PDA

View Full Version : W'sup with Nate?



RandyMoss8404
06-15-2005, 12:00 AM
I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

shockzilla
06-15-2005, 12:18 AM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

I don't think we need to be too worried. He's a professional and things will roll into place... :cool:

MNVikingGangsta
06-15-2005, 12:26 AM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.
i really woulnd't be worried at all. its not like those videos on the web site are showing EVERY play of practice. nate could have had a couple nice catches but the catch of the day often went to somebody else.

cajunvike
06-15-2005, 01:01 AM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

RandyMoss8404
06-15-2005, 01:20 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down

RandyMoss8404
06-15-2005, 01:28 AM
After viewing the tape, though, I will say one thing - Nate is no Randy, but he can get a step or two. If Pep can lay those in there perfectly....

cajunvike
06-15-2005, 01:35 AM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down

But while he is doing that (IF he can), who is gonna cover TT, MRob and Williamson...somebody is gonna get free and YOU KNOW Pep will hit them. YOU KNOW THIS! :lol:

RandyMoss8404
06-15-2005, 01:36 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down

But while he is doing that (IF he can), who is gonna cover TT, MRob and Williamson...somebody is gonna get free and YOU KNOW Pep will hit them. YOU KNOW THIS! :lol:

I'd be much more pleased to simply see MeMo streaking past Barnett and breaking a tackle from their safety on the way to a 60 yard td reception :-P

cajunvike
06-15-2005, 01:50 AM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down

But while he is doing that (IF he can), who is gonna cover TT, MRob and Williamson...somebody is gonna get free and YOU KNOW Pep will hit them. YOU KNOW THIS! :lol:

I'd be much more pleased to simply see MeMo streaking past Barnett and breaking a tackle from their safety on the way to a 60 yard td reception :-P

Works for me! OR...how 'bout all of that rolled into a slaughtering of the Packers at the Dome...as well as another one over at Lamb-moo Field! :lol:

RandyMoss8404
06-15-2005, 01:56 AM
Beating the Packers at the dome is a plus, but not a great one to me

Now, trashing them at Lambeau field - like in Randy's 'Way to pass on me, cocksuckers!' game?

Yes, that would be nice.

GQVikesfan
06-15-2005, 01:59 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down

But while he is doing that (IF he can), who is gonna cover TT, MRob and Williamson...somebody is gonna get free and YOU KNOW Pep will hit them. YOU KNOW THIS! :lol:

Dont forget about Kleinsasser and Wiggins!

akvikefan89
06-15-2005, 02:03 AM
I think we will see alot of screen passes this year to Bennet and Jimmy K and Short-Mid range passes to Wiggins and Burleson, Deeper passes to Taylor and Williamson.

eclipse_2303
06-15-2005, 02:12 AM
Lets hope he doesnt get the respect of a #1, then he will be even more effective.

akvikefan89
06-15-2005, 02:21 AM
Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.

MNVikingGangsta
06-15-2005, 02:28 AM
"akvikefan89" wrote:

Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.
yea that play was awesome, but wasn't it to big bad moe????

akvikefan89
06-15-2005, 02:30 AM
"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.
yea that play was awesome, but wasn't it to big bad moe????
I am 99.9% sure it was Bennett. He outran the whole defense.

MNVikingGangsta
06-15-2005, 02:31 AM
"akvikefan89" wrote:

"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.
yea that play was awesome, but wasn't it to big bad moe????
I am 99.9% sure it was Bennett. He outran the whole defense.maybe i am losing it... :sad:

MNVikingGangsta
06-15-2005, 02:37 AM
"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.
yea that play was awesome, but wasn't it to big bad moe????
I am 99.9% sure it was Bennett. He outran the whole defense.maybe i am losing it... :sad:
nope it actually was moe...http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=250109009
On the first series, linebacker Nick Barnett came up to stop Culpepper on third-and-short and left Moe Williams alone. Culpepper lofted the ball over Barnett and when safety Darren Sharper missed the tackle, Williams scampered 68 yards for a touchdown just 1:40 into the game.

ItalianStallion
06-15-2005, 02:49 AM
Don't worry about Nate. He will not make the circus Randy Moss-type catches, his strength is running after the catch and breaking tackles.

CanadaViking
06-15-2005, 03:18 AM
There is absolutely nothing to worry about, as far as N8 is concerned. The whole naming of a #1 receiver is little misleading when you don't have a Randy Moss, TO, marvin etc. I do not think the Vikes will have a single dominant WR, rather they will have 4-5 guys making plays and in the long run that will make our offense more balanced.

Our offense will be as potent as last year!!!! Save this post if you want but IMO we'll have more balance and more balance =equals more wins and a better TEAM attitude!

