I was arguing against your assertion that AP is the best back in the league. I’m aware of where Johnson and Jackson play.
So you’d trade 300-700 yards for 6 turnovers? Really? Reeeeeeeaaaaaaaallllllly?
Right next to the offensive line rankings, I’m guessing.
The MVP voters can see them.
The Vikings are better than all of those teams, and could quite plausibly end up at 15-1.
I think the odds are still against either of those two teams running the table (especially NO), but the voters aren’t just going to look at win-loss records anyway. The Vikings have essentially the same defense, and (with the exception of ROY candidate, Percy Harvin) same offense as last year. The only significance is at the QB position, and the dramatic difference that Favre has made in the team could not be more clear to see, plus the league loves Favre, and would love to give a 40-year-old icon the award.
It’s not just purple blinded Vikings fans that are saying this, by the way. The MVP talk for Favre is all over ESPN and the national sports media.
Your point? San Francisco, BTW, is AHEAD of Minnesota in most defensive categories (or at least was through yesterday). So don’t give any shit about it being just San Francisco.
By which metric do you measure that?
You can start at won-loss record, then look at common opponents, and then work your way down in whatever fashion you desire.
By the same logic, the Saints and Colts are better than any of their future opponents. Without going into detail, looks to me like the difficulty of schedule for the three teams is roughly Saints > Vikings >>> Colts; YMMV.
Yesterday must have really sucked for the 9ers. The Vikes are ahead of them today in PPG, rushing, and passing defense.
That they’re better than all those teams? How about their records to begin with? Which one of those teams do you contend is better than the Vikings by any metric?
If you agree that the Vikings are currently better than all of them (especially the Bears, who don’t even have a .500 record), then why shouldn’t it be assumed that the better team will win all those games. Could the Vikings get tripped up against a team like the Bengals? Sure. But they’re still going to be favored, and I think that’s the toughest game they’ve got left.
BTW, how great is it that the conversation in this thread has been dominated by talk of how good the Vikings and Favre are? This is truly a “stop and smell the roses” moment for me. I realize all of this could fall apart and we may not win a playoff game or the Super Bowl, but life as a Vikings fan is really good today.
Please continue.
Combo platter.
The 49ers gave up 30 points, an excellent passing day to Rodgers, as well as over 150 yards on the ground.
Meanwhile, the Vikings throttled the Seahawks on the ground (4 total yards). Hasselbeck didn’t have a bad day, but the Hawks only scored 9 points.
I think it’s plausible the Colts could win out, but not the Saints. The Patriots are the toughest team that any of these three teams have to face.
If you’d rather have Johnson or Jackson than Peterson, I’ve got a nice bridge here you’ll love. Leaving that aside, even if we assume that Peterson is in fact the third-best running back in the league, that still makes him significantly better than anyone on the Saints or Colts rosters.
The question is not whether or not I would “trade” 300-700 yards for 6 turnovers. The point is that Favre would have thrown a bunch more interceptions had he been forced to throw for that much extra yardage.
Hell, I could see us going 3-3. Arizona at home is no joke unless we’re facing Leinart. Carolina and Chicago on the road can both be scary games.
If we have the 1st-round bye locked up are not in contention for the NFC top-seed, it’s likely Favre and AP don’t see much action in the Giants game.
That’s the thing - the Vikings were so bad at the quarterback position last year that even bringing in an average quarterback would have produced spectacular improvement.
Gus Frerotte was pretty average.
Jackson is too old - I’d need to take a closer look at Johnson, but he’s doing incredible things on a team with no passing attack.
No argument there, but that does’t definitively make Manning or Brees more valuable than Favre. Opinions and intangibles and opinions about intangibles come into play, or maybe we’re just splitting hairs.
Take a look at Favre’s current interception rate and yards per attempt, extrapolate that over however many passes it would take for Favre to get 700 more yards, and get back to me.
Minnesota as a team was the 17th in passer rating last year. That’s pretty average.
But that was with absolutely no pressure on the QB. A little old lady with a walker could have flushed Jackson out of the pocket.
Minnesota took 45 sacks last year - 4th worst in the league.
You guys do know that these stats are freely available to the public, right?
Sorry, I thought you were talking about the Saints and the Colts. My mistake.