PDA

View Full Version : Dwight Smith agrees to 3 year deal with Vikes!



MplsViking
07-25-2006, 11:28 PM
I just heard this on sports center! 3 years with a 3.5 million bonus!! YES

VikingsTw
07-25-2006, 11:29 PM
Sweet, he's a good football player, i was hoping this would happen.

Webby
07-25-2006, 11:30 PM
Please, no caps in titles.

PurplePeopleEaters
07-25-2006, 11:30 PM
YES. We have ourselves a nickel! Our secondary is looking formidable now.

VikesFan4Life
07-25-2006, 11:30 PM
Link?

FuadFan
07-25-2006, 11:32 PM
That's good he'll be here for training camp just need to figure out what will be the best way to use him in our version of the Tampa 2.

VikingsTw
07-25-2006, 11:33 PM
"VikesFan4Life" wrote:

Link?

http://rubechat.kfan.com/forums/thread/693129.aspx

Best i could come up with, other sites are reporting it right now, i'm sure its a done deal.

VikesFan4Life
07-25-2006, 11:34 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:

"VikesFan4Life" wrote:

Link?

http//rubechat.kfan.com/forums/thread/693129.aspx

Best i could come up with, other sites are reporting it right now, i'm sure its a done deal.Ok, works for me!

Thanx.

Bdubya
07-25-2006, 11:38 PM
Nice! We officially have one heck of a secondary.

cambo282
07-25-2006, 11:39 PM
Dang..this is the best news I've heard in a long time!

VikingsTw
07-25-2006, 11:40 PM
ESPN bottom line is reportin it is a 1 year deal.

cajunvike
07-25-2006, 11:56 PM
Good...now we can sign you-know-who!

MplsViking
07-25-2006, 11:57 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:

ESPN bottom line is reportin it is a 1 year deal.

no way dwight smith said himself if someone doesn't offer him a long term contract he'll sign a 1 year contract with the bucs, so I don't buy it.

magicci
07-25-2006, 11:59 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:

Good...now we can sign you-know-who!
:???:

MplsViking
07-25-2006, 11:59 PM
who knows really, I'll just wait until we really know what the contract is i guess

VikesfaninWis
07-25-2006, 11:59 PM
Solid pickup indeed..

VikingsTw
07-26-2006, 12:00 AM
"MplsViking" wrote:

"VikingsTw" wrote:

ESPN bottom line is reportin it is a 1 year deal.

no way dwight smith said himself if someone doesn't offer him a long term contract he'll sign a 1 year contract with the bucs, so I don't buy it.

I'm hoping its not just a one year also, Smith is a pro bowl type player, at 27 you would hope you could tie him up a little longer, we'll see. The only officail report i have saw was ESPN one year deal.

VikesFan4Life
07-26-2006, 12:01 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

Good...now we can sign you-know-who!

Jaime Sharper? :evil4:

I'd love to have "you-know-who" here, but I just don't see it happening.

VikingsTw
07-26-2006, 12:03 AM
Why the f*ck are we still concerned about LB, I thought Tomlin put that to rest, Edwards isn't even in the back of my mind. Not gonna happen.

magicci
07-26-2006, 12:05 AM
Do you thank Tank Williams is a little mad?

ThePurplePotato
07-26-2006, 12:07 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2529748

Three years.

BloodyHorns82
07-26-2006, 12:07 AM
Works for me... Sweet!!!!

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 12:10 AM
"VikingsTw" wrote:

Why the f*ck are we still concerned about LB, I thought Tomlin put that to rest, Edwards isn't even in the back of my mind. Not gonna happen.

I was talking about Greenway...BUT since YOU brought up Edwards....I'd take him too! :lol:

MplsViking
07-26-2006, 12:11 AM
3 years 6.5 million dollars? sounds pretty affordable to me for a player of his caliber. With that as the contract i love the pickup.. and i also like the part where it says "It also provides the Vikings with one of the NFL's premier safety tandems"

VikingsTw
07-26-2006, 12:12 AM
"ThePurplePotato" wrote:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2529748

Three years.

