PDA

View Full Version : Still got a beef with Brad Childress?



Marrdro
10-18-2009, 03:27 AM
http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_13585763?source=rss

Marrdro's comment follows:

........SNICKER........

midgensa
10-18-2009, 03:37 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_13585763?source=rss

Marrdro's comment follows:

........SNICKER........


Go to bed!

Though I like seeing the "tomorrow" stories nice and early.

Marrdro
10-18-2009, 03:52 AM
"midgensa" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_13585763?source=rss

Marrdro's comment follows:

........SNICKER........


Go to bed!

Though I like seeing the "tomorrow" stories nice and early.

HAHA.....Working 0100 am to 0100 PM.
Sucking down coffee and scouring the web for news of interest to stay awake now.

Gonna be hard to stay awake during the game.

marshallvike
10-18-2009, 06:25 PM
we are 6-0 because of the talent put together on the team. IF he had something to do with that, he deserves credit for that. But he is still a moron game coach.

Purple Floyd
10-18-2009, 06:29 PM
I still don't like the way he runs things during the game. That being said I have committed to backing him this season.

marshallvike
10-18-2009, 06:37 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


I still don't like the way he runs things during the game. That being said I have committed to backing him this season.


I am trying uffda. sometimes his staff makes it sooooo hard

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 06:37 PM
Still got a beef with Brad Childress?

Absolutely, this game confirmed it.

I am sick to death of getting up by two scores, then changing mindsets and playing to not lose the game.
We did it against the 49ers, we did it against the Packers and we did it again here.


Just once I'd like to see us seal the deal.
Put the game out of reach instead of playing stupid fucking games with the other team.

oaklandzoo24
10-18-2009, 06:38 PM
As many have said...Chilly is a great GM, but a mediocre coach.

Elam529
10-18-2009, 06:42 PM
I do have a beef with Childress. Why put in Peterson that late?

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 06:46 PM
"Elam529" wrote:


I do have a beef with Childress. Why put in Peterson that late?


because we were losing?

If Peterson is helathy enough to play, he absolutely needed to be in there.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 06:55 PM
Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 06:58 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 06:59 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 07:02 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?

vikinggreg
10-18-2009, 07:04 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


The titan game where our starting qb was knock out of the game and Jackson came in and was sacked twice and we punted....that game?

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 07:06 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 07:06 PM
"vikinggreg" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


The titan game where our starting qb was knock out of the game and Jackson came in and was sacked twice and we punted....that game?


the game where down with no timeouts and 2 minutes left we punted.
Titans took three knees and won.
Childress later defended himself by saying he thought the Defense would get us the ball back.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 07:09 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:




Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


The titan game where our starting qb was knock out of the game and Jackson came in and was sacked twice and we punted....that game?


the game where down with no timeouts and 2 minutes left we punted.
Titans took three knees and won.
Childress later defended himself by saying he thought the Defense would get us the ball back.


And he was wrong and I am sure he accepts some of the blame as well.

Coaches coach and Players play.
He took a gamble and it did not pay off.

This is all hindsight 20-20.
What if the Defense got the ball back and we won.
What a genius he would be.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 07:12 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I'm not blaming him for the D collapse, however he does have input on offense, and for the past few weeks, we would get up by two scores then cruise.
We were fortunate enough twice to have drops/missed field goals give us a win, but one of these days that will cost us.

having said that, as long as he keeps winning, I'm glad to have him.
Just keep in mind the reason Shottenheimer was fired.
He'd start out strong, then play to not lose in the playoffs instead of trying to win.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 07:13 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:






Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


The titan game where our starting qb was knock out of the game and Jackson came in and was sacked twice and we punted....that game?


the game where down with no timeouts and 2 minutes left we punted.
Titans took three knees and won.
Childress later defended himself by saying he thought the Defense would get us the ball back.


And he was wrong and I am sure he accepts some of the blame as well.

Coaches coach and Players play.
He took a gamble and it did not pay off.

This is all hindsight 20-20.
What if the Defense got the ball back and we won.
What a genius he would be.


no, we punted with no timeouts and less than two minutes left.
Titans took three knees and walked away with a win.
There was no possible way for the D to get the ball back.
No way at all except for a fumbled snap.
Thats basic math right there.
40 seconds per play times three plays = 120 seconds or two minutes.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 07:18 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:








Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


The titan game where our starting qb was knock out of the game and Jackson came in and was sacked twice and we punted....that game?


the game where down with no timeouts and 2 minutes left we punted.
Titans took three knees and won.
Childress later defended himself by saying he thought the Defense would get us the ball back.


And he was wrong and I am sure he accepts some of the blame as well.

Coaches coach and Players play.
He took a gamble and it did not pay off.

This is all hindsight 20-20.
What if the Defense got the ball back and we won.
What a genius he would be.


no, we punted with no timeouts and less than two minutes left.
Titans took three knees and walked away with a win.
There was no possible way for the D to get the ball back.

No way at all except for a fumbled snap.
Thats basic math right there.
40 seconds per play times three plays = 120 seconds or two minutes.


I will be honest and say I do not remember that completely.
I cannot believe nobody else on the staff or in the booth told him the situation.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 07:20 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:










Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.

Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


The titan game where our starting qb was knock out of the game and Jackson came in and was sacked twice and we punted....that game?


the game where down with no timeouts and 2 minutes left we punted.
Titans took three knees and won.
Childress later defended himself by saying he thought the Defense would get us the ball back.


And he was wrong and I am sure he accepts some of the blame as well.

Coaches coach and Players play.
He took a gamble and it did not pay off.

This is all hindsight 20-20.
What if the Defense got the ball back and we won.
What a genius he would be.


no, we punted with no timeouts and less than two minutes left.
Titans took three knees and walked away with a win.
There was no possible way for the D to get the ball back.

No way at all except for a fumbled snap.
Thats basic math right there.
40 seconds per play times three plays = 120 seconds or two minutes.


