PDA

View Full Version : Ted Cottrell on KFAN yesterday



shockzilla
08-26-2004, 08:35 AM
Did anyone hear Ted Cottrell on KFAN yesterday? He was being interviewed by Chad Hartmann on Chad's afternoon show. They were talking about the Vikes’ D, obviously, and Chad asked him how he felt about the D this year, and he said he EXPECTS them to DOMINATE this year! Chad then asked “What makes you think that?” and Ted said flat-out “I don’t think, I KNOW. Just by how they look, how hard they’ve been working.” MAN DOES THAT SOUND PROMISING, EH? I just think we’re going to have such a good year defensively, probably the best in 20 years! Not since the Keith Millard days, anyway!

SKOL!!!!!!

whackthepack
08-26-2004, 09:43 AM
Thanks Skockzilla, I wish I would have heard it. Hartmann is a anti -homer, he tries so hard not to favor the local teams that he has become a pessimist.

Back in 1998 when Red said that he didn't see a loss on the schedule Hartmann and Barrerio(?) lambasted him, said Red was predicting we would go undefeated, but what he ment was that there wasn't a team on our schedule we couldn't beat. As you know we end 15-1 and almost went undefeated, damn Bucks!

casper
08-26-2004, 10:06 AM
That would have been nice to hear but it was even better coming from a Viking fan thanks shockzilla

Del Rio
08-26-2004, 10:09 AM
Yeah the D-Line has been lacking the last few years. I think this year looks promising.

Williams gave us our first 10+ sack individual effort since 99'

Hope that the front can be more like the 89' front with Doleman 21 sacks, Millard 18.0, Noga 11.5, Thomas 9.0

Hovan has had a few sub par years imo, but I guess when your secondary doesn't give you time then there aren't going to be very many sacks.

I think this year looks very promising :D

VKG4LFE
08-26-2004, 01:31 PM
That '89 line was incredible!!

VKG4LFE
08-26-2004, 01:32 PM
That line was also awesome on Tecmo bowl!!

SKOL
08-26-2004, 04:59 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

I think this year looks very promising :D

Nice pic Del Rio..., do you perform?

LosAngelis
08-26-2004, 05:21 PM
Isn't Ted Cottrell the guy who does food on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? He's one of your coaches?

ItalianStallion
08-26-2004, 05:26 PM
Didn't Tice guarantee the playoffs last year? I wouldn't put much weight on what he "knows".

Big Daddy
08-26-2004, 06:23 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:

Didn't Tice guarantee the playoffs last year? I wouldn't put much weight on what he "knows".

But it wasn't tice that said it, it was Ted Cottrell. And Cottrell has had some damn good defenses in his day. I think it is awesome that he is giving our guys some respect for the hard work they've put in. I don't think he would of said it if he didn't truely believe it!

VikingsTw
08-26-2004, 07:50 PM
Los that joke was so lame of course i dont watch queer shows with guys so i wouldnt get it.

PacNWVike
08-26-2004, 11:24 PM
"LosAngelis" wrote:

Isn't Ted Cottrell the guy who does food on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? He's one of your coaches?

HA! A witty salvo from La La Land. You funny man LosPeckerless... :lol:

ItalianStallion
08-26-2004, 11:26 PM
Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.

PacNWVike
08-26-2004, 11:36 PM
"PacNWVike" wrote:

"LosAngelis" wrote:

Isn't Ted Cottrell the guy who does food on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? He's one of your coaches?

HA! A witty salvo from La La Land. You funny man LosPeckerless... :lol:

Not insulting you personally Los... Haven't been on the board since January so folks may not remember my sense of humor... Skol Vikings!

SKOL
08-27-2004, 01:48 AM
"LosAngelis" wrote:

Isn't Ted Cottrell the guy who does food on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? He's one of your coaches?

I wouldn't know Los, I'VE never watched it. :wink:

hawaiianvike21
08-27-2004, 04:22 AM
"PacNWVike" wrote:

"PacNWVike" wrote:

"LosAngelis" wrote:

Isn't Ted Cottrell the guy who does food on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? He's one of your coaches?

HA! A witty salvo from La La Land. You funny man LosPeckerless... :lol:

Not insulting you personally Los... Haven't been on the board since January so folks may not remember my sense of humor... Skol Vikings!

I sure do! lmao! :lol: :thumbright:

Del Rio
08-27-2004, 09:31 AM
That pic isn't me :D

It's Kyle from Tenacious D, a band that the comedian jack Black started

whackthepack
08-27-2004, 10:06 AM
"Del Rio" wrote:

That pic isn't me :D

It's Kyle from Tenacious D, a band that the comedian jack Black started


Is it your twin brother? :wink:

muchluv4smoot
08-27-2004, 11:14 AM
"Del Rio" wrote:

That pic isn't me :D

It's Kyle from Tenacious D, a band that the comedian jack Black started



Tenacious D kicks *ss!

muchluv4smoot
08-27-2004, 11:21 AM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:

Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.


