ESPN NFL

After the Minnesota Vikings' 33-26 victory over the Washington Redskins, here are three issues that merit further examination:

1. Kevin SeifertFollowing their win against the Redskins, the Vikings take a seat in the examination room.
   I felt a pang of sympathy for this franchise, which is owned, operated and coached by competent people I respect. None of them could have enjoyed the end of a six-game losing streak, not after watching tailback Adrian Peterson suffer a knee injury that could change the course of his career and the direction of the franchise. Peterson is a special athlete, but there isn't a long list of running backs who have returned from multiple torn knee ligaments without losing some of their strength and explosion. The good news is that Peterson has always been a high-effort player, meaning he will be productive -- if not elite -- upon his return. But in the meantime, the Vikings will be forced to take a fundamental look at the makeup of their offense this winter and spring. Fair or otherwise, they can't count on Peterson to be the best player on their team anymore. Peterson finished the season with 970 yards, snapping a four-season streak of compiling at least 1,000 yards and 10 touchdowns. Only two players in NFL history have had a longer streak: LaDainian Tomlinson (eight) and Shaun Alexander (five).
2. Peterson's injury leaves receiver Percy Harvin as the Vikings' primary offensive playmaker entering the offseason. Harvin added two more big plays to what has been a career season Saturday, a 31-yard run on a reverse and a 36-yard catch on a jump ball from Webb. You might not realize it, but Harvin's 77 receptions this season is more than all but six wide receivers in the NFL. He's also rushed for 332 yards on 47 carries out of various formations. It's too bad the Vikings' poor record has overshadowed it, but Harvin has emerged as the multi-position threat the team envisioned for him three years ago and should be a cornerstone of the team's plans for 2012.
3. It's getting more difficult to find reasons why the Vikings shouldn't consider Joe Webb as a legitimate candidate for their starting job in 2012 and beyond. Obviously they have invested a high draft pick on Christian Ponder, and it's hardly time to render final judgment on a rookie after nine starts. But it would be underestimating Webb to say that he has just been a raw athlete making playground plays. His 17-yard touchdown pass to tight end Kyle Rudolph was thrown from the pocket with perfect touch to the back of the end zone. And consider this: Webb has accounted for five touchdowns on seven possessions in relief of Ponder this season, including three touchdown passes and two on the ground. It's hard to overlook that kind of production. Next season, coach Leslie Frazier will enter the second of a three-year contract. My expectation is that he will start the quarterback that gives him the best chance to see Year Three. At the very least, Webb should be in the conversation.

And here is one issue I still don't get:

Can Toby Gerhart be an every down replacement for Peterson? The Vikings traded up in the second round of the 2010 draft to select him, but for the most part they haven't found a way to use him except when Peterson has been injured. Gerhart has 786 rushing yards over two seasons, and on Saturday he ripped off a career-long 67-yarder to set up a touchdown. He definitely doesn't have Peterson's breakaway ability, and like the rest of the NFL, Gerhart doesn't run with as much power. But unless the Vikings find a free agent gem or invest another high draft pick on a runner, Gerhart probably is going to get his chance at the start of next season. We'll find out then if he's up to it.

In a way, I was right.

Last week did provide us the final dark weekend of the NFL offseason. I realize we don't yet have labor peace and the lockout is still on. But players will soon vote on the new collective bargaining agreement (CBA), possibly this weekend. And even if the delay continues, U2 is playing a certain NFC North city Saturday night. Ah yes, it will be a beautiful day. See you there.

The heart is a bloom
Shoots up through the stony ground
There's no room
No space to rent in this town
You're out of luck
And the reason that you had to care
The traffic is stuck
And you're not moving anywhere
You thought you'd found a friend
To take you out of this place
Someone you could lend a hand
In return for grace
It's a beautiful day
Sky falls, you feel like
It's a beautiful day
Don't let it get away

Harass me through the mailbag, Twitter or Facebook.

I've gotten a surprising number of missives similar to this one from John of Bremerton, Wash.: Though I grew up in Wisconsin and am a Packers fan, I am now losing my interest in the NFL as a whole. In an economy as bad as it has ever been in my 54-year life, players and owners to me are just an illustration of greed. Throw in the agents, lawyers, used car salesman, Wall Street hedge fund guys, politicians -- GREED RULES and I am checking out. They all could care less about the fan. Well this fan no longer cares about any of them. I have enjoyed your column but will no longer be following the NFL.

Kevin Seifert: My general sense throughout this dispute has been that fans would easily move past it provided no regular season games were canceled. After all, it's the games that count -- for everyone. To me, only the most hard-core fans would feel lasting effects of a delay in free agency or the cancellation of minicamps and organized team activities.

But as John points out, there is another segment of fans who are simply turned off by owners and employees of a successful industry brawling over how to divide a $9 billion pie, even if they do it during the offseason. Some of you also find it repugnant that the NFL draws a percentage of its revenues from taxpayer-funded stadiums and believe that fact should mitigate the extent of their capitalism.

