[Flaxwless]

Originally Posted by Popes

Actually, I'm with you. Tarvaris was the big question mark for me. He's got the physical tools and the starting job, but we have zero idea if he will be great, good, decent, or horrible. He doesn't really quite meet my "on the cusp" criteria, because I generally prefer some indication of production from the prior year. Two reasons I took him despite that:

- a bit of homerism
- I was comparing him to Brandon Jacobs and I personally don't think Jacobs will ever be a 20 carry a week guy. Jacobs has put up some production, but I don't think he'll ever get enough touches. Tarvaris will get the touches, but we don't know about the production possibilities. Hence I considered them equivalent. I'd rather have Tarvaris and take a shot that he can perform (down the road, I mean, I won't be playing him this year other than as a backup/bye week guy).

I know Brian has zero confidence in Chili's offense, but I think we might have a respectable offense come 2008. I also think Adrian Peterson catching some swing passes and going the distance with them might look really good for Tarvaris down the road.

Fair enough. I felt the homerism was the only way you'd do the deal for Jackson.