Show of hands who wants T-Jacks over Brett· Page 2

UffDaVikes
Registered

16 years ago

Until recently they seemed lost in trying to figure out how to use the talent they have amassed, but maybe they are finally getting it down.

"Formo" wrote:

You just jinxed them. =/

lol

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

Not really.

I threw a Maybe in there as a disqualifier.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

16 years ago

#12

I must say, even as a Packers fan, that Jackson is showing alot of potential.

The problem is though, like you said, the coaching staff. Another problem though is his decision making.

He seems to be a poor man's Micheal Vick or Cunningham at this point in his career. He lacks the athletacism Vick had/has and, apart from this last game, showed to have the same, if not worse, decision making, throwing the pass into all kinds of coverage.

Favre wouldn't have fixed your problem, but he would've been a short-term solution. I mean, seriously, Gus Frerotte? I know Favre's cap hit would be pretty hefty and he has a big contract, especially for one of the 'poorest' teams in the league, but if they could manage to sign him, wouldn't you want to have him starting? Jackson has been the second stringer for nearly the entire season, leaving it to Frerotte.

If I had to choose between Frerotte and Favre.. I'm pretty confident about who should start for my team.

Ofcourse you couldn't have seen the benching coming either, but having Jackson sitting behind Favre for a year or two wouldn't be that bad either.... especially if that got you a SB.

UffDaVikes
Registered

16 years ago

#13

I must say, even as a Packers fan, that Jackson is showing alot of potential.

The problem is though, like you said, the coaching staff. Another problem though is his decision making.

He seems to be a poor man's Micheal Vick or Cunningham at this point in his career. He lacks the athletacism Vick had/has and, apart from this last game, showed to have the same, if not worse, decision making, throwing the pass into all kinds of coverage.

Favre wouldn't have fixed your problem, but he would've been a short-term solution. I mean, seriously, Gus Frerotte? I know Favre's cap hit would be pretty hefty and he has a big contract, especially for one of the 'poorest' teams in the league, but if they could manage to sign him, wouldn't you want to have him starting? Jackson has been the second stringer for nearly the entire season, leaving it to Frerotte.

If I had to choose between Frerotte and Favre.. I'm pretty confident about who should start for my team.

Ofcourse you couldn't have seen the benching coming either, but having Jackson sitting behind Favre for a year or two wouldn't be that bad either.... especially if that got you a SB.

"Rockmolder" wrote:

Other than skin color I really don't see how jackson resembles either Cunningham or Vick. He is no where close to similar to either of them. I would say that the two he is the closest to as far as physical attributes are David Garrard and Ben Rothlisberger. Remember that I said physical attributes. He is not close to big ben at this point as a QB.

The biggest problem with him is that he is not a good WCO athlete. Putting him in a situation where he has to make quick drops and throw precise,short timing passes to WR's against cover 2 defenses is not something he is going to excel at and the games where he has been called on to do those things he has failed.
Where he has potential is in a system like they have in Pitt, Dallas, SD etc where he can take deeper drops, have more time to make his reads, and where the read progression goes from the deep routes to the short routes to compliment his arm strength, not from short to long where the quick reaction and timing are more critical.

We actually did more of that the past several weeks with gus and also with Jackson out of the two TE sets and it has made a difference in our ability to pass the ball and also it has freed up our running game even more than it was.

But we have to keep in mind we just played Detroit and an Arizona team that may have blinked for a week as they celebrated their first divisional title in a long, long time. These next 2 weeks will give a much better view of what he has learned on the bench this year.

dfosterf
Veteran Member

16 years ago

#14

Pay close attention to this comment, as it is a once - in - a - lifetime viewing experience. Major Dad made the right decision at the right time when he went to Gus.

That's right...I actually gave him a compliment!!

Circumstances have been favorable to the Vikes, especially in light of the fact that the pine-riding seems to have caused Tavaris to contemplate on what the fu## he is/was doing. I said as much as regards Gus when the move was made (ppo) , commentary along the lines of "In Gus you can trust"

Now I'm a bit worried. I was counting on the Vikes having to semi-waste their first round pick on Sam Bradford or some such in the draft...of course this is equalized by the diminished possibility of Donovan McNabb coming to Minnesota, which is my total nightmare. If it's between T-Jac and Donovan...well, I'll take my chances as a Packer fan with Tavaris any day, not because I think he is going to suck, but rather, he MIGHT suck, and I can work with that.