I know financial people will note that NFL business growth has slowed in recent years, a classic warning sign for realigning costs. You could find any number of economists who understand why owners locked out players. But some of you don't want to hear about it. I'm guessing the NFL is willing to sacrifice your patronage, in the short-term at least, with the knowledge that a much larger segment will come racing back as soon as the doors open with few questions asked.

---

Dustin of Dell Rapids, S.D., writes: With James Jones likely leaving via free agency, and Donald Driver growing older, will the Packers re-sign Jermichael Finley to a long term contract during/after this year? After Jones and Driver leave, if Finley is gone, our offense much less of an imposing force. Finley will likely be looking for some big money, but is he worth re-signing, even at a Vernon Davis size contract?

Kevin Seifert: Once again, I'm surprised at how many people are worried about this issue. Finley's contract does expire after the 2011 season, and Finley's wife tweeted this week that family members are already asking where Finley will play in 2012.

Despite Finley's enormous talent, longtime Packers beat writer Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel isn't convinced the Packers will re-sign him. A knee injury derailed Finley last season on the way to what appeared a breakout season, and the fact is he has yet to put together an elite-level 16-game season. The Packers have also invested heavily in a number of core players already, from quarterback Aaron Rodgers to receiver Greg Jennings to safety Nick Collins and cornerback Tramon Williams. Linebacker Clay Matthews will probably soon be up for an extension.

The 49ers signed Davis signed a six-year deal that included $23 million last September.

To me, Finley will answer this question himself by the type of 2011 season he produces. If he becomes the type of 16-game weapon many people believe he can be, it's going to be hard for the Packers to part ways with him.

---

Michael of Tallahassee, Fla., writes: How does the exemption(s) work that I'm hearing about regarding the salary cap? Specifically is this something that will be a permanent part of the upcoming labor agreement or is it a temporary thing to benefit the teams who are currently over the proposed salary cap and will go away in a couple of years.?

Kevin Seifert: For something like this, it's best to consult with former Packers contract negotiator Andrew Brandt, who is now an analyst for ESPN and the National Football Post. This year, writes Brandt, teams can reduce one player's cap charge by $3 million. So, in essence, the cap will be $120 million plus a $3 million exception, or $123 million. In 2012, the exception will be $1.5 million, but the exception is not built in to every year of the proposed CBA.

---

Zayne of Houston writes: What do you think of the chances that Clinton Portis comes to the Vikings? He is widely known as the best blocking RB in the league and the Vikings could definitely use him on third down with a rookie QB for protection and a safety gauge much like they used to use Chester Taylor.

Kevin Seifert: I suppose anything is possible, especially with a new coaching staff that surely has different ideas than its predecessor. And it's true, the Vikings first tried to sign LaDainian Tomlinson as a third-down back last season before drafting rookie Toby Gerhart.

But like Tomlinson, I don't think Portis would consider the Vikings his top option. As long as Adrian Peterson stays healthy, the No. 2 back in Minnesota won't play a lot. I'm not sure if the Vikings want a veteran backup for him, and I really don't think Portis would prefer to sign there if he had options.

---

Wayne of Lake Worth, Fla., writes: Receiver Derrick Williams of the Detroit Lions...In or Out?

Kevin Seifert: With Stefan Logan as a kickoff/punt returner, and rookie Titus Young expected to serve as the No. 3 receiver, the best Williams could do is the No. 4 receiver. He's had two years in that role. I wonder if the Lions' patience has run out.

---

Anton of Lowell, Ark., saw last week's discussion of the Bears' aging defense and wrote: Can you detail the Bears' talent pool of up and coming players on defense? It seems like they have failed to develop new draft picks (ala Lance Briggs) lately, and I'm scared we'll be seriously hurting once the 2000-04 guys are out the door. Can you shed any positive light on recent draft picks? Is our player development seriously lacking? If so, what can we attribute our recent dry spell to? Why have our new guys on D not taken the next step (Nick Roach, Corey Graham, Zack Bowman)?

Kevin Seifert: The Bears don't have much patience with their cornerbacks. I will say that. We've seen some really good play from Graham and Bowman in the past two years, but both got pushed deep down the depth chart after a couple of poor games. I especially wouldn't rule out the possibility of Bowman re-emerging as a starting-quality player, but it'll take an exceptional training camp to win back the Bears' trust.

One young player I really like is nickel back D.J. Moore, who had four interceptions, eight pass breakups and one touchdown last season. He seems to have a knack for the ball and understands pass coverage. Of course, we were saying the same about Bowman last year at this time. But if you're looking for some hope among the Bears' younger veterans, Moore is a worthy candidate.

Last in a series on NFC North players whose career trajectories put them on a path to consideration for the Pro Football Hall of Fame:

Of the five players profiled in this project, Minnesota Vikings tailback Adrian Peterson might be the most accomplished relative to his career span. And yet his case exemplifies, more than any other, the difficulty of separating yourself as one of the all-time elites at your position.

