PDA

View Full Version : Chester Predicted To Get More Yards Then Edge



purplepride818
03-13-2006, 10:31 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/03/13/mmqb/4.html

8. I think next October we'll all be writing, "Wow. I never thought the biggest impact player in free agency would be Chester Taylor with the Vikings." Prediction: Chester Taylor outgains Edgerrin James in 2006

this guy usually knows what hes talking about.not to mention hes one of the hall of fame voters

revprodeji
03-13-2006, 10:36 PM
His logic with the hutchenson situation is interesting

Prophet
03-13-2006, 10:37 PM
lol, people are already making those predictions. I don't put that much credibility into what Peter King says. I would love to see Taylor outgain Edge but my guess is that Edge will be the feature back and Chester will do a lot of sharing and not get the 25+ touches per game that Edge will get. We'll see. I like the prediction though, pretty bold since very few could even come within 70% of the 53-man roster predictions for next year.

ultravikingfan
03-13-2006, 10:38 PM
Thats good for us!

Let the speculation begin!

shawn9876uss
03-13-2006, 10:38 PM
I think that if taylor is the featured back, I would agree with King

DarrinNelsonguy
03-13-2006, 10:39 PM
Who cares about who rushes for what yardage? Let's just win some damn football games.

rdknieff
03-13-2006, 10:39 PM
that'd be nice but i won't be sold on Chester until I can see him play a few games...

V4L
03-13-2006, 10:39 PM
Yah who knows..

If Chester gets more then 10 carries a game he could have a shot at that...

Not to mention we will be passing alot.. That's more yards there

Displaced_Viking
03-13-2006, 10:41 PM
I like Peter King for his articles, but he's wasn't great at picking the games this year. I hope he's right. I know that when Taylor did play this year, I was impressed, and I'm sooo glad we didn't get Jamal Lewis.

Displaced_Viking
03-13-2006, 10:41 PM
I like Peter King for his articles, but he's wasn't great at picking the games this year compared to some of the other writers. I hope he's right. I know that when Taylor did play this year, I was impressed, and I'm sooo glad we didn't get Jamal Lewis.

purplepride818
03-13-2006, 10:46 PM
yeah i hope hes right

PurplePackerEater
03-13-2006, 10:50 PM
"purplepride818" wrote:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/03/13/mmqb/4.html

8. I think next October we'll all be writing, "Wow. I never thought the biggest impact player in free agency would be Chester Taylor with the Vikings." Prediction: Chester Taylor outgains Edgerrin James in 2006

this guy usually knows what hes talking about.not to mention hes one of the hall of fame voters

Good God, it's last offseason all over again.

VikesfaninWis
03-13-2006, 10:56 PM
That Taylor prediction would be nice, but I hope he is wrong on the Hutchinson situation... I wish that when a transition player gets an offer from another team, and his current team matches the offer, that the player had the final choice where he plays. Now that would be ultimate free agency.

I know, then why would there be transition and franchise tags anyway. It just would be nice to see it that way. In Brian Williams case, he wasn't happy with the Vikes anymore, and didn't want to be here.. They have no control if the are slapped with either tag, unless they pull a Alexander. The player should have the ultimate choice where he wants to play, especially if several teams are pitching for his services.

cc21
03-13-2006, 10:56 PM
Thats cool. Hopefully he is right, unless Edge only gains 300 yards, lol

VikesfaninWis
03-13-2006, 10:58 PM
"revprodeji" wrote:

His logic with the hutchenson situation is interesting



Is this screen wide because you have 2 sigs right next to each other? If so, try putting them above each other..

ultravikingfan
03-13-2006, 10:59 PM
"DarrinNelsonguy" wrote:

Who cares about who rushes for what yardage? Let's just win some gol 'darnit football games.

I bet if it was Darrin Nelson you would care!

Zing!

:razz:

:lol:

Displaced_Viking
03-13-2006, 11:11 PM
Sorry about the double post earlier.

Taylor's average Yards/rush is pretty sweet. 4.2 last season, 4.3 overall. And, if we get Hutch, running to the left will be oh so sweet.

Benet
03-13-2006, 11:14 PM
I refuse to place much faith in articles like this.. They're entirely speculative. Sure King has to write SOMETHING so he gets paid, but let's not get ahead of ourselves, the season doesn't start for another 7 months, a LOT can happen in 7 months.

