PDA

View Full Version : Favre Wants a Simplified PLaybook



i_bleed_purple
11-24-2010, 01:11 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.

Infidel
11-24-2010, 01:31 PM
Fascinating.

Thanks.

Mr Anderson
11-24-2010, 01:50 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Not sure if you were referring to the wishbone part to note it as a joke or not, but we are certainly not running the wishbone. Definitely, definitely not.

Maybe we could do it with Webb, Peterson, Gerhart, and Harvin in the backfield for a couple of snaps. That would be fun.

But I like that last quote a lot. "We have to be good at what we do."

I'd also like to see a lot more traditional running plays with 3 receivers on the field. Don't make Tahi guess what running lane Peterson is going to hit in a zone play. Power run blocking, stuff you learn in peewee ball. I just wish we had Herrera to pull.

We are still super talented on offense, let these guys get out there and do their thing.

i_bleed_purple
11-24-2010, 01:55 PM
Mr Anderson wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Not sure if you were referring to the wishbone part to note it as a joke or not, but we are certainly not running the wishbone. Definitely, definitely not.

Why not? Other teams run the full house formation, which is usually two fullbacks and a TB, why not the WB, if not just for a couple plays.

Rice ....X..X..O..X..X..Shank
..............Favre

..............Sauce
..........AD......Gerhart

try a counter or just power run, might not work, but it might.



Maybe we could do it with Webb, Peterson, Gerhart, and Harvin in the backfield for a couple of snaps. That would be fun. Basically an elaborate Wildcat?



But I like that last quote a lot. "We have to be good at what we do."

I'd also like to see a lot more traditional running plays with 3 receivers on the field. Don't make Tahi guess what running lane Peterson is going to hit in a zone play. Power run blocking, stuff you learn in peewee ball. I just wish we had Herrera to pull.

We are still super talented on offense, let these guys get out there and do their thing.

Yup, but I agree with what Favre says at the end, that we try to do too much, and need to go back to the basics.

I like the idea of 3 wide run plays. Peterson runs best in space, not when he's being hit behind the line, so spread them out with 3 wide, and run some off tackle.

Mr Anderson
11-24-2010, 02:11 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Mr Anderson wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Not sure if you were referring to the wishbone part to note it as a joke or not, but we are certainly not running the wishbone. Definitely, definitely not.

Why not? Other teams run the full house formation, which is usually two fullbacks and a TB, why not the WB, if not just for a couple plays.

Rice ....X..X..O..X..X..Shank
..............Favre

..............Sauce
..........AD......Gerhart

try a counter or just power run, might not work, but it might.



Favre said it as a joke. The wishbone a triple option scheme.

We could run the wishbone as a formation once in a while like any other formation, but we're never going to run "the wishbone" offense like Favre jokingly suggested.

Infidel
11-24-2010, 02:23 PM
The guy has a great sense of humor as well as a lot of wisdom.

Things could actually get better.

We are starting to run into good teams that have as many injuries as we do.

That's gotta be a plus in giving us a fighting chance.

i_bleed_purple
11-24-2010, 02:28 PM
Mr Anderson wrote:


We could run the wishbone as a formation once in a while like any other formation, but we're never going to run "the wishbone" offense like Favre jokingly suggested.

All I was saying. No way we go with the Wishbone Offense, but a couple plays.

slavinator
11-24-2010, 02:44 PM
Oh yeah, well I want two tickets to paradise! HA!

A little Eddie Money reference to kick off the holiday weekend!

(and lotsa exclamation points)

HEY
11-24-2010, 02:44 PM
i_bleed_purple wrote:

Peterson runs best in space, not when he's being hit behind the line
I think that goes for all running backs :P

On a more serious note: I would like to see more of Adrian Peterson in the back-field without a fullback for several reasons.

1. Peterson runs better without a fullback. I think there's some statistics on that somewhere, but I don't know where to find it.

2. Peterson prefers to run without a fullback in front of him. Again, I don't have the quote, but I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere. (I'm too lazy to look up anything today :P )

3. Tahi sucks! That's something I don't need to search for. ;)

4. Many times when Peterson is the single back, The Vikes use a 2 tight ends formation. That means Jimmy Kleinsasser instead of Tahi. I'd MUCH rather have arguably the best run-blocking TE than an adequate fullback.

By the way.
Talking about players in the backfield. I saw Percy Harvin running plenty of fake reverses against the Packers and it worked pretty well. The other teams know that Percy is dangerous on reverses, and for good reasons. I think he has averaged almost 10 yards on his reverses. I hope we see more plays which involves Percy in the backfield one way or another.

NDVikingFan66
11-24-2010, 03:10 PM
To talk about the making it simple and be good at what you do. My basketball coach in college always said we could give the other team our offensive plays, because we we know what we are doing better than the opposition, we will do it fundamentally right, and we will be better than them.

At first, I thought he was off his rocker, but as things were put into place, and the big picture was coming together, you could see some truth in that.

Be fundamentally solid at what you do, and do it well, and you are way ahead of the battle.

Purple Floyd
11-24-2010, 06:25 PM
I think this gets at the core of the issues with the whole offensive philosophy during the past regime. Bringing in skill players left and right is great but you also have to have everyone on the same page and if you don't, then you need to stick with the core plays and make sure they can be completed proficiently before you start adding things. When you fail to do that the players end up thinking too much and that is when dumb penalties happen.

Of course Brett has to shoulder a good chunk of the responsibility due to not being in the off season drills and training camp which is when they are working these things out.But also we have had a revolving door at WR and other positions that make expanding the formation package counterproductive.

Hopefully they can learn from this and play better with the adjustments they are making.

Infidel
11-24-2010, 07:15 PM
I think the criticisms of Favre for not going to training camp are overdone and not really valid.

The coaches agreed to it for a good reason. They just want to save on that old, injured and rickety body.

Every throw, every step could be the last one.

Probably a wise decision. He's bound to wear out sooner or later.....why push it?

I can see why he wants things simplified.....he's not the only one that missed--well, training camp and a bunch of practices. Lots of the walking wounded missed a lot of practice.

For a while, Percy was out most of every week.

Simplify!!!

jrjohn
11-24-2010, 07:47 PM
Infidel wrote:

I think the criticisms of Favre for not going to training camp are overdone and not really valid.

The coaches agreed to it for a good reason. They just want to save on that old, injured and rickety body.

Every throw, every step could be the last one.

Probably a wise decision. He's bound to wear out sooner or later.....why push it?

I can see why he wants things simplified.....he's not the only one that missed--well, training camp and a bunch of practices. Lots of the walking wounded missed a lot of practice.

For a while, Percy was out most of every week.

Simplify!!!

Infidel, look what your saying "old, injured, and rickety body, every throw, every step could be the last one" What the hell is this guy doing on the team to start with!

I feel the fact that he missed training camp has been underdone. Nobody would be allowed to touch him in training camp. TC is more than throwing passes, it's talking to the other players, letting them know what you expect. Timing, learing new plays, watching video, meetings, helping the new guys understand, getting in sync with the receivers, and equally important is showing the players that your part of the TEAM. It's a team sport.

Being in sync with the receivers, where have we heard that before, Thats all we heard was "Brett is out of sync with the receivers" for the first 3 weeks.

I'm sorry, but I think his lack of training camp set the tone for the first few games. The Vikings fell behind early on. Then blame game started and subsequent decention. Thats the kiss of death.

Infidel
11-24-2010, 08:03 PM
How could his missing training camp make the entire pass protection effort totally incompetent?

jrjohn
11-24-2010, 08:15 PM
Infidel wrote:

How could his missing training camp make the entire pass protection effort totally incompetent?

I guess were talking about two different things. I'll stop now.

thorshammer
11-24-2010, 08:28 PM
I think what Favre said best was we should do the things we do best that work and keep doing them. Why keep doing the things we don't seem to do well. Are we doing them just to do them. Stick to what works I believe was his point. Works for me. I for one am tired of seeing us do things over and over that don't work then once in awhile seeing us do something that works ...... never to see it again.......hmmmmmmm.

V4L
11-24-2010, 08:30 PM
Infidel wrote:

How could his missing training camp make the entire pass protection effort totally incompetent?

Wouldn't

But it would have helped get on page with his WRs who are running wrong routes and he is throwing wrong ones as well

In that same press conference you keep talking about he also talked bout different people being in and different plays.. They have NO chemistry

thorshammer
11-24-2010, 08:33 PM
I think what Favre said best was we should do the things we do best that work and keep doing them. Why keep doing the things we don't seem to do well. Are we doing them just to do them. Stick to what works I believe was his point. Works for me. I for one am tired of seeing us do things over and over that don't work then once in awhile seeing us do something that works ...... never to see it again.......hmmmmmmm.

V4L
11-24-2010, 08:34 PM
thorshammer wrote:

I think what Favre said best was we should do the things we do best that work and keep doing them. Why keep doing the things we don't seem to do well. Are we doing them just to do them. Stick to what works I believe was his point. Works for me. I for one am tired of seeing us do things over and over that don't work then once in awhile seeing us do something that works ...... never to see it again.......hmmmmmmm.


Exactly

It's not complicated.. It's the same vanilla offense each and every game

Same route combos.. Same formations..

We have a few things that work and don't stick to the basics.. We work best spreading the D.. Getting Adrian some lanes and hitting dig slant and crossing routes quickly.. Not lining up Bernard Berrian and Greg Lewis and Percy on the outsides and running go routes and stem routes

Purple Floyd
11-25-2010, 05:02 AM
How could his missing training camp make the entire pass protection effort totally incompetent?

Because the plays are based on timing and everyone knowing where each player will be on a given play and when. Brett will drop back and roll out differently than jackson so not having him there to build that chemistry is nothing you can disregard. But that is only a part. The number of different formations and personnel packages can take time to master and get comfortable in and every practice counts.

