win the division while  I stood by my Vikings irked you.  I can understand.  I don't like losing.  Which is why I am lobbying to have more divisional games each season.   

>Granted, I don't expect you to respond to this post, just as you didn't to the one earlier in this thread where I called you out AND backed it up with research.  Apparently that research thing just isn't your style.

  You called me out and backed it up with research?  I missed that post.  I do see a post where a young boy posts that he is on summer break.. you took issue with my statement that the Vikings had a sellout streak of well over 100 games... you said nothing that was inconsistent with what I had said, rather you were upset because the sellout may have occurred thanks in part to corporations buying tickets.  Downplaying facts and trying to make excuses is not calling someone out. 

  Alright.. now I see you're editing your post... a bunch of stuff about 'unluckiest ratings'.  Geez.. more excuses.  Here's the deal in the NFL - win or shuttup.  "Oooh, you guys are the champions, but that's cause you're lucky!!!".  Pathetic. 

[Moonboots]

>You realize you likely won't even HAVE a team in Minnesota in about three years.
 
   I've heard this every year for the last 20 years.  Let's talk about reality... for example, the Packers 'leaving' Milwaukee. 

>... given your display in the NFC North thread during most of last football season.

  I didn't join this site until mid-November 2008.  You're confused.  I think the fact that nearly everyone on the thread believed the Packers or Bears would win the division while  I stood by my Vikings irked you.  I can understand.  I don't like losing.  Which is why I am lobbying to have more divisional games each season.   

>Granted, I don't expect you to respond to this post, just as you didn't to the one earlier in this thread where I called you out AND backed it up with research.  Apparently that research thing just isn't your style.

  You called me out and backed it up with research?  I missed that post.  I do see a post where a young boy posts that he is on summer break.. you took issue with my statement that the Vikings had a sellout streak of well over 100 games... you said nothing that was inconsistent with what I had said, rather you were upset because the sellout may have occurred thanks in part to corporations buying tickets.  Downplaying facts and trying to make excuses is not calling someone out. 

  Alright.. now I see you're editing your post... a bunch of stuff about 'unluckiest ratings'.  Geez.. more excuses.  Here's the deal in the NFL - win or shuttup.  "Oooh, you guys are the champions, but that's cause you're lucky!!!".  Pathetic. 

Once again, all talk, no substance.

You seem to like it short and sweet.  Fine.  Win. Or Shut up.



Now we'll see where the excuses come from.

[jmayer1]

Something just dawned on me, and it upsets me, as a Brewers fan, to say it:

Cubs:Cardinals:Brewers::Packers:Bears:Vikings

Follow me?

I'm not following.  Last time I checked the Cards routinely outdraw the Cubs (in a bigger stadium, but if you're not selling out, which the Cubs only started doing this decade, I don't really see the difference) and obviously highly outperform them on the field.  The Cubs probably have a larger fan base than the Cards but please don't begin to compare them to the Packers. 

[Moonboots]

I'm not following.  Last time I checked the Cards routinely outdraw the Cubs (in a bigger stadium, but if you're not selling out, which the Cubs only started doing this decade, I don't really see the difference) and obviously highly outperform them on the field.  The Cubs probably have a larger fan base than the Cards but please don't begin to compare them to the Packers. 

I would buy the comparison if it were to scale.  But I agree with this also, the Cubs don't belong in the same sentence as the Packers when it comes to being a sports franchise unless that sentence is "The Cubs are far inferior to the Packers." 

[IAmMarquette]

I'm not following.  Last time I checked the Cards routinely outdraw the Cubs (in a bigger stadium, but if you're not selling out, which the Cubs only started doing this decade, I don't really see the difference) and obviously highly outperform them on the field.  The Cubs probably have a larger fan base than the Cards but please don't begin to compare them to the Packers. 

Fair enough. Allow me to clarify. The analogy applies strictly in terms of rivalries, not in terms of franchise success/prestige/however you want to say it. Historically, the Packers and Bears (like the Cubs and Cards) are rivals, who hate, yet respect each other. Both just plain hate the Vikings (maybe "hate" is too strong a word for the Brewers, I'm not sure).

[Moonboots]

Fair enough. Allow me to clarify. The analogy applies strictly in terms of rivalries, not in terms of franchise success/prestige/however you want to say it. Historically, the Packers and Bears (like the Cubs and Cards) are rivals, who hate, yet respect each other. Both just plain hate the Vikings (maybe "hate" is too strong a word for the Brewers, I'm not sure).

In more of a "who do these guys think they are?" sense?

