Trading or releasing T-Jack by Friday?

[LMITOUT]

I'm not sure what stats I've brought up, but most things you've said have been half-truths or things you've half-heard and then taken as gospel so who knows at this point what you're talking about.

One more time since it seems to be slow to sink in for you.

Stats are fine, but they don't tell the whole story. Just watch the guy and how he runs an offense or reads a defense. When he's out there it's a car wreck waiting to happen on every play. More often than not he's running for his life and throwing up ducks or divebombing balls into the dirt to avoid taking a sack.

It was night and day difference watching Sage come in on Friday night and how he acts under center. Hard counts to draw the defense into showing their blitz, etc. Jackson looks like he's playing Madden, hitting the A button to snap the ball and then seeing what happens next. There is more to running the team than the stats show and that's the "it" factor I speak of. I guess if you understood the game you'd see that.

[AWH]

31 other teams didn't want him.

Provide us with one source from one team (that means from someone on the payroll in an NFL team's front office) that says they didn't want T-Jack and that will be a start. I'm sure that won't be very difficult since no other team would want him. I didn't hear about anyone trying to trade for AP. Apparently no one else wants him. Dang, I guess the Vikes are just stuck with him!

One NFL guru on one of the major national networks was saying tonight that the Vikings had to keep T-Jack over Booty even if they aren't sold on him (Not saying that's how it is. It was laid out there as a hypothetical). Why? Because teams will be looking for QBs during the season when they have a starter go down and T-Jack has more trade value than Sage. In other words, an asset. Interesting! Not saying that this is true or not. But it's an interesting perspective from someone that has a less biased take on the Vikings QB situation. And if there would be higher trade value for T-Jack and no one wants him, what does this say for Sage?

Aaron

[gr8icefishinmind]

It's fun to read posts that so called football know it alls like LMIT throw out!! How can you watch all these games and not see that he is getting better and has shown alot of improvement this year compared to last!

Even if he is third string, why wouldn't u keep him here to watch and learn.....it's plain stupid not to!!

And stats are very important when comparing cause stats are facts and not someone made up.....like the things that you are spitting out!!!

[LMITOUT]

Yeah, the playoff game last year showed "alot of improvement".

[gr8icefishinmind]

Playoff games are way different that season games! The atmosphere is different and the hype is different! So to say he showed improvement in a PLAYOFF GAME......i guess i have nothing to base last years game off of, maybe a few more playoff games before that one and i could say yes or no!!!

[gr8icefishinmind]

But I am sure that the playoff game was a good learning experience for him! Not many qb's have lead a team to a superbowl the first time they get in the PLAYOFFS!!

[AWH]

most things you've said have been half-truths or things you've half-heard and then taken as gospel

[AWH]

How did that Brett Favre guy look in his last playoff game? Just curious...

Aaron

[LMITOUT]

Please share these half truths and a few things that I've said that I've heard that I'm taking as gospel?

[AWH]

How did I know that's the one quote of mine you were going to pull? I would have bet a lot of money on that one. Maybe because it's the only one you could find. But MOST of what I have said are half truths according to you. Interesting! Do you remember what I was responding to when I said the above? Interesting to note that it was a "half truth" of YOURS. Something to the effect that there are 10 T-Jack fans in the state. Interesting that you didn't pull that part of my response. Actually, that's obviously far less than a half truth, so I'm giving you more credit than you deserve on that. But I'm a nice guy that way. So you're welcome!

Thanks for also pointing out that I am willing to admit when I'm wrong. Some people are unable to do that and will tell you that there s#!t doesn't stink. Know anyone like that?

If you're going to pull a quote of mine that supports your arguement, at least you could find something that's relevant to what we've been discussing, which is the play on the field.

Thanks for showing me the light though. I need to play Madden to understand NFL football. Got it!

If being realistic is calling something a failure before it happens, you continue to be realistic in the negative way. I'll keep an open mind and be objective. I'm sure we'll find lots of common ground there!

When does the football season start? We need some real games!!!

Aaron

[AWH]

Here's what I find funny about this whole thread. No matter what side of the fence people are on when it comes to T-Jack, we are doing nothing but sharing opinions. In a nut shell, there are two opinions.

T-Jack Supporters: The guy deserves the opportunity to develop so he can reach his potential which could be very good.

T-Jack Haters: Opinions are that T-Jack isn't worthy of even being in the NFL and are essentially trying to say it as a FACT. Saying that he's a terrible QB that will never amount to anything, end of story, no ifs ands or buts.

Does this about sum up where the OPINIONS of the two sides come in?

Aaron

[LMITOUT]

Or could it be that the Vikings weren't shopping him?

Judd Zulgad and Chip Scoggins, of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, reports the Minnesota Vikings have called teams to see what they would be willing to offer for QB Tarvaris Jackson, according to a league source.

Take it for what it's worth, but apparently 31 teams decided Jackson was worthless to them and decided to let the Vikings and Vikings fans stew in their own mess.

