Phil Loadholt, Not Brett Favre, the Problem for the Minnesota Vikings

There are two types of tackles in the NFL. One is the tackle that will kick-step, use his feet, get in front of the defender, and use his hands to control his man. The other is what I call a hip-bender, which is a guy who takes two steps back, stops his feet, and just tries to push his defender and hope for the best.

Phil Loadholt is the second kind, and it’s going to get Brett Favre killed one of these days.

How many times are they going to allow Loadholt to watch his man run right around him and hit Favre as he’s throwing the ball, causing either an errant pass or a fumble?

He already cost them the game against the Dolphins, and could have cost them the game against the Lions were Detroit’s offense not so inept without Matthew Stafford.

Loadholt was a problem at the end of last season, and it’s carried over into 2010.

But, unfortunately for Favre, there is no “my offensive tackle doesn’t belong on the field and caused me to fumble or throw an interception” stat. So all anyone sees is the interceptions and the fumbles and instantly think that the Vikings’ struggles are all because of him.

The Vikings pulled out a win against the Lions so those talks will be tempered for at least one week, but they could start back up at any time if there’s nothing else going on around the league. Because, of course, we all know when there’s nothing else to talk about there’s always Brett Favre.

I’m not trying to excuse Favre entirely, however. He has been pressing, which he’s fully acknowledged, and has thrown some costly interceptions, but it’s not all him. In fact, I wouldn’t even say he deserves a quarter of the blame for this team and their struggles.

The wide receivers have been ineffective to say the least, the secondary is banged up beyond all recognition, the defensive line has been disappointing, and the offensive line has not lived up to expectations.

Then, after addressing all of those areas, can we start talking about Favre.