Amen, brother! +1 to you, sir.

---

The teams know each other so well that I'm not sure Favre could say anything that the Vikings don't already know. I would assume Minnesota's scouts take their jobs very seriously when it comes to scouting the Green Bay Packers.

Vice versa too. Jackson can't bring much to the Packers in that regard either. GB already knows what the Vikings are.

---

To me, that was a mild disappointment this season is we didn't draft a late round QB with potential and try to develop him pressure free.. the Ron Wolf methodology..

On TJ.. my opinion is that guy has natural talent that hasn't been tapped by the piss poor playcalling in Minnesota.. they haven't done him many favors in development in helping him with calling some short quick rhythm type throws..

As far as his public speaking, there have been many a great players in this league that couldn't give a 30 second interview if their career depended on it..

I would be mixed if he landed with the Packers though.. he wants to compete for the starting spot, and there isn't a spot for him to do so with the Packers.. which IMO would lead him to become an issue..

---

It always helps to know some tendencies, though. There was a reason that Gruden QB'd his team in practice before the SB. He knew all of Gannon's tendencies and favorite throws. Of course, this is slightly different, but T-jack should know where his CBs jump on, what kind of techniques their D-line likes to use on what downs and what not.

As for a late round QB, that would've been nice. That would've putten some sort of pressure on us, though. We could stash him on the practice squad for one year, most likely, but would have to sign him to the team after that if he's actually developping. Asuming that we'd just carry 3 QBs, that'd mean we'd have to either cut Flynn or Brohm. Brohm is a 2nd round pick who has potential and Flynn is the better QB, so it'd be hard to lose either of them. Of course, we could give up on one of the two after 2 years, but still, one extra year would come in handy.

Thank you - bashing these guys for poor speaking ability is unfair, IMO. McNair was a great on-field leader and (aside from what we're just hearing about now) a great man off the field, yet when he gave interviews you couldn't understand a word he said. Favre sounds, to my city-fied ears, like a total hick, but I don't see anyone calling that out. Because it means nothing.

Going after his ability on the field is perfectly fair - mocking his speech is just cold.

---

Gruden is a coach though and someone who basically developed Rich Gannon and the Raiders into what they were.

Favre didn't develop anything. He's a player. His responsibilities are executing the play and not developing it.

Person who makes the car knows it's weakness. Person who drives it probably doesn't.

Favre might be able to say hey Jennings likes to run this route or watch what he does here, but the Vikings have so much film on Jennings that they probably already know.

I wouldnt worry too much about it. If GB plays well, theyll be just fine. As would any other team.

---

It wasn't that much in their advantage as in ours, I think. Habbits you develop like jumping certain routes in practice from playing with Favre for years, ought to help in a game. Favre didn't know a nickel from a 4-3 half his career. Don't get me wrong, he's a great guy and his intelligence is often very underrated, but I think that Woodson's work habit in training (camp) and experience with Favre might give him the edge here. Same goes for Harris and Kampman for instance. And that while our defense has totally changed, while their offense will be pretty much the same as it has always been. Minus the 'Loki' (=wildcat) formation.

The driver who drives the car might now know the specifics, but he knows what's wrong if he rides around with a rattling exhaust, which you can't see from the outside.

Packers know that they just got to get Favre excited and he'll make a mistake especially considering his emotions will be running high. It's much easy to peg a player on his specific weakness because he's an individual.

The key to beating the Vikings won't and for the sake of the Vikings shouldn't be Brett Favre. It's to stop Adrian Peterson.

If I'm the Packers, I play the game like it's not Brett Favre at QB. If they get to caught up on beating Favre, Minnesota will beat them so once again I'm not concerned about what Favre knows on the Packers and what the Packers know about Favre.

I assume a lot on either side, but I also assume that the Packers know a lot about the Vikings and vice versa. That's why division games are always so tough. Teams know each other so well.

---

Yes, I agree. The point is to stop Peterson. They're going to have to throw it as well, though, and that's where we can get the ball back to our offense. Obviously, we can hit up Peterson some and hope that Atari goes back to his 2007 form and forces some fumbles, but it's far more likely that we can force Favre to make a turn-over.

Like you said, it won't give either side that much of an advantage, but I do think that Woodson, Harris and Collins will feel a little more comfortable jumping on a route when you know how the QB will throw it. Some of these things come easier when you've practiced with someone for years than just by watching gamefilm.

First of all we get a lead in the game.

That always seems to cause Childress to start throwing it more.

Then Favre starts pressing. We get some pressure on him and somebody back there will take one to the house.

I predict Kampman will make their rookie RT, (Loadholdt) who is not a good pass blocker anyhow, look very bad in this game. That will be bad for Brett because it means having to move to his left where Jenkins and the ROLB will be coming, and, where it makes it harder for him to get much zip on the ball.

The key is getting the lead. Childress can't help himself from putting the ball up more and with Brett there it would be too much for him to hold off.

---