AngloVike
11-25-2010, 09:02 AM
It seems ironic that Favre described most playbooks in the league as being too thick, yet 90% of posters here have been successfully calling the upcoming plays during games before Childress did.
Clearly Chilly couldn't get past page 3 before the new information pushed some of the old outta his head :woohoo:

Infidel
11-25-2010, 01:53 PM
90% of posters here have been successfully calling the upcoming plays

We may call the basic play, but it's a lot more complicated for the players because there are different formations and so many variations on what each position can do on each basic play.

"Peterson inside right tackle" is one that people successfully predict (we see it too much, it seems) but I suspect there are many variations and different assignments for players on what looks to us like a simple play.

Most pass plays probably have a nightmarish number of variations.

singersp
11-25-2010, 05:02 PM
I think the criticisms of Favre for not going to training camp are overdone and not really valid.

They are quite valid.

Every player/former player that was asked that question has said basically the same thing. No matter how good you are, even HOFers, you need to practice constantly to stay good at it.

It's not thesole onus of the WR's to know what the QB is going to do in certain situations, it's also the onus of the QB to know what the receicvers are going to in certain situations.

You don't pick that up playing one preseason game together & a handful of practices before the regular season. But this is what he tries to do & then blames a wr for zigging when he should have been zagging when the wr was coached to zig.

This is why you see QB's like Peyton Manning have sucess with his receivers. Hell, he holds his own camp & invites the receivers to come work with him.

Why? Because he wants to win & knows what it takes.

Favre does want to win. Unfortunately, he wants to show up a week or two before the start of the season & then tries to acclimate or re-acclimate his timing & knowledge of what the receivers will do. Usally at the expense of our first few games. We were very fortunate to play some shitty teams at the begining of the year last year & struggled to beat them.

That I think is part of the problem this season as well. Favre's arm just isn't there anymore & he can't have all practices all week & then play at his best on Sunday's.

How many times do we hear that Favre was held out of practice or limited in practice for this, that & the other reason?

One has to wonder. Who is really taking the bulk of the smnaps & practice during the week?

singersp
11-25-2010, 05:03 PM
I hope they didn't add that 4th & 12 lob pass that they ran in GB. :side:

battleaxe4cheese
11-25-2010, 09:05 PM
We'll see how the plays change for the better. My hunch is they look almost as mediocre as usual. Same lame offensive coordinator and same limp Oline.

HEY
11-25-2010, 09:27 PM
Favre is funny. "You could probably put a 100 dollar bill in one of the playbooks, and it will never be found". LOL!

snowinapril
11-25-2010, 09:43 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.

I was listneing to the conference when it happened and what stuck out to me was that Farve stress not changing the formation to run the same play, dig at Chilly. He was eluding to the fact that may be why we have so many FLAGS for false starts and illegal formation.

Infidel
11-25-2010, 10:47 PM
True.

It's good to see Favre come out and honestly talk about what Childress was doing wrong.

Also, somebody said the players have said that Favre's missing training camp was a big deal.

What player said that? The only one I've seen asked about it was Jared Allen and he laughed and said, "If it was a problem it would have been a problem last year. It's not a problem."

Truth is, the missing of practice due to injuries among receivers has been the biggest problem. For a while, Percy wasn't getting to many practices at all.

Then there's the absence of pass protection, but that's become so obvious it hardly needs to be stated anymore.

singersp
11-26-2010, 05:25 PM
True.

It's good to see Favre come out and honestly talk about what Childress was doing wrong.

Also, somebody said the players have said that Favre's missing training camp was a big deal.

What player said that? The only one I've seen asked about it was Jared Allen and he laughed and said, "If it was a problem it would have been a problem last year. It's not a problem."

Truth is, the missing of practice due to injuries among receivers has been the biggest problem. For a while, Percy wasn't getting to many practices at all.

Then there's the absence of pass protection, but that's become so obvious it hardly needs to be stated anymore.

You do realize it was the same OL that we had last year don't you?
You do realize the OL had a year to gel since last year, don't you?
You do realize that Favre was sacked more times per game last year than he was this year, don't you?

So what was different? Why is Favre failing this year?

1. Favre prepared himself to play more last year than he did this year. His timing issues early & late as well as diminishing accuracy are clearly visible.
2. We no longer have Chester Taylor, whose blocking skills were head & shoulders above AD.
3. Rice was missing. But for 4 of those first 8 games we had Randy Moss.
Last time I checked, we won 1 of those 4 games. I think you'd have to agree that Moss is as good or better than Rice.
4. Favre has returned to his gunslinging ways, rather than protecting the ball like he did last year. He's making poor decisions & nt playing as smart as he did last year. 17 Int's & 5 lost fumbles in 10 games says it all. Last year he had 7 INT's & 2 lost fumbles all year.

You can try to point at the OL all you want for the cause of all Favre's woes you want, but it's the same OLine that's statisically better at prorecting the QB this year than it was last.

I was the one to mention players/former players. It was not Vikings players that they were talking to about the need for practice/training camps it was players from around the league.

If you would watch pre-game shows, primarily the ones were they talked about Favre or anyone else missing camp & preseason you'd have heard what they said. Cris Carter (you remember Chris don't you) was one of them talking about the need for all players, including Favre, to be in camp if he wants his team to win.

As far as what Jared Allen said? Sure we won the first 3 games last year. But what you are forgetting is not only how mediocre we played out of the chute the first 3 games last year, but who we played.

Browns: (5-11) We beat them 34-20, but were losing at the half. It was AD's 180 yards rushing & 3 TD's that carried the team, not Favre's performance.

Lions: (2-14) We beat them 27-13, but again were losing at the half. The Lions turned the ball over to us 3 times. The 2 TD passes that Favre threw were thrown for only 1 yard & 3 yards. Yep, 4 yards total

49ers: (8-8) We beat them 27-24, but for the 3rd time in as many games were losing at the half. We were also still losing after the 3rd quarter & far into the 4th quarter. It took a miracle pass & a miracle catch that could have very easily not been caught or been out of bounds a lot more easily.

So we beat 3 teams, none of which was over .500 & only 1 of which was was better than .320.

Had we played more formidable teams early, we could have very easily been 0-3, just like this year.

Infidel
11-26-2010, 05:58 PM
You do realize it was the same OL that we had last year don't you?

I do. I also realize that they've had a year to get older, fatter and lazier.


You do realize the OL had a year to gel since last year, don't you?

Most of the gel seems to be on their fat bellies.


You do realize that Favre was sacked more times per game last year than he was this year, don't you?

Can't compare until the end of this year. I do know he got hammered many, many times in the LAST game we played last year....these things can skew the averages. I do know that it seemed he had more time last year and he's been hit harder and more often this year.


You can try to point at the OL all you want for the cause of all Favre's woes you want...

If you look at my post, I did say "pass protection" not OL. I do realize that Taylor is gone, but Tahi and Peterson are still here and they, too.....have failed fairly often. Chester used to fail once in a while, too.....I know it's a tough assignment.....but all in all, pass protection has failed--that's the key fact.

Infidel
11-26-2010, 06:03 PM
I do like your analysis of the first three games of both years.

Maybe Favre's injuries and performance problems this year are, to a great extent, due to the fact that we played better teams early on this year and they roughed him up a lot more than did the less dangerous teams of last year.

singersp
11-26-2010, 06:08 PM
You do realize it was the same OL that we had last year don't you?

I do. I also realize that they've had a year to get older, fatter and lazier.


You do realize the OL had a year to gel since last year, don't you?

Most of the gel seems to be on their fat bellies.


You do realize that Favre was sacked more times per game last year than he was this year, don't you?

Can't compare until the end of this year. I do know he got hammered many, many times in the LAST game we played last year....these things can skew the averages. I do know that it seemed he had more time last year and he's been hit harder and more often this year.


You can try to point at the OL all you want for the cause of all Favre's woes you want...

If you look at my post, I did say "pass protection" not OL. I do realize that Taylor is gone, but Tahi and Peterson are still here and they, too.....have failed fairly often. Chester used to fail once in a while, too.....I know it's a tough assignment.....but all in all, pass protection has failed--that's the key fact.

The stats were for regular season games & didn't include the post season hits he took in New Orleans.

Favre was sacked 0 times in the last game of the regular season. We played against several of the Giants scrubs in that game.

What we need is a whole different OL scheme that the players can execute or at least a qualified coach/coaches who can teach it, know what they are doing & players who can learn it quickly & execute it.

We don't need another one of the coaches "buddies".

Infidel
11-26-2010, 06:18 PM
I agree.

I can't account for stats, but I do know and trust my perceptions of how things went.

Last year I didn't feel that Favre was getting unfairly hammered (until New Orleans).

This year almost every game has seemed like open season on Favre.....especially the first three, but off and on since then.

Also.....more memorable, blind side, really hard hits this year.

Stats are useful for some things, but they can also be misleading.

singersp
11-26-2010, 06:21 PM
I do like your analysis of the first three games of both years.

Maybe Favre's injuries and performance problems this year are, to a great extent, due to the fact that we played better teams early on this year and they roughed him up a lot more than did the less dangerous teams of last year.

I believe it's certainly part of it. Timing was also a factor, which could have been remedied by more time together in both years. The timing was never down pat & we used the first part of the season to get that down.

Childress was an idiot for not playing the starters more in the 3rd & 4th preseason game when they clearly needed it. If you look at both years, Favre's average yards per throw/catch goes up after the first 3 games. To me that says the more confident he gets with his receivers & the better the timing gets, the deeper he throws.

I also believe the ankle affects his throws more than he admits to. We haven't heard "boo" about the tedonitis, so I don't know if that's an issue or not. From what the docs said before, It won't heal if he's playing every week.

singersp
11-26-2010, 06:45 PM
I agree.

I can't account for stats, but I do know and trust my perceptions of how things went.

Last year I didn't feel that Favre was getting unfairly hammered (until New Orleans).