I will be honest and say I do not remember that completely.
I cannot believe nobody else on the staff or in the booth told him the situation.


I'll look up the play by play and confirm, but I recall thinking wtf was he thinking as there was no possible chance to get the ball back.
he threw in the white flag then.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 07:22 PM
here ya go
last two drives of the game:


#
Minnesota Vikings at 03:40
# 2-R.Bironas kicks 71 yards from TEN 30 to MIN -1. 43-M.Hicks to MIN 21 for 22 yards (57-J.Stamer, 30-E.King).
# 1-10-MIN 21 (3:32) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass short middle to 19-B.Wade to MIN 29 for 8 yards (22-V.Fuller). FUMBLES (22-V.Fuller), recovered by MIN-81-V.Shiancoe at MIN 30.
# 2-1-MIN 30 (3:06) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 24 for -6 yards (92-A.Haynesworth).
# 3-7-MIN 24 (2:41) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 18 for -6 yards (sack split by 93-K.Vanden Bosch and 97-T.Brown).
#
4-13-MIN 18
(2:00) (Punt formation) 5-C.Kluwe punts 56 yards to TEN 26, Center-46-C.Loeffler, fair catch by 29-C.Carr.

# Tennessee Titans at 01:53
# 1-10-TEN 26 (1:53) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 25 for -1 yards.
# 2-11-TEN 25 (1:16) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 24 for -1 yards.
# 3-12-TEN 24 (:38) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 23 for -1 yards.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 07:32 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


here ya go
last two drives of the game:


#
Minnesota Vikings at 03:40
# 2-R.Bironas kicks 71 yards from TEN 30 to MIN -1. 43-M.Hicks to MIN 21 for 22 yards (57-J.Stamer, 30-E.King).
# 1-10-MIN 21 (3:32) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass short middle to 19-B.Wade to MIN 29 for 8 yards (22-V.Fuller). FUMBLES (22-V.Fuller), recovered by MIN-81-V.Shiancoe at MIN 30.
# 2-1-MIN 30 (3:06) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 24 for -6 yards (92-A.Haynesworth).
# 3-7-MIN 24 (2:41) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 18 for -6 yards (sack split by 93-K.Vanden Bosch and 97-T.Brown).
#

4-13-MIN 18
(2:00) (Punt formation) 5-C.Kluwe punts 56 yards to TEN 26, Center-46-C.Loeffler, fair catch by 29-C.Carr.

# Tennessee Titans at 01:53
# 1-10-TEN 26 (1:53) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 25 for -1 yards.
# 2-11-TEN 25 (1:16) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 24 for -1 yards.
# 3-12-TEN 24 (:38) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 23 for -1 yards.


Ok, we can put that on him and last year was rocky at times.

However, we are really looking at this year.
I mean what good does it do to bitch about last year.
He is 6-0 and we are winning.
That's all I care about is wins.
Not stats, not FF numbers.
I want wins and have spent my entire life wanting to see this team in a Super Bowl.

The players believe in Chilly, why can't we?

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 07:34 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


here ya go
last two drives of the game:


#
Minnesota Vikings at 03:40
# 2-R.Bironas kicks 71 yards from TEN 30 to MIN -1. 43-M.Hicks to MIN 21 for 22 yards (57-J.Stamer, 30-E.King).
# 1-10-MIN 21 (3:32) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass short middle to 19-B.Wade to MIN 29 for 8 yards (22-V.Fuller). FUMBLES (22-V.Fuller), recovered by MIN-81-V.Shiancoe at MIN 30.
# 2-1-MIN 30 (3:06) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 24 for -6 yards (92-A.Haynesworth).
# 3-7-MIN 24 (2:41) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 18 for -6 yards (sack split by 93-K.Vanden Bosch and 97-T.Brown).
#

4-13-MIN 18
(2:00) (Punt formation) 5-C.Kluwe punts 56 yards to TEN 26, Center-46-C.Loeffler, fair catch by 29-C.Carr.

# Tennessee Titans at 01:53
# 1-10-TEN 26 (1:53) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 25 for -1 yards.
# 2-11-TEN 25 (1:16) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 24 for -1 yards.
# 3-12-TEN 24 (:38) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 23 for -1 yards.


Ok, we can put that on him and last year was rocky at times.

However, we are really looking at this year.
I mean what good does it do to bitch about last year.
He is 6-0 and we are winning.
That's all I care about is wins.
Not stats, not FF numbers.
I want wins and have spent my entire life wanting to see this team in a Super Bowl.

The players believe in Chilly, why can't we?


As long as we're winning, I believe and support him, but all I'm saying is things like that will cost us at some point, I just hope its not at a critical points, and that is my beef with him.
I think he can still be a good coach for us, he's shown real improvements from the past few years, but I'm still wary.

Purple Floyd
10-18-2009, 07:44 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


here ya go
last two drives of the game:


#
Minnesota Vikings at 03:40
# 2-R.Bironas kicks 71 yards from TEN 30 to MIN -1. 43-M.Hicks to MIN 21 for 22 yards (57-J.Stamer, 30-E.King).
# 1-10-MIN 21 (3:32) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass short middle to 19-B.Wade to MIN 29 for 8 yards (22-V.Fuller). FUMBLES (22-V.Fuller), recovered by MIN-81-V.Shiancoe at MIN 30.
# 2-1-MIN 30 (3:06) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 24 for -6 yards (92-A.Haynesworth).
# 3-7-MIN 24 (2:41) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 18 for -6 yards (sack split by 93-K.Vanden Bosch and 97-T.Brown).
#
4-13-MIN 18
(2:00) (Punt formation) 5-C.Kluwe punts 56 yards to TEN 26, Center-46-C.Loeffler, fair catch by 29-C.Carr.

# Tennessee Titans at 01:53
# 1-10-TEN 26 (1:53) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 25 for -1 yards.
# 2-11-TEN 25 (1:16) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 24 for -1 yards.
# 3-12-TEN 24 (:38) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 23 for -1 yards.


Ok, we can put that on him and last year was rocky at times.

However, we are really looking at this year.
I mean what good does it do to bitch about last year.
He is 6-0 and we are winning.
That's all I care about is wins.
Not stats, not FF numbers.
I want wins and have spent my entire life wanting to see this team in a Super Bowl.

The players believe in Chilly, why can't we?


As long as we're winning, I believe and support him, but all I'm saying is things like that will cost us at some point, I just hope its not at a critical points, and that is my beef with him.
I think he can still be a good coach for us, he's shown real improvements from the past few years, but I'm still wary.



Just remember, great talent can win in the absence of great coaching. I use Barry Switzer often in support of that idea. He inherited a team stacked with talent and they went on to win a SB with him at the helm. I also see the Ravens with Billick much the same way. That team could have won the SB with several coaches at the helm. What I look for in a great coach is one who can lose a player and insert a backup and not see that person exploited because they adjust adapt.

Is Childress that type of coach? I will let you decide.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 08:07 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


here ya go
last two drives of the game:


#
Minnesota Vikings at 03:40
# 2-R.Bironas kicks 71 yards from TEN 30 to MIN -1. 43-M.Hicks to MIN 21 for 22 yards (57-J.Stamer, 30-E.King).
# 1-10-MIN 21 (3:32) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass short middle to 19-B.Wade to MIN 29 for 8 yards (22-V.Fuller). FUMBLES (22-V.Fuller), recovered by MIN-81-V.Shiancoe at MIN 30.
# 2-1-MIN 30 (3:06) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 24 for -6 yards (92-A.Haynesworth).
# 3-7-MIN 24 (2:41) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 18 for -6 yards (sack split by 93-K.Vanden Bosch and 97-T.Brown).
#

4-13-MIN 18
(2:00) (Punt formation) 5-C.Kluwe punts 56 yards to TEN 26, Center-46-C.Loeffler, fair catch by 29-C.Carr.

# Tennessee Titans at 01:53
# 1-10-TEN 26 (1:53) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 25 for -1 yards.
# 2-11-TEN 25 (1:16) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 24 for -1 yards.
# 3-12-TEN 24 (:38) 5-K.Collins kneels to TEN 23 for -1 yards.


Ok, we can put that on him and last year was rocky at times.

However, we are really looking at this year.
I mean what good does it do to bitch about last year.
He is 6-0 and we are winning.
That's all I care about is wins.
Not stats, not FF numbers.
I want wins and have spent my entire life wanting to see this team in a Super Bowl.

The players believe in Chilly, why can't we?


As long as we're winning, I believe and support him, but all I'm saying is things like that will cost us at some point, I just hope its not at a critical points, and that is my beef with him.

I think he can still be a good coach for us, he's shown real improvements from the past few years, but I'm still wary.



That is a rare and extreme error there.
I am mainly referring to all the bitching this year...our 6-0 year so far.

First loss we have all the blame will go to Chiller.
I guarantee it.


BTW, we will lose one.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 08:11 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 08:12 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!
;D

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 08:15 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.

Webby
10-18-2009, 08:19 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little "meow" negative Nancy!

;D


Well, come on, some dudes today were telling me it was unbeaten teams of the year Jan 3: Vikes/Giants...would be a monster game.

Yup.

Might be huge, but only one team is undefeated.... YEEEHAAA!

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 08:58 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

Mr Anderson
10-18-2009, 09:02 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 09:05 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:




BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


We don't have to lose.
But if we are (which we will) I would rather see it now.

Do you honestly think we will go 16-0 then?

MaxVike
10-18-2009, 09:10 PM
Good grief, you have got to be kidding me.
We are 6-0, live with it for now at least.

kevoncox
10-18-2009, 09:11 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:






BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little "meow" negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious jiggly butt.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


We don't have to lose.
But if we are (which we will) I would rather see it now.

Do you honestly think we will go 16-0 then?




We don't have to lose. We should go 16-0. There is no team on our roster that we cannot beat. The question is however, will we play discipline, inspired ball.

ultravikingfan
10-18-2009, 09:15 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:








BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little "meow" negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious jiggly butt.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


We don't have to lose.
But if we are (which we will) I would rather see it now.

Do you honestly think we will go 16-0 then?




We don't have to lose. We should go 16-0. There is no team on our roster that we cannot beat. The question is however, will we play discipline, inspired ball.


"Kevoncox...please return to Earth please"

Of course we could go 16-0.
But be realistic bro, we aren't.
Do not set yourself up for that big of letdown.


Oh the humanity...we went 15-1....wahhhhhhh....we suck!!!
;D

kevoncox
10-18-2009, 09:18 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:










BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little "meow" negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious jiggly butt.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


We don't have to lose.
But if we are (which we will) I would rather see it now.

Do you honestly think we will go 16-0 then?




We don't have to lose. We should go 16-0. There is no team on our roster that we cannot beat. The question is however, will we play discipline, inspired ball.


"Kevoncox...please return to Earth please"

Of course we could go 16-0.
But be realistic bro, we aren't.
Do not set yourself up for that big of letdown.


Oh the humanity...we went 15-1....wahhhhhhh....we suck!!!

;D


Nah man, I wouldn't say we sucked. I wouldn't mind us losing 3 games this season. However, I hate being in complete control of a game and simply allowing a team to hang in there, until they steal a game(kinda like the Colts game last season). I think we can go 16-0. It's just 1 game at a time.

Mr Anderson
10-18-2009, 09:29 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:






BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!
;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


We don't have to lose.
But if we are (which we will) I would rather see it now.

Do you honestly think we will go 16-0 then?



Absolutely not, but that wasn't my point. All I'm saying is we shouldn't have to lose a game or have any kind of slap in the face reality check to be focused. Childress and Co. should have our guys focused and primed to play every 60 minutes every Sunday.