It would have ben one hel of a miracle for cotrell to make that jets D good. Look at their D players and how many of them would start over our guys this year? Probably hardly any. Abraham, thats about it. Hell, Tyrone Carter was their starting safety and one of their better D players. A D coordinator can only do so much, with the talent he has. In NY, he had an extremely small amount of talent, but here he has a ton of talent to work with.

Now I am not gonna say we are all of a sudden gonna go from the 23rd ranked D, to a top 5 D, but this D will be much better with cotrell. We should be happy with a D around 15th, which is easily good enough with our offense.

One thing to note: when your offense is really good, it is usually harder for your D to be good, since your offense is scoring and giving the other teams offense the ball back all the time. Look at teams with good D's, they usually have bad offenses that don't score that much. This isn't a coinsidence. It will be pretty hard for our D to be a top 5 or even top 10 D, with our offense as good as it is. Possible? Yes, but very hard to do. Our D will be much better than their ranking.

PacNWVike
08-27-2004, 12:20 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

That pic isn't me :D

It's Kyle from Tenacious D, a band that the comedian jack Black started

Tenacious D! That is one funny band! :thumbright:

PacNWVike
08-27-2004, 12:23 PM
"muchluv4moss" wrote:

"ItalianStallion" wrote:
[quote]Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.

Now I am not gonna say we are all of a sudden gonna go from the 23rd ranked D, to a top 5 D, but this D will be much better with cotrell. We should be happy with a D around 15th, which is easily good enough with our offense.

I agree. And don't forget that wonderful little intangible called "chemistry" (no, not Ricky Williams and SOD's type) that makes a group of guys click. The Skins demonstrated you can pick up all the talented free agent hired guns you want and still fall flat on your fanny.

ItalianStallion
08-27-2004, 01:02 PM
I disagree muchluv, it is alot easier on a defense when their offense is goos.

Not only is there considerably less pressure to stop them from scoring anything on every possession, but the defense is out on the field alot less.

You claim that it is hard on the defense if the O is scoring all the time. That would only be true if our average drive was 30 seconds or something. Fortunatly a scoring drive almost always takes more time than your average 3 and out drive. Especially when we grind it out on the ground like we did alot last year.

The better our Offense is, the longer our drives are, which means more rest for the D.

thepacksux
08-27-2004, 01:25 PM
ItalianStallion wrote:
Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.

Cottrell was the scapegoat for herman edwards last year. That defense was so stripped down they had nobody. Thats why they were trying to sign antoine winfield who we stole at the last second... :D But look at the bright side. They got Quincy Carter in New york now :drunken:

thepacksux
08-27-2004, 01:29 PM
speaking of poor defenses though, I cant believe the packers fired donatel last year, he made a below average defense (personel wise), look decent with smoke and mirrors all year long and then he gets fired cuz the rookie linebacker screwed up his zone coverage by stayin near the line of scrimmage instead of dropping back 15 - 20 yards.

LosAngelis
08-27-2004, 03:57 PM
"PacNWVike" wrote:

"PacNWVike" wrote:

"LosAngelis" wrote:

Isn't Ted Cottrell the guy who does food on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? He's one of your coaches?

HA! A witty salvo from La La Land. You funny man LosPeckerless... :lol:

Not insulting you personally Los... Haven't been on the board since January so folks may not remember my sense of humor... Skol Vikings!

It's all water off my back, my friend. :-) After Bovy, your taunts seem harmless and well-intentioned...:-)

muchluv4smoot
08-27-2004, 04:05 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:

I disagree muchluv, it is alot easier on a defense when their offense is goos.

Not only is there considerably less pressure to stop them from scoring anything on every possession, but the defense is out on the field alot less.

You claim that it is hard on the defense if the O is scoring all the time. That would only be true if our average drive was 30 seconds or something. Fortunatly a scoring drive almost always takes more time than your average 3 and out drive. Especially when we grind it out on the ground like we did alot last year.

The better our Offense is, the longer our drives are, which means more rest for the D.



Name a team with a top D, that also had a top offense. I bet I can name many more teams with great D's that had offenses near the bottom of the league. Is that coincidence? I say no. No matter how much talent we have on our D, it will never be ranked high in the league. It will never be as good as the ravens, rankings wise. Why? Because of our offense. We have an offense that can score from anywhere and quickly. That hurts our D chances of being ranked high. Same with teams like the colts and chiefs.

