Skip to content

Vikings take a huge risk by trading Sage

With quarterback Sage Rosenfels being frozen out in the offseason and showcased in the preseason, the message to the other 31 NFL teams was clear:  Sage is available.

And now that the Vikings have traded the guy who was brought in last year to compete with Tarvaris Jackson before Brett Favre showed up and sent both of them to the bench, we need to ask one question.

What the hell are the Vikings thinking?

Favre has a bull’s-eye painted on every body part, and if (when) something on Favre shatters, the Vikings will need a veteran backup to Tarvaris Jackson.  They won’t have one.

Instead, the guy one snap away from becoming the quarterback will be Joe Webb, a rookie who was drafted to be a receiver and converted back to the position he played in college.  We love the guy; he’s got the vertical burst of Mike Vick but Webb is tall enough to see his receivers without rolling out of the pocket.  But he isn’t ready to play, and he most likely won’t be ready in 2010.

By sending Sage (and, as it turns out, running back Darius Reynaud, per Vikings.com) to the Giants for an undisclosed 2011 draft pick and a conditional pick in 2012, the Vikings are continuing to push whatever chips they have left into the center of the table for one final Favre-fueled run at a Super Bowl.

Meanwhile, the Vikings will see Sage again.  He’ll return with his new team to the Metrodome on December 12.  And we’ve got a feeling that he’ll be spilling his guts about everything he knows regarding the team with which he spent more than a year — but for which he never played.
 

Permalink 98 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, New York Giants, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
98 Responses to “Vikings take a huge risk by trading Sage”
  1. Nosredna says: Sep 3, 2010 9:45 PM

    Why is it Florio that you seem to think that Favre is the ONLY QB in the league with a bullseye painted on him?
    Adjust your toupee……your stupidity is showing again!

  2. FinFan68 says: Sep 3, 2010 9:45 PM

    It is no risk. Sage is a camp kid. He cannot play consistently throughout a single game much less a season. The dolphins gave him every opportunity to win the job and lost out to guys like cleo lemons. Vikings were smart to trade him…they are trying to boost T-Jack’s confidence a little also

  3. akneeland says: Sep 3, 2010 9:47 PM

    Any indication that this move is to free up some cash to allow Minnesota to pursue TJ Housh?

  4. rjgreen3 says: Sep 3, 2010 9:47 PM

    dumb, dumb, dumb, he is way more valuable then tjack, dumb, dumb, dumb

  5. SwedishMurderMachine says: Sep 3, 2010 9:49 PM

    This trade was total crap for the Vikings. We gave away our only decent backup QB in Sage and a playmaker in Reynaud.
    Childress is going to follow TJ to the unemployment line at the end of the year if Favre gets hurt.

  6. Fogs88 says: Sep 3, 2010 9:50 PM

    Your the only one painting a bullseye on Favre dude…….still obsessed I see.

  7. Jeff George Rocket Balls says: Sep 3, 2010 9:51 PM

    If the Vikings are pushing “whatever chips they have left into the center of the table for one final Favre-fueled run” as the article suggests then they would have cut Webb or tried to send him to the practice squad. Trading Sage doesn’t suggest the Vikes are putting all their stock in this season — it actually suggests the opposite.

  8. sandbun says: Sep 3, 2010 9:52 PM

    Yes, because so many teams have 3rd string QBs that are really to play right now if the first two guys go down.
    It’s questionable because they’re sticking with Sage over T-Jack, but almost every team uses their 3rd QB spot on a developmental guy just like Webb.
    And hey, if they really get desperate I hear Jeff George wants to make a comeback.

  9. Green and Gold Forever says: Sep 3, 2010 9:52 PM

    So let me get this straight… if their starter goes down (relatively likely) and then their backup goes down too (quite a bit less likely), then the Vikings are in deep, deep trouble.
    OK, but couldn’t you say that about practically every NFL team? Can’t say I have any love lost for the Vikes, but this story just reeks of stupidity and pointlessness.

  10. BucsRcomin says: Sep 3, 2010 9:52 PM

    the vikings will have a new coach next year to sort out the back up qb situation

  11. cusoman says: Sep 3, 2010 9:52 PM

    Settle down Vikes fans
    Fact is: Neither Rosenfels nor TJack are long-term starter options, that has been proven season after season. Webb might be good down the road, who knows, but we’re looking at 2012 at best for him. IF this is in fact Favre’s last season, we’ll probably have an off year with a no-name (that may or may not be TJack) and then the rebuilding begins. It’s just the way this all works under a coach who took a chance with a guy he thought he could develop.
    The part that slays me about this trade is that we didn’t get some help on the O-line. We don’t need future picks, we need good players NOW. Makes me wonder if they’re preparing for the worst…
    Nah. We’ll still wipe the floors with the talent we have spread everywhere else.

  12. NP13 says: Sep 3, 2010 9:53 PM

    Could they be dumping salary to get Housh? It’s still a dumb move either way…

  13. Fran the Man says: Sep 3, 2010 9:54 PM

    I’ve gotten to the point that I can’t stand to hear or even see Brad Childress.
    He has to be the dumbest SOB that ever coached an NFL team.
    I can’t believe the Wilfs were stupid enough to be duped into extending this moron’s contract.

  14. Tim_Stead says: Sep 3, 2010 9:54 PM

    I’m happy for Sage. It has to be nauseating to be around Favre and the diva act day in and day out.
    Vikes aren’t winning anything so he’s not losing out by this move to NY.

  15. CanadianBillsFan says: Sep 3, 2010 9:56 PM

    I think that it’s smart. The Viks know that they are legit this year and this may be their last year t make a serious run at the Superbowl. And whether Favre is injured or not is irrelevant to his backup because on a team perspective if Favre does get injured then there is not a single QB on their roster that could have replaced him.
    They’re making a run at a championship. Let them, it’s their time and they know it!

  16. wildfan says: Sep 3, 2010 9:56 PM

    The Vikes aren’t thinking. Brad Childress can say all he wants about how great TJack looks in practice, but it isn’t translating to the field. Childress is too proud to admit the TJack draft pick was/is a MISERABLE failure, and move past it. Instead he continues to cling to his shreds of dignity and his wasted draftee like a 6 year old clings to the tattered remains of their childhood blankie. And in the process they let a serviceable, quality backup get away. Oh well, if and when Favre goes down, us Vikings fans always have our annual mantra to fall back on….”There’s always next year!”

  17. aec4 says: Sep 3, 2010 9:57 PM

    if the Vikings were pushing all in for a 2010 title run, why would they dump a QB for a pick in 2011 and 2012? That doesn’t make sense. If you are going all in, it means you say “Screw the future.” Isn’t getting picks for a QB not screwing the future?
    What they’re doing is saying “If Favre goes down, we’re not winning anyway.”

  18. hrmlss says: Sep 3, 2010 9:57 PM

    The one thing never mentioned about Sage is that with growing up in Maquoketa Iowa, and playing for Iowa State, he was probably a Viking fan and therefore their most loyal QB on the roster, if there is any loyalty left in the NFL.

  19. Someone says: Sep 3, 2010 10:01 PM

    Yeah, the Vet who started 12 games whole games…

  20. Rhapsody says: Sep 3, 2010 10:03 PM

    Florio, stop pretending you know anything about football. You are not qualified to second guess FO decisions. If anything happens to Farve, the Vikings are not going anywhere with or without Sage. Stop being stupid.

  21. HawgNSonsTV2 says: Sep 3, 2010 10:05 PM

    HawgLife!

  22. In & Out Burger says: Sep 3, 2010 10:06 PM

    Jackson made it too the playoffs. If two QBs get injured, your not winning a Super Bowl anyway.

  23. Nacho Libre says: Sep 3, 2010 10:06 PM

    How is getting rid of a backup QB and at present, RB pushing all your chips to the center of the table for conditional draft picks over the next 2 years, gambling ANYTHING for THIS year? Retard…think before you type. If anything, they should’ve KEPT Sage for a run this year, getting rid of him doesn’t help this year when all they get is draft picks for NEXT year. Stupid dribble.

  24. Vikings14 says: Sep 3, 2010 10:06 PM

    Brad Childress is an idoit, Tjack needs to go. Joe Webb is actually Randy Moss. Would you ever put your fastest player at QB? Don’t think so. Webb should be filing in for the depleated WR’s….he is fast as heck and can do the job. Favre to Webb = Touchdown!

  25. Qoojo says: Sep 3, 2010 10:07 PM

    Isn’t it more like 2 snaps away from becoming the QB?

  26. rcunningham says: Sep 3, 2010 10:08 PM

    Florio, why are you such a tool?

  27. JimmySmith says: Sep 3, 2010 10:09 PM

    I actually disagree, it hardly would matter if it were Sage or T Jack Off if BrINT should go down. Granted, Sage is far superior to T Jack Off but then again, what back up isn’t?
    The Vikings will self destruct this season but it wouldn’t be bacause BrINT can’t play. It will be the O line falling down and a secondary that can’t cover.

  28. Nosredna says: Sep 3, 2010 10:16 PM

    # akneeland says: September 3, 2010 9:47 PM
    Any indication that this move is to free up some cash to allow Minnesota to pursue TJ Housh?
    _________________________________
    No one needs to worry bout freeing up much money to sign TJ. Seattle is on the hook for 7mil no matter what. The Vikes could sign him for 500K and Seattle still has to pay him 6.5mil.

  29. Hauschild says: Sep 3, 2010 10:16 PM

    Not sure how anybody in their right mind would feel this trade was bad, other than losing a solid return guy.
    I think the move was a smart one. The Vikings get a draft choice for a player they signed as a free agent.
    And, it would be insane to believe Favre won’t finish the season – he always does.
    Just relax and we’ll chat about this again around week 17.