Peterson has effected one of the most productive starts to a career for any running back in NFL history. And still, he'll probably need to repeat that output to land in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

As the first two charts show, Peterson rushed for more yards (5,782) in his first four seasons than all but five running backs in NFL history and more touchdowns (52) than all but four. That measure quantifies what we already knew: Peterson has been the best back in the NFL over the past four years. It also gives us some perspective on how the start of his career compares to the best who ever played the game.

But four years of elite play doesn't necessarily qualify a running back for the Hall of Fame, not when players like Emmitt Smith endured for 15 years or Marcus Allen for 16 or Walter Payton for 13. The threshold for Hall of Fame running backs is the ability to sustain near-elite production beyond the short career arcs of most players at the position.

The next chart shows the 13 Hall of Fame running backs whose careers took place mostly in the post-merger era. Eleven eclipsed the 11,000-yard mark, and the two that didn't -- Larry Csonka and Earl Campbell -- were enshrined amid understandable mitigating factors. Csonka was the lead runner for the best team in NFL history, the 1972 Miami Dolphins. Campbell's white-hot career was cut short after 115 games.

Let's say Peterson doubles his current rushing total to get to 11,564 career yards. Currently, there are 18 players who rushed for at least 11,000 yards. Of the seven who aren't in the Hall of Fame, only two are eligible. Curtis Martin (14,101) and Jerome Bettis (13,662 yards) missed out in their first year of eligibility in January, but both seem likely to be elected within a few years.

Of course, it will be no small feat for Peterson to double his total -- and it isn't likely to come in the four years it took him to get this far. Take another look at the first two charts, which illustrate the historical company Peterson has kept early in his career.

Quite simply, running back is a brutal position. Terrell Davis rushed for a stunning 6, 413 yards during his first four seasons with the Denver Broncos. Slowed dramatically by health issues, Davis managed only 1,194 yards during the final four seasons of his career.

Another former Broncos running back, Clinton Portis, rushed for 5,930 yards in his first four seasons and 3,993 in the five seasons since.

It's possible that history will grade Davis and Portis with a "Broncos curve," a reference to the annual success of running backs in the system of former coach Mike Shanahan. Regardless, both had more production in their first four years than Peterson but slipped off that Hall of Fame pace thereafter.

Since the moment he arrived in the NFL, Peterson has drawn comparisons to Campbell, Eric Dickerson and some of the NFL's other all-time great running backs. His production over that stretch, relative to their early career performances, has justified those associations.

But there is a reason why football people caution such early comparisons with Hall of Famers. Even the all-time greats slow down in the second half of their careers. But importantly, they still reel off a number of highly productive seasons after their early explosions.

Dickerson rushed for 6,291 yards over his final seven seasons after opening his career with 6,968 yards in his first four. Jumping ahead, the still-active LaDainian Tomlinson has rushed for 7,505 yards over six seasons after amassing 5,899 yards in his first four.

So let's arbitrarily say Peterson's cumulative production drops by 25 percent over the next four seasons. That means he averages 1,083 yards per season instead of his current 1,445. At that relatively optimistic rate, Peterson would need to play at least five more full seasons to eclipse 11,000 yards and demonstrate the kind of production over time that would give him the Hall of Fame spot he has positioned himself for.

Obviously, voters don't hold fast to the 11,000-yard barrier and have been known to consider mitigating circumstances. Campbell, for example, took a bruising 1,404 carries in his first four seasons. That's an average of 50 more per season than Peterson has taken, and it almost assuredly contributed to Campbell's short career.

It's easy to say that Adrian Peterson just needs to keep on running like Adrian Peterson in order to make the Hall of Fame. The history of running backs suggests he will slow down at some point in the next four years. The question is how much Peterson produces at a lower rate. To me, another five seasons of 75 percent Adrian Peterson should do the trick.

Earlier: Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers has put himself on the path toward Canton. Chicago Bears defensive end Julius Peppers and the Vikings' Jared Allen face stiff competition. Vikings guard Steve Hutchinson has all the credentials. Packers cornerback Charles Woodson is a lock.

As you know by now, ESPN.com's Blog Network is joining senior writer John Clayton in an offseason Power Rankings exercise to determine the game's 10 best players by position. We hit receivers last week and running backs this week. Hopefully they're a fun diversion for lockout-weary fans.

The bloggers? In some cases, we're in a lose-lose situation. If I rank an NFC North player high, I'm a homer. Leave one off the list, and I'm either biased or trying too hard not to look like a homer.

The latter scenario developed this week when, like the rest of my colleagues, I failed to rank Chicago Bears tailback Matt Forte in my top 10.

"Kevin, some NFCN blogger you turned out to be," wrote tearloch. "How could Forte not at least be in YOUR top 10 RBs?"

"What a joke," wrote Frankiemazz.

LambeauOrWrigley, meanwhile, noted that I included Forte "among the top players in the division" upon placing him on the 2010 All-NFC North team. LOW was particularly dismayed to see the New York Jets' LaDainian Tomlinson on my ballot at No. 10.

"Call me slow," LOW wrote, "but I assumed in your eyes you felt they had what one might consider an almost 'comparable' year. Both [Adrian Peterson] and [Chris Johnson] ran behind poor lines (as did Forte) and inept passing game. Though pure running skills wise I consider them better, as an overall value to a team, I honestly couldn't see how in his best stat LT could beat out Forte. I just checked stats and like it or not Forte beat LT in EVERY VIABLE STAT!"

In this case, I just flat-out over-thought and whiffed. I spent too much time making sure I didn't omit anyone from another division, and I really worked hard to make sure Tomlinson got a vote. I thought what he did last season -- 1,282 all-purpose yards for a team that made it to the AFC Championship Game -- was quite a statement at his age and merited some recognition. (Apparently I was the only one.)

But as many of you pointed out, Forte finished with 1,616 all-purpose yards for a team that made it to the NFC Championship Game, the 10th-best mark in the NFL. I can't speak for the other voters, but those figures should have been enough to get a spot on my ballot. I needed to start my list with the players I know best.

Who would I have left off? I probably would have had to drop my Tomlinson crusade. (My No. 9 running back, the Baltimore Ravens' Ray Rice, was third among NFL running backs last season with 1,776 all-purpose yards. He's making the cut.) I won't be getting a new job, as Frankiemazz requested. But like the rest of us, I will live and learn.

» NFC Final Word: East | West | North | South » AFC: East | West | North | South

Five nuggets of knowledge about Week 8:

Brick wall: Whether it's an injured Brett Favre or backup Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback Sunday for the Minnesota Vikings, you would have to assume the play calling will be the same: A whole lot of tailback Adrian Peterson. Peterson ranks second in the NFL with 684 rushing yards despite having played only six games, and he might be the team's safest option at Gillette Stadium. Unfortunately for the Vikings, the New England Patriots recently made a personnel shift that has tightened up their run defense substantially. After moving Vince Wilfork from nose tackle to defensive end, the Patriots have limited their past two opponents -- the Baltimore Ravens and San Diego Chargers -- to a combined 2.6 yards per carry. That's the lowest mark in the NFL over that stretch. The Vikings will have their hands full, no matter what direction they turn, as they attempt to end a seven-game losing streak on the road.

Helpless: Were it not for the Favre situation, this week would have been about receiver Randy Moss' return to New England. It has only been three weeks since the stunning trade, and the story would have been Moss' presumed determination to make the Patriots sorry they shipped him out. But as we've seen in the previous two weeks, a receiver can't affect a grudge-match performance on his own. Moss has always excelled against the Dallas Cowboys and Green Bay Packers, for different reasons. But in those two games, he has combined for a relatively harmless eight receptions. As much as it makes sentimental sense to project a big game for Moss this weekend, the Vikings' quarterback situation and their continued offensive struggles take that possibility out of his hands. Pun intended.

Keep it short: As we discussed Thursday, Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers will have his hands full facing the blitz-heavy New York Jets defense Sunday at New Meadowlands Stadium. The Jets have blitzed an NFL-high 51.5 percent of the time this season, according to ESPN Stats & Information, and when combined with their cornerback duo of Darrelle Revis and Antonio Cromartie, their defense has been awfully stingy against the deep pass. According to ESPN Stats & Information, quarterbacks have a 37.5 passer rating against them on throws that travel 15-plus yards in the air. Based on available information, it seems the Packers will need to be patient and focus on their short and intermediate routes Sunday.

Pressure point: The Packers have been vulnerable against the run this season, and another spate of injuries this week leaves them in a bad matchup with the Jets' rush offense. Led by a rejuvenated LaDainian Tomlinson, the Jets are averaging 159.2 rushing yards per game -- the second-best mark in the NFL. The Packers, meanwhile, could be without their starting defensive ends, Cullen Jenkins and Ryan Pickett, because of injuries. The Packers will also be missing three linebackers who have made starts for them this season. If you were the Jets, and you saw a front seven as riddled as the Packers', what would you do? Run it up the gut? Or challenge the Packers' stronger (and healthier) pass defense?

Patience, young Jedi: The Detroit Lions will get quarterback Matthew Stafford back on the field Sunday at Ford Field, and you have to assume Stafford will be eager to get rolling after missing most of the Lions' first six games. But here's hoping he has the maturity and patience to not try to get it all back in one game. No team has been eliminated, either mathematically or realistically, in the wide-open NFC North race. But the Lions should still be in long-term mode, especially as it relates to Stafford. If it accomplishes nothing else for the rest of the season, the franchise must get Stafford established as its quarterback of the present and future. To that end, an adrenaline-laced, multi-interception performance would be the worst thing that could happen. Let's just see Stafford lead his team to some victories, calmly and (relatively) mistake-free. For as much promise that surrounds him, Stafford hasn't been able to stay on the field long enough to show us he can do that.

EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. -- Here is a measure of Minnesota's confidence in its roster: The Vikings' top two picks of the 2010 draft both play positions with long-term starters firmly in place.

Virginia cornerback Chris Cook faces a season as a reserve/special teams player behind veterans Antoine Winfield, Lito Sheppard, Benny Sapp and eventually Cedric Griffin. Stanford running back Toby Gerhart, meanwhile, will get the touches left over by workhorse starter Adrian Peterson.