As far as Brett goes, I heard a portion of his presser yesterday. The transcript I posted on the Brett 2009 thread doesn't do it justice. It could be another instance of typical "stream of conciousness" by Brett, and I reckon the next few games will play a large part, but it sure sounded like this is it for Brett, more so than any other time, imo, and I have heard all of his comments since his very 1st one several years ago. If somehow he wound up on the Vikes next year, I would be FOR that. I have absolute trust in our new QB, and I think it would be quite cool to --- A-- Play against Brett Favre--- and ---B---Send his old ass packing back to Minnesota with his tail (and Mars' :icon_smile: ) between his legs. I don't think I'd get quite the same thrill with Brett as a Jet in the same scenario.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

16 years ago

#15

Lets get this first. I in no way meant to generalise african american QBs.

What I mean is, he has the speed to make things happen, get out of the pocket, run a bit from time to time. He doesn't have the mindset, he prefers passing, but from what I've seen he could easily do it. Just like Vick, just a bit slower. Maybe a comparison to Daunte in his prime would be more in place here.

His decision making leaves much to be desired aswell, just like Vicks usually did. He always had a QB rating around 70 with a low completion rate and his Ints getting close to his TDs. Just like Jackson has shown us in his first seasons.

Like you said yourself, coaching has had a big part in this. They seem to have found a better system for him, but like you also said, his good performances have been against pretty bad teams...

UffDaVikes
Registered

16 years ago

#16

Lets get this first. I in no way meant to generalise african american QBs.

What I mean is, he has the speed to make things happen, get out of the pocket, run a bit from time to time. He doesn't have the mindset, he prefers passing, but from what I've seen he could easily do it. Just like Vick, just a bit slower. Maybe a comparison to Daunte in his prime would be more in place here.

His decision making leaves much to be desired aswell, just like Vicks usually did. He always had a QB rating around 70 with a low completion rate and his Ints getting close to his TDs. Just like Jackson has shown us in his first seasons.

Like you said yourself, coaching has had a big part in this. They seem to have found a better system for him, but like you also said, his good performances have been against pretty bad teams...

"Rockmolder" wrote:

I think you are closer with the Culpepper comparison. He is athletic but he really isn't that elusive as to be a great runner.

Personally I don't think he is mentally sharp enough to be an effective WCO QB. Hell, very few men on the face of the earth are so it really isn't a slam, just a likely reality.

I also think our Tackles are going to have problems with protection in the next 2 games unless we go with 2 TE sets to help out and under pressure he has been a different QB.

alldaybaby
Registered

16 years ago

#17

I must say, even as a Packers fan, that Jackson is showing alot of potential.

The problem is though, like you said, the coaching staff. Another problem though is his decision making.

He seems to be a poor man's Micheal Vick or Cunningham at this point in his career. He lacks the athletacism Vick had/has and, apart from this last game, showed to have the same, if not worse, decision making, throwing the pass into all kinds of coverage.

Favre wouldn't have fixed your problem, but he would've been a short-term solution. I mean, seriously, Gus Frerotte? I know Favre's cap hit would be pretty hefty and he has a big contract, especially for one of the 'poorest' teams in the league, but if they could manage to sign him, wouldn't you want to have him starting? Jackson has been the second stringer for nearly the entire season, leaving it to Frerotte.

If I had to choose between Frerotte and Favre.. I'm pretty confident about who should start for my team.

Ofcourse you couldn't have seen the benching coming either, but having Jackson sitting behind Favre for a year or two wouldn't be that bad either.... especially if that got you a SB.

"Rockmolder" wrote:

poorest teams in the league ?????????? LOL
we use up all our cap every year , the packers have loads of cap and sign on one , wonder why that is ?

a classic Aaron rogers quote\r\n\r\nquote: \"I\'ve got a roommate, a guy I met in town. He works for the Packers now as an athletic trainer....He\'s been great for me...Our friendship goes a lot deeper than what we do. \"

alldaybaby
Registered

16 years ago

#18

Lets get this first. I in no way meant to generalise african american QBs.

What I mean is, he has the speed to make things happen, get out of the pocket, run a bit from time to time. He doesn't have the mindset, he prefers passing, but from what I've seen he could easily do it. Just like Vick, just a bit slower. Maybe a comparison to Daunte in his prime would be more in place here.

His decision making leaves much to be desired aswell, just like Vicks usually did. He always had a QB rating around 70 with a low completion rate and his Ints getting close to his TDs. Just like Jackson has shown us in his first seasons.

Like you said yourself, coaching has had a big part in this. They seem to have found a better system for him, but like you also said, his good performances have been against pretty bad teams...

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

I think you are closer with the Culpepper comparison. He is athletic but he really isn't that elusive as to be a great runner.