[AWH]

Is that one of my "half truths"? Where I asked a question of what possibly "could be"? Where I'm suggesting that maybe they were shopping him and maybe they weren't? Where I never stated anything as a fact? Is this a half truth? Just trying to understand here...

Great, two reporters report something "according to a league source". These are exactly the kinds of things I'm talking about that you have to take it for what it's worth. When the actual source isn't named, how much less credibility does it have? Again, I'm not saying it's true or it's not. Ive seen and read the same things. But it's also common place for reports "according to a league source" to turn out to be completely bogus. So who's taking what they hear for gospel here?

For the record, I believe that they probably were putting some feelers out there for what they could get for Jackson. Why not? It's not going to hurt anything.

apparently 31 teams decided Jackson was worthless to them and decided to let the Vikings and Vikings fans stew in their own mess.

Talk about half truths? Wow! These are the kinds of OPINIONS that your posts are loaded with that you're trying to portray as facts.

But since this is apparently a fact, I will have to remember this. When trade talks happen, any player that's discussed that isn't traded is because that player is deemed worthless by the other teams. Got it!

Aaron

[LMITOUT]

So you don't think the Vikings were shopping Jackson around?

[AWH]

To quote myself....

For the record, I believe that they probably were putting some feelers out there for what they could get for Jackson. Why not? It's not going to hurt anything.

All that I'm saying is that there are so many reports out there of people just trying to create news (not talking specifically of this, but any news reports), that I don't believe anything as an absolute fact unless tehre's a credible source behind it or until it actually happens. If we believe every report that we hear on things we could believe 10 different versions of the same story.

In regards to T-Jack trade talks, I never heard any actual sources named as those saying the Vikes were shopping him. I also heard one reporter that's more in tune with the Vikings than any of us here that stated he didn't believe the Vikings actually were trying to trade him. So again, what are we to believe? It's irrelevant now. Whether they were trying to trade him or not, they were never offered enough to make them bite and I really doubt they would be willing to let him go for a lower pick than they had to give up to trade for Sage.

Aaron

[FISHINGURU]

nice try ricky but i don't think junkson was the worse qb on our roster today...he's further along then booty but we also haven't gave booty an opportunity like junkson...booty hasn't even started an NFL game....give him 20 games through out 3 seasons and you could say he would get better as he goes too...we already know what we have with junkson...we'll never know what we had in booty.

gr8icefishinmind you put way to much stock into preseason performances...it absolutly means nothing....to say junkson looks way better this year then last year is hilarious....his stats have been ok for the competition he's faced but he still has all his bad habits and i haven't seen anything that has made anyone think he can change them.

all we can hope for as a team is someones starting qb gets hurt and junkson can have some value like LMIT said...we are better off keeping him now that no teams wanted him...would of been a bad time to just straight out release him.

i hope favre holds up so i don't have to watch that clown out on the field if he wins the #2 job.

[Born2Fish]

It is still funny that everyone dismisses the playoff game as "different atmosphere", "#1 defense", etc. etc. Junkson looked like he has pretty much all his career, clueless. To me(and I admit that I am not an all knowing football god) he looked like he gave up in that game. It wasn't the atmosphere(we were at HOME), or the defense(Arizona beat them the next round, and we happened to beat Arizona a few games earlier). So what shall we chalk that one up too? Inexperience? Most junk backers will say yes. I think it was because he just isn't a well rounded QB. He relies on his legs WAY too much, and at times he becomes totally clueless(ex. Vikings VS Eagles). We already have a RB, we don't need a QB that feels he has to run once a defensive lineman touches one of our offensive linemen. Sure that mobility is nice, but I would rather have him throw it out of bounds then get hit hard(which has happened on more than a few occasions).

[bottom-bouncer]

stats are like loose women! you can do what you want with them. the reality is t- jack has a hard time making decisions on the field. and untill he learns how to make good ones he has no business dressing on sundays.

[FISHINGURU]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ lol exactly

[zamboni]

All this over a 3rd stringer

[greebs]

All this over a 3rd stringer

nice try there trying to sneak in the "third stringer" label on a guy who's obviously "second stringer" material.

(I'm just funning with you by the way but I'm surprised one of the tj supporters hasn't gotten up in arms over you calling him a 3rd stringer yet.

[zamboni]

Well, he is OUR 3rd stringer

[greebs]

by the looks of this thread there are a few who will argue to the point of near violence with you on that one.

[AWH]

No violence needed in a good natured debate. I do find it funny how most of the T-Jack haters try to convince people that their opinions are facts though. Says a lot right there! It's also funny how certain people know who our 3rd stringer is before the Vikings have even made that decision themselves. We'll find out soon enough what the real story is. I don't think anyone with rational thoughts will say that they know for a fact what the Vikings will do.

Aaron

[zamboni]

We have the IRONMAN at the helm, we won't even need a second stringer this season, well, maybe the 2 Packer games when the Vikes are up 40-0, they might throw in the second guy to give Brett some rest