clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Can the Vikings Succeed Without Brett Favre?

New, comments

 XFINITY from Comcast has generously agreed to support the best NFL community around -- us! As part of that effort, between now and the end of the 2010 NFL season XFINITY will be sponsoring a variety of special editorial and interactive features on our site.

When you look at the history books, the Minnesota Vikings don't really have a lot to be proud of.  Sure, they've had some bright spots, like the Culpepper-to-Moss Connection a few years ago, and the most recent situation of having to use an arch-rival's QB in order to be competitive.  But overall, they just haven't really been significant in any way.

It is certainly worth contemplating though, whether the Vikings are truly a dangerous team without Brett FavreJared Allen is a beast (and an idiot), and Adrian Peterson has the skill set to become one of the all-time greats (and all-time fumblers).  The Williams Wall is still a force to be reckoned with (even though half of the tandem is in the sunset of his career), and they have a pretty solid WR unit (which could have simply been because of Favre).

My question is this: If Brett Favre decides to retire, will the Vikings be as dangerous as they were last season?

For whoever can come up with the best "Yes" argument, and the best "No" argument, we'll have those two members square off next week in a thread all their own.

So, wreck the best arguments, and we'll tally it up in a few days.  Have fun.