So it goes for a team that is expected to bring back all 22 starters from the group that advanced to the NFC Championship Game. The Vikings didn't find their quarterback of the future on Friday, twice passing up Notre Dame's Jimmy Clausen and Texas' Colt McCoy, but they still wound up with two players who figure -- at best -- to play secondary roles in 2010.

"We've helped our roster a lot today," said vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman, referring to the all-important depth Cook and Gerhart will provide. The way Gerhart ended up with the Vikings illustrates the way Spielman is approaching this draft: As a tool to polish the edges of his roster.

I was totally on board with the Vikings' decision to let veteran tailback Chester Taylor depart via free agency. If the Vikings follow past practice and Peterson stays healthy, their backup running back will get no more than 150 touches in 2010. It would have been irrational to pay Taylor the $7 million in guarantees he got from Chicago for such a limited role.

The Vikings made one run at signing a veteran replacement, but when veteran LaDainian Tomlinson signed with the New York Jets, Spielman quickly pivoted toward the draft -- where it is a more than reasonable expectation to find a complementary running back.

"I knew what was coming out in the draft and I knew the potential runners that could be available to us," Spielman said. "So if something does not work out in free agency, I have a pretty extensive chart.... So you make a run at one. You don't have to panic because potentially you can get something down the road in the draft."

Spielman passed on an opportunity to draft Cal's Jahvid Best at No. 30 overall Thursday night. But he jumped for Gerhart -- giving up his third-round pick (No. 93 overall) to move up 11 spots in the second round. Although Gerhart's 231-pound frame is big enough to be a fullback, the Vikings project him as a traditional (and bruising) tailback in their scheme. Although he didn't fully confirm it, coach Brad Childress suggested Gerhart has the tools to replace Taylor as a third-down back as well.

"I think you see a very versatile athlete there," Childress said. "I know he carried the ball between the tackles [at Stanford], ... but he's exceptional in the pass game. It's not something that was highly emphasized there. I know the system that [Stanford] runs, and he'll come in here and be able to adapt very quickly. He gives you a bigger body, whether it's a backup running back or a special teamer."

Because he has that "bigger" frame and attended Stanford, Gerhart has drawn middling comparisons to former Cardinal fullback Tommy Vardell. But Gerhart runs the 40-yard dash in a legitimate 4.5 seconds, and I think anyone who watched him play in college knows he has a significant burst and tremendous competitive instincts. Even Gerhart said he believes he has "more wiggle" than Vardell and that he can be "more all-purpose."

You'll find no argument here. I might not draft Gerhart be a 20-carry per game back, but that's not what the Vikings need as long as Peterson is on the roster.

"I'm not sure what my role is going to be," Gerhart said, "but I think it's going to be to complement the best running back in football. ... I look forward to finding out more and contributing to the team."

In the scenario I believe the Vikings envision, Gerhart will follow in Taylor's footsteps: About three-to-six carries per game and two-to-three catches in third-down situations. I think that's a fair way to use him, and it's a rotation that Childress and running backs coach Eric Bieniemy established during three years of working with Peterson and Taylor.

Bieniemy, in fact, once recruited Gerhart to UCLA when he worked as the Bruins' running backs coach in 2006. Gerhart planned to commit until the Vikings hired Bieniemy away two weeks before NCAA signing day. Bieniemy had big plans for Gerhart as a feature back then. Now, he'll have him as a finishing touch.

"Kind of ironic," Gerhart said.

EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. -- The Minnesota Vikings have found a replacement for departed tailback Chester Taylor. The Vikings wanted Stanford running back Toby Gerhart so much they gave up their third-round pick (No. 93 overall) to move up 11 spots in the second round to draft him.

The Vikings made a run at signing free agent LaDainian Tomlinson for that role, but they clearly were focused on the draft after Tomlinson signed with the New York Jets. I’ll have much more before Friday evening is over, but Gerhart will provide a decidedly complementary style relative to starter Adrian Peterson.

Unless they trade up again, the Vikings are done for the night. More in a bit.

Chug-a-chug. Chug-a-chug. Can you hear it? That's the sound of our NFC North train gaining steam as we approach the 2010 NFL draft. We're at T-minus 19 days. The intensity of our discussions will continue ramping up until April 22 arrives.

There are any number of places where we can rap about the draft. (Like my flow?) You can hit the mailbag, join us over on Facebook or tweet us on Twitter. Let's see what's on your mind this weekend.

Christopher of Minneapolis writes: Kevin, I gotta ask why you think players have been turning down coming to play for the Vikings. Last offseason, T.J. Houshmandzadeh decided to go to a Seattle team that was obviously in a much worse place than the Vikings at the time in their division. Then this year already two free agents have chosen other teams over us: LaDainian Tomlinson and Tye Hill (not sure how good of an addition he would actually have been). So I'm asking what do you think it is about playing here? We have a an owner that wants to win, a very good team with a good chance at making a deep playoff run. I just don't get why free agents would pass up the opportunity to play here.

