PDA

View Full Version : Concerns in Minnesota are legit



singersp
09-17-2011, 11:21 AM
Concerns in Minnesota are legit

http://blogs.nfl.com/2011/09/16/concerns-in-minnesota-are-legit/

MulletMullitia
09-17-2011, 03:09 PM
I hate to say it, but Lombardi is right. Our offensive line is the biggest problem. It doesn't matter who the QB is if you can't protect him.

Purple Floyd
09-18-2011, 10:17 AM
I hate to say it, but Lombardi is right. Our offensive line is the biggest problem. It doesn't matter who the QB is if you can't protect him.

Stop the presses!........

I thought you were telling us McChunky was going to win us games because of his experience? I told you he wasn't going to be able to raise the play of those around him enough to make a difference like that other QB did in 09.

i_bleed_purple
09-18-2011, 11:38 AM
To be fair, I think our OL is significantly worse this season than in 09.

Purple Floyd
09-18-2011, 12:26 PM
To be fair, I think our OL is significantly worse this season than in 09.

How? McKinney is gone and replaced by a player who is a vet at that position and at least was able to keep Manning clean. Cook , who played RT was replaced by Loadholt who is an absolute upgrade in talent and the rest of the line-correct me if I am wrong- Is the same. And the Childress KAO is now gone and we all know that it couldn't get any worse as far as scheme is concerned.....

norsefan
09-18-2011, 04:17 PM
Coaching issues on not having the Kickoff Return Team ready for an Onside Kick. We had been dominating the Clock, and their Defense had to be dog tired and not ready to go out there. Then, to have pulled Harvin from Kickoff Return after 1 Bucs score allowed (slower) Booker to take it 6 yards deep in the End Zone and not take the Touchback. Special Teams not having a good day is quite a bit on ST Coach Mike Priefer. PENALTIES, Offsides, etc, is oh HC. NOT USING OUR 3 TOs as the Bucs were inside of our 20 and running out the Clock is on our HC. I was excited in the first Half. Cedric Griffin is all heart at CB, but still returning from recent ACL surgery. GET RID OF BERNARD BERRIAN! Waste of space for #1 WR. 4 targets = 1 catch. Some of that is on Donovan; yet if BBs speed was what they say it is, he would get more separation for more catches.

MindCrimes67
09-18-2011, 04:26 PM
I dont know, but i am just stunned as to how we look so good in first half then nothing. I feel our special teams was horrible today. Punting and returns together. Kluwe had an off day for sure, not very good. Our defense just wilted in 2nd half. Very disappointing...

Freakout
09-18-2011, 04:48 PM
How? McKinney is gone and replaced by a player who is a vet at that position and at least was able to keep Manning clean. Cook , who played RT was replaced by Loadholt who is an absolute upgrade in talent and the rest of the line-correct me if I am wrong- Is the same. And the Childress KAO is now gone and we all know that it couldn't get any worse as far as scheme is concerned.....

Johnson did not keep Manning clean. He gave up 6 sacks last season. McKinnie was far from perfect in pass protection but he was always damn good at run blocking and for a team built around a running game his lose does affect us.

Age and injuries also affect a team. Hutch isn't the same player that he was in 2009. Sure players can also improve but a guy like Sullivan has limited upside due to his size so his growth isn't going to off set what we lose in McKinnie and Hutch. Loadholt actually regressed his 2nd year so he is just getting back to his 2009 form. Herrera is coming off of an ACL injury.

There is just no logical reason to say that our line is better. While the scheme may be less complicated it won't makeup for the drop in talent.

gregair13
09-18-2011, 04:52 PM
Not like we were too concerned about being a good team anyways.

Zand
09-18-2011, 05:02 PM
Someone mentioned it earlier and you can blame the Oline all you want but at the end of the day if a coach doesn't know how to play with a clock, that's how you end up having to make a comeback with 24 seconds, not to mention horrible play calling in those 24 seconds.

Blame the coaches, other teams are ready without OTA's. If your coach can't coach then how do you win?

kevoncox
09-18-2011, 08:45 PM
The fact that he allowed TB to run out the clock while withing goal line was inexcusable. A seasoned madden player would tell you that you have to stop the clock.

Everyone will blame McNabb.....well not everyone just Purple Floyd... but both of these losses are squarely on coaching.
We have had a few years of poor drafting and we did nothing to improve the talent on this team via free agency.
Had we been able to sign our players to long term contracts, we would have been able to be a player to bring in a major WR this offseason. However, we are still leading games against good teams at half time.

VikesFan787
09-18-2011, 09:00 PM
Every time we hike the ball I have this... uneasy feeling. A feeling of "the worst possible thing is going to happen". I tend to think Leslie has that same feeling.

Purple Floyd
09-18-2011, 09:07 PM
The fact that he allowed TB to run out the clock while withing goal line was inexcusable. A seasoned madden player would tell you that you have to stop the clock.