Personally I don't think he is mentally sharp enough to be an effective WCO QB. Hell, very few men on the face of the earth are so it really isn't a slam, just a likely reality.

I also think our Tackles are going to have problems with protection in the next 2 games unless we go with 2 TE sets to help out and under pressure he has been a different QB.

"Rockmolder" wrote:

i dont see the falcons d-line causing him too many problems , the giants yes it could be , but he had maybe his best game of last year against them

a classic Aaron rogers quote\r\n\r\nquote: \"I\'ve got a roommate, a guy I met in town. He works for the Packers now as an athletic trainer....He\'s been great for me...Our friendship goes a lot deeper than what we do. \"

Rockmolder
Honored Member

16 years ago

#19

I must say, even as a Packers fan, that Jackson is showing alot of potential.

The problem is though, like you said, the coaching staff. Another problem though is his decision making.

He seems to be a poor man's Micheal Vick or Cunningham at this point in his career. He lacks the athletacism Vick had/has and, apart from this last game, showed to have the same, if not worse, decision making, throwing the pass into all kinds of coverage.

Favre wouldn't have fixed your problem, but he would've been a short-term solution. I mean, seriously, Gus Frerotte? I know Favre's cap hit would be pretty hefty and he has a big contract, especially for one of the 'poorest' teams in the league, but if they could manage to sign him, wouldn't you want to have him starting? Jackson has been the second stringer for nearly the entire season, leaving it to Frerotte.

If I had to choose between Frerotte and Favre.. I'm pretty confident about who should start for my team.

Ofcourse you couldn't have seen the benching coming either, but having Jackson sitting behind Favre for a year or two wouldn't be that bad either.... especially if that got you a SB.

"alldaybaby" wrote:

poorest teams in the league ?????????? LOL
we use up all our cap every year , the packers have loads of cap and sign on one , wonder why that is ?

"Rockmolder" wrote:

They had the lowest revenue in the entire league, combined with having the lowest current value. Also, they had an operating income of -19.1 Million Dollars.

These are numbers from 2007. I know these numbers don't say it all, but enough to show you that the franchise wasn't/isn't running that good.

I don't wanna bash on the Vikings in any way. All I wanted to say is that you don't have alot of money to just randomly spend on hefty contractsm and with the signing of Jared Allen, I can imagine they wouldn't want to sign/trade for another top free agent.

alldaybaby
Registered

16 years ago

#20

I must say, even as a Packers fan, that Jackson is showing alot of potential.

The problem is though, like you said, the coaching staff. Another problem though is his decision making.

He seems to be a poor man's Micheal Vick or Cunningham at this point in his career. He lacks the athletacism Vick had/has and, apart from this last game, showed to have the same, if not worse, decision making, throwing the pass into all kinds of coverage.

Favre wouldn't have fixed your problem, but he would've been a short-term solution. I mean, seriously, Gus Frerotte? I know Favre's cap hit would be pretty hefty and he has a big contract, especially for one of the 'poorest' teams in the league, but if they could manage to sign him, wouldn't you want to have him starting? Jackson has been the second stringer for nearly the entire season, leaving it to Frerotte.

If I had to choose between Frerotte and Favre.. I'm pretty confident about who should start for my team.

Ofcourse you couldn't have seen the benching coming either, but having Jackson sitting behind Favre for a year or two wouldn't be that bad either.... especially if that got you a SB.

"Rockmolder" wrote:

poorest teams in the league ?????????? LOL
we use up all our cap every year , the packers have loads of cap and sign on one , wonder why that is ?

"alldaybaby" wrote:

They had the lowest revenue in the entire league, combined with having the lowest current value. Also, they had an operating income of -19.1 Million Dollars.

These are numbers from 2007. I know these numbers don't say it all, but enough to show you that the franchise wasn't/isn't running that good.

I don't wanna bash on the Vikings in any way. All I wanted to say is that you don't have alot of money to just randomly spend on hefty contractsm and with the signing of Jared Allen, I can imagine they wouldn't want to sign/trade for another top free agent.

"Rockmolder" wrote:

the difference between the two teams rock is if the vikings have a need they go out and get their man if one is out there available , what i've seen of Ted Thompson recently he does the exact opposite .............lets see if this offseason is different, some good FA's coming on the market that will really fill in the holes that the packers have right now

a classic Aaron rogers quote\r\n\r\nquote: \"I\'ve got a roommate, a guy I met in town. He works for the Packers now as an athletic trainer....He\'s been great for me...Our friendship goes a lot deeper than what we do. \"

Important Information: