PDA

View Full Version : Why such a lack of respect



midgensa
03-13-2005, 05:08 PM
I have seen a lot of posts on here about how Daunte and Nate cannot get it done without Moss and I don't think it is very fair.
Both players looked quite capable while Moss was out for 5 1/2 games (which the team was 3-3 in). Daunte still had a passer rating of 98.9 in those games and that is including the god awful Giants game, which even with Moss would have been damn near identical because we always let the Giants do that to us. Sure his overall averages were down a little, but with his stats in those games he would have still averaged a 29 TD with 9 INT year with 3,800 yards, definitely pro bowl numbers.
Burleson was also effective with 300 yards recieving and three TDs in those games. He is no Moss, but is definitely capable of growing into a premier receiver in this league. I just don't see why so many of us Purple bleeders seem to think this offense will sputter without Moss. Sure it will be different, but it can still get the job done ... a solid kicker would be a nice addition for sure though.

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 05:14 PM
I dont think the Offense will lose a step Robinson is a very good wideout Burleson has a huge upside. To me it seemed the Culpepper started to throw to him a lot more in the 4th quarters of games. Although I do think we need to add some people to our WR core. We dont have to use any of our first round picks on wideouts. There will be Parrish from Miami and some of the Sooners wideout still there later in the draft.

snowinapril
03-13-2005, 05:16 PM
I think the biggest problem might be the new OC and TICE. They need to get their poop in a group or we could be in trouble. No more f'n up on the sideline throwing the red flag and stop calling trick plays in serious games. Let's go out and punch teams in the mouth from the git-go.

fourdoorchevelle
03-13-2005, 05:19 PM
i have also seen alot of threades trashing the mossless offence . in thoses 5 games had scores of 28 and 31 . also averaged 23 pnts/game. only acouple points behind our season average. only one game below 20 points (13 against gmen). looking forward to burl breakin takles for big gains!!!

vikefan4ever
03-13-2005, 05:20 PM
"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

I dont think the Offense will lose a step Robinson is a very good wideout Burleson has a huge upside. To me it seemed the Culpepper started to throw to him a lot more in the 4th quarters of games. Although I do think we need to add some people to our WR core. We dont have to use any of our first round picks on wideouts. There will be Parrish from Miami and some of the Sooners wideout still there later in the draft.we NEED to draft a WR in the first round!

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 05:24 PM
Didnt we almost come from behind to beat indy last year without Moss. I think we still have one of the best offenses without Moss we resigned Wiggins. I am for stocking up the defensive side of the ball we got Burleson outside of the 1st round. There will be Talent there in the draft.

midgensa
03-13-2005, 05:25 PM
"vikefan4ever" wrote:

"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

I dont think the Offense will lose a step Robinson is a very good wideout Burleson has a huge upside. To me it seemed the Culpepper started to throw to him a lot more in the 4th quarters of games. Although I do think we need to add some people to our WR core. We dont have to use any of our first round picks on wideouts. There will be Parrish from Miami and some of the Sooners wideout still there later in the draft.we NEED to draft a WR in the first round!

I think we could definitely use a WR in the first round, but we can grab one of those second tier guys ( Williamson, Clayton and the guy whose name I can't remember) at No. 18.

ultravikingfan
03-13-2005, 05:28 PM
"snowinapril" wrote:

I think the biggest problem might be the new OC and TICE. They need to get their poop in a group or we could be in trouble. No more f'n up on the sideline throwing the red flag and stop calling trick plays in serious games. Let's go out and punch teams in the mouth from the git-go.

------------------http://www.smilies-and-more.de/pics/smilies/signs/239.gif----------http://www.smilies-and-more.de/pics/smilies/signs/059.gif

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 05:28 PM
Williamson and Roddy White would be nice picks. I would pick them if Pollack or Davis arent there at 18.

midgensa
03-13-2005, 05:32 PM
"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

Williamson and Roddy White would be nice picks. I would pick them if Pollack or Davis arent there at 18.

Thanks, I keep forgetting White's name even though he could be a steal type of receiver. Kiper loves all five of these guys and thinks they are all bonified NFL WR's. He thinks it is a pretty deep position in the draft, so no reason to be gun-happy at seven if we can get DJ or maybe a new Cadillac ... but I do admit Mike Williams would look good in Purple and Gold.

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 05:34 PM
I like Williamson the most he is a track good he has decent hands and is 6'4.

midgensa
03-13-2005, 05:36 PM
"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

I like Williamson the most he is a track good he has decent hands and is 6'4.

Yeah I kind of like him almost as much as the top two and think Edwards may be a little overrated. I think Williamson could easily be a 1,000 yard receiver within two years in this league.

ultravikingfan
03-13-2005, 05:38 PM
http://www.smilies-and-more.de/pics/smilies/signs/278.gif


:lol:

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 05:40 PM
He would fit very well with Nate. I dont really buy that Nate is just a posseion WR. He has some big play capabilities he doesnt have blow away speed but he is very shifty.

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 05:56 PM
"midgensa" wrote:

"vikefan4ever" wrote:

"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

I dont think the Offense will lose a step Robinson is a very good wideout Burleson has a huge upside. To me it seemed the Culpepper started to throw to him a lot more in the 4th quarters of games. Although I do think we need to add some people to our WR core. We dont have to use any of our first round picks on wideouts. There will be Parrish from Miami and some of the Sooners wideout still there later in the draft.we NEED to draft a WR in the first round!

I think we could definitely use a WR in the first round, but we can grab one of those second tier guys ( Williamson, Clayton and the guy whose name I can't remember) at No. 18.


Clayton is not the answer, trust me. He is not fast and is 5'9. He is more of the style of receiver that burleson is. We need a deep threat at WR and mike, braylon and troy williamson are the only ones out there. Willamson will not make it to 18 either. Washington, dallas, SD, carolina, and KC are all interested in drafting him.

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 05:58 PM
"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

He would fit very well with Nate. I dont really buy that Nate is just a posseion WR. He has some big play capabilities he doesnt have blow away speed but he is very shifty.


Notice that nates big plays came in games moss played. Moss took the attention that allowed nate to make the big plays. We need a WR to draw that attention. Nate is good, but not a deep threat, unless we can get another WR in here to draw some attention and be a deep threat.

midgensa
03-13-2005, 06:14 PM
"muchluv4smoot" wrote:

"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

He would fit very well with Nate. I dont really buy that Nate is just a posseion WR. He has some big play capabilities he doesnt have blow away speed but he is very shifty.


Notice that nates big plays came in games moss played. Moss took the attention that allowed nate to make the big plays. We need a WR to draw that attention. Nate is good, but not a deep threat, unless we can get another WR in here to draw some attention and be a deep threat.

Nate had 141 yards receiving at Lambeau without Moss and made a couple of big plays. Just because a receiver is not a serious deep threat does not mean he needs one to make big plays. T.O. has never been known for catching the longball and lord knows he does not have anyone around him being a deep threat. T.O. makes a lot of 10-15 yard catches and can shed tackles. Nate is very similar (admitedly, not quite T.O. though) And Kelly Campbell and Marcus Robinson have been known to catch the longball.
I would still like one of those receivers, but Burleson is a lefit No. 1 in this league.

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 06:17 PM
"midgensa" wrote:

"muchluv4smoot" wrote:

"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

He would fit very well with Nate. I dont really buy that Nate is just a posseion WR. He has some big play capabilities he doesnt have blow away speed but he is very shifty.


Notice that nates big plays came in games moss played. Moss took the attention that allowed nate to make the big plays. We need a WR to draw that attention. Nate is good, but not a deep threat, unless we can get another WR in here to draw some attention and be a deep threat.

Nate had 141 yards receiving at Lambeau without Moss and made a couple of big plays. Just because a receiver is not a serious deep threat does not mean he needs one to make big plays. T.O. has never been known for catching the longball and lord knows he does not have anyone around him being a deep threat. T.O. makes a lot of 10-15 yard catches and can shed tackles. Nate is very similar (admitedly, not quite T.O. though) And Kelly Campbell and Marcus Robinson have been known to catch the longball.
I would still like one of those receivers, but Burleson is a lefit No. 1 in this league.



Deep threat is not what nate is. Yes he is a big play WR because he can break tackles and is awesome after the catch. But we need a DEEP THREAT wr. Someone that the D will fear when he goes downfield on a streek. We don't have that. Edwards, troy, and williams are the only 3 deep threat guys, and none will be there at 18.

Also, who didn't have 100+ yards on green bay?

midgensa
03-13-2005, 06:29 PM
"muchluv4smoot" wrote:

Deep threat is not what nate is. Yes he is a big play WR because he can break tackles and is awesome after the catch. But we need a DEEP THREAT wr. Someone that the D will fear when he goes downfield on a streek. We don't have that. Edwards, troy, and williams are the only 3 deep threat guys, and none will be there at 18.

Also, who didn't have 100+ yards on green bay?

I already said that Nate was not a deep threat. I said we don't need a stud deep threat. Robinson and Campbell will do. Other than Moss and maybe Chad Johnson, there are no deep threat receivers in the league that demand tons of coverage like you are suggesting.
T.O. is more of a route runner than deep threat, Harrison is definitely a route runner, Muhhamad, Horn, etc. All great receivers without being known as longball hitters.
They can all go long, as can Burleson, but none of them do it regulary, and none of them are running with serious deep threats "drawing coverage" away from them. Nate will be just fine.

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 06:37 PM
It's simple, we need mike wiliams, braylon edwards or troy williamson, or our receiving corp won't be very good. Burleson is good yes, but not ready for that much attention. Robinson showed us when moss was out, that we can't count on him as a #2 WR and cambell isn't even gonna be on our team next year to be a deep threat.

We have a week receiving corp right now behind burleson and we need to add a serious threat to play next to him. Williamson, williams and edwards are the only 3 WR's in the draft that can do this next year in the NFL.

And yes I know D wins championships, but we don't need any D players that will be there at 7, so take a stud WR. Get the pass rushing DE and SS we need with the #18 and #49 pick. The WR will start for us, the DE and SS will be coming off the bench.

Paulbedy59
03-13-2005, 06:43 PM
It will be tougher to run for one thing,we had trouble running with Moss out.The main reason being that we had to cope with 8 men in the box.Something we rarely saw with Moss on the field. :salute:

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 06:44 PM
"Paulbedy59" wrote:

It will be tougher to run for one thing,we had trouble running with Moss out.The main reason being that we had to cope with 8 men in the box.Something we rarely saw with Moss on the field. :salute:


Another reason we need a deep threat WR like mike williams. To keep the D honest.

Paulbedy59
03-13-2005, 06:47 PM
Agreed! You have to have that deep threat to stretch the field and keep that saftey from always playing up close.And I think Williams can and will do that.. :salute:

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 06:54 PM
"Paulbedy59" wrote:

Agreed! You have to have that deep threat to stretch the field and keep that saftey from always playing up close.And I think Williams can and will do that.. :salute:


Yep. Williams would be great at that. I would love to see him come here and watch teams try to single cover him for few weeks, because he is a rookie. He would dominate so quickly.

I just see only 3 of those types of WR's in this draft, and that is why I don't wanna wait until pick 18 to get a WR. Sure if we knew troy williamson was gonna be there at 18, I probably would, but he isn't gonna get past dallas, washington, SD, carolina, and KC, to get to us at 18.

Clayton isn't gonna scare any team as a deep threat, and the other team would play their safeties very close to the line of scrimmage if we had him and burleson starting, making it impossible to run. they could also defend the pass still, because they aren't afraid of us going deep.

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 06:57 PM
Which NFL is Willams compared to?

Paulbedy59
03-13-2005, 06:58 PM
A bigger stronger T.O to me

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 06:59 PM
"finnishvikingsfan" wrote:

Which NFL is Willams compared to?


What?

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 07:00 PM
Thats who I would compare him with. I am starting to come around to the idea of getting a WR with the 7th pick.

Paulbedy59
03-13-2005, 07:00 PM
I think he means what current NFL reciever is williams comparable too

muchluv4smoot
03-13-2005, 07:01 PM
"Paulbedy59" wrote:

A bigger stronger T.O to me



Oh, which WR in the NFL.

Williams is a better version of burress. He has much much better hands, the best I have seen since cris carter. He is better at going and getting the ball. He is better at using his body and strength. He also has much better character. Burress just has him in speed by a little.

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 07:02 PM
Yeah WR. Thank you.

Paulbedy59
03-13-2005, 07:03 PM
"muchluv4smoot" wrote:

"Paulbedy59" wrote:

A bigger stronger T.O to me



Oh, which WR in the NFL.

Williams is a better version of burress. He has much much better hands, the best I have seen since cris carter. He is better at going and getting the ball. He is better at using his body and strength. He also has much better character. Burress just has him in speed by a little.Thats also a good comparison :salute:

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 07:04 PM
nice comparison

viks_fan21
03-13-2005, 07:19 PM
Guys, with Nate burleson and Mike Williams, we will still have one of the leagues best passing attacks.

finnishvikingsfan
03-13-2005, 07:21 PM
without a doubt we also have one of the best QB in the leauge so that will help us out.

midgensa
03-13-2005, 07:21 PM
I definitely agree. And I hope we end up with Williams.

Paulbedy59
03-13-2005, 07:26 PM
I am not so sure,His stock went way up with his workout. :salute:

sitandbehitski
03-13-2005, 07:27 PM
I still say if DJ is available take him. Dontarious Thomas scares me, he has all the physical tools you can ask for but got burned on mental mistakes and tackling issues on almost every play. DJ would make our LBs EJ, DJ & Napoleon Dynamite, that sounds alot better, giving us one of the better D's in the league. (At least on paper) Nate & MRob will be fine with a WR at #18, the better WRs are usually latter in the draft, anyway. (Just look at Anquan Bolding a couple years ago.

Paulbedy59
03-13-2005, 07:32 PM
Yeah,and whats wierd is that smarts,where suppose to be an asset of his. :salute:

WI-ULT-MOSS-FAN
03-13-2005, 08:12 PM
if hes used #1 yea, if not i say no

eclipse_2303
03-13-2005, 08:26 PM
1000 yards isn't even that much. You only need like 63 yards a game.

ultravikingfan
03-13-2005, 09:27 PM
"eclipse_2303" wrote:

1000 yards isn't even that much. You only need like 63 yards a game.

It is still the benchmark used to help judge a WR performance, along with RB's.