  30. Footballz says: Sep 3, 2010 10:19 PM

    2 thoughts.
    1. Sage was out performed by Jackson in training camp by leaps and bounds. Yes Sage looked good in the preseason, against 2nd stringers… I would hope so because he is a quality backup. This can be debatable so refer to part 2.
    2. So our huge risk is that we traded a guy that we should have kept in case an injury occurs to our starter and then we are 1 snap away from our backup getting injured and our 3rd string QB coming in and playing.
    Lets look at this from a couple different ways. Favre has never missed a game. Yes, he is old but why is he suddenly injury prone? He has started like 285 games straight or something. The thing that upsets me the most is that we are being called crazy because he don’t have an NFL ready 3rd string QB. This article could be written about any team in the NFC north or NFL for that matter.
    The Bears are stupid because they should have an NFL ready starter as their 3rd sting QB. Can you believe the brain trust in Detroit? They will go no where with Drew Stanton as their starter because they are ultimately 1 snap away from being 1 snap away from him starting. Ted Thompson really needs to be fired. He may have an MVP caliber starting QB but both his backups have never started a game in the NFL. You might as well give them the #1 overall pick for next year (Note the heavy sarcasm).

  31. nfcnorris says: Sep 3, 2010 10:22 PM

    “whatever chips they have left”
    this only means to me the Wilf’s no longer care about the Super Bowl (I’m laughing here Brett) but they do want out of Minnesota, fast! Minnesota is never giving the Wilf’s a $, so they’re doing what they can to destroy the franchise and justify the move to L.A. or wherever! Sad…and Chilly is their fall guy. And the NFC North will suffer.

  32. Michael says: Sep 3, 2010 10:22 PM

    Aren’t we talking about the most durable qb in the history of the NFL? And we’re worried about who the 3rd qb is?

  33. bonafide says: Sep 3, 2010 10:23 PM

    Some teams don’t even keep a third quarterback… So I don’t really see why you’re writing an article criticizing the Vikings for having a third quarterback not prepared to play. How good of shape are the Packers in if Aaron Rodgers gets hurt? Matt Flynn isn’t prepared to play, and after him it’s… well, Graham Harrell, if he makes the team, which is doubtful. Probably practice squad.

  34. Gunner420 says: Sep 3, 2010 10:23 PM

    Fire Childress!

  35. Jeff George Rocket Balls says: Sep 3, 2010 10:26 PM

    FACT: Favre hasn’t needed a backup in 20 years. FACT: T-Jack’s QB rating in 2008 (last season he actually played) was 95.4. Sage has NEVER had a QB rating above even 85 in ANY season that he played at least 5 games. Give me a break guys, T-Jack is fine as a backup. The Vikes traded a career backup so he could be a backup in NY instead of a third-stringer in Minneapolis. They did this because they had a young guy who they like (Webb) who they couldn’t put on their practice squad (because he wouldn’t clear waivers). FACT: If Favre goes down the Vikes are in trouble. That’s true both before and after this trade.

  36. Bob Nelson says: Sep 3, 2010 10:28 PM

    Tarvaris Jackson would not be on the roster of 31 other teams. LOL!!

  37. MrHumble says: Sep 3, 2010 10:32 PM

    I don’t think the vikings made a mistake as far as their evaluation of sage, he is only a backup and there are more of those around that will fill the spot if BF should go down. The message I don’t understand is that childress still thinks so highly of tjak. by keeping tjak it means there will be more controversy next year.

  38. CaneMatador says: Sep 3, 2010 10:33 PM

    Come on Florio, If we are down to our 3rd qb, then this season isn’t going anywhere anyways!! And what QB doesn’t have a bulls eye on them??!!

  39. Ambrose says: Sep 3, 2010 10:35 PM

    The Viking decision makers aren’t stupid. This tells me that Favre must be feeling pretty good and that they have expectations that he can play near the level he played last season. Tavaris is no slouch either. And the new kid is an athlete. You have to go with whatever gives you the most confidence. They are preparing to go to battle and until they fail, you have to expect the unexpected. As a nemesis of mine on this site likes to point out, Favre’s failure is simply my wishful thinking ……and he’s right. I do hope he cannot replicate his success from last season. I don’t want to see that happen. Let’s get it started already.

  40. BigBear123 says: Sep 3, 2010 10:36 PM

    We love the guy; he’s got the vertical burst of Mike Vick but Webb is tall enough to see his receivers without rolling out of the pocket.
    ————–
    Old Vick maybe.
    Current Vick’s vertical burst is similar to Jay Cutler’s.
    Dennis Dixon is a good current comparison.

  41. Someone says: Sep 3, 2010 10:39 PM

    What’s with all this, “the Vikes are cashing in all their chips for a Super Bowl”? Will Favre be here next year? Did the Vikes add value to the team by this trade?
    And now the Vikings fans start eating themselves.