This year almost every game has seemed like open season on Favre.....especially the first three, but off and on since then.

Also.....more memorable, blind side, really hard hits this year.

Stats are useful for some things, but they can also be misleading.

It's a copycat league & coaches are all well aware of what NO did to exploit Favre's/Vikings weakness. I said prior to game 1 of this year that every team will try to do the same thing.

If you can't stop it & you don't correct the situation with quick slants or a mobile QB, you are going to lose games. By Favre's own admission, the timing isn't there with him for a lot of our quick slants, so they are tearing those out of the playbook. And since Favre isn't mobile enoug & teams are still stacking the box for AD, I unfortunately see more losses coming.

With lesser plays, we are becoming more vanilla. While it sounds nice to only include plays that work, one has to wonder exactly how many plays is that? How long will it take teams to figure out the limited number of plays that we will run.

Also, you can't have just one gameplan or set of plays that works.

Many people believe a team needs to be have certain percentage of run plays & a certainpercentage of pass plays that is split dependant on what kind of talent you have.

I've always disagreed with that philosophy. If you are facing a team that gives up more passes than runs, you go in with a passing gameplan. If you are facing a team that gives up more running plays than passes, you go in with a running gameplan. But, if the team happens to stop your gameplan, even though prior history dictates you should have success with it, you need to change your gameplan, find what works best against them & go with what is working best at the time.

This is where I believe the Vikings have failed. They seem to go in with the same game plan regardless of who our opponents are & try to beat them with what we got rather than with what they are giving up. Also it doesn't seem to change at the half.

The one notable time I did notice it being done is when we used the no huddle. It worked, but then we didn't try to use it again.

Infidel
11-26-2010, 06:47 PM
Childress was an idiot for not playing the starters more in the 3rd & 4th preseason game when they clearly needed it.

Remember last year when Chilly wanted to bench Favre to "protect" or save on wear and tear?

This has been a theme with Chilly. In those preseason games you mention.....he was trying to "save" on his assets by playing the second team.

This year he has also kept Favre and others from practicing to rest them.......often.

And we've had a lot of nagging and varied injuries on a lot of people--especially Favre and the receivers.

That's gotta be a big factor in ALL of the problems.

Anyhow, I think it's too easy to play the "training camp" card and overlook these other things.

Infidel
11-26-2010, 06:59 PM
It's a copycat league & coaches are all well aware of what NO did to exploit Favre's/Vikings weakness. I said prior to game 1 of this year that every team will try to do the same thing.

If you can't stop it & you don't correct the situation with quick slants or a mobile QB, you are going to lose games. By Favre's own admission, the timing isn't there with him for a lot of our quick slants, so they are tearing those out of the playbook. And since Favre isn't mobile enoug & teams are still stacking the box for AD, I unfortunately see more losses coming.

It's gotten worse. After NO succeeded with that high/low hit last year.....several other teams have seemed to be concentrating on trying to knock Favre out of the game.

As to more losses.....it depends on a lot of variables.

There will be changes....maybe better adjustments during the game.

Rice may help a lot......or not.

As for the Redskins......the Vikings have a huge motivation to go out and prove themselves.....prove that Childress was the problem.

If they can execute......who knows?

A trend for the better? Stranger things have happened.

singersp
11-26-2010, 07:47 PM
Childress was an idiot for not playing the starters more in the 3rd & 4th preseason game when they clearly needed it.

Remember last year when Chilly wanted to bench Favre to "protect" or save on wear and tear?

This has been a theme with Chilly. In those preseason games you mention.....he was trying to "save" on his assets by playing the second team.

This year he has also kept Favre and others from practicing to rest them.......often.

And we've had a lot of nagging and varied injuries on a lot of people--especially Favre and the receivers.

That's gotta be a big factor in ALL of the problems.

Anyhow, I think it's too easy to play the "training camp" card and overlook these other things.

I'm not playing just the training camp card or the preseason card. I'm playing the practice card. Be it TC, preseason or the weeks in between regular season games.

If you read several of my posts (one thread was deleted where I spelled it out nicely) it includes every practice they've had since game one of the regular season.

It's a no brainer that any practice together would have helped the situation & timing issues prior to the start of the regular season. Since Favre wasn't there it couldn't be accomplished. Once Favre arrived either he was being held out of or limited in practice. If not him being out or limited, then Harvin, Shiancoe or Berrian might not have been practicing.

So when did they get the most time to practice together? It is happening during regular season games & at the expense of losing those games, when it should be happening on the practice field & should have happened prior to the start of the regular season.

The "saving" of Favre's arm during practice between games has not worked according to plan & it is clear they needed more time together. Gameday is not the time to be doing it.

IMO, even though it was a bye week, if winning meant everything to these players, they should have took the initiative to practice together to better prepare themselves for the upcoming game. It was obvious they needed work, they chose not to put in the extra effort.

singersp
11-26-2010, 07:54 PM
It's a copycat league & coaches are all well aware of what NO did to exploit Favre's/Vikings weakness. I said prior to game 1 of this year that every team will try to do the same thing.

If you can't stop it & you don't correct the situation with quick slants or a mobile QB, you are going to lose games. By Favre's own admission, the timing isn't there with him for a lot of our quick slants, so they are tearing those out of the playbook. And since Favre isn't mobile enoug & teams are still stacking the box for AD, I unfortunately see more losses coming.

It's gotten worse. After NO succeeded with that high/low hit last year.....several other teams have seemed to be concentrating on trying to knock Favre out of the game.

As to more losses.....it depends on a lot of variables.

There will be changes....maybe better adjustments during the game.

Rice may help a lot......or not.

As for the Redskins......the Vikings have a huge motivation to go out and prove themselves.....prove that Childress was the problem.

If they can execute......who knows?

A trend for the better? Stranger things have happened.

Lets hope we see a change for the better. However the same OC & OL coach is in tact.

We should see & I expect to see better play calling with more audibles & perhaps better adjustments to the game plan.

If they can execute, we still need the defense to step up & do there part as well.

Otherwise we could have the same problem we did back when Cottrell was DC. The offense could put up a shitload of points & we still lose the game.

As to Rice this Sunday. He was held out of practice today & his status for Sunday is undetrmined.

Freakout
11-26-2010, 08:50 PM
Didn't help Brett's longevity by starting the season with no idea who was going to be our 3rd down back / blitz pickup guy. That was really stupid.

Infidel
11-26-2010, 09:00 PM
I don't know what to expect.

That's pretty much the way it's been all season.

Who could have predicted that unlikely comeback against the Cards???

I'm just gonna hope for the best, and if not.....well, they are the Vikings, after all.

Mr Anderson
11-26-2010, 09:26 PM
It's a copycat league & coaches are all well aware of what NO did to exploit Favre's/Vikings weakness. I said prior to game 1 of this year that every team will try to do the same thing.

If you can't stop it & you don't correct the situation with quick slants or a mobile QB, you are going to lose games. By Favre's own admission, the timing isn't there with him for a lot of our quick slants, so they are tearing those out of the playbook. And since Favre isn't mobile enoug & teams are still stacking the box for AD, I unfortunately see more losses coming.

It's gotten worse. After NO succeeded with that high/low hit last year.....several other teams have seemed to be concentrating on trying to knock Favre out of the game.

As to more losses.....it depends on a lot of variables.

There will be changes....maybe better adjustments during the game.

Rice may help a lot......or not.

As for the Redskins......the Vikings have a huge motivation to go out and prove themselves.....prove that Childress was the problem.

If they can execute......who knows?

A trend for the better? Stranger things have happened.

Lets hope we see a change for the better. However the same OC & OL coach is in tact.

We should see & I expect to see better play calling with more audibles & perhaps better adjustments to the game plan.

If they can execute, we still need the defense to step up & do there part as well.

Otherwise we could have the same problem we did back when Cottrell was DC. The offense could put up a shitload of points & we still lose the game.

As to Rice this Sunday. He was held out of practice today & his status for Sunday is undetrmined.
I'd like to see what our OC and OL coach can do if we decide to play to our guys' strengths instead of stubbornly trying to force one system. I think this coaching change will reveal who's capable and who's not on this staff. For all we know, Bevell is a great offensive coordinator that was held back by Childress and Morris was constricted by zone blocking. The last handful of games this season should tell us a lot.

Infidel
11-26-2010, 09:34 PM
True.

And what these games tell us should be exactly what we've been wondering about!!!

Really looking forward to it.

I just hope Rice is able to play at his best level.

And I hope Favre is over his flu and well by Sunday.

And I hope they ALL get real serious about this game.

singersp
11-26-2010, 10:49 PM
It's a copycat league & coaches are all well aware of what NO did to exploit Favre's/Vikings weakness. I said prior to game 1 of this year that every team will try to do the same thing.

If you can't stop it & you don't correct the situation with quick slants or a mobile QB, you are going to lose games. By Favre's own admission, the timing isn't there with him for a lot of our quick slants, so they are tearing those out of the playbook. And since Favre isn't mobile enoug & teams are still stacking the box for AD, I unfortunately see more losses coming.

It's gotten worse. After NO succeeded with that high/low hit last year.....several other teams have seemed to be concentrating on trying to knock Favre out of the game.

As to more losses.....it depends on a lot of variables.

There will be changes....maybe better adjustments during the game.

Rice may help a lot......or not.

As for the Redskins......the Vikings have a huge motivation to go out and prove themselves.....prove that Childress was the problem.

If they can execute......who knows?

A trend for the better? Stranger things have happened.

Lets hope we see a change for the better. However the same OC & OL coach is in tact.

We should see & I expect to see better play calling with more audibles & perhaps better adjustments to the game plan.

If they can execute, we still need the defense to step up & do there part as well.

Otherwise we could have the same problem we did back when Cottrell was DC. The offense could put up a shitload of points & we still lose the game.