Everyone will blame McNabb.....well not everyone just Purple Floyd... but both of these losses are squarely on coaching.
We have had a few years of poor drafting and we did nothing to improve the talent on this team via free agency.
Had we been able to sign our players to long term contracts, we would have been able to be a player to bring in a major WR this offseason. However, we are still leading games against good teams at half time.

Well I guess your post just provides a picture into your lack of comprehension and that you really aren't listening to what I am saying.

It is certainly true that I really dislike McNabb but then again I really disliked Favre too. The difference being Brett came in with an opportunity to take the team to the next level and he darn near did it.

But as I have been saying all year we do not have the depth to contend for the division title or the playoffs and McChunky isn't going to get us there so my stance is we are wasting our time bringing him in here and we should just concentrate on developing the younger players. Bitch all you want about my stance but I am willing to bet by mid season everyone will be adjusted to that mentality when we are out of the playoffs and they realize what I already know in that this season holds no hope except building for the future and McNabb isn't part of that picture.

You may also be interested in my recent posts stating that the ownership screwed up by not hiring an experienced GM to make the coaching staff and personnel decisions and to evaluate whether we have the right coaches in place.

So feel free to evoke my name all you want but I have been here long enough and been right enough to know that your opinion means squat in the general scheme of things.

But hey- Don't get butt hurt by players that quit and owners that are getting schooled in running a franchise and instead turn the focus on some rube posting on a chat board because that is the real problem.

Marrdro
09-19-2011, 01:29 PM
I should have posted our OL stats in this thread instead of the one I did post them in. Pretty funny when you look at this and then look at how terrible most of you think the OL is.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE_LINE&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&archive=false&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RUSHING_TOTAL_TOUCHDOWNS&qualified=true

Zeus
09-19-2011, 02:16 PM
But hey- Don't get butt hurt by players that quit and owners that are getting schooled in running a franchise and instead turn the focus on some rube posting on a chat board because that is the real problem.

You sumbitch! Quite effing up the Vikings!

=Z=

i_bleed_purple
09-19-2011, 02:29 PM
I should have posted our OL stats in this thread instead of the one I did post them in. Pretty funny when you look at this and then look at how terrible most of you think the OL is.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE_LINE&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&archive=false&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RUSHING_TOTAL_TOUCHDOWNS&qualified=true

Lol you bringing up OL "Stats"

In fact, the "Stats" you show are rushing totals.

Rushing totals that show AP being the beast that he is. None of those "Stats" Show that our line sucks and AP gains about 85% of the yards by himself.

Wanna see a fun stat? Guess what team leads the league in rushes for a loss between the tackles?

(I'll give you a hint, it's the Vikings) http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE_LINE&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&archive=false&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RUSHING_CENTER_STUFF&qualified=true

Counting rushing yards and believing it in any way that our OL deserves any credit for it is laughable.

Better yet, McNabb has 44 rush yards and a 6.3 average. He actually brings UP our rushing totals, rather than hinders it like most QB's do.

Considering most teams don't have a QB who can run like McNabb can, those "Stats" are even more skewed.

Actually, the only reason McNabb should be running is when our blocking isn't good enough to give him a decent pocket. So, kinda goes against your whole "Our OL isn't complete shit" idea you're throwing out here.

Marrdro
09-19-2011, 02:35 PM
Lol you bringing up OL "Stats"

In fact, the "Stats" you show are rushing totals.

Rushing totals that show AP being the beast that he is. None of those "Stats" Show that our line sucks and AP gains about 85% of the yards by himself.

Wanna see a fun stat? Guess what team leads the league in rushes for a loss between the tackles?

(I'll give you a hint, it's the Vikings) http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE_LINE&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&archive=false&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RUSHING_CENTER_STUFF&qualified=true

Counting rushing yards and believing it in any way that our OL deserves any credit for it is laughable.

Better yet, McNabb has 44 rush yards and a 6.3 average. He actually brings UP our rushing totals, rather than hinders it like most QB's do.

Considering most teams don't have a QB who can run like McNabb can, those "Stats" are even more skewed.

Actually, the only reason McNabb should be running is when our blocking isn't good enough to give him a decent pocket. So, kinda goes against your whole "Our OL isn't complete shit" idea you're throwing out here.
What do you mean just rushing totals?

Whats laughable is you trying to give me clues.

i_bleed_purple
09-19-2011, 02:37 PM
What do you mean just rushing totals?

I mean, your OL "Stats" consist of:
attempts, yards, average, td's, 1st downs, and breakdowns of left, center and right. How exactly is that NOT rushing totals? The thing about OL, is no stats can tell you how well they play. When you have a guy like AP, he makes the OL look alot better than they are.


Whats laughable is you trying to give me clues.
Somebody has to.

btw, didn't care to comment on the whole "leading the league in carriers for a loss" stat?

Marrdro
09-19-2011, 02:44 PM
I mean, your OL "Stats" consist of:
attempts, yards, average, td's, 1st downs, and breakdowns of left, center and right. How exactly is that NOT rushing totals? The thing about OL, is no stats can tell you how well they play. When you have a guy like AP, he makes the OL look alot better than they are.