  42. Wiscdave says: Sep 3, 2010 10:41 PM

    Rosenfels plays well in the preseason, with the rookies, backups, and practice squad players, against rookies, backups, and practice squad players. What does that make him? King of the slappies? If the preseason is so important for talent evaluation, why is the NFL willing to reduce it to two games? During the preseason, the fans see about 10 percent of what the coaches see in practice, coaching sessions, and workouts, in what has become a year-round business. Given all of their smart personnel moves over the past several years, you have to give Childress et al. the benefit of the doubt. Despite what Florio says, the sky has not fallen yet.

  43. Majik Bullet says: Sep 3, 2010 10:45 PM

    Green and Gold Forever says:
    September 3, 2010 9:52 PM
    So let me get this straight… if their starter goes down (relatively likely) and then their backup goes down too (quite a bit less likely), then the Vikings are in deep, deep trouble.
    OK, but couldn’t you say that about practically every NFL team? Can’t say I have any love lost for the Vikes, but this story just reeks of stupidity and pointlessness.
    ____________________-
    Fairly impressive post from a Packer homer, except for the part about the guy who hasn’t missed a game in nearly 20 years being likely to get hurt.
    But honestly, why would a team be thinking about what happens if their number one and two QB go down? And how does trading a player who won’t see the field for future picks considered going all in? And honestly, it’s not like Sage is going to be the next Kurt Warner to come in and dominate if the starter goes down.

  44. Ilovefoolsball says: Sep 3, 2010 10:45 PM

    Good for Sage, he can actually be a backup at a team that has won a superbowl, and has a chance to win another superbowl.
    Unlike the Vikings. They have never won and will never win a superbowl (except for the one that they played in their imagination after beating the saints.)

  45. BigSuede says: Sep 3, 2010 10:49 PM

    Or, could this be the vikings getting ready to sign a newly released Matt Lienert.
    Lienert would be a step up over tavaris jackson… and may be a long time solution.
    yea- i said it…

  46. SquirtWorm says: Sep 3, 2010 10:59 PM

    Your starting to come across as a smarmy little bitch to me, Florio.

  47. Green n' Gold says: Sep 3, 2010 11:12 PM

    Just another in a long list of DUMBASS moves from a franchise that hasn’t won anything and continues to be the joke of the NFL!!

  48. Dave The Panther says: Sep 3, 2010 11:13 PM

    Looks like they are opening the door to bringing in Leinart.

  49. c.carterhof says: Sep 3, 2010 11:34 PM

    hitnbombs28-
    So…you are Viking fan? And you are going to switch to rooting for the Steelers next year, and until Chilly gets fired?
    Uh, you dont get it. You are not a fan, stick with the Steelers, dont want you as a fellow Viking.
    Ambrose- very good post, I’m impressed.

  50. antalicus says: Sep 3, 2010 11:43 PM

    Tarvaris is going to play a lot better when he doesn’t have to think about the possibility of Sage taking his position.

  51. Mike Daly says: Sep 3, 2010 11:55 PM

    Rosenfels is a serviceable if unspectacular quarterback who would probably produce enough for the Vikings to win the division with what the Vikings have – entrusting the team to a selfish gunslinging diva who is motivated only by making himself the hero when all he can do is cost the team a title is stupidity squared. Trading Rosenfels doesn’t make sense even if the pick the Vikings get proves worth it.

  52. Bing253 says: Sep 3, 2010 11:56 PM

    They really aren’t taking that big of a risk because Sage wouldn’t be taking them to the super bowl either so if Favre goes down then the Vikings are screwed. Look at the Colts and Pats backups because they have no experience behind their guys so the Vikings are better off than a lot of teams but since Florio is a Vikings fans it makes sense he would post this story?

  53. Green n' Gold says: Sep 3, 2010 11:56 PM

    Lol at the idiot who said Matt Flynn isn’t ready for the Packers. That’s why half the GM’s around the league love the kid. 3 years in the system, watch when we get a 2nd rounder for him next year and then Harrel is the number 2. Then the whole process repeats itself over and over. That’s what happens when you have a franchise QB and a Coach that’s the best in the business at developing Young QB’s.
    You wouldn’t know that Queen fan cuz you have don’t have SQUAT !! Lol!!

  54. Murgen says: Sep 3, 2010 11:57 PM

    Dammit Florio, Why the hell do you keep agitating the Vikingtards!? I know it’s funny as hell to watch, but who the hell is going to clean up the mess?

  55. cvh2009 says: Sep 3, 2010 11:59 PM

    The bigger story is the trade for Reynaud! Short-term this could really hurt the team, unless of course, my instincts are wrong and another trade is in the works.
    If a trade is not in the works, it is obvious what happened: Giants did not want Sage and his “starting” salary, so they demanded Reynaud as additional compensation. Which suggests, if true, that the Vikes were desparate to rid themselves of Sage. Because, due to injuries they are a little short on skill players.
    Personally, I’m hoping they are working on another even more massive trade, if you guys know what I mean.