(But here's hoping he's wrong about Hutchinson and right about Chester Taylor :razz:)

Del Rio
03-13-2006, 11:16 PM
If we run the WCO I highly doubt he will outgain anyone.

In fact if we had edge here and we ran the WCO I am willing to bet he doesn't break 1000

Mr. Purple
03-13-2006, 11:18 PM
Thats right, he knows whats up!

vikings11_27
03-13-2006, 11:18 PM
good point

revprodeji
03-13-2006, 11:19 PM
"VikesfaninWis" wrote:

"revprodeji" wrote:

His logic with the hutchenson situation is interesting



Is this screen wide because you have 2 sigs right next to each other? If so, try putting them above each other..

i fixed it...thanks, the other message board I am on has different sig policies

olson_10
03-13-2006, 11:26 PM
taylor more yards than edge? yah its very easily possible! edge decided he would go for the money and warm weather rather than the nice stats and wins..he is behind one of the leages absolute worst o-lines..taylor could easily go for 1300 yards this year, with 500 yards receiving, as long as he is durable enough to carry the premier runningback load..look at the line he will be running behind, its rediculous! the left side mckinnie, hutchinson (he is ours because of the sneaky contract terms), and birk..3 potential pro bowlers in our o-line, wow..edge will barely go for 1100 yards this year which is my prediction, since he will be swarmed in the backfield every play, and he wont catch that many balls with warner on his butt and out with a broken thumb by week 3

Viking_Spirit
03-13-2006, 11:32 PM
Taylor's gonna be a solid RB, but I don't think he'll outgain Edge. There's not going to be anybody challenging Edge for carries in the Cardinals offense (Marcel Shipp? Please.), and Taylor will have Bennett, Moore, or Fason challenging him for carries.

i_bleed_purple
03-13-2006, 11:33 PM
watch edge be out with a season ending injury by week 2 now, then taylor can have more yards as long as he lasts untill week 5.

really tho, i think it's entirely possible. I see us running a cheifs-type running game. if you need some yards, you run to the left behind the big 3. if Fonoti can come back to proper weight and regain the form he used to have, we could throw MJ at RT and we'd have one beastly O line. I'm excited already.

DCPologirl
03-13-2006, 11:36 PM
well that would be fabulous but.........unlikely? lol

i_bleed_purple
03-13-2006, 11:37 PM
"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

Taylor's gonna be a solid RB, but I don't think he'll outgain Edge. There's not going to be anybody challenging Edge for carries in the Cardinals offense (Marcel Shipp? Please.), and Taylor will have Bennett, Moore, or Fason challenging him for carries.

Wilfy's already said he's not gonna give Bennett a new contract, I see Moore possibly being a challenge for the top spot, because moore and Taylor are very similar. I think Taylor does everything moore does slightly better. I really don't know about Fason. He only ever played as a short yardage back. I have yet to see him in on a first or second down. Whatever happens i hope we pick a starter and stick with him, giving him only OCCASIONAL breathers. not like the last few years where every second play there was a new running back.

Viking_Spirit
03-13-2006, 11:40 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

Taylor's gonna be a solid RB, but I don't think he'll outgain Edge. There's not going to be anybody challenging Edge for carries in the Cardinals offense (Marcel Shipp? Please.), and Taylor will have Bennett, Moore, or Fason challenging him for carries.

Wilfy's already said he's not gonna give Bennett a new contract, I see Moore possibly being a challenge for the top spot, because moore and Taylor are very similar. I think Taylor does everything moore does slightly better. I really don't know about Fason. He only ever played as a short yardage back. I have yet to see him in on a first or second down. Whatever happens i hope we pick a starter and stick with him, giving him only OCCASIONAL breathers. not like the last few years where every second play there was a new running back.

Well, it's good news that Bennett isn't gonna get a new contract. With that, I still think Taylor will end up splitting carries with Moore (although I would like us to have one feature back), and Fason will take the goal-line carries.

DCPologirl
03-13-2006, 11:41 PM
what's up with Burleson?

i_bleed_purple
03-13-2006, 11:45 PM
last i heard he's still with us, but he's a RFA with a very low qualifying offer. I haven't heard of him getting any offers, but as soon as all the big name guys are gone i think he's going to get a little attention.