Kevin Seifert: Christopher, I think you're looking at only half of a trend. There's no doubt some high-profile free agents/trade candidates have turned down offers from the Vikings in recent years, but there are plenty of others who did not. The list includes quarterback Brett Favre, defensive end Jared Allen, receiver Bernard Berrian and tight end Visanthe Shiancoe. It's not as if no one will come to the Vikings. It's more like some.

If there is a trend, we should look for a common denominator. In the cases you mention, I don't see one. Houshmandzadeh went to Seattle in part because he thought the Seahawks' quarterback position was stronger. Favre was still months away from signing. Tomlinson, meanwhile, is going to play a lot more with the New York Jets than he would have in Minnesota. That's just a fact of life with Adrian Peterson on the roster.

As for Hill, you're right: His decision was a relatively minor one. At best, he would have competed for the nickel job with Benny Sapp. The timing of his decision to sign with Tennessee -- hours after visiting the Vikings -- suggested the visit might have been intended all along to increase leverage with the Titans.

I know there are some issues that might make the Vikings less than attractive to some free agents, from the aging practice facility to their uncertain future in the Metrodome. But I don't see any common thread in the instances you've mentioned.

---

Via Facebook, Ben of Fort Smith, Ark., writes: I just read that Jared Gaither could possibly be available for a second-round pick. He played very well last year and still has plenty of room to improve. I believe the Ravens use a different blocking scheme than Green Bay does, but do you think it would be worthwhile for the Packers to make a move for him and get the jump on one of the top corners or OLBs in the draft, rather than settle for possibly the fifth-best tackle prospect and then whichever corners or OLBs are left later on?

Kevin Seifert: I've gotten more than a few questions on Gaither, not only from Packers fans but also from those who follow Detroit.

To review: Gaither is Baltimore's 24-year-old left tackle, a player many in Baltimore figured would be a fixture for the next 10 years. The Ravens hedged their commitment, however, by placing only a first-round tender on him as a restricted free agent. That means a team signing Gaither to an offer sheet would only have to give up a first-round pick, and perhaps less if they work out a sign-and-trade deal with the Ravens.

If you're the Packers, you would gladly give up the No. 23 overall pick for a long-term answer at left tackle. The same would probably go for the Lions, who have the second pick (No. 34 overall) of the second round.

But here's the question: Is Gaither a lock to be that kind of franchise player? It's only fair to wonder when the Ravens, who know him best, seem prepared to listen to offers. You could point out that Baltimore has Michael Oher on board and ready to move to left tackle. But if the Ravens trust Gaither's future, it's doubtful they would give up on him regardless. They seem to have some doubts.

It's easy to think that another team's disappointment could be your club's success story. Ultimately, that could be the case with Gaither. But if he's really available, it's fair to wonder why the Ravens don't want to keep him.

---

Rob of Milwaukee writes: If the rumors are true about the Packers interest in Brian Westbrook, could this mean the end of Ahman Green in Green Bay?

Kevin Seifert: First, I don't have any confirmation that the Packers are in fact interested in Westbrook. General manager Ted Thompson doesn't often have interest in aging veteran free agents, no matter what position or talent level. And as we discussed Thursday, coach Mike McCarthy believes backup tailback Brandon Jackson made significant strides last season.

If the Packers decide they need a veteran in the backfield, I wouldn't at all be surprised if Green -- not Westbrook -- is the choice. Here's what McCarthy said on that topic at last month's owners meeting: "...I like what Ahman Green gave us there at the end of the year. I thought once he got reacquainted with some of the things we do that are different from when he was here earlier, and frankly he did some nice things on special teams once he got comfortable. I mean, he's definitely an option that's potentially out there."

---

Bryan of St. Marys, Ga., writes: I was wondering if you had heard anything about a possible trade between the Lions and Redskins switching first round picks?

Kevin Seifert: It's certainly being rumored, but like most draft-related intrigue, it's based mostly on circumstantial evidence.

St. Louis seems likely to draft Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford at No. 1 overall. The next-best quarterback is Notre Dame's Jimmy Clausen, who seems to be drawing interest from Washington (No. 4) and Cleveland (No. 7), among other teams.

So if you're Detroit and you want to trade out of the No. 2 pick, you have to hope that multiple teams emerge with a strong desire to draft Clausen. That team could take a chance and deal with Tampa Bay at No. 3, but the only way to ensure Clausen will be available is to trade into the Lions' spot.

To be clear, there is no evidence that we've reached this point yet. But that's what would need to happen for the Lions and Redskins to swap places in the draft.

---

Chris of San Diego writes: I read that Lance Louis of the Chicago Bears is subject to the NFL conduct policy for a crime he committed prior to being drafted because he pleaded guilty to it a year after he was drafted. Can you explain why he is retroactively subject to NFL rules?

Kevin Seifert: The original incident -- a fight with a former San Diego State teammate -- occurred in November 2008. But from what I understand, the league considers the incident part of its personal conduct policy because the charges were filed after Louis signed with the Bears last summer. That's the distinction, however arbitrary it might be.

With all that said, Louis pleaded guilty to misdemeanor battery, making it unlikely he'll face an NFL suspension. A fine could be in order, however.

