The hue and cry went out far and wide from the loudest of the loudest voices in the sports talk business following the Vikings' loss to the New Orleans Saints in the NFC Championship game. "Favre's decision cost the Vikings the game," they cried. "No way Manning does the same, not when its for all the marbles."
More cliches and loud pontificating ensued. Then the Super Bowl was played.
Not only did the Saints--a team the Vikings ran up and down the field against--show, they beat the favored Indianapolis Colts by two touchdowns. And they did so on the strength of a late-game pick of a cross-body pass by Peyton Manning. It was not as far back across the body as had been Brett Favre's two weeks ago, but it was back across the body, to a blind spot, and it was picked.
For Manning and the Colts, the late fourth-quarter pick was far more immediately damaging than was Favre's intercepted pass against the Saints. Favre's pick merely sent the game to overtime. Manning's pick resulted in a Saints' defensive touchdown and sealed the game in regulation.
While Colts' fans, with prior Super Bowl victory in hand, will gain little sympathy around the NFL for their team's late-game miscues and defeat, Vikings' fans likely will receive additional sympathy along with an unexpected boost to next year's fortunes.
On Sunday, the Saints demonstrated that they were the better team. They also added fuel to the notion among Vikings' fans that the Vikings were the best team in the NFL this past season. That, alone, would provide Favre with motivation to return next season.
How the Saints beat the Colts should also embolden Favre. While, two weeks ago, Favre likely had doubts about his decision-making with a championship in reach, he now has re-affirmation of the fact that bad picks happen to the best of quarterbacks at the worst of times. In light of Manning's pick, Favre can take solace in the fact that momentary indiscretion, not age or fading ability, was responsible for that pick against the Saints.
Buoyed by Manning's error to view his own similar error in a different light, and encouraged by the return of the core of this year's offense, Favre might well decide to return to Minnesota in 2010 and take a run at a field that probably is not going to change all that much except at the margins.
In an off-season already filled with uncertainty about the return to play of E.J. Henderson and Cedric Griffin and Chester Taylor's status as a member of the team, the Colts' loss via a Manning interception thus offers one unexpected ray of hope for the Vikings and their fans in 2010.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I agree. Manning's pick was far worse than Favre's since it was a pick 6 that sealed it for the Saints. And after seeing the Colt's play in the superbowl I have no doubt in my mind that if the vikings made it to the superbowl they would've won it.
I really like the posts I read here, they are far more knowledgeable than the other media outlets. Now, I do have a question, with the needs the team has, what position should they draft for?
Paul,
The Vikings will have some holes to fill that might prove difficult or impossible to fill, but they still will return one of the better teams in the league....assuming that they have an NFL-caliber starting quarterback.
VG
B,
Thanks. It helps not to have a master, as some others have.
Right now, the Vikings are in the position of having to take the best player on the board. There should be plenty of solid players left on the board at the end of the first round, but their options obviously will be more limited than had they picked earlier.
The Vikings would love to find a starting cornerback, left tackle, or defensive tackle to replace Pat Williams, but they probably would be quite happy to land a starting right guard or even a starting outside linebacker. Of all of the positions that the Vikings will be scouting, offensive guard and defensive tackle are the most likely to provide a player capable of starting in the NFL in game one of the 2010 season. With cap and longevity considerations, I would expect the Vikings to look long and hard at taking a viable guard with their first-round pick, if one is available.
VG
Ok, this is probably way off topic and if I need to be chided, well, so be it. VG, do you think the losses in the latter part of the season were as more of a result of Childress trying to show who's boss, instead of the team's failure to show up? Also, should Farve retire, would they go with Jackson, Rosenfels or some other option?
B,
The late-season losses were primarily a function of Childress wanting to prove that his way was the right way, regardless of the evidence in front of him. When that mindset changed following the first-half debacle at Chicago (a change clearly made out of necessity), the Vikings' on-field performance improved.
I believe Favre will return next season. If he does not, the Vikings better hope that Childress misjudged Rosenfels' ability last Fall. Jackson is not the answer at quarterback and bringing someone else in given the unique free-agency rules in place for an uncapped 2010 seems unlikely.
VG
VG
So, Childress really is a pompous ass (my words). He must have the ownership buffaloed to command the power he has. Is Rosenfels that bad or is he a "system" QB? I know he was a serviceable backup in Houston and what I read about him was that while he was not a savior QB, was that he was a solid, depndable QB. There have been teams that have won with less at QB given the rest of the talent on the team. It's confusing and to a degree frustrating to someone who has been a fan for over 40 yrs.
Post a Comment