Gift
03-14-2006, 12:00 AM
"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

Taylor's gonna be a solid RB, but I don't think he'll outgain Edge. There's not going to be anybody challenging Edge for carries in the Cardinals offense (Marcel Shipp? Please.), and Taylor will have Bennett, Moore, or Fason challenging him for carries.

Wilfy's already said he's not gonna give Bennett a new contract, I see Moore possibly being a challenge for the top spot, because moore and Taylor are very similar. I think Taylor does everything moore does slightly better. I really don't know about Fason. He only ever played as a short yardage back. I have yet to see him in on a first or second down. Whatever happens i hope we pick a starter and stick with him, giving him only OCCASIONAL breathers. not like the last few years where every second play there was a new running back.

Well, it's good news that Bennett isn't gonna get a new contract. With that, I still think Taylor will end up splitting carries with Moore (although I would like us to have one feature back), and Fason will take the goal-line carries.
I worry about short yardage, Fasion just doesn't have the power needed or atleast not that I've seen.

ultravikingfan
03-14-2006, 12:03 AM
"Gift" wrote:

"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

Taylor's gonna be a solid RB, but I don't think he'll outgain Edge. There's not going to be anybody challenging Edge for carries in the Cardinals offense (Marcel Shipp? Please.), and Taylor will have Bennett, Moore, or Fason challenging him for carries.

Wilfy's already said he's not gonna give Bennett a new contract, I see Moore possibly being a challenge for the top spot, because moore and Taylor are very similar. I think Taylor does everything moore does slightly better. I really don't know about Fason. He only ever played as a short yardage back. I have yet to see him in on a first or second down. Whatever happens i hope we pick a starter and stick with him, giving him only OCCASIONAL breathers. not like the last few years where every second play there was a new running back.

Well, it's good news that Bennett isn't gonna get a new contract. With that, I still think Taylor will end up splitting carries with Moore (although I would like us to have one feature back), and Fason will take the goal-line carries.
I worry about short yardage, Fasion just doesn't have the power needed or atleast not that I've seen.

I worry about that too. He really did not prove anything last year in short yardage. Once maybe.

BBQ Platypus
03-14-2006, 12:04 AM
"Experts" also predicted the triumphant return of Hovan. I wouldn't put too much stock into this. Yeah, Taylor is good, but I don't even think he's good enough to be an every-down back, much less to be used enough to get more yardage than Edge.

I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

Benet
03-14-2006, 12:14 AM
"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

"Experts" also predicted the triumphant return of Hovan. I wouldn't put too much stock into this. Yeah, Taylor is good, but I don't even think he's good enough to be an every-down back, much less to be used enough to get more yardage than Edge.

I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

By all accounts he has had a "triumphant return." I'd say anchoring the Bucs defensive line and getting a new multi-year deal with them is a big turnaround from his last year with us.

http://www.buccaneers.com/news/newsdetail.aspx?newsid=5038

Good luck to him, he did a great job for us in 2001, 2002 and 2003.

mr.woo
03-14-2006, 12:15 AM
we will ( i ccant belive im saying this) have a better line than somebody next year if we get hutchinson. and not anybody but the cardinals.

V4L
03-14-2006, 12:22 AM
"Benet" wrote:

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

"Experts" also predicted the triumphant return of Hovan. I wouldn't put too much stock into this. Yeah, Taylor is good, but I don't even think he's good enough to be an every-down back, much less to be used enough to get more yardage than Edge.

I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

By all accounts he has had a "triumphant return." I'd say anchoring the Bucs defensive line and getting a new multi-year deal with them is a big turnaround from his last year with us.

http://www.buccaneers.com/news/newsdetail.aspx?newsid=5038

Good luck to him, he did a great job for us in 2001, 2002 and 2003.

Exactly.. Stats weren't flashy.. But he did a steller job as a NT

BBQ Platypus
03-14-2006, 12:25 AM
"Benet" wrote:

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

"Experts" also predicted the triumphant return of Hovan. I wouldn't put too much stock into this. Yeah, Taylor is good, but I don't even think he's good enough to be an every-down back, much less to be used enough to get more yardage than Edge.

I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

By all accounts he has had a "triumphant return." I'd say anchoring the Bucs defensive line and getting a new multi-year deal with them is a big turnaround from his last year with us.

http://www.buccaneers.com/news/newsdetail.aspx?newsid=5038

Good luck to him, he did a great job for us in 2001, 2002 and 2003.

You never fail to misunderstand my posts. I am referring to predictions extending only to next year, as was the case when they predicted that Hovan would have his best season in 2003.