[Dish]

Not sure I agree with him, but Peter King has the Bears ranked #4...not in the NFC, but in the NFL. He has the Packers above the Vikings too.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/index.html

[Moonboots]

Not sure I agree with him, but Peter King has the Bears ranked #4...not in the NFC, but in the NFL. He has the Packers above the Vikings too.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/index.html

14. Green Bay
I'm shocked the Packers won only six games last year. It just showed how valuable a piece of their puzzle Cullen Jenkins was. At 6-2 and 305 pounds and with good lateral quickness, he should come back from the torn pectoral that caused him to miss 12 games last year and play very well in the new 3-4. This is a team with far better talent than six wins, and I expect Aaron Rodgers to be better in the fourth quarter this year than last, by the sheer experience factor.

Interesting...

Though I think 4th in the NFL might be a bit high for Chicago, I don't think I'll have any issues with someone predicting them to win the division.  They were 9-7 last year and added a much better talent at QB, plus a quality defensive line coach trying to fix their woes on the front four for next year.

Although, I don't even know why we're talking about this.

...Minnesota is the class of the North by far and yet another division championship is already locked up.

It's a moot point. 

[Hards Alumni]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=sixnflplayoffteamsthatmi&prov=tsn&type=lgns

#5

5. Minnesota Vikings

Once every few years, the Vikings are the trendy pick to get back to the Super Bowl.

Thirty-three years and counting, they've yet to deliver on the expectations.

This year, many will dub the Vikings as a potential Super Bowl team.

And for good reason. Adrian Peterson is the best running back in the game. The defense remains solid, especially against the run. Defensive end Jared Allen(notes) punctuates a great pass rush.

The biggest question mark—the passing game—could become an exclamation point if Brett Favre(notes) ends up becoming the quarterback.

With or without Favre, there's something about this team that just doesn't click. Plenty of their fans sense it, even if they won't admit it to themselves during the high-hopes phase of the calendar, when everyone is 0-0.

Frankly, it's the coach. And if the Vikings don't make it back to the playoffs in 2009, there will be a new one in Minnesota next year at this time.

[LON]

Not sure I agree with him, but Peter King has the Bears ranked #4...not in the NFC, but in the NFL. He has the Packers above the Vikings too.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/index.html

Peter King is a horrible writer and if I wanted his opinion on where to get a coffee when I'm on the East Coast or the joys of traveling first class then I'll read his columns.

[Moonboots]

As much as I love piling on the Vikings, I WILL say that I'm excited to have three competitive teams in the division for the first time in awhile.  I don't think we're NFC East quality yet, but with the exception of two two-team races in '03 and '04 that came down to the wire (with the Packers squeaking it out against the Vikes in both cases, if anyone was wondering...) the NFC North has been a yawner for a bit with the Bears running away in '05 and '06, the Packers in '07, and the Vikes in '08.  I realize last year's final standings left only a one game gap between the Vikes and the Bears, but it was more a matter of which team wanted to lose less as opposed to two teams making a strong push to the finish.

Divisional battles are going to be even more intense than normal this year, and I expect both the Packers and Bears fan bases to be worked into a frenzy by week 1.  It'll be a good year of football.

[Jay Bee]

From wcco.com - contractual agreement has been reached.

Barring some unforeseen major physical setback, Brett Favre will be at training camp in Mankato when they open up the end of July, a source has told WCCO's Mark Rosen.

That source said that Favre and the Vikings have indeed come to a contractual agreement, with heavy incentives. The Vikings equipment manager has already ordered number 4 purple jerseys with his name on it.

However, on Sunday, Favre's longtime agent, Bus Cooke denied a report that was out there that Favre and the Vikings had come to an agreement.

What isn't known is when this will be officially announced. Minnesota Vikings head coach Brad Childress is in Alaska fishing this week with his good friend, Eagles head coach, Andy Reid.

ProFootballTalk.com speculated the announcement will come Fourth of July weekend, when a lot of media folks are on vacation to minimize the circus atmosphere.

John David Booty is currently wearing number 4, but not for long. Rosen said he believes the Vikings will keep Booty. The logical man to try and move would be Tavaris Jackson with Sage Rosenfels backing Favre up and ready to take over if Favre can't get the job done.

[SaintPaulWarrior]

John David Booty is currently wearing number 4, but not for long. Rosen said he believes the Vikings will keep Booty. The logical man to try and move would be Tavaris Jackson with Sage Rosenfels backing Favre up and ready to take over WHEN Favre can't get the job done.

Fixed.

[GGGG]

The problem is the coaching.  They passed the ball too much last year with Jackson at QB.  Childress is gonna look like Mike Martz this year with Favre - despite having the best running back in the game.