The talent level on our defense is out of this world, and we let someone come into our house and put up 21 points in the 4th quarter. If we had a quarter of the pride and tenacity the Ravens play with, we could shut teams out on a regular basis.

Vikefan05
10-18-2009, 10:06 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:




Still got a beef with Brad Childress?

Absolutely, this game confirmed it.

I am sick to death of getting up by two scores, then changing mindsets and playing to not lose the game.
We did it against the 49ers, we did it against the Packers and we did it again here.


Just once I'd like to see us seal the deal.
Put the game out of reach instead of playing stupid fricken games with the other team.

+1

V4L
10-18-2009, 11:36 PM
Yes I do

Fire Chilldress

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 11:38 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Yes I do

Fire
Slap Chilldress in the face

V4L
10-18-2009, 11:42 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Yes I do

Fire
Slap Chilldress in the face




Good call

ejmat
10-18-2009, 11:43 PM
"Elam529" wrote:


I do have a beef with Childress. Why put in Peterson that late?


And this post my good PPO friend's is a perfect example of how Childress is damned if he does and damned if he don't with some people.
People beeeyatch when AP is not in then they blame Childress when he is in.

ejmat
10-18-2009, 11:45 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I may be rong here but didn't a draw -play score a long TD run for the Ravens?

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 11:47 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:




Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I may be rong here but didn't a draw -play score a long TD run for the Ravens?


not on third down was it?

Even if it was, they don't do it constantly, we do.
I'm sure we ran that play in that situation at least 9-10 times this season.
Occasionally its a good call, but I'm sure DCoordinators keep that in mind when gameplanning.

ejmat
10-18-2009, 11:52 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:




BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


A major step down?
Where?
Please explain.
They are 6-0.
Want to look at a major step down look at what Tice's team did when they were 6-0.


Yes the team lost focus in the 4th quarter today.
Was that Childress, Frazier or the players?
Love how Childress is the scapegoat for everything and anything that goes wrong.
Even when they are 6-0 there's an excuse in that the team is so good they would be 6-0 without him.
How the hell does anyone know that?


It seems to me the players enjoy playing for him.
Is there anyone here that disagrees with that?
They must know a bit more about the situation then any of us computer coaches at the keyboard.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 11:54 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:






BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


A major step down?
Where?
Please explain.
They are 6-0.
Want to look at a major step down look at what Tice's team did when they were 6-0.


Yes the team lost focus in the 4th quarter today.
Was that Childress, Frazier or the players?
Love how Childress is the scapegoat for everything and anything that goes wrong.
Even when they are 6-0 there's an excuse in that the team is so good they would be 6-0 without him.
How the hell does anyone know that?


It seems to me the players enjoy playing for him.
Is there anyone here that disagrees with that?
They must know a bit more about the situation then any of us computer coaches at the keyboard.



I bet he meant its a step down from the number of things he had against Childress before.

ejmat
10-18-2009, 11:55 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:








BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


A major step down?
Where?
Please explain.
They are 6-0.
Want to look at a major step down look at what Tice's team did when they were 6-0.


Yes the team lost focus in the 4th quarter today.
Was that Childress, Frazier or the players?
Love how Childress is the scapegoat for everything and anything that goes wrong.
Even when they are 6-0 there's an excuse in that the team is so good they would be 6-0 without him.
How the hell does anyone know that?


It seems to me the players enjoy playing for him.
Is there anyone here that disagrees with that?
They must know a bit more about the situation then any of us computer coaches at the keyboard.



I bet he meant its a step down from the number of things he had against Childress before.




Could be.
I may have misread it.
If I did Holland I apologize and thanks for pointing it out to me IBP.

i_bleed_purple
10-18-2009, 11:57 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:










BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


A major step down?
Where?
Please explain.
They are 6-0.
Want to look at a major step down look at what Tice's team did when they were 6-0.


Yes the team lost focus in the 4th quarter today.
Was that Childress, Frazier or the players?
Love how Childress is the scapegoat for everything and anything that goes wrong.
Even when they are 6-0 there's an excuse in that the team is so good they would be 6-0 without him.
How the hell does anyone know that?


It seems to me the players enjoy playing for him.
Is there anyone here that disagrees with that?
They must know a bit more about the situation then any of us computer coaches at the keyboard.



I bet he meant its a step down from the number of things he had against Childress before.




Could be.
I may have misread it.
If I did Holland I apologize and thanks for pointing it out to me IBP.


that was Mr. A btw ;)

ejmat
10-18-2009, 11:58 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:












BTW, we will lose one.


shun the non-believer


LOL!
I am a chicken little pussy negative Nancy!

;D


Seriously though, if we can beat the Packers and Steelers, I seriously think we have a shot at going 14-2 or better.
Giants aren't as good as advertised, and at week 17, its possible they rest some starters.
I could see us dropping one against the Bears, and Possibly the Bengals depending on how they're playing at that point in the season.
Hopefully by the time we're playing them, our safeties get their act together, and we can play a complete game.


I said it before this game.
If we can go 2-1 in the next 3 we will be sitting really pretty heading into the bye and I will be very happy.

We are good.
But I do not think we are gonna roll undefeated.
I would rather get the loss sooner than later.
That way the team can refocus, get hungry for vengeance and come out and whip some serious ass.
Also, with the lose sooner it will give this team time to put what they have done in perspective and point out the weak spots.

So, staying with my 2-1 happiness I think we will have the best chance next weekend.
The Steelers are tough and Big Ben is a great game manager.
I do not want to lose to the Inbred Sheep Humpers.

Just to clarify...sure I would not like to lose at all.
But if we do, sooner the better.

And that's the problem. We shouldn't have to lose to be motivated, focused, and hungry.

Right now that's my biggest qualm with Childress and co. Which is a major step down from the last 3 years.


A major step down?
Where?
Please explain.
They are 6-0.
Want to look at a major step down look at what Tice's team did when they were 6-0.


