Thread: Would Cards D have been different vs TJack?

Prophet wrote:

purplepat wrote:

You know, my original premise was not whether the Vikes could or could not have won with TJack as the QB. Certainly, we had no way of foreseeing the defensive scheme that the Cards threw at the Vikings.

It just struck me that it might be hard for any team, any QB to complete passes downfield if the defense drops 8 men into coverage. I'd have to re-watch the game (if I could stomach it), and see how many times we kept a TE or RB in to block, meaning we had only four receivers out, and how many times a safety valve might have been effective. Given his age and desire to avoid getting hurt, I don't think it's a secret that Favre isn't going to take off running. In fact, I'm not sure I've seen him run past the line of scrimmage with the ball in his hand a single time this year (except maybe when he threw it that one time past the LOS). I was merely postulating that if we start to see the same kind of defense, we need to come up with an answer for it, and that answer might be Jackson.

In that game I would have tossed Jackson into the mix after the first possession of the third quarter failed. Favre had his head up his ass and didn't have his normal fire in his eyes. I know, people don't like mixing up the QBs, but, there are days when some are off and tossing Jackson in would have been interesting. The best game of his career was when he beat the Cardinals in their house the year that the Cardinals went on to the SB. I wouldn't have minded seeing that. One of the things I'm excited about is the depth at QB (realizing that TJack and Rosenfels are both good backups) and don't have a problem switching out in various situations. What's there to lose? Well, home field advantage in the playoffs with the Saints taking a two game lead. Toss TJack into the mix in this situation when Favre is obviously off his game and not even seeing the open receivers and tossing into quad coverage.

I still give most of the credit to Billy Davis for dialing up a defense and to Whisenhunt for having the team ready to play. The Vikings came in like they were asleep in comparison.

Two excellent posts right there.

Prophet wrote:

In that game I would have tossed Jackson into the mix after the first possession of the third quarter failed. Favre had his head up his ass and didn't have his normal fire in his eyes. I know, people don't like mixing up the QBs, but, there are days when some are off and tossing Jackson in would have been interesting. The best game of his career was when he beat the Cardinals in their house the year that the Cardinals went on to the SB. I wouldn't have minded seeing that. One of the things I'm excited about is the depth at QB (realizing that TJack and Rosenfels are both good backups) and don't have a problem switching out in various situations. What's there to lose? Well, home field advantage in the playoffs with the Saints taking a two game lead. Toss TJack into the mix in this situation when Favre is obviously off his game and not even seeing the open receivers and tossing into quad coverage.

I still give most of the credit to Billy Davis for dialing up a defense and to Whisenhunt for having the team ready to play. The Vikings came in like they were asleep in comparison.

This was something I thought about during the third quarter. Since they had game planned around stopping Favre and did so effectively I wonder what would have happened if T. Jack had been put in. Do they switch on D? How do you account for his ability to run the ball now. I don't know if it would have made a difference in the outcome of the game but it would have been interesting to watch.

Prophet wrote:

purplepat wrote:

You know, my original premise was not whether the Vikes could or could not have won with TJack as the QB. Certainly, we had no way of foreseeing the defensive scheme that the Cards threw at the Vikings.

It just struck me that it might be hard for any team, any QB to complete passes downfield if the defense drops 8 men into coverage. I'd have to re-watch the game (if I could stomach it), and see how many times we kept a TE or RB in to block, meaning we had only four receivers out, and how many times a safety valve might have been effective. Given his age and desire to avoid getting hurt, I don't think it's a secret that Favre isn't going to take off running. In fact, I'm not sure I've seen him run past the line of scrimmage with the ball in his hand a single time this year (except maybe when he threw it that one time past the LOS). I was merely postulating that if we start to see the same kind of defense, we need to come up with an answer for it, and that answer might be Jackson.

In that game I would have tossed Jackson into the mix after the first possession of the third quarter failed. Favre had his head up his ass and didn't have his normal fire in his eyes. I know, people don't like mixing up the QBs, but, there are days when some are off and tossing Jackson in would have been interesting. The best game of his career was when he beat the Cardinals in their house the year that the Cardinals went on to the SB. I wouldn't have minded seeing that. One of the things I'm excited about is the depth at QB (realizing that TJack and Rosenfels are both good backups) and don't have a problem switching out in various situations. What's there to lose? Well, home field advantage in the playoffs with the Saints taking a two game lead. Toss TJack into the mix in this situation when Favre is obviously off his game and not even seeing the open receivers and tossing into quad coverage.

I still give most of the credit to Billy Davis for dialing up a defense and to Whisenhunt for having the team ready to play. The Vikings came in like they were asleep in comparison.

That's gotta be the dumbest idea ever. Favre has a much better chance of bringing the Vikings back than Tjack. In hindsight we know we lost, but if Tjack had played most of the second half and we lost it could have schism in the lockerroom, and with the fan base. Think the Colts ever consider pulling Manning? of course not, not after 1 bad half.