Somebody has to.

btw, didn't care to comment on the whole "leading the league in carriers for a loss" stat?
Slide your coverage (I mean eyes) to the last two columns on the right. One is QB hits allowed the other is Sacks allowed if I'm not mistaken.

We are the lowest for QB hits (4) and pretty damn good with sacks (4).

As to your question, no, I didn't comment on it cause thats your normal way of getting out of a bind with me. Besides, I covered that in another thread were I posted all the OL totals.

i_bleed_purple
09-19-2011, 02:51 PM
Slide your coverage (I mean eyes) to the last two columns on the right. One is QB hits allowed the other is Sacks allowed if I'm not mistaken.

We are the lowest for QB hits (4) and pretty damn good with sacks (4).



I'm glad you mentioned that. 4 hits allowed, that's pretty good no?

a) helps to have a QB who can escape pressure
b) we didn't exactly pass alot. 45 attempts, 4 hits. (but also 4 sacks? I'm assuming hits doesn't include sacks?) If it does, makes me wonder what they consider a "hit". However, so 45 attempts, 4 hits, hit every 11.25 throws. Now, I'm not going to go through and do the math for every team, but I'd imagine our hit:throw ratio isn't #1 in the league. Just call it a hunch.


As to your question, no, I didn't comment on it cause thats your normal way of getting out of a bind with me. Besides, I covered that in another thread were I posted all the OL totals.
:rofl:

So pointing out the flaw in your argument is a way of getting out of a "bind"?

I guess since you like to ignore flaws in the point you try to make, yeah, I suppose that is a good tactic.

Marrdro
09-19-2011, 03:10 PM
I'm glad you mentioned that. 4 hits allowed, that's pretty good no?

a) helps to have a QB who can escape pressure
b) we didn't exactly pass alot. 45 attempts, 4 hits. (but also 4 sacks? I'm assuming hits doesn't include sacks?) If it does, makes me wonder what they consider a "hit". However, so 45 attempts, 4 hits, hit every 11.25 throws. Now, I'm not going to go through and do the math for every team, but I'd imagine our hit:throw ratio isn't #1 in the league. Just call it a hunch.


:rofl:

So pointing out the flaw in your argument is a way of getting out of a "bind"?

I guess since you like to ignore flaws in the point you try to make, yeah, I suppose that is a good tactic.
Do you call bootlegs scrambling? I'm guessing you will say no, (thats my view of it), so with that in mind, how many times did Dnabb actually have to scramble to extend a play Sunday?

When will you ever learn. I don't argue. I discuss. Arguing means I'm taking a stance and won't get off of it. Discussing means I will not only talk about multiple points, but will also change my viewpoint of another can give me better information.

i_bleed_purple
09-19-2011, 03:16 PM
I call moving out of the pocket scrambling, whether it's moving to buy time, a designed rollout or just taking off and gaining yardage.

Yesterday, McNabb scrambled a fair bit, probably 4 or 5 carriers (didn't look up the actual number) and a more times moving around in the backfield. In the SD game, McNabb actually ran more, gained something like 30 yards on 3 carriers.

tastywaves
09-19-2011, 04:52 PM
Do you call bootlegs scrambling? I'm guessing you will say no, (thats my view of it), so with that in mind, how many times did Dnabb actually have to scramble to extend a play Sunday?

When will you ever learn. I don't argue. I discuss. Arguing means I'm taking a stance and won't get off of it. Discussing means I will not only talk about multiple points, but will also change my viewpoint of another can give me better information.

Actually, mostly you argue.

Not that there is any merit to a dictionary, but this is what they contend is the definition of argue.


ar·gue (ärgy)
v. ar·gued, ar·gu·ing, ar·gues
v.tr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against; debate: "It is time to stop arguing tax-rate reductions and to enact them" (Paul Craig Roberts).
2. To attempt to prove by reasoning; maintain or contend: The speaker argued that more immigrants should be admitted to the country.
3. To give evidence of; indicate: "Similarities cannot always be used to argue descent" (Isaac Asimov).
4. To persuade or influence (another), as by presenting reasons: argued the clerk into lowering the price.
v.intr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against something: argued for dismissal of the case; argued against an immediate counterattack.
2. To engage in a quarrel; dispute.

Seems you only like to associate with the last one.

Discuss and argue are pretty interchangeable. Hardly worth continuing to correct posters for using it in the proper context.

Purple Floyd
09-19-2011, 06:04 PM
You sumbitch! Quite effing up the Vikings!

=Z=

It's a character flaw.

Purple Floyd
09-19-2011, 06:07 PM
I should have posted our OL stats in this thread instead of the one I did post them in. Pretty funny when you look at this and then look at how terrible most of you think the OL is.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE_LINE&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&archive=false&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RUSHING_TOTAL_TOUCHDOWNS&qualified=true

Since when have stats ever given us a win? BTW- Did you hear the speech Morris gave in the locker room after they win? It was basically that he didn't give a damn about stats, only that they went out there and won. Maybe take a few minutes to look up his speech and make a new spreadsheet for him.