If I had even a penny for every time a Green Bay fan has asked about Brian Westbrook or LaDainian Tomlinson or some other possibility to provide depth behind tailback Ryan Grant, well, I'd have many coins. Let's face it: It would be out of character for the Packers to sign a veteran free agent this time of year.

But there are other elements at play here as well. Listening to coach Mike McCarthy speak last week at the NFL owners meeting, it sure sounded like he has supreme confidence in Brandon Jackson to handle the job. If a veteran becomes a necessity at some point, Ahman Green might be the first option.

McCarthy said he thought Jackson took a "huge step" last season, specifically in a Dec. 20 game at Pittsburgh.

"I thought against Pittsburgh that his blitz pickup was as good as I've seen since Marcus Allen in the early '90s," McCarthy said. "And his confidence and everything from that game, I thought he took a big step and I'm hoping he can maintain that or take it further as we move on."

My thoughts on this topic have evolved now that Grant has established himself as a legitimate full-time runner. As with Minnesota, the Packers' backup running back is a secondary role that becomes a big deal only if the starter is unavailable. Grant has proved exceptionally durable in three years with the Packers, playing in 47 of a possible 48 games.

The Packers haven't often gotten big-time yardage from a backup running back in recent years, as you can see in the chart below. Last season, in fact, quarterback Aaron Rodgers was their second-leading rusher. Green and Jackson followed with 160 and 111 yards, respectively.


So while you can never rule out the possibility of high-profile addition, most clues -- and common sense -- suggest the Packers will put their faith in Jackson to handle this role in 2010.

» NFC Stock Watch: East | West | North | South » AFC: East | West | North | South

Falling

Favre conspiracy theories: Can we all agree it's pointless to suggest that quarterback Brett Favre somehow dropped the ball on recruiting free-agent running back LaDainian Tomlinson? And that the uncertainty of Favre's future actually played a role in Tomlinson's decision to sign with the New York Jets? In my mind, it's simple: Tomlinson went to New York because he's going to play more there. If anything, I'm betting Tomlinson is guessing Favre will play in 2010. Because if he doesn't, the Vikings are likely to revert to their run-heavy scheme -- one that almost certainly would have a significant role for a backup tailback. "Favre's indecision hurts Vikings" makes for a good headline, but there's no meat on those bones.

Rising

Matthew Stafford, Detroit quarterback: Stafford is close to being fully healed from the knee and shoulder injuries that limited him to 10 games in his rookie season. He reported to the Lions' offseason conditioning program as the team's unquestioned starter and has also taken up residence as a locker room leader and representative. Team officials have looped him into their offseason plans, asking him for opinions and even inviting him to make recruiting calls to free agents. "I think they know that I know a lot of guys in the league and personnel pretty well," Stafford said. "It's fun to be able to help out a little bit."

Ed Werder's report on Brett Favre's involvement in recruiting LaDainian Tomlinson reminds us of one thing above all else: Favre is operating on his own timetable and won't be pressured to speed it up.

According to Werder, the Vikings asked Favre to speak with Tomlinson last week and encourage him to sign with the Vikings. Favre, however, told Tomlinson he had "no clue" whether he would play this season and offered a neutral endorsement via text message.

While the odds remain in favor of Favre eventually agreeing to play, it's hardly surprising that he wouldn't address it with Tomlinson. Favre believes his two retirement announcements -- in 2008 from Green Bay and 2009 from the New York Jets -- were premature decisions forced by organizational timetables. I don't think he wants to make what he views as a mistake again, and he wasn't going to tell Tomlinson anything different than what he said earlier this month on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno:" That he isn't close to making a decision.

Favre knows the Vikings have no choice but to wait on him. Coach Brad Childress is already on record saying that Tarvaris Jackson and Sage Rosenfels will compete for the starting job if Favre retires.

It's quite possible Tomlinson was less than fully satisfied by Favre's response, but I still think it was at best a secondary factor in his decision to sign with the Jets. As we discussed Monday, Tomlinson should get more opportunities to carry the ball in the Jets' offense. There's nothing Favre could do about that, one way or the other.

Regular reader/commenter suamico72 is relentless, I can say with some certainty. After reading Monday morning’s Black and Blue post, suamico72 objected to an apparently incomplete explanation for why LaDainian Tomlinson spurned Minnesota and signed with the New York Jets.

I noted Tomlinson will play a larger role in the Jets’ offense, but suamico72 added: “AND because he wanted a ‘stable’ quarterback situation, WHY do you refuse to report on this Kevin? it was the FIRST thing LT referred to when asked! your colleagues refer to it, WHY NOT YOU? Are the espnanites not letting you say anything negative towards prince favre?”

I’ll admit there is no certainty that Brett Favre will play this season. Further, I probably won’t consider the Vikings a first-tier Super Bowl contender if he retires and leaves Tarvaris Jackson and Sage Rosenfels to compete for the job. But it’s my somewhat informed take that Favre’s status was at best a deeply secondary factor in Tomlinson’s decision.

