Vikings bench Jackson, turn to Frerotte at QB

8-7 and 7-9 does not make one a winner, and, most importantly, he was getting worse each year. If you're not an acccurate passer, which Vick never was, you're not going to have long career as a starting QB. Even without the dogs, his career was heading downhill fast.

 

didn't favre go 4-12 in 2005 and 8-8 in 2006?

with bad packers teams?

was his career going downhill or was he just surrounded by a bad defense and a poor supporting offense?

with talent around him, he was 13-3 last year

the guy wrote that "calling vick a quarterback is a gross misnomer," and that's obviously a ridiculous statement

not sure how you can defend him?

 

I'm not defending anybody; I'm saying Vick had become a mediocre quarterback and wasn't going to get any better. And just like Favre, Vick fans can't give him all the credit when he's winning and absolve him of all blame when he's losing. Any coach in the NFL would tell you that Vick regressed after 2004 and wasn't getting any better because he wasn't willing to develop his skills as a passer.

 

i don't totally disagree with that. i just think comments like "calling vick a quarterback is a gross misnomer" which somebody above did are ignorant and symbolic of this message board, where people are content to pass down the same tired cliches and truisms and conventional wisdom instead of looking deeper into an issue

 

Agreed.

 

What a spineless move by Childress to bench this guy.

If you've watched 10 minutes of any Vikings' game in the last year, you know one thing: They never allowed Jackson to do shit. The guy's been working the same two plays -- the naked bootleg and the quick slant -- since the day he entered the league. And all along, Childress claimed they were molding his raw talent, that he was the franchise, that they were going to take it slow and not ask too much.

And you know, all of that is fine ... right up to the point where you bench him because your slow-ass process had fans complaining.

At that point, it's a bullshit move.

You've got to give the guy a shot to succeed. If you're going to trot his ass out there for two-plus years, ask him to take the boos and the constant criticism while he follows your plan, you just can't pull him without at least a shot to run the show because fans are grumbling.

 

There's room for debate, here, and plenty of it.

But when your alternative is Gus Friggin' Frerotten . . .

 

No thread discussing Minnesota Viking playcalling is complete without mention of fan favorite Bob Schnelker. This clip shows Viking coach Jerry Burns after a victory against the Rams. Rich Karlis kicked seven field goals. The offense did not score a touchdown.

Burnsie starts warming up around the 1:00 mark. When Pat Reusse asks a questions around the 4:50 mark Burnsie gives his thoughts on the fan reaction when Schnelker was shown up on the scoreboard.

Warning: Very NSFW language!

Bear with the clip. Turn your head sideways and behold greatness. I loved Jerry Burns.

 

Again, you can't allow a bad QB to do much of anything in the NFL. Childress has been trying to win with a running game and defense. It's perfectly acceptable to blame him for thinking Jackson was an NFL starter and tying the team's fortunes to him. And that's what he'll ultimately lose his job for. But coaches DO NOT open the playbook for any new QBs, even talented ones. This also goes to the idea that many NFL coaches still have the beliefyou can win without a playmaking QB. The 2000 Ravens were an aberration. You cannot win consistently in the NFL, especially in the playoffs, without good quarterback play.

 

But again, you're doing the same thing Childress is -- thinking of Jackson as a "new" QB. He's not. This is the guy's third season in the NFL, second season starting. I'm not saying he's a vet or anything, but if you're still trotting him out there after watching him play for 20-plus games, you have to have some confidence he can do something.

Plus, I just don't know how Jackson's performances when he has been given some rope don't count in his favor. Because each time they've put Jackson in situations where he threw on first and second down and kept the defense off-balance, the guy has played much, much better. I would love to know the percentage of his passes that came on third and more than five yards. I bet it's the highest in the league, or at least top three.

It reminds me of Casey Dick's situation last year at Arkansas -- to a certain degree. Teams got a steady dose of McFadden and Jones on first and second downs -- and in some cases Dick wasn't even on the field for those plays -- and then they trotted him out on third and long and asked him to make a play. Dick was considered one of the worst QBs in the SEC because of it. Now, after McFadden and Jones are gone and Arkansas is running a normal offense, Dick is throwing for 300-plus yards a game and people are saying he's really improved. He hasn't, though. His situation has.

What the Vikings have asked Jackson to do is like asking a pitcher to come in every inning in a game when runners are in scoring position. If you do that, you can't then freak out when the guy's ERA is double digits.

 

Jackson is just not a good QB, and he never will be. He should never have been the starter to begin with.

 

Old Jack Frost