As to Rice this Sunday. He was held out of practice today & his status for Sunday is undetrmined.
I'd like to see what our OC and OL coach can do if we decide to play to our guys' strengths instead of stubbornly trying to force one system. I think this coaching change will reveal who's capable and who's not on this staff. For all we know, Bevell is a great offensive coordinator that was held back by Childress and Morris was constricted by zone blocking. The last handful of games this season should tell us a lot.

For the odds of Bevell being a great OC, see the "Vikings WildCard! *THIS REALLY COULD HAPPEN**" thread.

Mr Anderson
11-26-2010, 10:54 PM
It's a copycat league & coaches are all well aware of what NO did to exploit Favre's/Vikings weakness. I said prior to game 1 of this year that every team will try to do the same thing.

If you can't stop it & you don't correct the situation with quick slants or a mobile QB, you are going to lose games. By Favre's own admission, the timing isn't there with him for a lot of our quick slants, so they are tearing those out of the playbook. And since Favre isn't mobile enoug & teams are still stacking the box for AD, I unfortunately see more losses coming.

It's gotten worse. After NO succeeded with that high/low hit last year.....several other teams have seemed to be concentrating on trying to knock Favre out of the game.

As to more losses.....it depends on a lot of variables.

There will be changes....maybe better adjustments during the game.

Rice may help a lot......or not.

As for the Redskins......the Vikings have a huge motivation to go out and prove themselves.....prove that Childress was the problem.

If they can execute......who knows?

A trend for the better? Stranger things have happened.

Lets hope we see a change for the better. However the same OC & OL coach is in tact.

We should see & I expect to see better play calling with more audibles & perhaps better adjustments to the game plan.

If they can execute, we still need the defense to step up & do there part as well.

Otherwise we could have the same problem we did back when Cottrell was DC. The offense could put up a shitload of points & we still lose the game.

As to Rice this Sunday. He was held out of practice today & his status for Sunday is undetrmined.
I'd like to see what our OC and OL coach can do if we decide to play to our guys' strengths instead of stubbornly trying to force one system. I think this coaching change will reveal who's capable and who's not on this staff. For all we know, Bevell is a great offensive coordinator that was held back by Childress and Morris was constricted by zone blocking. The last handful of games this season should tell us a lot.

For the odds of Bevell being a great OC, see the "Vikings WildCard! *THIS REALLY COULD HAPPEN**" thread.
I think you're right, it's very unlikely, but you never know. That's why I prefaced it with "for all we know."

Mr Anderson
11-26-2010, 11:15 PM
Oddly enough, this was published on PFT minutes after my last post.
Darrell Bevell is Ready to Run the Show (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/26/darrell-bevell-is-ready-to-run-the-show/)

marstc09
11-26-2010, 11:57 PM
Oddly enough, this was published on PFT minutes after my last post.
Darrell Bevell is Ready to Run the Show (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/26/darrell-bevell-is-ready-to-run-the-show/)


“This week, it was a little bit different,” Bevell said via Tom Pelissero of espn1500.com. “I still kept Coach Frazier informed, told him what we were doing, how we felt like we should attack them. But it wasn’t like, ‘I don’t like that, throw that out’ or ‘I like this, put that in.’ There wasn’t any of that.”

Frazier does have some adjustments he wants made in the offense.

Eating crow yet Zeus?

I love how this is totally proving some cats wrong on here. One cat was swearing up and down about Chilly not having control of the offense. Looks like even Bevell was sick of him.

Infidel
11-27-2010, 12:23 AM
Another revealing clip......


However, Childress -- who espoused a run-first version of the West Coast offense -- only partly relinquished control. He was heavily involved in game-planning meetings, held a play sheet on the sideline and communicated constantly with Bevell on game days, at times relaying the precise play he wanted to call.

That's exactly how I figured it worked.

Nice to have these things out in the open with the departure of the mad little colonel.

Mr Anderson
11-27-2010, 12:29 AM
Another revealing clip......


However, Childress -- who espoused a run-first version of the West Coast offense -- only partly relinquished control. He was heavily involved in game-planning meetings, held a play sheet on the sideline and communicated constantly with Bevell on game days, at times relaying the precise play he wanted to call.

That's exactly how I figured it worked.

Nice to have these things out in the open with the departure of the mad little colonel.

Where is that from?

marstc09
11-27-2010, 12:32 AM
Another revealing clip......


However, Childress -- who espoused a run-first version of the West Coast offense -- only partly relinquished control. He was heavily involved in game-planning meetings, held a play sheet on the sideline and communicated constantly with Bevell on game days, at times relaying the precise play he wanted to call.

That's exactly how I figured it worked.

Nice to have these things out in the open with the departure of the mad little colonel.

Where is that from?

http://1500espn.com/sportswire/Vikings_offense_finally_belongs_to_coordinator_Darrell_Bevell112610

Another good quote in there...


"I'm not worried about (people) saying, 'Hey, this is Bevell's offense now,' and 'let's see what it's going to look like,'" Bevell said. "All those things -- those are good questions. I just want to be able to win. I don't care if we run it 50 times or (pass) 50 times -- whatever it is. I just want to be able to get a win."

Mr Anderson
11-27-2010, 12:39 AM
I like the sounds of that.

Purple Floyd
11-27-2010, 06:33 PM
Another revealing clip......


However, Childress -- who espoused a run-first version of the West Coast offense -- only partly relinquished control. He was heavily involved in game-planning meetings, held a play sheet on the sideline and communicated constantly with Bevell on game days, at times relaying the precise play he wanted to call.

That's exactly how I figured it worked.

Nice to have these things out in the open with the departure of the mad little colonel.

Where is that from?

http://1500espn.com/sportswire/Vikings_offense_finally_belongs_to_coordinator_Darrell_Bevell112610

Another good quote in there...


"I'm not worried about (people) saying, 'Hey, this is Bevell's offense now,' and 'let's see what it's going to look like,'" Bevell said. "All those things -- those are good questions. I just want to be able to win. I don't care if we run it 50 times or (pass) 50 times -- whatever it is. I just want to be able to get a win."

Aw crap, that just shot holes in some peoples whole theory about how things were run lol.

Infidel
11-27-2010, 06:59 PM
:D

Yes, and I've noticed that we are not seeing much of those "some peoples" on the forum.

Guess they're hoping to lay low through this difficult time.

:D :D :D

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 02:11 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

singersp
11-29-2010, 02:26 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 02:46 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?
You and I both know the Chiller was the scapegoat in all of this and that turnovers by the QB and poor DL play are the reason we are in the mess we are in this year.

On a side note, it appears that removing Leslie from the defensive playcalling seemed to make things a bit better, even though it was against a one dimensional, broke team.

Purple Floyd
11-29-2010, 03:20 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?
You and I both know the Chiller was the scapegoat in all of this and that turnovers by the QB and poor DL play are the reason we are in the mess we are in this year.

On a side note, it appears that removing Leslie from the defensive playcalling seemed to make things a bit better, even though it was against a one dimensional, broke team.

Yeah, that OL and DL really blew alot of coverages way back in the secondary. Good thing Madieu and Asher were there to bail them out. LMAO

marstc09
11-29-2010, 05:21 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?

My guess is that Chilly got a big head after his "NFC Championship" run. He made some changes that the players were not buying. Judging by what the players have said, I would think I am pretty damn close. Chilly is gone. Favre is here and starting. 0 turnovers for the first time this season. Case closed.

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 05:25 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?
You and I both know the Chiller was the scapegoat in all of this and that turnovers by the QB and poor DL play are the reason we are in the mess we are in this year.

On a side note, it appears that removing Leslie from the defensive playcalling seemed to make things a bit better, even though it was against a one dimensional, broke team.

Yeah, that OL and DL really blew alot of coverages way back in the secondary. Good thing Madieu and Asher were there to bail them out. LMAO
Hey Purp, did you see how many times Dnabb had to check down to a RB after looking deep?

Thats called coverage down field.

Did M-will give a deep one? Sure, it happens. But to say that our DB's played bad yesterday is kindof out there isn't it?

marstc09
11-29-2010, 05:25 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?
You and I both know the Chiller was the scapegoat in all of this and that turnovers by the QB and poor DL play are the reason we are in the mess we are in this year.

On a side note, it appears that removing Leslie from the defensive playcalling seemed to make things a bit better, even though it was against a one dimensional, broke team.

Really?! Huh. Chilly was a scapegoat? O turnovers by that same QB and much more pressure from that DL. What changed? Chilly. Sure the players played better. But why? What changed? The my way or the highway, I don't know how to work with a team guy is gone. Makes perfect sense.

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 05:28 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?

My guess is that Chilly got a big head after his "NFC Championship" run. He made some changes that the players were not buying. Judging by what the players have said, I would think I am pretty damn close. Chilly is gone. Favre is here and starting. 0 turnovers for the first time this season. Case closed.
Are you saying that the turnovers were a result of who was the HC?

Was a change in order? I guess, but I don't think a change was in order to alleviate/eliminate turnovers.

Purple Floyd
11-29-2010, 05:31 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?
You and I both know the Chiller was the scapegoat in all of this and that turnovers by the QB and poor DL play are the reason we are in the mess we are in this year.

On a side note, it appears that removing Leslie from the defensive playcalling seemed to make things a bit better, even though it was against a one dimensional, broke team.

Yeah, that OL and DL really blew alot of coverages way back in the secondary. Good thing Madieu and Asher were there to bail them out. LMAO
Hey Purp, did you see how many times Dnabb had to check down to a RB after looking deep?

Thats called coverage down field.

Did M-will give a deep one? Sure, it happens. But to say that our DB's played bad yesterday is kindof out there isn't it?

You saying that opinion is out of there after the last 5 seasons of the flyshit you have been sprinkling in the pepper made me lol my friend. :woohoo:

marstc09
11-29-2010, 05:39 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?

My guess is that Chilly got a big head after his "NFC Championship" run. He made some changes that the players were not buying. Judging by what the players have said, I would think I am pretty damn close. Chilly is gone. Favre is here and starting. 0 turnovers for the first time this season. Case closed.
Are you saying that the turnovers were a result of who was the HC?