  56. tombrookshire says: Sep 4, 2010 12:01 AM

    Lets not get crazy here. Anyway, the Vikes, said to be a leading contender for the Supe, are counting, I SAID COUNTING on Brett Favre to take them all the way. Anything happens, Tavaris is the QB. I would say that the Vikes took a big chance by not trading for, or drafting a QB. Can Peterson also pass the ball as he is the only offense if Favre goes down, which I would say is better than a 50% chance. Someone’s gonna pay, Brad, if this season tanks due to the QB.

  57. Blackn'Gold says: Sep 4, 2010 12:19 AM

    That’s good news for the Giants to have a dependable backup quarterback. Vikings apparently are looking to the future. This will be good news for Tavares Jackson. I don’t believe that the Great Farve will finish the season due to injury. Stay tuned.
    GO STEELERS!

  58. GB3Pack4 says: Sep 4, 2010 12:19 AM

    This is absolutely insane. Sage and Tarvaris look like backups, but Sage is substantially closer to being a starting QB than TJack (whom I like and respect) will ever be. If Brett goes down, so does the Vikings’ season.

  59. IRCHS1963 says: Sep 4, 2010 12:25 AM

    The Viking organization is in total disarray…. A problem with receivers ‘going down’, moving a good quality back-up QB and moving forward with a ‘has-been’ QB as their starter. It keeps going form bad to worse.

  60. Krow says: Sep 4, 2010 12:32 AM

    We needed a return man badly. Reynaud is more important to us than Sage.

  61. bbq says: Sep 4, 2010 12:36 AM

    I feel like the Vikings are like this really awesome Rubic’s cube only they can’t quite get it solved and a few of the stickers are peeled off so you’re not really sure what they are anyway.

  62. Bradwins says: Sep 4, 2010 12:38 AM

    Essentially, this item is saying “if the first string guy gets hurt, and then the second string guy gets hurt, the Vikings are screwed!” Um….yeah. Many teams don’t even carry three QBs. If you’re first two guys go down, you’re screwed. Not sure how that makes them different from everyone else.
    You guys really seem to get off on getting all bent out of shape about things that aren’t really all that worthy of it.

  63. dabbflappy says: Sep 4, 2010 12:55 AM

    I’m having trouble understanding why trading a 3rd string QB is such a disaster.
    Name a NFL team that *wouldn’t* be in serious trouble if it were down to its 3rd QB.
    On the other hand, what the Vikes gain is measurable and immediate.
    If the rumors are true that a disgruntled Rosenfels told the world that Favre was contemptuous of Childress, then he had to go.
    It’s addition by subtraction. The Vikings are better without a negative presence.

  64. brainranger67 says: Sep 4, 2010 12:58 AM

    this is funny…can’t wait to hear a numbskulls response from Gravy, he’s such a knob.

  65. Majik Bullet says: Sep 4, 2010 1:12 AM

    Green n’ Gold says:
    September 3, 2010 11:12 PM
    Just another in a long list of DUMBASS moves from a franchise that hasn’t won anything and continues to be the joke of the NFL!!
    __________________
    So if the Vikes are a joke, what does that make the team that got swept by that joke last year?
    And what GMs love Flynn, other than the ones in your head? I’ve never heard that once from a single GM, let alone 16 of them. You actually said Flynn is worth a 2nd rounder in the same post you called someone else an idiot. Classic, nice work homer.
    As for the QB developmental prowess of one Mike McCarthy, I think Alex Smith and the entire 49er fanbase would beg to differ. And I’m sure Buffalo is ecstatic about the excellent grooming Brian Brohm has received. You know, the 2nd round pick who barely lasted a year in GB under MM’s tutelage.

  66. tig 0 bitties says: Sep 4, 2010 1:19 AM

    As a vikes fan i’m not all that excited about this trade. I loved Reynaud, he had some play making ability. In return we don’t get any immediate help for this season. I wonder if the vikes are done making any moves via trades.

  67. PurpleRaid12 says: Sep 4, 2010 1:34 AM

    I think this is one of the dumbest moves we have made this offseason, aside from the fact that we haven’t fixed holes in the offensive line. We refuse to add depth at Center and Guard. We could have gone after Logan Mankins or the LT McNeil from the Chargers, instead we trade away an above average PR and a quality backup for a 2011 pick?! Are you kidding me? I want to see Childress’ explanation for this one come Saturday…

  68. bigbolt says: Sep 4, 2010 1:38 AM

    Where the hell were the Bills and Cardinals while this trade was going down????? How can you tell your friends that Trent Edwards and Derek Anderson/Matt Leinart are your starting QBs??? Rosenfels has been productive as an NFL starter.

