Brett Favre is wearing the goat's horns
Following are opinions from Mille Lacs County Times editor-sports editor Gary Larson, reporter Luther Dorr and former Times intern Logan Marxhausen who’s now on the sports staff at the St. Cloud State University Chronicle. Note: This feature is written on Monday each week.
********
•Question: The Minnesota Vikings’ season came to an end Sunday as they lost to the New Orleans Saints in the National Football Conference title game. What were your observations on the game?
-Dorr: After the wonderful season he had, better, I think, than even he expected, it’s unfortunate that Brett Favre is wearing the goat’s horns today.
His fumble right before the half cost the team, at the least, a field goal. His first interception was thrown into a crowd of three defenders when the Vikings were in New Orleans territory in the third quarter and the last interception was simply a terrible decision by a player of his caliber and experience. He had some yardage if he had run and at least a field goal attempt would have been possible. Almost as bad was the way the Vikings handled that last possession of regulation. Two long-developing runs that were stuffed, instead of quicker handoffs that could have gotten the field goal try under 50 yards, and then a penalty for 12 men on the field?? That was a horrendous series of plays at a key time. Lost in the post-game talk that I heard was the fact that if the Vikings had won one of those games they lost in December to five-win teams, they would have been at home, and likely won. The defense was good (Brees, 45 yards the second half), the offense was good (except for turnovers) and the Vikings appeared to be the better team Sunday. It was one of those few chances a team gets for a Super Bowl and it got away.
Marxhausen: The team was not the team Vikings fans saw all season. I saw some posts about how the referees lost the game for the Vikings. Even though the refs had their say in the matter, the Vikings had plenty of chances to step forward and take the lead and the win. The fumblerooski play did not work for the Vikings all six times they fumbled. Brett Favre’s interceptions did not help the cause, and it seemed like he was forcing the ball a little too much and ended up making some rookie mistakes in the process. I was disappointed in the defensive line and how it didn’t attack Drew Brees as much. Analysts pointed all week leading up to the game that the Vikings’ defense was a better defense and that it would stand out more. That was not the case Sunday.
-Larson: Can we take solace in that the Vikings were so, so close to getting another shot at a Super Bowl championship? Probably not.
The Vikings dominated every important statistic, including time of possession. When is the last time you saw a team dominate in first downs 31-15 and manage to lose? Minnesota may have scored 40 or more points against a very average New Orleans defense if not for the three lost fumbles and two interceptions.
Fans will remember Favre’s final interception as the play that lost the game but Minnesota should’ve had the game in hand by then.
Despite his interceptions, it was a gallant effort by Favre. While New Orleans didn’t register a sack, it leveled Favre several times and each time he returned to the huddle.
********
•Question: Was signing quarterback Brett Favre the major key to the Vikings winning a division title and advancing to within one game of the Super Bowl? Should he return for another season with Minnesota?
-Dorr: Favre was a key, no doubt. The return of linebacker E.J. Henderson was huge, as was the addition of rookie Percy Harvin and the emergence of Sidney Rice (some say he’s the team MVP) to stardom. The Vikings were 10-6 last season without those guys and the two extra wins this year came because of the addition of those players. Favre was very important. Should he return? If he wants to, why not if he feels he can play at the same level as this season? He had an amazing year and I’m sure he’d be welcome if he wants to play.
-Marxhausen: Brett Favre had everything to do with the Vikings’ turnaround and advancement into the playoffs. No other quarterback on the team or available in the free agency market could have done what Favre did for Minnesota this season. Sure, both the offense and defense played phenomenally and everybody deserves credit, but if there is one thing that haunted Minnesota fans in recent years it was an inaccurate passing quarterback. Favre was the missing link to a winning team and I believe the Vikings would have had no trouble winning in the playoffs or the Super Bowl if E.J. Henderson wouldn’t have gotten injured. If he actually meant all the things he said about having fun this season and his body is still healthy, then only Favre’s mind needs convincing to play. Favre is a winner and loves the game of football. He will only return if he thinks he can help the team and not hinder it. If he’s healthy and wants to play the Vikings should bring him back.
-Larson: Favre was the main reason Minnesota won a division title and advanced to within one game of the Super Bowl. When he arrived at training camp in August it was reported there was some tension and resentment on the team but he apparently quickly won the dissenters over and was the Vikings’ leader on and off the field. And, he certainly put the Vikings in focus nationally.
How sweet were those two victories over Green Bay? If he’s healthy, why not bring him back for another year? What are the alternatives? Sage Rosenfels? Tarvaris Jackson? A 2010 rookie? Minnesota has the pieces in place for another run for the title. But, that may not be the case two years from now.
********
•Question: The NFL overtime format seems to favor the team that wins the coin toss. Should the NFL change its overtime format? If so, what would you recommend?
-Dorr: The team that wins the coin toss has an advantage but the all-time stats aren’t as one-sided as one might think. I think the college or high school way of doing things is probably more fair but who worries about fair play in professional football? I wouldn’t mind if the format was changed in the NFL but not because the Vikings lost Sunday. I thought a long time ago that a change should be made.
-Marxhausen: Overtime is an unfair way of doing things at the moment, but it is the current rule. Football is already too long of a sport and if you have to play a whole overtime, games could frequently run to more than four hours. I love the way college has set up overtime and I believe the NFL should adopt that format. Both teams will get the ball at the 35-yard line and the game will continue just as NCAA football rules state. Each team has a chance to score just as many times as its opponent. This will show who really has the better defense and offense.
-Larson: You knew whichever team won the coin toss Sunday was going to win the game, didn’t you? The current format is unfair and injects the element of “luck” even before the overtime begins. I like the high school and college formats where both teams have the opportunity to go on offense. At the very least the NFL should go to a format where each team is allowed at least one possession.
********
Do you have an opinion on any of this week’s questions? Do you agree or disagree with the sportswriters? Let us know by sending an e-mail to editor.millelacscotimes@ecm-inc.com or a note to Mille Lacs County Times, 225 S.W. 2nd St. Milaca, MN 56353. Or comment online.