Yes the team lost focus in the 4th quarter today.
Was that Childress, Frazier or the players?
Love how Childress is the scapegoat for everything and anything that goes wrong.
Even when they are 6-0 there's an excuse in that the team is so good they would be 6-0 without him.
How the hell does anyone know that?


It seems to me the players enjoy playing for him.
Is there anyone here that disagrees with that?
They must know a bit more about the situation then any of us computer coaches at the keyboard.



I bet he meant its a step down from the number of things he had against Childress before.




Could be.
I may have misread it.
If I did Holland I apologize and thanks for pointing it out to me IBP.


that was Mr. A btw ;)


I'm all screwed up.
lol.
I will just apologize.
;D

ejmat
10-19-2009, 12:00 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:






Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I may be rong here but didn't a draw -play score a long TD run for the Ravens?


not on third down was it?

Even if it was, they don't do it constantly, we do.
I'm sure we ran that play in that situation at least 9-10 times this season.
Occasionally its a good call, but I'm sure DCoordinators keep that in mind when gameplanning.


Rice's draw was on 1st down but draw plays are used quite frequently on 3rd downs.
They can be ery effective when teams are looking for the pass especially with RBs like AP or CT.

mnjamie
10-19-2009, 12:04 AM
Childress does need to go, simple.

He can not manage a game in tight situations and it will show.
It has in the past and will again.

ejmat
10-19-2009, 12:08 AM
"mnjamie" wrote:


Childress does need to go, simple.

He can not manage a game in tight situations and it will show.
It has in the past and will again.


Simple?
So what you are saying is 6-0 isn't good enough?
I think he has managed a few games over his career in tight situations and did just fine.
He's also made a few mistakes.
But simple?
No.

Vikes
10-19-2009, 12:08 AM
Chilly is doing great!

He has put together a good plan so far, and he deserves the chance to finish, what he started.

Go Vikes!

i_bleed_purple
10-19-2009, 12:09 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:








Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I may be rong here but didn't a draw -play score a long TD run for the Ravens?


not on third down was it?

Even if it was, they don't do it constantly, we do.
I'm sure we ran that play in that situation at least 9-10 times this season.
Occasionally its a good call, but I'm sure DCoordinators keep that in mind when gameplanning.


Rice's draw was on 1st down but draw plays are used quite frequently on 3rd downs.
They can be ery effective when teams are looking for the pass especially with RBs like AP or CT.



yes, its a good idea, which is why it worked at first, however teams are catching on.
The DC's aren't dumb, they are fully aware that the Vikings like to do this, we've done it consistently over the past 3 years.

ejmat
10-19-2009, 12:11 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:










Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I may be rong here but didn't a draw -play score a long TD run for the Ravens?


not on third down was it?

Even if it was, they don't do it constantly, we do.
I'm sure we ran that play in that situation at least 9-10 times this season.
Occasionally its a good call, but I'm sure DCoordinators keep that in mind when gameplanning.


Rice's draw was on 1st down but draw plays are used quite frequently on 3rd downs.
They can be ery effective when teams are looking for the pass especially with RBs like AP or CT.



yes, its a good idea, which is why it worked at first, however teams are catching on.
The DC's aren't dumb, they are fully aware that the Vikings like to do this, we've done it consistently over the past 3 years.


It is true but it works pretty well so why change something that works? Let's not forget they have thrown on 3rd down pretty often this year too.
They have to mix things up.

i_bleed_purple
10-19-2009, 12:12 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:












Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I may be rong here but didn't a draw -play score a long TD run for the Ravens?


not on third down was it?

Even if it was, they don't do it constantly, we do.
I'm sure we ran that play in that situation at least 9-10 times this season.
Occasionally its a good call, but I'm sure DCoordinators keep that in mind when gameplanning.


Rice's draw was on 1st down but draw plays are used quite frequently on 3rd downs.
They can be ery effective when teams are looking for the pass especially with RBs like AP or CT.



yes, its a good idea, which is why it worked at first, however teams are catching on.
The DC's aren't dumb, they are fully aware that the Vikings like to do this, we've done it consistently over the past 3 years.


It is true but it works pretty well so why change something that works? Let's not forget they have thrown on 3rd down pretty often this year too.
They have to mix things up.


I don't remember it working more than once this season, and we've run it quite a bit.

ejmat
10-19-2009, 01:05 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:














Look, we are 6-0.
There seems to be more ragging on Childress than there is praise.
This blows my damn mind.
What also blows my mind is that Chiller gets blamed for everything.
Hardly ever the execution of the players, but Chiller.


The guy must be doing something right?
And for some to still say "Fire Childress"?
Are you kidding?

Here's the logic:

Last year when we lost a lot (not all) put all the blame on Chilly.
Stay with me here.
So those of you who did better be putting all the blames for wins on Chiller this year or you make zero sense.


Were all of our games pretty?
No.
Did the Vikes get the job done?
Yes.

End of story.


well, we're not saying fire Childress, the question was "Still got a Beef?" and the answer is yes.
We are lacking the killer instinct we need to be great.
Look at the Pats, they were up early on the Titans, but they don't ease up in the second quarter, they keep pushing to ensure there's no chance of losing.
Our execution is good, which is a reflection on coaching.
however the mindset and playcalling blows my mind at time.

So no, not end of story.


Some are still saying Fire Childress.
I am not just looking at this thread.

Mindset?
How do you know the teams mindset?



coaches mindset.
He's too content with punting early in the game, he's too content with field goals instead of touchdowns.
Running a draw on third and long was a good call the first time, but I haven't seen it work at all this season.
Time to change it up.
Childress seems content to play to not lose, instead of trying to win the game.
Only when the Ravens got within one score did we see the playbook open up again.
I'm not sure whether that falls on Bevell or Childress, butthe way I see it, Childress has the final say, he can easilly tell Bevell to start playing football instead of pussyball.

Remember the Titans game last year?


His mindset has won him 6 games.