You make good points, but for some reason, teams that have great D's in this league, always have horrible offenses, and vice versa. Sure you can say that because of FA, that those teams have all their talent on D and none on offense, but that isn't always true. Look at the Bills of 2 years ago, with one of the best offenses in the league. Their D sucked badly that year too. Look at their offense and D last year. They had a horrible offense and an awesome D. Sure some of that can be contributed to a few good FA pickups, but it also has something to do with their offense IMO.

Also look at teams who lead the league in time of possession last year. We were either 2nd or 3rd in T.O.P, yet our D was still ranked 23rd in the league. You would think they would be higher than that, if our offense had the ball that often. Same can be said for many of the top T.O.P leaders last year, they had bad D rankings still.

What you say, makes sense, but it always seems to work out that teams with great offenses and high T.O.P, end up having bad D's. I wouldn't call that coincidence.

muchluv4smoot
08-27-2004, 04:08 PM
"thepacksux" wrote:

ItalianStallion wrote:
Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.

Cottrell was the scapegoat for herman edwards last year. That defense was so stripped down they had nobody. Thats why they were trying to sign antoine winfield who we stole at the last second... :D But look at the bright side. They got Quincy Carter in New york now :drunken:


Yeah, plus cottrell didn't have total control of the jets D, like he did in buffalo and will here in minnesota. He had to run herman edwards style of D. Cottrell says that he is happy that he is back in a place where he can do what he wants on D.

PacNWVike
08-28-2004, 06:35 PM
"LosAngelis" wrote:

"PacNWVike" wrote:

"PacNWVike" wrote:

"LosAngelis" wrote:

Isn't Ted Cottrell the guy who does food on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? He's one of your coaches?

HA! A witty salvo from La La Land. You funny man LosPeckerless... :lol:

Not insulting you personally Los... Haven't been on the board since January so folks may not remember my sense of humor... Skol Vikings!

It's all water off my back, my friend. :-) After Bovy, your taunts seem harmless and well-intentioned...:-)

Cool. My shots are never personal, only in fun. :thumbright:

hawaiianvike21
08-29-2004, 04:32 AM
"muchluv4moss" wrote:

"thepacksux" wrote:

ItalianStallion wrote:
Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.

Cottrell was the scapegoat for herman edwards last year. That defense was so stripped down they had nobody. Thats why they were trying to sign antoine winfield who we stole at the last second... :D But look at the bright side. They got Quincy Carter in New york now :drunken:


Yeah, plus cottrell didn't have total control of the jets D, like he did in buffalo and will here in minnesota. He had to run herman edwards style of D. Cottrell says that he is happy that he is back in a place where he can do what he wants on D.

You also have to remember that the jets didnt have much quality player on d either. THere pass rush was pretty bad to mereley averge, lb's were a bunch of bikerts running around, most were aging and dont have much athleticsm, secondary was average at best.

However through all of that, cotrells usually doesnt give up a lot of points and thats with a d simular to waht we had in 2001. I know we are in for something special if cottrell can do that with that horrible jet d and edwards on him like a guard dog.

chubchub
08-29-2004, 05:23 AM
"Del Rio" wrote:

Yeah the D-Line has been lacking the last few years. I think this year looks promising.

Williams gave us our first 10+ sack individual effort since 99'

Hope that the front can be more like the 89' front with Doleman 21 sacks, Millard 18.0, Noga 11.5, Thomas 9.0

Hovan has had a few sub par years imo, but I guess when your secondary doesn't give you time then there aren't going to be very many sacks.

I think this year looks very promising :DYou've got it backwards- the d-line doesn't give the secondary time.

chubchub
08-29-2004, 05:26 AM
"muchluv4moss" wrote:

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.


It would have ben one hel of a miracle for cotrell to make that jets D good. Look at their D players and how many of them would start over our guys this year? Probably hardly any. Abraham, thats about it. Hell, Tyrone Carter was their starting safety and one of their better D players. A D coordinator can only do so much, with the talent he has. In NY, he had an extremely small amount of talent, but here he has a ton of talent to work with.

Now I am not gonna say we are all of a sudden gonna go from the 23rd ranked D, to a top 5 D, but this D will be much better with cotrell. We should be happy with a D around 15th, which is easily good enough with our offense.

One thing to note: when your offense is really good, it is usually harder for your D to be good, since your offense is scoring and giving the other teams offense the ball back all the time. Look at teams with good D's, they usually have bad offenses that don't score that much. This isn't a coinsidence. It will be pretty hard for our D to be a top 5 or even top 10 D, with our offense as good as it is. Possible? Yes, but very hard to do. Our D will be much better than their ranking.Their D was much better than ours last year.

chubchub
08-29-2004, 05:32 AM
"muchluv4moss" wrote:

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

I disagree muchluv, it is alot easier on a defense when their offense is goos.