Was a change in order? I guess, but I don't think a change was in order to alleviate/eliminate turnovers.

That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 05:42 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/minnesota-vikings/09000d5d81c60ebb/Favre-wants-a-simplified-playbook?module=HP_video

Some things to note:
We're gonna run the Wishbone.
Favre, Bevell and Rogers sat down and went through the O and went over what works and what they need to change
They are NOW going to be playing to Favre's strengths.

He is really making Childress look like an idiot.

Also, interesting:

Favre: "We have to be good at what we do. I always said, if I were a coach.... Which will never happen... I would be very simple, and be more.. They have to stop what we do.
Who looks like the idiot?

a. The guy who has a complex offense?

or

b. The guy who struggled running it?

Weren't we 12-4 with that same playbook last year?

Weren't a lot of people sucking Childress' knob last year & patting him on the back?

Where oh where is that Childeress get's extension thread?

My guess is that Chilly got a big head after his "NFC Championship" run. He made some changes that the players were not buying. Judging by what the players have said, I would think I am pretty damn close. Chilly is gone. Favre is here and starting. 0 turnovers for the first time this season. Case closed.
Are you saying that the turnovers were a result of who was the HC?

Was a change in order? I guess, but I don't think a change was in order to alleviate/eliminate turnovers.

That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.
I think its out there to say that the Chiller never listened to his players, especially the Noodle.

Clearly the Noodle and the Chiller were on the outs since the Chiller tried to bench him last year, but I have not seen anything from any player, including the Noodle that said the Chiller never listened.

Heck, if memory serves he stood up a player committee just to hear those types of things.

Again, makes no sense unless of course you want to listen to a sports hacks spin on something.

Zeus
11-29-2010, 05:46 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

marstc09
11-29-2010, 05:49 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Zeus
11-29-2010, 05:52 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Now you're starting to act like Marty. Make some baseless, unsupported claim and then put the onus on others to prove you wrong.

I've read all the quotes. Not a damn one said "Childress never listened to Favre at practice."

=Z=

i_bleed_purple
11-29-2010, 05:53 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 05:54 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm
I have and to date I haven't seen anything from anyone that aludes to that.

What I have read is a hack, who injected his opinion right below a players quote.

Again, doesn't mean the Chiller didn't listen, and it doesn't mean he does. It might just mean the players elected to not burn a bridge that might be needed elsewhere.

Long story short, my worst fear has come true. We know have a owner making decisions based on fans opinions. That is never a good thing.

Again, I have no allegiance to the Chiller. I could care less who the HC is. My biggest concern in all of this is that we don't have any stability anymore and will eventually have to relive 1992 and 2006 again.

I hate rebuidling all the damn time.

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 05:57 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 05:59 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Now you're starting to act like Marty. Make some baseless, unsupported claim and then put the onus on others to prove you wrong.

I've read all the quotes. Not a damn one said "Childress never listened to Favre at practice."

=Z=
A. I always have something that gave me one of my hairbrained opinions/discussion points and I usually provide it in my post.

b. Its not about right and wrong. Its a discussion page. ;)

i_bleed_purple
11-29-2010, 06:03 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.

marstc09
11-29-2010, 06:26 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Now you're starting to act like Marty. Make some baseless, unsupported claim and then put the onus on others to prove you wrong.

I've read all the quotes. Not a damn one said "Childress never listened to Favre at practice."

=Z=

It is called common sense. the proof is there. Go reread quotes. I would find them myself but I don't want to waste my time with you. You are hard headed just like Chilly.

marstc09
11-29-2010, 06:28 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.



It is called common sense. Something some posters lack here. The proof is there. Some just choose to ignore it.

marstc09
11-29-2010, 06:31 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.

That is called common sense. +1

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 06:31 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.
You need to go re-watch who was in the meeting during the game and re-read the quotes.

Leslie was not only there, he actually said something alongs the lines of run something that works.....

marstc09
11-29-2010, 06:35 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.
You need to go re-watch who was in the meeting during the game and re-read the quotes.

Leslie was not only there, he actually said something alongs the lines of run something that works.....

Ummmm so isn't that totally ruining your logic on Chilly vs. Leslie. LOL

Caine
11-29-2010, 06:37 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Now you're starting to act like Marty. Make some baseless, unsupported claim and then put the onus on others to prove you wrong.

I've read all the quotes. Not a damn one said "Childress never listened to Favre at practice."

=Z=

Apparently you missed the one where Favre said, "We never talked"...

We also heard the same complaint from Brad Johnson and Gus Frerotte.

It's been VERY well documented that Chiller didn't listen to anybody, nor did he actively seek input from his Key players.

Caine

Caine
11-29-2010, 06:45 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.
You need to go re-watch who was in the meeting during the game and re-read the quotes.

Leslie was not only there, he actually said something alongs the lines of run something that works.....

Ummmm so isn't that totally ruining your logic on Chilly vs. Leslie. LOL

Marrdro has a huge blind spot where Favre is concerned. If there is a way to spin something to blame Favre, Marty will try it...as silly as it makes him look at times.

FWIW, Pat Kirwan's article was about how HE drew up a playbook...not every franchise follows that model. And, as I stated earlier, it has been VERY well documented that Chiller did NOT include his QB's in his game planning. Johnson complained about it, Frerotte complained about it, and Favre mentioned it when asked how often he spoke to Chiller - He said, "Never"...not, "Only when going over the game plan"...it was "NEVER".

The fact that Frazier has a finger in the pot now is simply him doing his job. He may not be setting up the Offensive game plan, but he has to stay involved in the process because HE is ultimately responsible for it. He's simply trusting Bevell to put it together. Trying to spin THAT into the implication that Chiller had player meeting to go over elements of the playbook or game plan is laughable.... especially when it's been repeatedly said that he had almost NO communication with the players.

Caine

Purple Floyd
11-29-2010, 07:26 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Now you're starting to act like Marty. Make some baseless, unsupported claim and then put the onus on others to prove you wrong.

I've read all the quotes. Not a damn one said "Childress never listened to Favre at practice."

=Z=

Apparently you missed the one where Favre said, "We never talked"...

We also heard the same complaint from Brad Johnson and Gus Frerotte.

It's been VERY well documented that Chiller didn't listen to anybody, nor did he actively seek input from his Key players.

Caine

This was a topic that Pete Bercich brought up on KFAN last week. He stated that Johnson, Holcolm, Brett, Bollinger etc never had a say in the game plan and were never allowed any input into the preparation during the week and his comment was that that was one of the biggest factors in the player resentment towards him. It was also why Moss went off on his tangent because he knew things the pats would try to do and he was blown off by Childress and obviously that worked out well for the team during the game.

Why a coach who had never been a HC at any level and wasn't even the play caller at the pro level would close off debate and discussion about the opponents and how to attack them is beyond me but obviously it didn't work out well.

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 07:41 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.
You need to go re-watch who was in the meeting during the game and re-read the quotes.

Leslie was not only there, he actually said something alongs the lines of run something that works.....

Ummmm so isn't that totally ruining your logic on Chilly vs. Leslie. LOL
And what logic is that?

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 07:44 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Now you're starting to act like Marty. Make some baseless, unsupported claim and then put the onus on others to prove you wrong.

I've read all the quotes. Not a damn one said "Childress never listened to Favre at practice."

=Z=

Apparently you missed the one where Favre said, "We never talked"...

We also heard the same complaint from Brad Johnson and Gus Frerotte.

It's been VERY well documented that Chiller didn't listen to anybody, nor did he actively seek input from his Key players.

Caine
I stand corrected. I do remember that one. But he also said that all of his dinput went throught the O-coord.

Infidel
11-29-2010, 07:48 PM
Purple Floyd said:



This was a topic that Pete Bercich brought up on KFAN last week. He stated that Johnson, Holcolm, Brett, Bollinger etc never had a say in the game plan and were never allowed any input into the preparation during the week and his comment was that that was one of the biggest factors in the player resentment towards him. It was also why Moss went off on his tangent because he knew things the pats would try to do and he was blown off by Childress and obviously that worked out well for the team during the game

Exactly the problem.

Thanks.

Infidel
11-29-2010, 07:50 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.
You need to go re-watch who was in the meeting during the game and re-read the quotes.

Leslie was not only there, he actually said something alongs the lines of run something that works.....

Ummmm so isn't that totally ruining your logic on Chilly vs. Leslie. LOL
And what logic is that?

I gotta admit......you don't have any, my friend.

:D

Marrdro
11-29-2010, 07:59 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.
You need to go re-watch who was in the meeting during the game and re-read the quotes.

Leslie was not only there, he actually said something alongs the lines of run something that works.....

Ummmm so isn't that totally ruining your logic on Chilly vs. Leslie. LOL
And what logic is that?

I gotta admit......you don't have any, my friend.

:D
I feel sorry for ya.

Traveling_Vike
11-29-2010, 09:53 PM
Once this issue came up, I was astonished that it took so long for someone to finally mention the well-documented Moss debacle. Floyd finally got it down.

This particular incident is even worse than most of the others mentioned. It's bad enough to not allow your players any input in the game plan, but it is another level entirely to completely blow off someone who has valuable information on an opponent for whom he recently played. That is beyond stubbornness and well into stupidity.

This was the catalyst that eventually led to Childress's dismissal.

Ther are many out there who blame Moss for his antics, but that should not let the blatant stupidity of this decision slide. It doesn't matter who Moss is or what he did outside of this fact: he had valuable info that was completely wasted.

Zeus
11-29-2010, 10:10 PM
Once this issue came up, I was astonished that it took so long for someone to finally mention the well-documented Moss debacle. Floyd finally got it down.

This particular incident is even worse than most of the others mentioned. It's bad enough to not allow your players any input in the game plan, but it is another level entirely to completely blow off someone who has valuable information on an opponent for whom he recently played.