I see the draw on 3rd down a lot because 3rd is a passing down.
Ideally the middle should be open for the draw.
It just has not worked and you just cannot abandon everything that does not work.
Also, it is safe.
3rd and long you do not want to force one and give the other team good field position.
Besides, watch other games and see how many times teams go for it on 4th down instead of punt.
It is probably a very low percentage.

I would put most of the Raven comeback on the Defense.
I am pretty sure Brad is not calling the Defense or really putting a foot in their ass.
That is the job of his D-Cord.
I that guy is fucking it up, boot him.
The players have to execute their assignments and actually make a tackle, that you cannot blame the coach for.


I may be rong here but didn't a draw -play score a long TD run for the Ravens?


not on third down was it?

Even if it was, they don't do it constantly, we do.
I'm sure we ran that play in that situation at least 9-10 times this season.
Occasionally its a good call, but I'm sure DCoordinators keep that in mind when gameplanning.


Rice's draw was on 1st down but draw plays are used quite frequently on 3rd downs.
They can be ery effective when teams are looking for the pass especially with RBs like AP or CT.



yes, its a good idea, which is why it worked at first, however teams are catching on.
The DC's aren't dumb, they are fully aware that the Vikings like to do this, we've done it consistently over the past 3 years.


It is true but it works pretty well so why change something that works? Let's not forget they have thrown on 3rd down pretty often this year too.
They have to mix things up.


I don't remember it working more than once this season, and we've run it quite a bit.



I can't tell you the exact % or anything.
What I can tell you is it is common not just for the VIkings but for many and I can guarantee you they have thrown a lot on 3rd down as well.
You have to play balanced and try to catch teams off guard.
Draws can be very effective on third downs.
It may not always work but you still have to do it sometimes.

HEY
10-19-2009, 02:39 AM
I still has a problem with his game management. I don't like his play calling at times, but it's the clock management that is horrible.

Perhaps we should do what the Redskins did today. Let someone else take care of the play-calling so Childress can focus on the other things...

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d81382299&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Marrdro
10-19-2009, 06:11 AM
"HEY" wrote:


I still has a problem with his game management. I don't like his play calling at times, but it's the clock management that is horrible.

Perhaps we should do what the Redskins did today. Let someone else take care of the play-calling so Childress can focus on the other things...

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d81382299&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Childress doesn't, I reapeat one more time for possible penetration, doesn't call the plays.
Hasn't for quite some time......WOW
::)

singersp
10-19-2009, 08:12 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Childress doesn't, I reapeat one more time for possible penetration, doesn't call the plays.
Hasn't for quite some time......WOW
::)


**snickers**


But coach Brad Childress played it conservative with three straight runs, and Longwell's 31-yard field goal gave Flacco one more chance with 1:49 to go.
http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Vikings-33-Ravens-31/67edb408-0112-4ea5-a0b5-02a4b9bdee3c


Still, Childress decided to play it conservative by running three straight times after Rice's big catch. Settling for the field goal gave Flacco one last chance to take the game.

"I felt like we needed to score a touchdown," Favre said. "They were feeling it at that stage of the game. I think everyone in the building felt the same way."
http://wjz.com/sports/Favre.Vikings.escape.2.1256674.html

:P

ejmat
10-19-2009, 08:30 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Childress doesn't, I reapeat one more time for possible penetration, doesn't call the plays.
Hasn't for quite some time......WOW
::)


**snickers**


But coach Brad Childress played it conservative with three straight runs, and Longwell's 31-yard field goal gave Flacco one more chance with 1:49 to go.
http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Vikings-33-Ravens-31/67edb408-0112-4ea5-a0b5-02a4b9bdee3c


Still, Childress decided to play it conservative by running three straight times after Rice's big catch. Settling for the field goal gave Flacco one last chance to take the game.

"I felt like we needed to score a touchdown," Favre said. "They were feeling it at that stage of the game. I think everyone in the building felt the same way."
http://wjz.com/sports/Favre.Vikings.escape.2.1256674.html

:P




The sportswriter has no clue who calls the plays evidently. Childress himself stated a long time ago that Bevell would be calling the majority of the plays.
What proof does the sportswriter have that Childress called those 3 plays?

Now how many times did the VIkings go down field in today's game?
I would hardly call the play calling conservative.
It's funny because the same people that vie for AP to get the ball say that CHILDRESS is being conservative when he gives him the ball.
He's averaging like 5 yards a carry.
Therefore if he does get the ball 3 times chances are he will get a first down.
That's not conservative.

singersp
10-19-2009, 08:58 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Childress doesn't, I reapeat one more time for possible penetration, doesn't call the plays.
Hasn't for quite some time......WOW
::)


**snickers**


But coach Brad Childress played it conservative with three straight runs, and Longwell's 31-yard field goal gave Flacco one more chance with 1:49 to go.
http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Vikings-33-Ravens-31/67edb408-0112-4ea5-a0b5-02a4b9bdee3c


Still, Childress decided to play it conservative by running three straight times after Rice's big catch. Settling for the field goal gave Flacco one last chance to take the game.

"I felt like we needed to score a touchdown," Favre said. "They were feeling it at that stage of the game. I think everyone in the building felt the same way."
http://wjz.com/sports/Favre.Vikings.escape.2.1256674.html

:P




The sportswriter has no clue who calls the plays evidently. Childress himself stated a long time ago that Bevell would be calling the majority of the plays.
What proof does the sportswriter have that Childress called those 3 plays?

Now how many times did the VIkings go down field in today's game?
I would hardly call the play calling conservative.
It's funny because the same people that vie for AP to get the ball say that CHILDRESS is being conservative when he gives him the ball.
He's averaging like 5 yards a carry.
Therefore if he does get the ball 3 times chances are he will get a first down.
That's not conservative.


Majority certainly doesn't mean all.