Marrdro wrote:

Ahhhhh, been patiently waiting for this....... :P

I need to go find them, but there were a couple of articles posted earlier this year were a few defensive players were quoted as saying that it was harder to gameplan against the Vikes with TJ than the Vikes with our current starter.

Rationale was that they didn't have to worry about the noodles legs, just his arm. Against TJ they had to worry about his legs, and not so much his arm.

Is that a comparison of the two? Hell no. It just points out the obvious, the two have assets that cause concern.

I for one doubt that we would have seen the ameoba. That in and of itself would have taken the ability to put a "Spy" down in the box which in turn might have freed up AD to roam a bit more.

On a side note, I find it kindof interesting that a few of you automatically say we couldn't have won with TJ when in fact he won with a lesser team last year. Our team is arguably "Alot" better in almost every catagory this year.

Two things....

Link to those articles? I don't believe you.

We are a lot better in almost every category due in large part to a man named Favre. Things would be a hell of a lot different with TJ. Lesser team than last year? How so?

jmcdon00 wrote:

Prophet wrote:

purplepat wrote:

You know, my original premise was not whether the Vikes could or could not have won with TJack as the QB. Certainly, we had no way of foreseeing the defensive scheme that the Cards threw at the Vikings.

It just struck me that it might be hard for any team, any QB to complete passes downfield if the defense drops 8 men into coverage. I'd have to re-watch the game (if I could stomach it), and see how many times we kept a TE or RB in to block, meaning we had only four receivers out, and how many times a safety valve might have been effective. Given his age and desire to avoid getting hurt, I don't think it's a secret that Favre isn't going to take off running. In fact, I'm not sure I've seen him run past the line of scrimmage with the ball in his hand a single time this year (except maybe when he threw it that one time past the LOS). I was merely postulating that if we start to see the same kind of defense, we need to come up with an answer for it, and that answer might be Jackson.

In that game I would have tossed Jackson into the mix after the first possession of the third quarter failed. Favre had his head up his ass and didn't have his normal fire in his eyes. I know, people don't like mixing up the QBs, but, there are days when some are off and tossing Jackson in would have been interesting. The best game of his career was when he beat the Cardinals in their house the year that the Cardinals went on to the SB. I wouldn't have minded seeing that. One of the things I'm excited about is the depth at QB (realizing that TJack and Rosenfels are both good backups) and don't have a problem switching out in various situations. What's there to lose? Well, home field advantage in the playoffs with the Saints taking a two game lead. Toss TJack into the mix in this situation when Favre is obviously off his game and not even seeing the open receivers and tossing into quad coverage.

I still give most of the credit to Billy Davis for dialing up a defense and to Whisenhunt for having the team ready to play. The Vikings came in like they were asleep in comparison.

That's gotta be the dumbest idea ever. Favre has a much better chance of bringing the Vikings back than Tjack. In hindsight we know we lost, but if Tjack had played most of the second half and we lost it could have schism in the lockerroom, and with the fan base. Think the Colts ever consider pulling Manning? of course not, not after 1 bad half.

lol, you have been around pp.o for too long to be saying that is the dumbest idea ever. That would be quite an accomplishment and is worthy of an award if true.

I'm saying that people should not have such fragile egos and why not try something else when something is not working. It rarely happens for the reasons you mentioned. When you have fanatics driving the system never assume logic prevails.

I don't think it's a dumb idea. Just look what happens when a QB goes down due to injury. Particularly someone like Favre. Take the 2007 Dallas game. Brett goes down halfway through the second quarter. He was 5/14 for 54 yards and 2 int. Rodgers comes in and goes 18/26 for 201 yards a TD and no int. Now they didn't win. Dallas was up 27-10 at the time Rodgers entered the game. The Boys won but by the end of the third quarter it was 27-24. And Dallas had to push to win the game in the fourth.

Now that does not mean it will happen all the time but it still would have been interesting to see what would have happened.

I'm still amazed when people bring up running the ball when talking about TJ. Truth is he does not look to create with his feet all that often.

Its at least still an option with TJ, whereas Favre isn't going anywhere.

Freakout wrote:

I'm still amazed when people bring up running the ball when talking about TJ. Truth is he does not look to create with his feet all that often.

No, but Brett can't run to save his life. The top running QB so far this year? Rodgers. He's not looking to run either but when the lanes open up he takes off.

raptorman wrote:

I don't think it's a dumb idea. Just look what happens when a QB goes down due to injury. Particularly someone like Favre. Take the 2007 Dallas game. Brett goes down halfway through the second quarter. He was 5/14 for 54 yards and 2 int. Rodgers comes in and goes 18/26 for 201 yards a TD and no int. Now they didn't win. Dallas was up 27-10 at the time Rodgers entered the game. The Boys won but by the end of the third quarter it was 27-24. And Dallas had to push to win the game in the fourth.

Now that does not mean it will happen all the time but it still would have been interesting to see what would have happened.

Favre is playing at an MVP level all season and you want to bench him for a mediocre half? That's dumb. I'll take my chances with Favre.
Might be different if Favre was injured, or the game was out of reach.
Favre's 275 passing yards is better than Tjacks career high.