Cheers!

akvikefan89
06-15-2005, 04:00 AM
"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.
yea that play was awesome, but wasn't it to big bad moe????
I am 99.9% sure it was Bennett. He outran the whole defense.maybe i am losing it... :sad:
nope it actually was moe...http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=250109009
On the first series, linebacker Nick Barnett came up to stop Culpepper on third-and-short and left Moe Williams alone. Culpepper lofted the ball over Barnett and when safety Darren Sharper missed the tackle, Williams scampered 68 yards for a touchdown just 1:40 into the game.

Yep. Your right :shock: . Good thing I reserved that .1% :lol:
I was thinking of a differnent play where Bennett had a nice TD off a screen. Just goes to show you how effective it can be :grin:

RandyMoss8404
06-15-2005, 04:15 AM
Right.

What you meant to say was MeMo.

MNVikingGangsta
06-15-2005, 05:17 AM
"akvikefan89" wrote:

"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:


Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.
yea that play was awesome, but wasn't it to big bad moe????
I am 99.9% sure it was Bennett. He outran the whole defense.maybe i am losing it... :sad:
nope it actually was moe...http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=250109009
On the first series, linebacker Nick Barnett came up to stop Culpepper on third-and-short and left Moe Williams alone. Culpepper lofted the ball over Barnett and when safety Darren Sharper missed the tackle, Williams scampered 68 yards for a touchdown just 1:40 into the game.

Yep. Your right :shock: . Good thing I reserved that .1% :lol:
I was thinking of a differnent play where Bennett had a nice TD off a screen. Just goes to show you how effective it can be :grin:
very true, i can't wait to see that screen run with rosenthal and jimmy back in there

ItalianStallion
06-15-2005, 05:21 AM
akvikefan, maybe your refererring to the long run bennett got on a screen pass against the Packers in the Christmas eve game. I loved that, three straight offensive plays=three touchdowns. Too bad our D couldn't hold it.

MNVikingGangsta
06-15-2005, 05:23 AM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:

akvikefan, maybe your refererring to the long run bennett got on a screen pass against the Packers in the Christmas eve game. I loved that, three straight offensive plays=three touchdowns. Too bad our D couldn't hold it.
that game was so awesome until the end. that was the only game i got to go to last season. i was talking so much shit to the packer fans that were around me and then we lost :cry:

DarrinNelsonguy
06-15-2005, 05:51 AM
He'll be fine, rmember its early and we don't want the team to peak to early or we may fade away after week 3 of the season instead of week 6. LOL

audioghost
06-15-2005, 08:37 AM
Impressive catch....here's a picture of one!

http://www.kfan.com/vikings/devcamp2005/60205/photos/2.jpg

Plus he's catching passes from Daunte...can't make an impressive catch if you don't have to!

VKG4LFE
06-15-2005, 05:44 PM
I don't care if the catches he makes are impressive or just average, as long as he catches the d@mn ball!!

cajunvike
06-15-2005, 06:14 PM
"audioghost" wrote:

Impressive catch....here's a picture of one!

http://www.kfan.com/vikings/devcamp2005/60205/photos/2.jpg

Plus he's catching passes from Daunte...can't make an impressive catch if you don't have to!

SWEEEEEET!!!

VKG4LFE
06-15-2005, 06:42 PM
Yeah, I would classify that as impressive!! He took the ripped undershirt idea from Moss!!

ChiTownVike
06-15-2005, 06:57 PM
"MNVikingGangsta" wrote:

"akvikefan89" wrote:

Remember the touchdown screen play to Bennett to start the Packers playoff loss to us??? It was very effective all year. Culpepper is an outside running threat and when you have him running an outside option screen pass, it is very hard to defend. Cover Culpepper equals pass to speedy Bennett/Agile Wiggins. Cover Bennett equals monster Culpepper running down the field. It is extremely difficult to cover both.
yea that play was awesome, but wasn't it to big bad moe????


Ya, It was Moe

MNVikingGangsta
06-17-2005, 07:26 PM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.
another reason as to why he isn't making any "impressive" catches is because he had surgery on his broken middle finger so they are brining him along slowly

PAvikesfan
06-17-2005, 09:58 PM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down

the only thing Al Harris is locking down is the fake hair on his head. he's a li'bitch.

vikingdude82
06-17-2005, 10:17 PM
If we put Williamson or Taylor on the field Harris will have to take one of those than Burleson, besides Harris and Carrol they don't have a secondary.

RandyMoss8404
06-17-2005, 11:39 PM
"vikingdude82" wrote:

If we put Williamson or Taylor on the field Harris will have to take one of those than Burleson, besides Harris and Carrol they don't have a secondary.

Their secondary is Al Harris and Arturo Freeman

RandyMoss8404
06-17-2005, 11:43 PM
"PAvikesfan" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down

the only thing Al Harris is locking down is the fake hair on his head. he's a li'beeyatch.