Taylor, Hutchinson, and Leber are not going to fill every hole that our team has (unless they put on a lot of weight). I had crafted a reply to your response to my post in another thread, but that thread was locked before I finished typing it. We need at least SOME experienced, high-level players on our team, particularly at the safety position and at middle linebacker (which, being the quarterback of the offense, is a risky position to entrust to a player who, though high on potential, has hitherto been low on results - regardless of how much film you've watched). But I digress. In any case, these "experts" are often wrong. Hovan only got 30 tackles and 1 sack last season, which isn't really a triumphant return. He was and is a slightly-above-average player, as is Taylor (in my opinion).

As I mentioned before, I'd love to be proven wrong. I'd also love it if you stopped acting like a douche.

In conclusion, nyah nyah! You're an idiot! Stupidhead! I felt that I had to mention that, because, as you are well aware, insulting someone's intelligence is an excellent substitute for a real argument.

Benet
03-14-2006, 12:47 AM
"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

You never fail to misunderstand my posts. I am referring to predictions extending only to next year, as was the case when they predicted that Hovan would have his best season in 2003.

There was absolutely no mention anywhere that you were referring to Hovan making a triumphant return in 2003. How was I supposed to know?

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

Taylor, Hutchinson, and Leber are not going to fill every hole that our team has (unless they put on a lot of weight).

You're right, by themselves they're not. But whining like a bitch because they're not named Adam Vinatieri, Alan Faneca and Julian Peterson (yes I know Faneca's not a free agent, but your demands of A class players lead me to use him as an example) is idiotic because we've only been in Free Agency 2 WHOLE DAYS AND WE HAVEN'T HAD THE DRAFT YET!

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

I had crafted a reply to your response to my post in another thread, but that thread was locked before I finished typing it.

This is me crying for all that time you wasted. No, wait.. It isn't.

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

We need at least SOME experienced, high-level players on our team, particularly at the safety position and at middle linebacker (which, being the quarterback of the offense, is a risky position to entrust to a player who, though high on potential, has hitherto been low on results - regardless of how much film you've watched).

Hey I agree with you! (Shock! Horror!) Middle Linebacker is a crucial position, that's why I'm going to assume, unless explicitly shown otherwise, that Leber will play either of the Outside Linebacker spots, but not the middle. I don't know who we might bring in or draft for Middle Linebacker, but that is the one position I would like us to make a big splash on, in the draft if we have to.

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

But I digress. In any case, these "experts" are often wrong. Hovan only got 30 tackles and 1 sack last season, which isn't really a triumphant return. He was and is a slightly-above-average player, as is Taylor (in my opinion).

Yes, experts are often wrong. So are fans. You see where I'm going with this? By your own words Hovan didn't have a triumphant return, yet he did enough for the Bucs to become so enamoured with him they re-signed him for a number of years, and he was part of a run defence that jumped from 19th (without him) to 6th (with him) and was #1 in overall defence.

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

As I mentioned before, I'd love to be proven wrong.

I think I just did that. Be great if you could admit it rather than just say it.

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

I'd also love it if you stopped acting like a douche.

I know you are but what am I.

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:


In conclusion, nyah nyah! You're an idiot! Stupidhead! I felt that I had to mention that, because, as you are well aware, insulting someone's intelligence is an excellent substitute for a real argument.

Up until the last fews thing I said above this, I haven't insulted your intelligence.. Apart from with the cracks about your preferred policies of General Managers being from the Madden 2006 school of NFL business than having any basis in reality.. And maybe that joke about you throwing your toys out of the pram already.. So maybe I do have it in for you because you're an idiot.. But what I said in this thread, up til now, was nothing more than a rebuttal of what you were trying to sound authoritative about. I back up what I say with evidence and all you can do is call me a douche. So get bent.

fabybaby32
03-14-2006, 01:18 AM
I dont know if chester will outgain edge, but I do believe he will be a great back. I picked him up for fantasy football and actually followed him alot. When he got his chances he delivered. I know his stats arent much to look at, but if hes the feature back, I think he will wow people.

collegeguyjeff
03-14-2006, 02:43 AM
well the cardinals had a total of 800 yards rushing and 2 td's. i know for a fact edge won't come close to his numbers for the colts.