Childress also stated that if Favre wasn't signed by TC, no way in hell would he be signed.
;)

ejmat
10-19-2009, 10:25 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Childress doesn't, I reapeat one more time for possible penetration, doesn't call the plays.
Hasn't for quite some time......WOW
::)


**snickers**


But coach Brad Childress played it conservative with three straight runs, and Longwell's 31-yard field goal gave Flacco one more chance with 1:49 to go.
http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Vikings-33-Ravens-31/67edb408-0112-4ea5-a0b5-02a4b9bdee3c


Still, Childress decided to play it conservative by running three straight times after Rice's big catch. Settling for the field goal gave Flacco one last chance to take the game.

"I felt like we needed to score a touchdown," Favre said. "They were feeling it at that stage of the game. I think everyone in the building felt the same way."
http://wjz.com/sports/Favre.Vikings.escape.2.1256674.html

:P




The sportswriter has no clue who calls the plays evidently. Childress himself stated a long time ago that Bevell would be calling the majority of the plays.
What proof does the sportswriter have that Childress called those 3 plays?

Now how many times did the VIkings go down field in today's game?
I would hardly call the play calling conservative.
It's funny because the same people that vie for AP to get the ball say that CHILDRESS is being conservative when he gives him the ball.
He's averaging like 5 yards a carry.
Therefore if he does get the ball 3 times chances are he will get a first down.
That's not conservative.


Majority certainly doesn't mean all.

Childress also stated that if Favre wasn't signed by TC, no way in hell would he be signed.
;)


You are right but I believe there's a big difference in the two situations.


Regardless, the play calling was in no way, shape or form conservative.
Therefore whether it was Childress or Bevell it is a moot point and just some people trying to make crap up to degrade Childress.
When the only thing a person can write to justify his claim that they ran the ball on 3 straight plays is being conservative he must forget who the Vikings' RBs are.
It's really a joke if you ask me.
Favre threw 29 times yesterday.
How many of the throws were deep?
Conservative?
My ASS!

The Dropper
10-19-2009, 11:00 AM
Link. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/notebook?page=lastcall09/week6)

Favre had a funny exchange with Vikings coach Brad Childress late in the victory over the Ravens. Childress came over and told him that momentum was shifting to the Ravens and the Vikings needed to finish drives with touchdowns. Favre said his response was: "No s---, Sherlock."

And yet, given the chance to finish a drive with a touchdown, the coaching staff's response was to call a run on 3rd and 9 from the 17. Go for the first down! Pick that up and it's game over. Then call three consecutive run plays. If you don't score a touchdown, then at least you've
run out the clock and can kick a field goal for the win.

It would have been one thing to go conservative if the defense had given any indication over the previous 20 minutes that they could stop anything that the Ravens were doing on offense. But given the defense's meltdown, you have to go for that touchdown.

That's my beef.

AngloVike
10-19-2009, 11:13 AM
The problem I have is when we go 14 points up in the first quarter and then can only manage 19 more points in the remaining 45 mins of the game. I expect a bit more 'kick arse' in the KAO then we are currently seeing and expect it to last longer than one quarter of football.

Bkfldviking
10-19-2009, 11:21 AM
"AngloVike" wrote:


The problem I have is when we go 14 points up in the first quarter and then can only manage 19 more points in the remaining 45 mins of the game. I expect a bit more 'kick arse' in the KAO then we are currently seeing and expect it to last longer than one quarter of football.


I agree fully.
I think we should score points on every drive.
With the talent we have, the chemistry on offense, there is no reason we should ever go three and out.
Field goal range is defintely within our reach and TD's are always a possibility.

ejmat
10-19-2009, 11:42 AM
"Bkfldviking" wrote:


"AngloVike" wrote:


The problem I have is when we go 14 points up in the first quarter and then can only manage 19 more points in the remaining 45 mins of the game. I expect a bit more 'kick arse' in the KAO then we are currently seeing and expect it to last longer than one quarter of football.


I agree fully.
I think we should score points on every drive.
With the talent we have, the chemistry on offense, there is no reason we should ever go three and out.
Field goal range is defintely within our reach and TD's are always a possibility.


Let's not forget they scored 33 points against one of the best defenses in the league.
This crap about coring every drive is unrealistic.
The 1998 team didn't score on every drive neither did the 2007 Patriot team.
The offense is the second highest scoring offense in the league right now.
The only team better is the Saints.
What more do people want?
So they called a draw on 3rd and nine.
What if it worked?
Would you be asking the same question?
I highly doubt it.
What if the pass didn't work?
Would you question that by saying they should have given the ball to AP?
The conservative talk is ruled out when you are averaging over 30 points a game when the offense are the ones scoring those points.

Big C
10-19-2009, 11:47 AM
I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin. The offense is showing signs of life with a real QB. Something the Childress era has NEVER experienced. Chilli had something to do with that but hopefully learnt his lesson and is working with the front office for a legitimate franchise QB who can develop and take over once Favre retires.

That all being said, I wouldn't want any other coach running the Vikings at this point. I judge a coach by the way a team is playing and there aren't too many teams playing better than the Vikings. As far as I am concerned, Chilehaus (named after the most astonishing building I have seen in my life - in Hamburg, Germany) can keep his job and sign an extention. The foundation for the success this season was built upon his work (along with Front Office) over the last 3 years. The Bears, Packers and Lions have given inconsistent results over the last 3.5 years. The Vikings have consistently improved.

Chilehaus for president.

Zeus
10-19-2009, 12:05 PM
"Big" wrote:


I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin.

People seem to forget that the Vikings were TRAILING at that point, 31-30.
What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

Or - what if the pass was just incomplete, but that makes the clock stop with 2:15 showing.
FG and then kick-off AND THEN 2-minute warning.
That gives the Ravens 2 more plays than they ended up having and Hauschka's 44-yarder suddenly becomes a 35-yarder, for example.

I, personally, don't have much of a problem with how the end played out.

=Z=

i_bleed_purple
10-19-2009, 12:08 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"Big" wrote:


I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin.