Except that the only person who mentioned this supposed "input" was Moss.

=Z=

Traveling_Vike
11-29-2010, 10:58 PM
Once this issue came up, I was astonished that it took so long for someone to finally mention the well-documented Moss debacle. Floyd finally got it down.

This particular incident is even worse than most of the others mentioned. It's bad enough to not allow your players any input in the game plan, but it is another level entirely to completely blow off someone who has valuable information on an opponent for whom he recently played.

Except that the only person who mentioned this supposed "input" was Moss.

=Z=

Sorry, Z, but I have to call you on this. It was all over the sports talk shows for more than a week leading up to the game. Everyone was talking about how Moss's knowledge of and experience with the Patriots would be invaluable.

I can't find it now, but I am also fairly certain that I saw a quote from another player saying that Randy tried to offer up info on the Pats' tendencies, but was completely dismissed.

Purple Floyd
11-29-2010, 11:09 PM
Once this issue came up, I was astonished that it took so long for someone to finally mention the well-documented Moss debacle. Floyd finally got it down.

This particular incident is even worse than most of the others mentioned. It's bad enough to not allow your players any input in the game plan, but it is another level entirely to completely blow off someone who has valuable information on an opponent for whom he recently played.

Except that the only person who mentioned this supposed "input" was Moss.

=Z=

because nobody else wanted Klink to send them to the Russian Front. Otherwise known as Nashville.:woohoo:

Purple Floyd
11-29-2010, 11:10 PM
Purple Floyd said:



This was a topic that Pete Bercich brought up on KFAN last week. He stated that Johnson, Holcolm, Brett, Bollinger etc never had a say in the game plan and were never allowed any input into the preparation during the week and his comment was that that was one of the biggest factors in the player resentment towards him. It was also why Moss went off on his tangent because he knew things the pats would try to do and he was blown off by Childress and obviously that worked out well for the team during the game

Exactly the problem.

Thanks.

Just hit the thank you button next time and show how much you care.B)

Purple Floyd
11-29-2010, 11:12 PM
That is definitely a possibility and one would be silly to ignore it. Leslie even said he was playing to Favres strengths by listening to him at practice. Something Chilly never did.

You have ZERO evidence of this. None. Not one shred.

=Z=

Are you fucking nuts? Go read the players and coaches quotes. That is all the evidence you need. You are the only one who can't see it. Hmmmmmmmm

Favre said the first thing they did after Chilly, was meet with the OC and QB coach, then go through the playbook and pick plays that they feel the most comfortable with to make up the gameplan.

If this was something they did frequently, I don't quite think he'd bring it up do you?
But thats the point. Your taking something the player said and putting your opinion on it.

Thats exactly what Mars is calling proof. A hack taking what the player said and then putting his spin on it.

By the way, I think there was an article by Pat Kirwan that said that is how the playbook is drawn up.

a. The coach stews over it the whole offseason, coming up with plays.
b. The staff implement it.
c. They practice it.
d. The team (including the QB) tells the staff which ones they like the best.

In essence, we started over this week and basically had to redo item d. as per our new HC.

Again, nothing strange in that or a slam on the Chiller if you ask me. Just something smart that our new HC did.

Strange... because last I checked, our DEFENSIVE coach became our HC. According to Favre, Fraizer was not a part of that little meeting. It was Favre, Bevell and Rodgers. Favre's the guy on the field, Bevell calls the plays, and Rogers is the guy in the booth. Fraizer is letting them do their thing. The offense has not changed, the gameplans have. Now that Bevell is calling the O, he wants to do it his way, not Chilly's way. And to me, it seemed much more effective.

Remember, I don't recall who said it, maybe Bevell or Favre, but Chilly had final call on playcalling. He would frequently tell Bevell what type of play to call, or sometimes even specifically tell him the play. He carried a play sheet with him. He was not letting Bevell do his thing, he was very controlling.

I'm not twisting anything, I'm simply taking multiple first hand accounts, and forming a viable conclusion.
You need to go re-watch who was in the meeting during the game and re-read the quotes.

Leslie was not only there, he actually said something alongs the lines of run something that works.....

Ummmm so isn't that totally ruining your logic on Chilly vs. Leslie. LOL
And what logic is that?

I gotta admit......you don't have any, my friend.

:D
I feel sorry for ya.

Now boys. We are still Vikings fans. I think it just might be time to go to a neutral corner for a bit.;)

Infidel
11-29-2010, 11:52 PM
I did, but they counted ten on Marrdro, so the fight's over.

Marrdro
11-30-2010, 05:33 PM
I did, but they counted ten on Marrdro, so the fight's over.
I thought you learned this by now. We don't fight on here. We discuss.

Infidel
11-30-2010, 06:38 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.

Marrdro
12-01-2010, 02:26 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

I do call him the Noodle only cause it pissed to many off when I called him Lord Noodle Arm Dickhead (LNAD for short).

How do I blame him for his injuries? I, along with most of the reputable media just sit back and chuckle at all the "Injuries" he seems to have each and every week.

Heck, one of them (Adam Shine) laughed at the fans for believing all the hype instead of laughing at the Noodle. I'm kindof in his corner. By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL

As to the Chiller. One more time for possible penetration. I have no allegiance to the Chiller. I think he had issues but he isn't as bad as posters like you make him out to be.

Truth of the matter is, the only reason I am sad to see him go is mostly focused on what I think the change at HC will do when it comes to what our 06 and 07 draft classes (and FA's) are now gonna do as the FA market hits at the end of the season.

Look my friend, most of us just like to banter about opinions. Very few of us have an agenda on here, especially when it comes to who is right and who is wrong on a certain discussion point.

Hell, a few of us (me included) even come around to learn a thing or three and have some fun doing it.

Relax, kick back, join in the discussions and quit trying to prove to us that you are somehow "Right" on everything. In the end, no one wants to hear it and no one really cares.

It is, in the end, just a internet site.


(Sorry Webby, it is the best one out there though):laugh:

Marrdro
12-01-2010, 02:32 PM
Back to the topic at hand if I may..........

I have a question........

I was sitting on the shitter last night taking a good "Prophet", reading a article and at the bottom of the article were some readers comments that went like this......

"We won last year cause the Noodle (Noodle wasn't actually in the comments but I have seen it of late) was running the offense"

Comment after comment read pretty much the same.

Anyway, I remember a pretty good sized amount of you on here were feeding me that line of BS as well.

Question: For those of you (and I know who you are) that were taking that path of discussion, are you now saying that the Noodle made his offense so complicated that he now has to simplify it for himself?

Help me out here. Did/does the Noodle run the offense or did the coaching staff?

I sit back and patiently wait for the discsussion......Don't make me go pull up your posts. :P :P :P

Infidel
12-01-2010, 05:24 PM
Oh, pull up the posts, please.

:D

I haven't seen ANYBODY say that. This seems to be a more inane than usual Marrdro attempt to start an argument. At least I usually come up with real issues and not straw men.

The reality is this:

I agree with Favre when he says that we won more last year mostly because we were getting more than our share of lucky breaks and this year we've gotten bad breaks and been gradually hampered more and more by various injuries.

Blame Chilly's overly complicated offense for the profound impact of nagging injuries.

When QB is injured and misses practice at the same time that his receivers are injured and missing practice (I say "receivers" but it was mostly Harvin as a REAL receiver--the rest were mediocre and being rotated in a bizarre fashion) there will be problems.

Key fact about the lucky breaks of last year: many of those lucky breaks were hits on Favre that didn't turn out to be as crippling as they have this year.

He actually managed to hold up fairly well for most of the year under a lot of pressure.....some of that was sheer good luck. This year things have not gone as well.

Here's a thought for you: having a top-level QB with no backup is a very bad place to be.

Trading Rosenfel might have been a more serious mistake than is commonly realized.

Late last year and all this year, teams have been coming in with the mindset that if they can knock Favre out of the game--they will win.

So what's the practical effect of this?

Favre becomes a target. We've seen it over and over again this year and we certainly saw it in the last game of last year.

Strategy against the Vikings is simple: Disable Favre.

With a credible backup QB....that strategy would be pretty pointless and teams would devote their efforts on a wider focus.

tastywaves
12-01-2010, 05:34 PM
Oh, pull up the posts, please.

:D

I haven't seen ANYBODY say that. This seems to be a more inane than usual Marrdro attempt to start an argument. At least I usually come up with real issues and not straw men.

The reality is this:

I agree with Favre when he says that we won more last year mostly because we were getting more than our share of lucky breaks and this year we've gotten bad breaks and been gradually hampered more and more by various injuries.

Blame Chilly's overly complicated offense for the profound impact of nagging injuries.

When QB is injured and misses practice at the same time that his receivers are injured and missing practice (I say "receivers" but it was mostly Harvin as a REAL receiver--the rest were mediocre and being rotated in a bizarre fashion) there will be problems.

Key fact about the lucky breaks of last year: many of those lucky breaks were hits on Favre that didn't turn out to be as crippling as they have this year.

He actually managed to hold up fairly well for most of the year under a lot of pressure.....some of that was sheer good luck. This year things have not gone as well.

Here's a thought for you: having a top-level QB with no backup is a very bad place to be.

Trading Rosenfel might have been a more serious mistake than is commonly realized.

Late last year and all this year, teams have been coming in with the mindset that if they can knock Favre out of the game--they will win.

So what's the practical effect of this?

Favre becomes a target. We've seen it over and over again this year and we certainly saw it in the last game of last year.

Strategy against the Vikings is simple: Disable Favre.

With a credible backup QB....that strategy would be pretty pointless and teams would devote their efforts on a wider focus.

Good point this strategy wouldn't work for the likes of Indy, New England, New Orleans, San Diego, Atlanta,......

I think the primary strategy right now against Favre is to apply pressure and bang him up a little, but make sure he can still play so they don't have to face a healthy QB.