Wiggles67
03-14-2006, 06:14 PM
"Gift" wrote:

"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"Viking_Spirit" wrote:

Taylor's gonna be a solid RB, but I don't think he'll outgain Edge. There's not going to be anybody challenging Edge for carries in the Cardinals offense (Marcel Shipp? Please.), and Taylor will have Bennett, Moore, or Fason challenging him for carries.

Wilfy's already said he's not gonna give Bennett a new contract, I see Moore possibly being a challenge for the top spot, because moore and Taylor are very similar. I think Taylor does everything moore does slightly better. I really don't know about Fason. He only ever played as a short yardage back. I have yet to see him in on a first or second down. Whatever happens i hope we pick a starter and stick with him, giving him only OCCASIONAL breathers. not like the last few years where every second play there was a new running back.

Well, it's good news that Bennett isn't gonna get a new contract. With that, I still think Taylor will end up splitting carries with Moore (although I would like us to have one feature back), and Fason will take the goal-line carries.
I worry about short yardage, Fasion just doesn't have the power needed or atleast not that I've seen.I think this might be why they did sign that FB and also why they are bringing in Henderson...to help with some of these short yardage situations.

Del Rio
03-14-2006, 06:19 PM
"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

"Benet" wrote:

"BBQ Platypus" wrote:

"Experts" also predicted the triumphant return of Hovan. I wouldn't put too much stock into this. Yeah, Taylor is good, but I don't even think he's good enough to be an every-down back, much less to be used enough to get more yardage than Edge.

I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

By all accounts he has had a "triumphant return." I'd say anchoring the Bucs defensive line and getting a new multi-year deal with them is a big turnaround from his last year with us.

http://www.buccaneers.com/news/newsdetail.aspx?newsid=5038

Good luck to him, he did a great job for us in 2001, 2002 and 2003.

You never fail to misunderstand my posts. I am referring to predictions extending only to next year, as was the case when they predicted that Hovan would have his best season in 2003.

Taylor, Hutchinson, and Leber are not going to fill every hole that our team has (unless they put on a lot of weight). I had crafted a reply to your response to my post in another thread, but that thread was locked before I finished typing it. We need at least SOME experienced, high-level players on our team, particularly at the safety position and at middle linebacker (which, being the quarterback of the offense, is a risky position to entrust to a player who, though high on potential, has hitherto been low on results - regardless of how much film you've watched). But I digress. In any case, these "experts" are often wrong. Hovan only got 30 tackles and 1 sack last season, which isn't really a triumphant return. He was and is a slightly-above-average player, as is Taylor (in my opinion).

As I mentioned before, I'd love to be proven wrong. I'd also love it if you stopped acting like a douche.

In conclusion, nyah nyah! You're an idiot! Stupidhead! I felt that I had to mention that, because, as you are well aware, insulting someone's intelligence is an excellent substitute for a real argument.

Not cool, not allowed.

Knock it off. If you two have a problem with each other PM and work it out like big boys if not PM a mod, do not openly attack another member.

Del Rio
03-14-2006, 06:25 PM
"olson_10" wrote:

taylor more yards than edge? yah its very easily possible! edge decided he would go for the money and warm weather rather than the nice stats and wins..he is behind one of the leages absolute worst o-lines..taylor could easily go for 1300 yards this year, with 500 yards receiving, as long as he is durable enough to carry the premier runningback load..look at the line he will be running behind, its rediculous! the left side mckinnie, hutchinson (he is ours because of the sneaky contract terms), and birk..3 potential pro bowlers in our o-line, wow..edge will barely go for 1100 yards this year which is my prediction, since he will be swarmed in the backfield every play, and he wont catch that many balls with warner on his butt and out with a broken thumb by week 3

Not really. Their offensive line gave up fewer sacks then most. Sure the rushing was horrible, but that does not immediately point to the line. Edge is a good fit in Arizona.

Arizona is destined to lose though. They were like 8th in total offense and 8th in total defense and they still sucked it up.

He will definately have more yards then Chester no doubt about it. I wouldn't be surprised if CHester had 650 yds rushing. This is the WCO offense he may touch the ball 20-30 times but they wont be rushes.

cajunvike
03-14-2006, 06:36 PM
I don't believe that premise...but would be delighted to be proven wrong!

Del Rio
03-14-2006, 06:38 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:

I don't believe that premise...but would be delighted to be proven wrong!

There is no need to proove you wrong when you have never been proven right.

:grin: :grin: