Tarvaris Jackson has made a speedy recovery from his broken finger, or whatever it was, and will return as starting quarterback Sunday against the Chargers.
This is good news if you’re a fan of T-Jack. There are some of those out there right? I mean besides Brad Childress, who said the following when asked if he thinks Jackson gives the team the best chance to win:
I do, and I believed that coming out of training camp. The other side of that equation is that you have got these nine games. We have talked about the injuries already. [But] I want to see exactly what you have in that package, and I want to see him grow and develop.
You have to hand it to Chilly – he sticks to his guns. He’s going to keep putting Jackson in there until the kid either starts playing better or there’s a complete mutiny. I wonder, though, how Brooks Bollinger’s second half performance in the Eagles game might end up influencing Chilly. Would he tend to have a quicker hook now, knowing Brooks at least looked semi-competent? Or is he so committed to Jackson that even if the kid stinks up the place, Brooks will remain on the bench?
Of course there was another quarterback whose name cropped up this week in conjunction with the Vikings – Jeff George. Pretty much everyone laughed at the suggestion that Jeff could make a comeback at this point in his life, including Brad Childress, who suggested George go to fantasy camp if he wants some action, and said in response to a reporter’s observation that George was on the “downside” of his career:
Downside would probably be – I think – kind.
Kind. Sort of like calling your tenure as a coach “disappointing,” right Brad?
On the subject of the team’s uncanny ability to put together good opening drives then suck donkey for the rest of the game, Bryant McKinnie said:
We watched the first drive, and we were like, “What’s the difference? Why can’t we keep doing that?” I don’t know.
Bryant can’t explain why the team is good at the start and bad the rest of the game. I can’t explain why a team would pay a guy like Bryant as much money as they do to be as mediocre as he is. So I guess we’re all just confused.
Darren Sharper was the latest veteran defensive player to take shots at the coaching staff. After Sunday’s loss Darren said:
You have to get some playmakers. That is one thing you could do, get some playmakers or let your playmakers be playmakers.
Strong words. Darren has subsequently toned them down some however, saying:
We have the playmakers here that are necessary and can get the job done. But the thing you’re saying about getting is more of with the players you have. What can you do to make them more of a playmaker? And what can they do to make more plays? If you have an opportunity to go get the ball or get this block, get this quarterback, cover your guy. That’s what the game comes down to is making plays; when I say get more playmakers I mean just as far as the guys that you have. Make them step their game up.
Just let them be playmakers. … If you have guys that have a lot of special talents, have abilities, just go out there and let them do their thing.
In other words, Sharper thinks the defensive scheme is a load of crap. He thinks he isn’t being freed up enough to gamble and get picks and pad his stats. And he’s probably right. Sharper had a pretty good year his first season with us, but the last two, under Mike Tomlin and now Leslie Frazier, he’s gotten many fewer opportunities. Most of the time he’s playing way off, protecting against the deep ball, and doesn’t have the chance to read situations and take chances and, yes, make plays. He probably has a point. I don’t see things changing as long as Childress is the guy setting the tone philosophically however. He’s too much of a play-it-safe coach to ever let a guy like Sharper freelance the way he wants.