As we discussed Sunday, Tomlinson’s role would have been far more limited in Minnesota than it will be with the Jets. That would have been the case whether Favre played or not. Tomlinson left San Diego believing he could offer more to a winning team than the Chargers were asking. I believe he recognized he has a far better chance of doing that in New York than in Minnesota.

History tells us Favre will commit to playing at some point this summer. The Vikings’ apparent lack of urgency to craft a contingency plan suggests they believe the same thing. I think Tomlinson left Minnesota knowing there was an awfully strong chance Favre will play, even if he could be given no guarantees.

Suggesting that Tomlinson signed with the Jets because of Favre’s uncertainty is like saying a tree fell because of loose soil around it. The state of said soil might have contributed, but something had to push the darn thing first. (Oh, and Favre = soil in this little metaphor.)

From an NFC North perspective, the second weekend of NFL free agency was notable in large part by a spending spree in Green Bay that netted contact extensions for three veteran players: Nose tackle Ryan Pickett, safety Nick Collins and right tackle Mark Tauscher.

When considered with the week-old extension for left tackle Chad Clifton, the Packers have spent upwards of $80 million in a little over a week. Mike Vandermause of the Green Bay Press-Gazette termed that sum "staggering" and added: "General Manager Ted Thompson clearly believes his team is capable of great success, and he's putting up the money to prove it."

Yes, this was a bonanza relative to Thompson's historical trends. I'll get into this more later on the blog, but it's clear Thompson wasn't prepared to overhaul the offensive line after coaches spent much of 2009 trying to find a suitable combination of players. He also wanted to maintain depth for his run defense, even after selecting nose tackle B.J. Raji at the top of the 2009 draft, and he needed to do something eventually for Collins.

Continuing around the NFC North:

• Tauscher confirmed he has agreed to a two-year deal, according to Pete Dougherty of the Press-Gazette.
• Minnesota offered free-agent running back LaDainian Tomlinson a deal similar to the one he signed with the New York Jets, according to Mark Craig of the Star Tribune. But as we discussed Sunday, Tomlinson preferred the Jets in large part because he'll have more opportunities to carry the ball, agent Tom Condon told the Associated Press.
• In his weekly mailbag, Dan Pompei of the Chicago Tribune notes it could be awkward that tight end Greg Olsen is making $550,000 this season while new blocking tight end Brandon Manumaleuna will pull in $6.105 million in the first year of his new contract.
• Don't overlook Josh Bullocks in the Bears' safety mix, writes Jeff Dickerson of ESPNChicago.com.
• As Detroit appears on the verge of acquiring backup quarterback Shaun Hill, John Niyo of the Detroit News notes the Lions haven't had a backup quarterback win a game for them in five years.

My reaction to Minnesota's swing-and-miss with running back LaDainian Tomlinson is the same as when Chester Taylor jumped to Chicago. The Vikings' backup running back job is an important but ultimately secondary role as long as starter Adrian Peterson plays a full season, and it should be viewed accordingly.

I couldn't get worked up about Taylor's departure, and I really don't consider it a crisis now that Tomlinson has agreed to terms with the New York Jets. Over the past two seasons, Taylor touched the ball 284 times via rushing or pass plays. That averages out to 8.88 touches per game, or about 14 percent of the Vikings' offensive plays over that span. That's not a big enough number to lose sleep over, in my opinion.

Peterson is the focus of the Vikings' running game, and you're kidding yourself if you think they will pull back on his carries because of continuing fumble problems. Tomlinson no doubt had several reasons for signing with the Jets, but I'm sure this undeniable fact was one of them: He's going to be more involved in the Jets offense (current starter: Shonn Greene) than he would have been in the Vikings'.

From Minnesota's perspective, it made sense to pursue a future Hall of Famer. If he wanted to gear down his career to that extent, bully for the Vikings. But it's not surprising he chose the other option.

Discussion will naturally turn to veteran Brian Westbrook, who played under Vikings coach Brad Childress when Childress was Philadelphia's offensive coordinator. Childress has always had great respect for Westbrook, but it's only fair to note the Vikings have yet to show interest. Westbrook's history of concussions makes him a risk for any team he might sign with.

Without Taylor or Tomlinson, the Vikings wouldn't have an experienced back to take over if Peterson is sidelined for an extended period of time. But for now, it will be interesting to see if the Vikings give second-year player Albert Young at least an offseason look at the role.

Childress talked up Young during a radio interview last week. It's also possible to find immediate running back help in the draft.

The Vikings would have done well to sign Tomlinson, but I don't think his decision qualifies as a blow. It just adds a little pressure on their depth chart and draft preparations.

There are reports out of San Diego that free agent running back LaDainian Tomlinson is leaning toward signing with the New York Jets, but it makes perfect sense for Tomlinson to keep all options open as he negotiates his next contract.

That means Tomlinson must portray neutrality from a public perspective: to spark a bidding war between the Jets and Minnesota. I think that's why he told Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune that he didn't know where he will sign, despite rampant reports linking him to the Jets.

I'll have more to say when we get confirmation of Tomlinson's destination. Right now, you're seeing the negotiating process play out before your eyes.