Not at all. It's a common fan impulse to hypothesize connections between characters or species that vaguely resemble each other. I've seen many variations on "The Borg created V'Ger" or "V'Ger created the Borg" bandied about online over the years, even though neither makes one damn bit of sense. (V'Ger didn't even know that organic beings were living things. How could it be the creation, or creator, of a race of cybernetic-organic hybrids? Not to mention that V'Ger's technology was so advanced it made Borg tech look like horse-drawn carriages. Even The Return admitted that V'Ger and the Borg have practically nothing in common and had to concoct an immensely convoluted excuse for how they could be connected after all.)
Another good point. In The Return
's defense, I would point out that it was written before Star Trek: First Contact changed the way the Borg were presented so back then a connection between the Borg and V'ger wouldn't have been as far-fetched, especially since The Return
made the connection through a different branch of the Borg that assimilated through using energy patterns. (Not that you're criticizing The Return
, Christopher, I realize you aren't. I just want to make that point since not everyone realizes that when The Return
was written the Borg weren't portrayed as being all about assimilation like they were from First Contact on.)
The fact is, different creators independently coming up with similar ideas is something that happens all the time. It's a routine fact of life for just about any writer -- one of the main reasons stories or script pitches get rejected is because the publisher or TV series is already doing something similar.
I realize this. I just find it interesting that these two realities have such similarities, but you're right it really shouldn't be that surprising to me.