Marrdro
12-01-2010, 05:36 PM
Oh, pull up the posts, please.

:D

I haven't seen ANYBODY say that. This seems to be a more inane than usual Marrdro attempt to start an argument. At least I usually come up with real issues and not straw men.

Thats cause you haven't been around long enough. Most of them will chime in as they typically stand by what they say. If not, I might just break my rule and pull a few to pick on them a bit.

And by the way, it isn't an arguement, its called having a bit of fun my friend.

Please relax with the arguement stuff. You'll have more fun.



The reality is this:

I agree with Favre when he says that we won more last year mostly because we were getting more than our share of lucky breaks and this year we've gotten bad breaks and been gradually hampered more and more by various injuries.

Blame Chilly's overly complicated offense for the profound impact of nagging injuries.

When QB is injured and misses practice at the same time that his receivers are injured and missing practice (I say "receivers" but it was mostly Harvin) there will be problems.
You could be right in that regard, however, that doesn't mean the offense is to complicated if you ask me. It means that the team isn't practicing enough to be able to run it like they did last year.

To say its to complicated this year and then ignore the data from last year is were you loose me.


Key fact about the lucky breaks of last year: many of those lucky breaks were hits on Favre that didn't turn out to be as crippling as they have this year.

He actually managed to hold up fairly well for most of the year under a lot of pressure.....some of that was sheer good luck. This year things have not gone as well.
Keep trying with the hits and injury thing if you will, but I am never gonna come to your way of thinking. All QB's (especially ones that run a WCO) get hit. It isn't like the Noodle is going through something the other 31 guys aren't going through.

Remember, I've put up the week 11 DVOA stuff that proves our OL is protecting at a 6.0% DVOA with the league average being 6.3%.

Football Outsiders (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings)


Here's a thought for you: having a top-level QB with no backup is a very bad place to be.

Trading Rosenfel might have been a more serious mistake than is commonly realized.

Late last year and all this year, teams have been coming in with the mindset that if they can knock Favre out of the game--they will win.

Because we have no backup QB.

So what's the practical effect of this?

Favre becomes a target. We've seen it over and over again this year and we certainly saw it in the last game of last year.

Strategy against the Vikings is simple: Disable Favre.

With a credible backup QB....that strategy would be pretty pointless and teams would devote their efforts on a wider focus.
That is a good discussion point, however, if memory servers, we not only have a backup (that beat Sage out two years in a row) but we have a backup to that backup.

I know you don't have a high opinion on TJ. Thats OK, but it doesn't mean that teams think the Vikes will loose with TJ in there.

Heck, there were several articles posted on this site of D-coords who said that if they had to gameplan vs TJ it would complicate things because of his mobility.

I've been on that bandwagon ever since. You didn't think I came up with that discussion point on my own did you?

tastywaves
12-01-2010, 06:00 PM
Oh, pull up the posts, please.

:D

I haven't seen ANYBODY say that. This seems to be a more inane than usual Marrdro attempt to start an argument. At least I usually come up with real issues and not straw men.

Thats cause you haven't been around long enough. Most of them will chime in as they typically stand by what they say. If not, I might just break my rule and pull a few to pick on them a bit.

And by the way, it isn't an arguement, its called having a bit of fun my friend.

Please relax with the arguement stuff. You'll have more fun.



The reality is this:

I agree with Favre when he says that we won more last year mostly because we were getting more than our share of lucky breaks and this year we've gotten bad breaks and been gradually hampered more and more by various injuries.

Blame Chilly's overly complicated offense for the profound impact of nagging injuries.

When QB is injured and misses practice at the same time that his receivers are injured and missing practice (I say "receivers" but it was mostly Harvin) there will be problems.
You could be right in that regard, however, that doesn't mean the offense is to complicated if you ask me. It means that the team isn't practicing enough to be able to run it like they did last year.

To say its to complicated this year and then ignore the data from last year is were you loose me.


Key fact about the lucky breaks of last year: many of those lucky breaks were hits on Favre that didn't turn out to be as crippling as they have this year.

He actually managed to hold up fairly well for most of the year under a lot of pressure.....some of that was sheer good luck. This year things have not gone as well.
Keep trying with the hits and injury thing if you will, but I am never gonna come to your way of thinking. All QB's (especially ones that run a WCO) get hit. It isn't like the Noodle is going through something the other 31 guys aren't going through.

Remember, I've put up the week 11 DVOA stuff that proves our OL is protecting at a 6.0% DVOA with the league average being 6.3%.

Football Outsiders (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings)


Here's a thought for you: having a top-level QB with no backup is a very bad place to be.

Trading Rosenfel might have been a more serious mistake than is commonly realized.

Late last year and all this year, teams have been coming in with the mindset that if they can knock Favre out of the game--they will win.

Because we have no backup QB.

So what's the practical effect of this?

Favre becomes a target. We've seen it over and over again this year and we certainly saw it in the last game of last year.

Strategy against the Vikings is simple: Disable Favre.

With a credible backup QB....that strategy would be pretty pointless and teams would devote their efforts on a wider focus.
That is a good discussion point, however, if memory servers, we not only have a backup (that beat Sage out two years in a row) but we have a backup to that backup.

I know you don't have a high opinion on TJ. Thats OK, but it doesn't mean that teams think the Vikes will loose with TJ in there.

Heck, there were several articles posted on this site of D-coords who said that if they had to gameplan vs TJ it would complicate things because of his mobility.

I've been on that bandwagon ever since. You didn't think I came up with that discussion point on my own did you?

TJ was kept over Sage, but I wouldn't say he beat him out this year. Not even close really.

That being said, right now, I would like to see TJ playing.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 03:40 PM
Back to the topic at hand if I may..........

I have a question........

I was sitting on the shitter last night taking a good "Prophet", reading a article and at the bottom of the article were some readers comments that went like this......

"We won last year cause the Noodle (Noodle wasn't actually in the comments but I have seen it of late) was running the offense"

Comment after comment read pretty much the same.

Anyway, I remember a pretty good sized amount of you on here were feeding me that line of BS as well.

Question: For those of you (and I know who you are) that were taking that path of discussion, are you now saying that the Noodle made his offense so complicated that he now has to simplify it for himself?

Help me out here. Did/does the Noodle run the offense or did the coaching staff?

I sit back and patiently wait for the discsussion......Don't make me go pull up your posts. :P :P :P
Nobody other than my good friend the Infidel is gonna answer?

Comeone, were are all of you guys who said the Noodle was basically in charge of the game plan and the play calling.

LOL. Crickets as I thought.

Infidel
12-02-2010, 04:33 PM
I still can't believe anybody said that.

If they did, you should be able to remember some of their names.

Myself.....I have WISHED Favre was in charge of the game plan and play calling.

Last Sunday he had major input for the first time and look how much better things went.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 04:50 PM
I still can't believe anybody said that.

If they did, you should be able to remember some of their names.

Myself.....I have WISHED Favre was in charge of the game plan and play calling.

Last Sunday he had major input for the first time and look how much better things went.
I do remember thier names my friend. Thats why I keep spreadsheets.

They will chime in. For some reason they haven't been on since I poked them. Watch the fun start when they do get back on.:laugh:

marstc09
12-02-2010, 05:03 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 05:05 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.
Probably stuck his finger down his throat for effect. :laugh:

Quick question. What ailment you got for him on the board this week? As I said, I sent a fin in on strep throat.

Infidel
12-02-2010, 05:09 PM
They will chime in. For some reason they haven't been on since I poked them. Watch the fun start when they do get back on.

Ok......waiting.

marstc09
12-02-2010, 05:09 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.
Probably stuck his finger down his throat for effect. :laugh:

Quick question. What ailment you got for him on the board this week? As I said, I sent a fin in on strep throat.

Either you missed the point completely or you are just trying to bait Infidel. I don't get baited anymore.

Favre was sick. Plain and simple.

Infidel
12-02-2010, 05:10 PM
Yeah, I know.

I don't take the bait anymore either.

:)

marstc09
12-02-2010, 05:13 PM
Back to the topic at hand if I may..........

I have a question........

I was sitting on the shitter last night taking a good "Prophet", reading a article and at the bottom of the article were some readers comments that went like this......

"We won last year cause the Noodle (Noodle wasn't actually in the comments but I have seen it of late) was running the offense"

Comment after comment read pretty much the same.

Anyway, I remember a pretty good sized amount of you on here were feeding me that line of BS as well.

Question: For those of you (and I know who you are) that were taking that path of discussion, are you now saying that the Noodle made his offense so complicated that he now has to simplify it for himself?

Help me out here. Did/does the Noodle run the offense or did the coaching staff?

I sit back and patiently wait for the discsussion......Don't make me go pull up your posts. :P :P :P
Nobody other than my good friend the Infidel is gonna answer?

Comeone, were are all of you guys who said the Noodle was basically in charge of the game plan and the play calling.

LOL. Crickets as I thought.

Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 05:13 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.
Probably stuck his finger down his throat for effect. :laugh:

Quick question. What ailment you got for him on the board this week? As I said, I sent a fin in on strep throat.

Either you missed the point completely or you are just trying to bait Infidel. I don't get baited anymore.

Favre was sick. Plain and simple.
I hear ya, didn't miss the point and I'm not baiting.....just asking a followon question and having a bit of fun doing it.

Or fun now outlawed on the site......?:ohmy:

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 05:15 PM
Back to the topic at hand if I may..........

I have a question........

I was sitting on the shitter last night taking a good "Prophet", reading a article and at the bottom of the article were some readers comments that went like this......

"We won last year cause the Noodle (Noodle wasn't actually in the comments but I have seen it of late) was running the offense"

Comment after comment read pretty much the same.

Anyway, I remember a pretty good sized amount of you on here were feeding me that line of BS as well.

Question: For those of you (and I know who you are) that were taking that path of discussion, are you now saying that the Noodle made his offense so complicated that he now has to simplify it for himself?