NFL Network also reported a three year, SWEET!!! Mike Tomlin's contract is three years also.


Tank can get mad all he wants but if he wants the job bad enough he will win the job, i think its unlikely, as much as i like Tank, his size, speed, ect you can't take away the experience and success Smith has had in the system. Not to mention he's also another player we now have that has been to a Superbowl. Love it.

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 12:13 AM
"VikesFan4Life" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Good...now we can sign you-know-who!

Jaime Sharper? :evil4:

I'd love to have "you-know-who" here, but I just don't see it happening.

They had BETTER sign Greenway!!! :mad:

VikesFan4Life
07-26-2006, 12:14 AM
"magicci" wrote:

Do you thank Tank Williams is a little mad?

Although I like Dwight Smith as a player, and I think this is a good move, I cant help but say that this move vexes me a bit:

Will Smith be playing at safety or nickel? If at strong safety, what about Tank? Maybe Tomlin/Childress have doubts about his coverage skills?

If he is to be the nickel corner, what roles do Cedric Griffin, Dovonte Edwards, Dustin Fox, and Ronyell Whitaker play? At least one of those players will probably not remain with the team.

I'm sure the situation will iron itself out during the course of Training Camp, but I'm looking forward to the battle for the NB spot.

VikesFan4Life
07-26-2006, 12:16 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"VikesFan4Life" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Good...now we can sign you-know-who!

Jaime Sharper? :evil4:

I'd love to have "you-know-who" here, but I just don't see it happening.

They had BETTER sign Greenway!!! :mad:

Sorry, I thought you were talking about Donnie Edwards.

I'm sure Greenway will get signed just in time. :crosses fingers:

NordicPrincess
07-26-2006, 12:17 AM
This is great!

Pretty funny, I was just watching the Baltimore news - their sportscaster was talking about how the Ravens were going to make a run for Dwight.

First they lose Chester Taylor to us, now Dwight Smith <snicker>

hawaiianvike21
07-26-2006, 12:21 AM
Does this mean the end for tank williams or a summer long battle between williams and smith for the starting and nickel positions? :???:

Mr. Purple
07-26-2006, 12:21 AM
Correct me if i'm wrong but in the cover 2, its like you have two Free Safties instead of a SS and FS. I think that right there is the reason Tomlin brought him in.Also for his ability to play CB.I think we'll see Tank mixing in with the LB's and also see him on the field in running situations. I'm SO excited over this move, this futher increases an already deep secondary!!

Bdubya
07-26-2006, 12:21 AM
http://www.uakron.edu/aupdate/images/DwightSmith.jpg

Just imagine what he could do for us in the Super Bowl!

FuadFan
07-26-2006, 12:24 AM
Maybe we will try Tank Williams as our middle linebacker it will add to that competition everybody wants to talk about.

purpleFavreEaters
07-26-2006, 12:28 AM
I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Caine
07-26-2006, 12:29 AM
According to the linked ESPN article, Sharper may move to Strong Safety...

I never really considered Sharper as an SS. To me, the SS has to be a hitter. He has to be the guy that punishes receivers and runners who dare venture into the backfield. He has to be able to tackle - hard - in space.

This does NOT describe Darren Sharper.

Sharper is good, and I'm not trying to demean him in any way. I'm just not seeing him as a SS. He fits beautifully as a FS. He's a ball hawk, not a hitter. That would be why Tank Williams was added.

So, by adding Smith, we have to ask, "What are we going to do with him"? Will he play as the nickle back? Will we convert him to SS? Will Sharper move to SS? And, finally, is this REALLY the best move for us right now? Hopefully, it turns out to be exactly that.

Time will tell.

Caine

Bdubya
07-26-2006, 12:33 AM
"Caine" wrote:

According to the linked ESPN article, Sharper may move to Strong Safety...

I never really considered Sharper as an SS. To me, the SS has to be a hitter. He has to be the guy that punishes receivers and runners who dare venture into the backfield. He has to be able to tackle - hard - in space.

This does NOT describe Darren Sharper.

Sharper is good, and I'm not trying to demean him in any way. I'm just not seeing him as a SS. He fits beautifully as a FS. He's a ball hawk, not a hitter. That would be why Tank Williams was added.

