vikings/nfl

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Forever mangled in presidential lore, the old proverb is still relevant when considering the Vikings' two-year odyssey in finding a suitable backup quarterback. Almost a year to the day after making a desperation trade for Brooks Bollinger, the Vikings this week acquired Kelly Holcomb to give them legitimate insurance behind starter Tarvaris Jackson.

In the end, the Vikings upgraded their depth and soothed concerns about Bollinger's poor preseason performance. But especially in light of their near-disaster at the position last summer, it is fair to question why the Vikings waited until 14 days before the regular season to solidify such a critical role this year.

Coach Brad Childress admitted this week that the team has been discussing Holcomb internally "for a while," and that his arrival was not a knee-jerk reaction to Bollinger's play. This assertion, according to multiple league sources, is absolutely true: The Vikings have considered Holcomb a safety net and likely trade target since well before training camp began.

So why wait so long after identifying the position for upgrade? The Philadelphia Eagles, who acquired Holcomb from Buffalo on March 26, established a high price -- possibly a third- or fourth-round draft choice -- for all suitors before training camp. While Holcomb seemed destined to be a roster casualty, the Eagles understandably wanted him as insurance in case Donovan McNabb, A.J. Feeley or rookie Kevin Kolb were injured.

Any team that wanted Holcomb in time for training camp, giving him the benefit of learning its personnel and scheme nuances, would have to pay handsomely. And to be fair, giving up a mid-range pick for a 34-year-old backup would have been a steep price.

All of which proves a cardinal rule of NFL team-building: The most important personnel decisions are made not in August but in March and April, when the maximum number of players are available through free agency and the draft. Yet in consecutive years, the Vikings have been forced to amplify their March decision on the backup position.

In 2006, they settled on Mike McMahon in part because they had decided not to raise starter Brad Johnson's salary above $1.2 million. McMahon was the best quarterback they could find who would sign for a salary below Johnson's.

The strategy backfired in training camp, when McMahon played his way out of the NFL with a horrendous preseason. The Vikings replaced him by acquiring Bollinger from the New York Jets, and early this offseason Childress and personnel director Rick Spielman decided to enter training camp with Bollinger and Jackson as their top two quarterbacks.

Because the Vikings had all of last season to evaluate Bollinger, it can only be assumed the Vikings were convinced he could at least serve as a solid backup for Jackson.

That evaluation came at a critical time. Had they believed otherwise, the Vikings could have acquired Holcomb before the Bills traded him to Philadelphia. They also could have pursued free agents Jeff Garcia, David Carr, Patrick Ramsey or even Joey Harrington.

By passing -- or at least delaying a decision until after spring drills -- the Vikings left themselves at the mercy of a smart team such as the Eagles. And when Philadelphia finally was ready to deal reasonably, the Vikings faced competition from at least one other serious suitor in the Seattle Seahawks.

The upshot is that the Vikings got their man at a fair price five months past the ideal acquisition point. What did they lose in the tradeoff?

Luckily for them, it seems the damage will be minimal -- assuming Holcomb adjusts rapidly and Jackson stays on the field for at least the first few games of the season. Nevertheless, Holcomb warned against underestimating the time it takes even an experienced quarterback to assimilate a new environment.

"I am with a new team," he said. "I don't know how guys run routes. Every guy is a little different with his steps. The running backs, one guy is going to be wide. One guy is going to be a little tighter. You try to all get it the same."

They might have been fooled twice, but ultimately another axiom can be applied as well: Better late than never.

Kevin Seifert • kseifert@startribune.com