Sorry...how many catches did the BEST WIDEOUT IN FOOTBALL have against him on Christmas Eve?

cc21
06-18-2005, 12:00 AM
Nate is still recovering from his broken middle finger that he got late last season. Sports weekly said that he had surgery on it this offseason and Steve Loney said that he can't catch to good with it right now.

canadian_vikes_fan
06-18-2005, 12:03 AM
"coreychavous21" wrote:

Nate is still recovering from his broken middle finger that he got late last season. Sports weekly said that he had surgery on it this offseason and Steve Loney said that he can't catch to good with it right now.broken middle finger??? :lol:

I didnt know it was that - howd that happen??

cc21
06-18-2005, 12:05 AM
i think it happened during the colts game last year, but he still played. And the week before that he broke his nose and they just popped it back in on the sidelines and he went back out.

collegeguyjeff
06-18-2005, 12:22 AM
give me a break, everyone saw the big plays burleson did last year he looked very impressive for a 2nd year player, this isn't regular season so who cares they are warming up. everyone says our defense looks good but this is only camp, this isn't regular season and they have a whole year to get better and play as a team for the playoffs

midgensa
06-18-2005, 12:28 AM
Burleson will be fine, people just like doubt. He was very impressive with or without Moss last season. N8 is a great NFL receiver and will continue to be a draft steal. He will go for 1,200 plus this year, just watch.
By the way, when did Vikings fans start licking Al Harris' balls? That guy is a very average corner.

RandyMoss8404
06-18-2005, 05:03 AM
"midgensa" wrote:

Burleson will be fine, people just like doubt. He was very impressive with or without Moss last season. N8 is a great NFL receiver and will continue to be a draft steal. He will go for 1,200 plus this year, just watch.
By the way, when did Vikings fans start licking Al Harris' balls? That guy is a very average corner.

I love how people talk based on big name/little name. If you think Al Harris is a 'very average corner' you don't watch football. End.

Ltrey33
06-18-2005, 05:56 AM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

After viewing the tape, though, I will say one thing - Nate is no Randy, but he can get a step or two. If Pep can lay those in there perfectly....

Nate is not Randy, I agree. Randy was "the freak" after all, but I think Nate is good enough. He's not going to make the crazy catches that Randy did, but he will be solid. I look for him to be more of a Hines Ward type player, they just seem to be built from the same mold. Also keep in mind that Nate isn't going to have to carry the same load that Randy did. Everyone focused a lot on Moss, and the entire offense was built around him. If Nate had to fill Randy's role, I'd be worried, but he doesn't. Nate just has to be a good reciever, he doesn't have to be insane. With the run game a bit more active and a more balanced recieving corps, I think Nate will do just fine being the #1 guy.

duffVIkEs
06-19-2005, 06:37 AM
"W'sup" with your grasp of the English language.

ultravikingfan
06-19-2005, 07:15 AM
"duffVIkEs" wrote:

"W'sup" with your grasp of the English language.

Who's?

whackthepack
06-20-2005, 03:55 PM
Nate, does have an injured finger from early in a development camp.

The coaching staff has told him to run routes, but not catch balls as they do not want to risk injurying the finger again.

Del Rio
06-20-2005, 04:05 PM
Al Harris is a good cover corner he has the more knocked down passess then any other CB. His interceptions are weak, his tackling is non exsistant. Other then that I can't stand him for no other reason then he is on one of my favorite teams to hate.

Del Rio
06-20-2005, 04:07 PM
"duffVIkEs" wrote:

"W'sup" with your grasp of the English language.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v227/Dzombiekilla/abf948a0.gif

PurplePeopleEaters
06-21-2005, 07:00 AM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"duffVIkEs" wrote:

"W'sup" with your grasp of the English language.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v227/Dzombiekilla/abf948a0.gif

haha. that is great. I always yell that at people really loud so that other people will notice. I will be like "YOU DAMN RACISTS".

jberg987
06-21-2005, 07:26 AM
PPE, not sure what the lettering in yellow is in the upper right corner, its all blurry to me, just figured Id say something if no one else has.

RandyMoss8404
06-21-2005, 07:32 AM
"duffVIkEs" wrote:

"W'sup" with your grasp of the English language.

Was that a question? Because generally those end in question marks.

Anything else, rookie?

cajunvike
06-21-2005, 07:50 AM
MC's they retreat cause they know I can beat 'em
And eat 'em in a battle and the ref won't cheat 'em
I'm the best takin' out all rookies
So forget Oreos eat Cool J coookies

I'm bad!!!

vegasvike
06-21-2005, 08:06 AM
"ltrey33" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

After viewing the tape, though, I will say one thing - Nate is no Randy, but he can get a step or two. If Pep can lay those in there perfectly....