Help me out here. Did/does the Noodle run the offense or did the coaching staff?

I sit back and patiently wait for the discsussion......Don't make me go pull up your posts. :P :P :P
Nobody other than my good friend the Infidel is gonna answer?

Comeone, were are all of you guys who said the Noodle was basically in charge of the game plan and the play calling.

LOL. Crickets as I thought.

Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.
LOL, comeon Mars.

Theres whole threads on here (with your name in them) saying how the Noodle was running the offense and coming up with the gameplans.

Your a crafty craft man. Still like ya though. :laugh:

marstc09
12-02-2010, 05:16 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.
Probably stuck his finger down his throat for effect. :laugh:

Quick question. What ailment you got for him on the board this week? As I said, I sent a fin in on strep throat.

Either you missed the point completely or you are just trying to bait Infidel. I don't get baited anymore.

Favre was sick. Plain and simple.
I hear ya, didn't miss the point and I'm not baiting.....just asking a followon question and having a bit of fun doing it.

Or fun now outlawed on the site......?:ohmy:

I don't joke when people are sick. I am right now and it sucks. I can't even imagine playing an NFL football game. You need to be a warrior to do that.

dfosterf
12-02-2010, 05:19 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.
Probably stuck his finger down his throat for effect. :laugh:

Quick question. What ailment you got for him on the board this week? As I said, I sent a fin in on strep throat.

If I was Mars I'd go with intermittent vertigo. Barney has never used that one.

marstc09
12-02-2010, 05:21 PM
Back to the topic at hand if I may..........

I have a question........

I was sitting on the shitter last night taking a good "Prophet", reading a article and at the bottom of the article were some readers comments that went like this......

"We won last year cause the Noodle (Noodle wasn't actually in the comments but I have seen it of late) was running the offense"

Comment after comment read pretty much the same.

Anyway, I remember a pretty good sized amount of you on here were feeding me that line of BS as well.

Question: For those of you (and I know who you are) that were taking that path of discussion, are you now saying that the Noodle made his offense so complicated that he now has to simplify it for himself?

Help me out here. Did/does the Noodle run the offense or did the coaching staff?

I sit back and patiently wait for the discsussion......Don't make me go pull up your posts. :P :P :P
Nobody other than my good friend the Infidel is gonna answer?

Comeone, were are all of you guys who said the Noodle was basically in charge of the game plan and the play calling.

LOL. Crickets as I thought.

Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.
LOL, comeon Mars.

Theres whole threads on here (with your name in them) saying how the Noodle was running the offense and coming up with the gameplans.

Your a crafty craft man. Still like ya though. :laugh:

Please find them. I would never say that. I would say he could run the offense and game plan. I am sure you just twisted.

jargomcfargo
12-02-2010, 05:26 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.
Probably stuck his finger down his throat for effect. :laugh:

Quick question. What ailment you got for him on the board this week? As I said, I sent a fin in on strep throat.

If I was Mars I'd go with intermittent vertigo. Barney has never used that one.

Benign and unimpressive. I'd go with Tilly Willy of the Ag Bag.
That ought to engender some sympathy even from the hard hearted, such as yourself and Marrdro!

Zeus
12-02-2010, 06:09 PM
Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.

From the Bears post-game thread:

Pretty good if we let Favre do what he did in the second half. I am convinced Favre let Chilly/Bevell do their thing in the first half and it didn't work. Favre even hinted at it post game. It had been discussed all week on kfan. Favre took over and scored 30 points and 300+ yards in the 2nd! Good god. Hopefully Childress can get it through his head that Favre is going to be the guy to lead this team to the Super Bowl.

=Z=

Infidel
12-02-2010, 06:21 PM
And that has nothing to do with what Marrdro said, which was:


(People here have said) We won last year cause (Favre) was running the offense.

Which implies that Favre was running the offense for the entire year, which we all know is false.....and I still maintain that nobody would have said that.

Looks like yet another Marrdro attempt at baiting.

Still open to being convinced, though.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 07:06 PM
Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.

From the Bears post-game thread:

Pretty good if we let Favre do what he did in the second half. I am convinced Favre let Chilly/Bevell do their thing in the first half and it didn't work. Favre even hinted at it post game. It had been discussed all week on kfan. Favre took over and scored 30 points and 300+ yards in the 2nd! Good god. Hopefully Childress can get it through his head that Favre is going to be the guy to lead this team to the Super Bowl.

=Z=
Thanks Z, he knows I wasn't gonna go search for them.

Besides, he's not the only one that was spewing forth that drivel. My good friend that I buy jerseys from was pretty busy with the keyboard in that area as well.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 07:07 PM
LOL!

Your discussion seems to consist of calling Favre a "noodle," blaming him for his injuries and bemoaning the loss of Childress.

You just like to ridicule other posters, incite fights and then deny everything.

Just dropped you another notch on the old spreadsheet, my friend.
LOL, keep trying my friend.

By the way, money on this week is "Strep Throat". LOL


Laugh all you want but he was seen puking after the game by many reporters.
Probably stuck his finger down his throat for effect. :laugh:

Quick question. What ailment you got for him on the board this week? As I said, I sent a fin in on strep throat.

If I was Mars I'd go with intermittent vertigo. Barney has never used that one.
ROTHFLMAO......Well played my friend. Well played indeed.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 07:08 PM
And that has nothing to do with what Marrdro said, which was:


(People here have said) We won last year cause (Favre) was running the offense.

Which implies that Favre was running the offense for the entire year, which we all know is false.....and I still maintain that nobody would have said that.

Looks like yet another Marrdro attempt at baiting.

Still open to being convinced, though.
Hang around, it will get better.

And one more time. It isn't baiting. I just have a good memory (and lots of spreadsheets) on things that people continually harp on.

This is just one of them.

marstc09
12-02-2010, 07:13 PM
Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.

From the Bears post-game thread:

Pretty good if we let Favre do what he did in the second half. I am convinced Favre let Chilly/Bevell do their thing in the first half and it didn't work. Favre even hinted at it post game. It had been discussed all week on kfan. Favre took over and scored 30 points and 300+ yards in the 2nd! Good god. Hopefully Childress can get it through his head that Favre is going to be the guy to lead this team to the Super Bowl.

=Z=

Umm that is exactly what I said. I mentioned that game for a reason.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 07:19 PM
Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.

From the Bears post-game thread:

Pretty good if we let Favre do what he did in the second half. I am convinced Favre let Chilly/Bevell do their thing in the first half and it didn't work. Favre even hinted at it post game. It had been discussed all week on kfan. Favre took over and scored 30 points and 300+ yards in the 2nd! Good god. Hopefully Childress can get it through his head that Favre is going to be the guy to lead this team to the Super Bowl.

=Z=

Umm that is exactly what I said. I mentioned that game for a reason.
You have said it more than just there and in many different ways.......

Remember the one time you re-posted Kirwans article....LOL.

Heck a couple of times I think I replied to you with the "What are they doing drawing plays up with sticks and bottle caps" or something like that.

LOL. It was either you or bleed. Can't remember exactly. Probably cause it was both of ya. :P

marstc09
12-02-2010, 07:53 PM
And that has nothing to do with what Marrdro said, which was:


(People here have said) We won last year cause (Favre) was running the offense.

Which implies that Favre was running the offense for the entire year, which we all know is false.....and I still maintain that nobody would have said that.

Looks like yet another Marrdro attempt at baiting.

Still open to being convinced, though.

Yea Zeus is trying to find anything to get back at me from his naked bootleg debacle. It is funny. Nice try though.

marstc09
12-02-2010, 07:54 PM
And that has nothing to do with what Marrdro said, which was:


(People here have said) We won last year cause (Favre) was running the offense.

Which implies that Favre was running the offense for the entire year, which we all know is false.....and I still maintain that nobody would have said that.

Looks like yet another Marrdro attempt at baiting.

Still open to being convinced, though.
Hang around, it will get better.

And one more time. It isn't baiting. I just have a good memory (and lots of spreadsheets) on things that people continually harp on.

This is just one of them.

You did not address his point. You seem to do that a lot when you are wrong.

marstc09
12-02-2010, 07:56 PM
Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.

From the Bears post-game thread:

Pretty good if we let Favre do what he did in the second half. I am convinced Favre let Chilly/Bevell do their thing in the first half and it didn't work. Favre even hinted at it post game. It had been discussed all week on kfan. Favre took over and scored 30 points and 300+ yards in the 2nd! Good god. Hopefully Childress can get it through his head that Favre is going to be the guy to lead this team to the Super Bowl.

=Z=
Thanks Z, he knows I wasn't gonna go search for them.

Besides, he's not the only one that was spewing forth that drivel. My good friend that I buy jerseys from was pretty busy with the keyboard in that area as well.

See Infidels post and mine then compare to your original. Comprehension is the key. I know that is hard for some one here.

marstc09
12-02-2010, 07:59 PM
Links? Quotes? I bet nobody has said that. I do remember some people saying he might have input. I think during the Bears game last year but that ended really quick when Chilly got a big head. Now that big head is gone. Thank god.

From the Bears post-game thread:

Pretty good if we let Favre do what he did in the second half. I am convinced Favre let Chilly/Bevell do their thing in the first half and it didn't work. Favre even hinted at it post game. It had been discussed all week on kfan. Favre took over and scored 30 points and 300+ yards in the 2nd! Good god. Hopefully Childress can get it through his head that Favre is going to be the guy to lead this team to the Super Bowl.

=Z=

Umm that is exactly what I said. I mentioned that game for a reason.
You have said it more than just there and in many different ways.......

Remember the one time you re-posted Kirwans article....LOL.

Heck a couple of times I think I replied to you with the "What are they doing drawing plays up with sticks and bottle caps" or something like that.

LOL. It was either you or bleed. Can't remember exactly. Probably cause it was both of ya. :P

Poor Marrdro........You really are King Twister.