People seem to forget that the Vikings were TRAILING at that point, 31-30.
What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

Or - what if the pass was just incomplete, but that makes the clock stop with 2:15 showing.
FG and then kick-off AND THEN 2-minute warning.
That gives the Ravens 2 more plays than they ended up having and Hauschka's 44-yarder suddenly becomes a 35-yarder, for example.

I, personally, don't have much of a problem with how the end played out.

=Z=


or what if he didn't do any of the above, as that hasn't been his tendency, scored and made the game a 6 point game instead of a 2 point game, forcing the ravens to score a TD?
Why are you only dwelling on the negative .
We were playing good offense on the last drive, where are the posts about that?
Rice had a breakout game, not going to give him a chance?

Zeus
10-19-2009, 12:11 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"Big" wrote:


I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin.

People seem to forget that the Vikings were TRAILING at that point, 31-30.
What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

Or - what if the pass was just incomplete, but that makes the clock stop with 2:15 showing.
FG and then kick-off AND THEN 2-minute warning.
That gives the Ravens 2 more plays than they ended up having and Hauschka's 44-yarder suddenly becomes a 35-yarder, for example.

I, personally, don't have much of a problem with how the end played out.


or what if he didn't do any of the above, as that hasn't been his tendency, scored and made the game a 6 point game instead of a 2 point game, forcing the ravens to score a TD?
Why are you only dwelling on the negative .
We were playing good offense on the last drive, where are the posts about that?
Rice had a breakout game, not going to give him a chance?


Yeah, that's what I'm doing - by supporting the coaching decision, I'm dwelling on the negative.


=Z=

ejmat
10-19-2009, 12:18 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"Big" wrote:


I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin.

People seem to forget that the Vikings were TRAILING at that point, 31-30.
What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

Or - what if the pass was just incomplete, but that makes the clock stop with 2:15 showing.
FG and then kick-off AND THEN 2-minute warning.
That gives the Ravens 2 more plays than they ended up having and Hauschka's 44-yarder suddenly becomes a 35-yarder, for example.

I, personally, don't have much of a problem with how the end played out.


or what if he didn't do any of the above, as that hasn't been his tendency, scored and made the game a 6 point game instead of a 2 point game, forcing the ravens to score a TD?
Why are you only dwelling on the negative .
We were playing good offense on the last drive, where are the posts about that?
Rice had a breakout game, not going to give him a chance?


Yeah, that's what I'm doing - by supporting the coaching decision, I'm dwelling on the negative.


=Z=


Especially when they won the game.
How could you Zeus?
;D

i_bleed_purple
10-19-2009, 12:18 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"Big" wrote:


I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin.

People seem to forget that the Vikings were TRAILING at that point, 31-30.
What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

Or - what if the pass was just incomplete, but that makes the clock stop with 2:15 showing.
FG and then kick-off AND THEN 2-minute warning.
That gives the Ravens 2 more plays than they ended up having and Hauschka's 44-yarder suddenly becomes a 35-yarder, for example.

I, personally, don't have much of a problem with how the end played out.


or what if he didn't do any of the above, as that hasn't been his tendency, scored and made the game a 6 point game instead of a 2 point game, forcing the ravens to score a TD?
Why are you only dwelling on the negative .
We were playing good offense on the last drive, where are the posts about that?
Rice had a breakout game, not going to give him a chance?


Yeah, that's what I'm doing - by supporting the coaching decision, I'm dwelling on the negative.


=Z=





What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

yep, extremely positive.
I take it your a glass is half-full kinda guy right?

i_bleed_purple
10-19-2009, 12:23 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"Big" wrote:


I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin.

People seem to forget that the Vikings were TRAILING at that point, 31-30.
What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

Or - what if the pass was just incomplete, but that makes the clock stop with 2:15 showing.
FG and then kick-off AND THEN 2-minute warning.
That gives the Ravens 2 more plays than they ended up having and Hauschka's 44-yarder suddenly becomes a 35-yarder, for example.

I, personally, don't have much of a problem with how the end played out.


or what if he didn't do any of the above, as that hasn't been his tendency, scored and made the game a 6 point game instead of a 2 point game, forcing the ravens to score a TD?
Why are you only dwelling on the negative .
We were playing good offense on the last drive, where are the posts about that?
Rice had a breakout game, not going to give him a chance?


Yeah, that's what I'm doing - by supporting the coaching decision, I'm dwelling on the negative.


=Z=


Especially when they won the game.
How could you Zeus?
;D


we could have easily lost if they didn't miss a field goal, people seem to be foorgetting this.
Oh wait, I forgot, the Vikings can do no wrong.

C Mac D
10-19-2009, 12:24 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:




I'm not happy with the decision to run the ball for the field goal. We should have attempted the TD and put the nail in the coffin.

People seem to forget that the Vikings were TRAILING at that point, 31-30.
What if Favre takes a shot into the end zone and the pass is picked off?
Or he takes a sack and the FG, instead of being a chip shot is a long-ranger?

Or - what if the pass was just incomplete, but that makes the clock stop with 2:15 showing.
FG and then kick-off AND THEN 2-minute warning.
That gives the Ravens 2 more plays than they ended up having and Hauschka's 44-yarder suddenly becomes a 35-yarder, for example.

I, personally, don't have much of a problem with how the end played out.


or what if he didn't do any of the above, as that hasn't been his tendency, scored and made the game a 6 point game instead of a 2 point game, forcing the ravens to score a TD?
Why are you only dwelling on the negative .
We were playing good offense on the last drive, where are the posts about that?
Rice had a breakout game, not going to give him a chance?


Yeah, that's what I'm doing - by supporting the coaching decision, I'm dwelling on the negative.


=Z=


Especially when they won the game.
How could you Zeus?
;D


we could have easily lost if they didn't miss a field goal, people seem to be foorgetting this.
Oh wait, I forgot, the Vikings can do no wrong.


And if they do, it mustn't be discussed without Zeus' approval.