  69. badfish69 says: Sep 4, 2010 1:48 AM

    # Green n’ Gold says: September 3, 2010 11:56 PM
    Lol at the idiot who said Matt Flynn isn’t ready for the Packers. That’s why half the GM’s around the league love the kid. 3 years in the system, watch when we get a 2nd rounder for him next year and then Harrel is the number 2. Then the whole process repeats itself over and over. That’s what happens when you have a franchise QB and a Coach that’s the best in the business at developing Young QB’s.
    You wouldn’t know that Queen fan cuz you have don’t have SQUAT !! Lol!!
    ——————————————————
    You have no idea if Matt Flynn is ready or not until you can actually see him do it in a game that counts. 2007 in Dallas it was plain to see that Rodgers was ready. So what if a couple of GM’s like him? That don’t mean squat.

  70. panteraphenomenon says: Sep 4, 2010 3:11 AM

    YOU ARE RELENTLESS.
    Please write about other things. 80 % of your posts involve some mention of Farve. Get off your knee’s for once Florio.

  71. David56 says: Sep 4, 2010 3:45 AM

    Sage or TJack? The question was who would Vikings fans have most wanted to see if Brett went down with a bad injury?
    As a Giants fan I can only hope that after all this talk Sage is never needed except to mop up because Eli stays healthy all season. I am glad the G-Men brought in someone with far more experience. The choices would have been somewhat thin anyway.
    Now if only Big Blue would unload punter(?) Matt Dodge. I just hope they don’t wait for a shank punt that costs them a game to make that move.

  72. Occam says: Sep 4, 2010 4:21 AM

    aec4 says:
    “if the Vikings were pushing all in for a 2010 title run, why would they dump a QB for a pick in 2011 and 2012? If you are going all in, it means you say “Screw the future.” Isn’t getting picks for a QB not screwing the future?”
    That’s a little too much common sense for the daily, “Florio’s Quest For Comments” article.

  73. Revolution22 says: Sep 4, 2010 5:22 AM

    I’ve believed Favre was coming back since before the three Vikings went to his place to get a decision. I’ve also believed that either 1. Favre is going to get hurt this season so bad he’ll be FORCED into retirement. 2. He’s due for a REALLY crappy season. Either way sucks for the Vikes, but one thing is for certain, he won’t repeat last year’s performance. IF he goes down, TJ can’t hold the Vikings up. If he has a terrible season, every single game he screws the pooch is a direct moral blow for the purple. So: Cutting Sage was a TERRIBLE move. They have absolutely NO insurance now. Either way, it just keeps looking better for the Green and Gold.

  74. zoinks says: Sep 4, 2010 6:04 AM

    If the Vikings are being foolhardy for not having a qualified candidate as their #3…… then what does that say about the Colts, who don’t even have a capable #2?
    Oh, but that’s okay….because Peyton is tough and plays hurt, right?
    Last time I checked, Brett Favre had played more games than any player the history of the NFL, and has never missed a game with injury. A badly broken thumb and a partially torn bicep weren’t enough to keep him off the field….but a sore ankle is supposed to be cause for concern?
    I’ve ignored the whole Favre saga to the best of my ability, and I could care less whether he plays….but this whole article is sheer stupidity. Florio has already milked the Favre-gate cow until its udders ran dry. Now he’s just squeezing whatever crap falls from its nether regions.

  75. Love_Boat_Scandal says: Sep 4, 2010 6:28 AM

    “And we’ve got a feeling that he’ll be spilling his guts about everything he knows regarding the team with which he spent more than a year — but for which he never played.”
    Gee whiz, Professor Football, where did you come up with that brilliant theory? You must be the smartest man in the world.

  76. MACK DADDY says: Sep 4, 2010 6:51 AM

    “Childress doesn’t have a clue” -Brett Lorenzo Favre

  77. adenaguy says: Sep 4, 2010 7:36 AM

    Packer fan projection for 2010. Good accurate
    unbiased look at what to expect.
    http://www.theonion.com/video/packers-fan-announces-he-will-return-to-drinking-f,14397/

  78. Dustin Chandler says: Sep 4, 2010 7:42 AM

    Damn.
    You would’ve thought they had traded away Brett Favre or something… judging by the angst in this post.
    The more I think about this trade the smarter it is. They got something for a backup QB.. I mean.. that’s pretty good already. No reason the Giants needed him anyways.. it’s dumb on the Giants part, not the Vikings.
    Like some others have been saying… wouldn’t any team in the NFL be in trouble if the starting QB and the back-up both went down!? What a total non-story! This is rediculous. lol.
    call me when Brett Favre misses a game. I don’t have a phone… don’t need one.