Not only is there considerably less pressure to stop them from scoring anything on every possession, but the defense is out on the field alot less.

You claim that it is hard on the defense if the O is scoring all the time. That would only be true if our average drive was 30 seconds or something. Fortunatly a scoring drive almost always takes more time than your average 3 and out drive. Especially when we grind it out on the ground like we did alot last year.

The better our Offense is, the longer our drives are, which means more rest for the D.



Name a team with a top D, that also had a top offense. I bet I can name many more teams with great D's that had offenses near the bottom of the league. Is that coincidence? I say no. No matter how much talent we have on our D, it will never be ranked high in the league. It will never be as good as the ravens, rankings wise. Why? Because of our offense. We have an offense that can score from anywhere and quickly. That hurts our D chances of being ranked high. Same with teams like the colts and chiefs.

You make good points, but for some reason, teams that have great D's in this league, always have horrible offenses, and vice versa. Sure you can say that because of FA, that those teams have all their talent on D and none on offense, but that isn't always true. Look at the Bills of 2 years ago, with one of the best offenses in the league. Their D sucked badly that year too. Look at their offense and D last year. They had a horrible offense and an awesome D. Sure some of that can be contributed to a few good FA pickups, but it also has something to do with their offense IMO.

Also look at teams who lead the league in time of possession last year. We were either 2nd or 3rd in T.O.P, yet our D was still ranked 23rd in the league. You would think they would be higher than that, if our offense had the ball that often. Same can be said for many of the top T.O.P leaders last year, they had bad D rankings still.

What you say, makes sense, but it always seems to work out that teams with great offenses and high T.O.P, end up having bad D's. I wouldn't call that coincidence.That doesn't make sense- a good offense keeps your D off the field. If our offense was average- we might have had one of the worst defenses ever!

Del Rio
08-29-2004, 10:41 AM
Have you ever heard of a coverage sack?

The Secondary does indeed give the D-line time to get to the quarterback.

ItalianStallion
08-29-2004, 01:30 PM
Muchluv I wouldn't look at the trends you are when determining how a defense is affected by an offense.

The reason you don't see alot of top ranked Offensive-defensive team is because there is alot of parity in the league. It is damn near impossible to get together a team with enough talent on both sides of the ball to be near the best in the league in both areas, epsecially with the salary cap.

I think the Broncos of were pretty good on both sides when they won it all both years.

muchluv4smoot
08-29-2004, 02:47 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:

Muchluv I wouldn't look at the trends you are when determining how a defense is affected by an offense.

The reason you don't see alot of top ranked Offensive-defensive team is because there is alot of parity in the league. It is damn near impossible to get together a team with enough talent on both sides of the ball to be near the best in the league in both areas, epsecially with the salary cap.

I think the Broncos of were pretty good on both sides when they won it all both years.


Again I say that there are a million more examples of teams with great D's, that have horrible offenses and vise versa. I am not talking a good D and a good offense, I am talking about teams with the best D's in the league each year. Buffalo 2 years ago had a great offense and a horrible D, yet they had plenty of talent on their D that year. The next year, their D was a great D, yet their offense stunk to high hell. I am sorry, but I just don't think it is coincidence that it always happens this way. It isn't always lack of talent.

I'll put it this way. A team with a great defense, will always use a more conservative offense, and not beat themselves, since they know their D will get the ball right back to them. A team with a bad D, will do the opposite on offense, knowing they have to take chances and get points whenever possible.

muchluv4smoot
08-29-2004, 02:49 PM
"chubchub" wrote:

"muchluv4moss" wrote:

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

Sorry my fault, I thought it was Tice. Keep in mind how bad the Jets D was last year though, he isn't a miracle worker for sure.


It would have ben one hel of a miracle for cotrell to make that jets D good. Look at their D players and how many of them would start over our guys this year? Probably hardly any. Abraham, thats about it. Hell, Tyrone Carter was their starting safety and one of their better D players. A D coordinator can only do so much, with the talent he has. In NY, he had an extremely small amount of talent, but here he has a ton of talent to work with.

Now I am not gonna say we are all of a sudden gonna go from the 23rd ranked D, to a top 5 D, but this D will be much better with cotrell. We should be happy with a D around 15th, which is easily good enough with our offense.

One thing to note: when your offense is really good, it is usually harder for your D to be good, since your offense is scoring and giving the other teams offense the ball back all the time. Look at teams with good D's, they usually have bad offenses that don't score that much. This isn't a coinsidence. It will be pretty hard for our D to be a top 5 or even top 10 D, with our offense as good as it is. Possible? Yes, but very hard to do. Our D will be much better than their ranking.Their D was much better than ours last year.


Much better?? Scoring D was much better but not overall D. Their overall D was much worse than ours.