Nate is not Randy, I agree. Randy was "the freak" after all, but I think Nate is good enough. He's not going to make the crazy catches that Randy did, but he will be solid. I look for him to be more of a Hines Ward type player, they just seem to be built from the same mold. Also keep in mind that Nate isn't going to have to carry the same load that Randy did. Everyone focused a lot on Moss, and the entire offense was built around him. If Nate had to fill Randy's role, I'd be worried, but he doesn't. Nate just has to be a good reciever, he doesn't have to be insane. With the run game a bit more active and a more balanced recieving corps, I think Nate will do just fine being the #1 guy.

I agree 100% with that

UTVikfan
06-21-2005, 06:51 PM
My how things have changed in one year. This year people are "worried about Nate being able to be the #1". Last year in posts here Nate Burleson was a bust. He will do fine, just like last year.

vikes09
06-21-2005, 06:55 PM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

I have yet to see him make an impressive catch in mini-camp. Yes, I know it's mini-camp, but still.

I have all the faith in the world in Nate, but I'm wondering if he's going to be able to earn the respect from opposing defenses that a number one receiver should. Check out the videos from today's session (6-14) on KFan's website - he gets by Winfield (barely) but can't stretch out to make the catch. It's a bit worrying.

He IS trying to beat Winfield...heck, how many WRs in the LEAGUE are gonna beat AW...rest assured, Nate will smoke opposing CBs this coming season...especially Batman & Company over in Packerland!!! :lol:

I hope you're right

I still say Al Harris is going to lock him down


i doubt that al harris is going to cover him. with such bad corners they will probably put al harris on the #2 (in theory "taking him out of the game"), and then the #2 corner with safety help. this is what we did against the texans vs. andre johnson. you saw how much that worked. he ran short stuff on us all day.

ultravikingfan
06-21-2005, 10:38 PM
"RandyMoss8404" wrote:

"duffVIkEs" wrote:

"W'sup" with your grasp of the English language.

Was that a question? Because generally those end in question marks.

Anything else, rookie?

Don't you hate it when somebody makes an ridiculous statement and never replies back to other members outrage.

Odin VAVikefan
06-22-2005, 12:48 AM
I think Nate will be fine...he's not Randy Moss, and never will be. I think we are going to have to get used to being without a top 5 wide receiver for a while, and settle for having 4 darn good ones. Only a few teams get to have a top 5 reciever (umm...that would almost always be five teams), and the overwhelming majority aren;t graced with the kind of depth we have. I personally feel like Nate will get 800-1,000 yds and about 10 TD's this season, barring injury. This would be great, if we could get this kind of production and have an up-for grabs WR corps like New England at the same time. If it worked OK for them, we should rock with our comparatively better WR corps.

KWillFan
06-22-2005, 01:04 AM
Nate will get over 1000yds this season and 10TDs. The real question is will Williamson, Taylor, or Robinson be able to make ANY kind of impact. If any of them step up then Nate will have a great season. I think the emphysis will be on the ground game, most teams will try to shut it down and put pressure on Pep to make plays with the before mentioned. Someone(s) will need to step up to make it happen though.

What kind of impact do you think Fason will have this year if any?

Odin VAVikefan
06-22-2005, 01:12 AM
"KWillFan" wrote:

Nate will get over 1000yds this season and 10TDs. The real question is will Williamson, Taylor, or Robinson be able to make ANY kind of impact. If any of them step up then Nate will have a great season. I think the emphysis will be on the ground game, most teams will try to shut it down and put pressure on Pep to make plays with the before mentioned. Someone(s) will need to step up to make it happen though.

What kind of impact do you think Fason will have this year if any?

That's an excellent question. I think that Fason is a very good prospect and that the Vikes' Front Office was smart to get him. He has a lot to offer in the next few seasons, once he gets the playbook digested (preferably not through eating it). However, I myself would like to see him being a student of the game this year, and be all the more ready to explode in our opponents' faces next season or in 2007. Right now, from what I've heard, he may be a little too raw. If he's playing this season, it's likely going to be because something has gone horribly wrong with Bennett and/or Mewelde, which I seriously hope does not happen. I guess my take is that, because I only see Fason starting if a catastrophe with our frontrunners occurs, I really hope he doesn't play much at all this year. Nothing against him, he's a great diamond in the rough, and I want to see him take over Moe's role next year.

PurplePeopleEaters
06-22-2005, 01:24 AM
"jberg987" wrote:

PPE, not sure what the lettering in yellow is in the upper right corner, its all blurry to me, just figured Id say something if no one else has.

Thanks. If no one can see it I might has well not have it. It says Where will you be February 5th 2006?