  79. nowathand says: Sep 4, 2010 8:14 AM

    I love how there’s this premise is built on the idea that teams think they would do better if they could just knock Favre out.
    If that is your hope for winning the NFC North, I have about 18 seasons worth of evidence that won’t happen. At tops, only one of the turnovers against New Orleans could have been caused by the hits on Favre. He still put his team in better position to win than Brees did in that game.
    There are so many issues with the hunted/hunter argument and the “target on your back” argument. I see this argument used to explain why the Bengals won’t win their division (I prefer the argument “Last Year’s Ravens + Anquan Boldin and Terrance Cody”) but they led their division for much of the year. In the “target on your back” argument, wouldn’t they have had the target on their back from the moment they were at the top?
    I guess Favre didn’t get a target on his chest when he did the low block last year in preseason?
    Mike Williams of the Bucs said he should have been drafted in the first round. Does that put a target on his back for all the first round corners? How far do you want to take this madness? You can’ t play in the NFL half-heartedly.
    You put your health on the line every time you go out there. It is, in essence, madness. If there were really teams out there that had an extra gear or an extra level of recklessness in regard to fines and suspension, then there wouldn’t be so much parity. I think Mike does a great job putting out a website that has the latest NFL info in a cleaner format than ESPN’s. However, when he starts philosophizing about things like this, it’s clear that he has never played in the NFL.
    In the even Tarvaris has to play, he is put on a short leash and the Vikings hope Joe Webb is ready to go in and convert third downs.

  80. kmartinson says: Sep 4, 2010 9:03 AM

    Who cares why they got rid of Sage…the fact is…they did. IF Favre ever gets hurt, the end result will be in 8 in the box against TJack every single play. Can he handle it differently this time around? He won’t get his completions dumping it off to Chester Taylor. Hopefully he has improved under the guidance of Mr. Miagi–I mean Chilly.

  81. va4favre says: Sep 4, 2010 9:05 AM

    I was initially opposed to this trade, but the more I read the comments, the more I am seeing the other side. If Sage was the leak in the locker room, then the Vikes are stronger without him. I actually think the Vikes might be one of the few NFL teams that could still win if their starter goes down. They still have Peterson. What does GB do if Rodgers is injured? Don’t forget he was lost to season ending injuries the two times he came in for Favre. I don’t see you taking about GB’s weakness. Oh I forgot, they already won the SB this year.

  82. acers says: Sep 4, 2010 9:44 AM

    Green and Gold Forever says:
    September 3, 2010 9:52 PM
    So let me get this straight… if their starter goes down (relatively likely) and then their backup goes down too (quite a bit less likely), then the Vikings are in deep, deep trouble.
    OK, but couldn’t you say that about practically every NFL team? Can’t say I have any love lost for the Vikes, but this story just reeks of stupidity and pointlessness.
    Acers says:
    Wow, I was pretty shocked from the level-headed comment froma G&G fan, but it is dead on!
    What team will WIN the Super Bowl with their BACK-UP, let alone their 3rd guy?? NOBODY……the colts, pats, packers, chargers, falcons, ravens, cowboys, steelers are ALL toast without their number 1 out there!!
    Keep in mind the Vikes did WIN THE DIVISION with Tjack/Frerotte under center……shows how much depth we have at D, and have the best RB in the league.

  83. ejmat says: Sep 4, 2010 10:26 AM

    Just another article written about one of the stupidest topics and eaten up by all the anti-Viking fans.
    First things first. I do think Sage is better than Jackson. However this trade will not make or break them. Every team has the chance of their starter going down. How do you think the Steelers will do this year? What if Manning went down in Indy? What if Brady goes down?
    It’s all a bunch of “what ifs”. I just find it funny as hell anti-Viking fans are eating this up as if the sky now falls for the Vikings. Do you think Sage was going to help get the Vikings to the SB? The answer is, NO. So for a player that was going to be cut as of today, the Viking front offic were smart enough to get future draft picks for someone that would most likely never step on the field.
    Keep on being happy about this. It really shows how people look at the entire story. Instead, they find someway to bash a team and its fans. LMFAO!!!!!!!

  84. lozmor says: Sep 4, 2010 10:27 AM

    I don’t know when the NFL has switched to a take out the QB so we can win league. If people will target Favre, then Vikes Def should target every starting QB on their schedual. Start by taking out Brees. It would be eaiser to bet N.O. if on the first play they go after Brees’s knees. That’s not how 31 NFL teams play so why do the so called NFL analyist keep saying it is only going to happen to Favre? Manning, Brees, Brady, and all the other QB’s better get good insurance if this is going to be allowed by the NFL.

  85. zygi milf says: Sep 4, 2010 10:51 AM

    # JimmySmith says: September 3, 2010 10:09 PM
    The Vikings will self destruct this season but it wouldn’t be bacause BrINT can’t play. It will be the O line falling down and a secondary that can’t cover.
    **************
    You kind of described your beloved Packers in that statement as well.

  86. Revolution22 says: Sep 4, 2010 11:06 AM

    “What if Manning went down in Indy?”
    I’d be very happy, that’s what, ejmat.

  87. shaggytoodle says: Sep 4, 2010 12:10 PM

    In & Out Burger says:
    September 3, 2010 10:06 PM
    Jackson made it too the playoffs. If two QBs get injured, your not winning a Super Bowl anyway.
    ________________________________
    So why did the Vikings need to kiss so much of Brett’s butt, to make him come back? They had a QB they could have groomed, and worked with especially with the defense and running game, like the Steelers did with Ben and, Jets with Sanchez. The Vikings must like trying to mess up good things.

  88. sand0 says: Sep 4, 2010 12:32 PM

    Florio has criticized the Vikings in the past for keeping both Sage and Tavaris, both of which make #2 money. Now that they let Sage go, they are criticized for that.
    Any team in the NFL that goes to their 3rd string QB is in trouble. You don’t win superbowls with your third stringer. Brett is also relatively dependable compared with other QB’s. In his career he has missed very few games due to injury.

  89. ejmat says: Sep 4, 2010 1:13 PM

    sand0 says:
    September 4, 2010 12:32 PM
    Brett is also relatively dependable compared with other QB’s. In his career he has missed very few games due to injury.
    ———————-
    Very few = 0. That is why I think this thread or article is hilarious. If Brett goes down the Vikes aren’t going to the superbowl. So what does it matter? They just obtained future compensation for someone about to get cut.
    Keep criticizing Florio and anti-Viking fans. It’s pretty damn funny.

  90. Pervy *Harvin says: Sep 4, 2010 1:22 PM

    where is my post??????????

  91. flop 4 strahan says: Sep 4, 2010 5:38 PM

    Sources say Sage told Chilly to trade him now or he was going to sh*t on his desk.

  92. snowbum says: Sep 4, 2010 7:44 PM

    The Steelers are one snap away from needing their 4th string QB because they only have 2 left that can play, and the Vikings are in trouble for trimming down to 3? What if they were planning on cutting T-Jack or Sage before the season? Wouldn’t you rather get something in return then nothing?

  93. slegeir says: Sep 4, 2010 10:16 PM

    hopefully he went to a team that really wants him. Sounds like a win, win for him.

  94. Mike Daly says: Sep 5, 2010 11:56 PM

    What if Manning went down in Indy? I’d say, “It’s about time!”
    As for the Vikings, they need to start developing a QB of the future.

  95. Codebeard says: Sep 6, 2010 11:23 AM

    Majik Bullet says:
    September 3, 2010 10:45 PM
    Green and Gold Forever says:
    September 3, 2010 9:52 PM
    So let me get this straight… if their starter goes down (relatively likely) and then their backup goes down too (quite a bit less likely), then the Vikings are in deep, deep trouble.
    OK, but couldn’t you say that about practically every NFL team? Can’t say I have any love lost for the Vikes, but this story just reeks of stupidity and pointlessness.
    ____________________ -
    Fairly impressive post from a Packer homer, except for the part about the guy who hasn’t missed a game in nearly 20 years being likely to get hurt.

    There’s a difference between missing a game and getting hurt. Granted when Favre has been hurt he’s still played, but ask the Jets if they would’ve rather him played or sit a couple years ago come December. Not that the Vikings would sit Favre for Jackson so long as all of Brett’s limbs were still attached, but still.
    Anyway, most of the comments are dead-on. If a team is worrying about the 3rd QB starting, they’re no longer a contender regardless of what team you’re talking about.

  96. ACS2 says: Sep 7, 2010 11:48 AM

    Hauschild says:
    September 3, 2010 10:16 PM
    Not sure how anybody in their right mind would feel this trade was bad, other than losing a solid return guy.
    I think the move was a smart one. The Vikings get a draft choice for a player they signed as a free agent.
    ————–
    Nice try, but they actually traded for Rosenfels.. They traded a fourth round pick a year ago. Not a free agent.
    ————–
    Hauschild says:
    September 3, 2010 10:16 PM
    And, it would be insane to believe Favre won’t finish the season – he always does.
    ————–
    Following this logic, you could’ve said it’d be insane to believe the Saints would win the Super Bowl–they’ve never won it before.
    Sooner or later, Favre will retire (and stay retired longer than a month) or he will be forced into retirement by injury. Sure, he’s been an ironman. But he’s not the man of steel.

  97. ACS2 says: Sep 7, 2010 11:50 AM

    sand0 says:
    September 4, 2010 12:32 PM
    Brett is also relatively dependable compared with other QB’s. In his career he has missed very few games due to injury.
    ———–
    Hilarious. Is it too much to ask to know something.. Anything.. About the starting QB of your favorite team?

  98. ACS2 says: Sep 7, 2010 12:03 PM

    va4favre says:
    September 4, 2010 9:05 AM
    What does GB do if Rodgers is injured? Don’t forget he was lost to season ending injuries the two times he came in for Favre.
    ————
    Rodgers played in 7 games during Favre’s time in Green Bay. In 2006 against New England he broke his foot and was out the remainder of the season.
    I believe that’s it. Oh, and now he’s started two years without missing a snap despite being sacked more than anyone else last season.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!