Tweet
Posted by ESPN.com's Kevin Seifert
This analysis of Brett Favre's future brings forth a number of important points. Here's the most significant, in my opinion:
Minnesota's offseason pursuit of Favre might have officially ended July 28, but it had lasting consequences. Favre's ghost is still hanging over the franchise. Every time Sage Rosenfels or Tarvaris Jackson have a bad practice -- reportedly, a common occurrence during training camp -- it's reasonable to wonder if the Vikings and/or Favre would re-think their positions.
Whether that actually happens is a separate point. The mere act of expressing interest this spring, combined with Favre's legendary waffling, made this potential union a permanent storyline of the Vikings' season. In reality, only one thing could render it moot: Rosenfels or Jackson decisively winning the starting job and performing competently throughout the season.
Before Friday night's preseason opener at Indianapolis, neither quarterback had come close to that benchmark. Rosenfels' 10-for-13 performance raised some short-term hopes, but even he admitted he was better against the Colts than he had been in practice.
You might be tempted to suggest that the story could be rendered moot if the media would stop covering it. But I think FoxSports.com's Jay Glazer accurately portrayed the mindset of many people within the Vikings organization. Like reporters, NFL players can connect the dots. They know they weren't seeing great quarterback play in practice and know that Favre changes his mind often. Those are two key ingredients.
Ultimately, of course, only two people would be involved in the decision to reverse course and pursue Favre: Owner Zygi Wilf and coach Brad Childress. And last month, both men said in unequivocal terms that Favre would not be an option in the future.
Of course, they couldn't have said anything less. Leaving the door open wouldn't have engendered much trust from Rosenfels or Jackson. But if we've learned anything during the past year with the Favre story, it's to believe that no public statement is permanent or irreversible. If Wilf and Childress conclude that Favre presents their overwhelmingly best option, I think they'll be willing to change course and explain it in terms of making the best decision for the team. That's also the thought of Sports Illustrated's Peter King, who wrote Monday that he had a "strong feeling" the Vikings will call Favre if they grow dissatisfied with their current situation.
So where does all this leave us? Following Rosenfels' performance in Indianapolis, the timing might not be right to start knocking on Favre's door. Jackson is scheduled to start Friday night against Kansas City, and then I'd imagine the Vikings will assess their situation then. Should they consider Favre at that point, there would be 22 days to get him acclimated before the start of the regular season.
We like to talk about FavreCon around here. Monday morning, I'd put us at 3 on a scale of 1-10. But as always, Hewhoshallnotbenamed is hanging over us.
Favre continues to cast shadow over Vikings - NFC North - ESPN
This analysis of Brett Favre's future brings forth a number of important points. Here's the most significant, in my opinion:
Minnesota's offseason pursuit of Favre might have officially ended July 28, but it had lasting consequences. Favre's ghost is still hanging over the franchise. Every time Sage Rosenfels or Tarvaris Jackson have a bad practice -- reportedly, a common occurrence during training camp -- it's reasonable to wonder if the Vikings and/or Favre would re-think their positions.
Whether that actually happens is a separate point. The mere act of expressing interest this spring, combined with Favre's legendary waffling, made this potential union a permanent storyline of the Vikings' season. In reality, only one thing could render it moot: Rosenfels or Jackson decisively winning the starting job and performing competently throughout the season.
Before Friday night's preseason opener at Indianapolis, neither quarterback had come close to that benchmark. Rosenfels' 10-for-13 performance raised some short-term hopes, but even he admitted he was better against the Colts than he had been in practice.
You might be tempted to suggest that the story could be rendered moot if the media would stop covering it. But I think FoxSports.com's Jay Glazer accurately portrayed the mindset of many people within the Vikings organization. Like reporters, NFL players can connect the dots. They know they weren't seeing great quarterback play in practice and know that Favre changes his mind often. Those are two key ingredients.
Ultimately, of course, only two people would be involved in the decision to reverse course and pursue Favre: Owner Zygi Wilf and coach Brad Childress. And last month, both men said in unequivocal terms that Favre would not be an option in the future.
Of course, they couldn't have said anything less. Leaving the door open wouldn't have engendered much trust from Rosenfels or Jackson. But if we've learned anything during the past year with the Favre story, it's to believe that no public statement is permanent or irreversible. If Wilf and Childress conclude that Favre presents their overwhelmingly best option, I think they'll be willing to change course and explain it in terms of making the best decision for the team. That's also the thought of Sports Illustrated's Peter King, who wrote Monday that he had a "strong feeling" the Vikings will call Favre if they grow dissatisfied with their current situation.
So where does all this leave us? Following Rosenfels' performance in Indianapolis, the timing might not be right to start knocking on Favre's door. Jackson is scheduled to start Friday night against Kansas City, and then I'd imagine the Vikings will assess their situation then. Should they consider Favre at that point, there would be 22 days to get him acclimated before the start of the regular season.
We like to talk about FavreCon around here. Monday morning, I'd put us at 3 on a scale of 1-10. But as always, Hewhoshallnotbenamed is hanging over us.
Favre continues to cast shadow over Vikings - NFC North - ESPN
Comment