So, by adding Smith, we have to ask, "What are we going to do with him"? Will he play as the nickle back? Will we convert him to SS? Will Sharper move to SS? And, finally, is this REALLY the best move for us right now? Hopefully, it turns out to be exactly that.

Time will tell.

Caine

I agree with you there. Adding talent is always a good thing, but now we have more questions than we did before. We have too many solid players. Smith and Tank are both safties that I would be happy with - but if one of them ends up playing at nickle back, are they being underutilized? What about Offord, Fox and Blue? Are they all going to stay with the team?

VikingsTw
07-26-2006, 12:33 AM
"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Would you like to go back to thw Wasa Serwanga days? I know i don't, i'll take all the DB's i can get my hands on, offord just came off a ACL tear, along with Tank, very shaky situation at Safety. I don't want to see Dustin Fox playing SS. Injuries happen, i love the depth.

XxS2TheEvoxX
07-26-2006, 12:42 AM
Very happy with this signing... That's all I have to say.

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 12:44 AM
"VikesFan4Life" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"VikesFan4Life" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Good...now we can sign you-know-who!

Jaime Sharper? :evil4:

I'd love to have "you-know-who" here, but I just don't see it happening.

They had BETTER sign Greenway!!! :mad:

Sorry, I thought you were talking about Donnie Edwards.

I'm sure Greenway will get signed just in time. :crosses fingers:

Don't get me wrong...I would take Donnie Edwards too!!! :grin:

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 12:47 AM
"Bdubya" wrote:

"Caine" wrote:

According to the linked ESPN article, Sharper may move to Strong Safety...

I never really considered Sharper as an SS. To me, the SS has to be a hitter. He has to be the guy that punishes receivers and runners who dare venture into the backfield. He has to be able to tackle - hard - in space.

This does NOT describe Darren Sharper.

Sharper is good, and I'm not trying to demean him in any way. I'm just not seeing him as a SS. He fits beautifully as a FS. He's a ball hawk, not a hitter. That would be why Tank Williams was added.

So, by adding Smith, we have to ask, "What are we going to do with him"? Will he play as the nickle back? Will we convert him to SS? Will Sharper move to SS? And, finally, is this REALLY the best move for us right now? Hopefully, it turns out to be exactly that.

Time will tell.

Caine

I agree with you there. Adding talent is always a good thing, but now we have more questions than we did before. We have too many solid players. Smith and Tank are both safties that I would be happy with - but if one of them ends up playing at nickle back, are they being underutilized? What about Offord, Fox and Blue? Are they all going to stay with the team?

One of them is gonna play MLB! :lol:

triedandtruevikesfan
07-26-2006, 12:47 AM
I don't think we can have too many good defensive players. Especially at that position where injuries happen often. Even if we don't play him at safety or we move someone to another position to make room for him on the starting line up. That gives us depth, which is something we desperately need in my opinion.

VikesfaninWis
07-26-2006, 01:01 AM
Now who do you think is better between Dwight Smith, and a fully healthy Tank Williams? I hope Tank still has a chance to show us all why he has the nickname Tank..

PurplePeopleEaters
07-26-2006, 01:11 AM
"VikesfaninWis" wrote:

Now who do you think is better between Dwight Smith, and a fully healthy Tank Williams? I hope Tank still has a chance to show us all why he has the nickname Tank..

Tank at SS Dwight at Nickel. Solves all of our problems.

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 01:11 AM
"triedandtruevikesfan" wrote:

I don't think we can have too many good defensive players. Especially at that position where injuries happen often. Even if we don't play him at safety or we move someone to another position to make room for him on the starting line up. That gives us depth, which is something we desperately need in my opinion.

Right on, TNT! We can never have too much depth...now to get some more depth at LB! :evil4:

oddmanout22287
07-26-2006, 01:15 AM
"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Tank wasn't signed to play nickle, he was signed to play Strong Safety. Smith, on the other hand, will most likely play Nickle, and I'd MUCH rather have him in the Nickle then the rest of the unproven corners we have behind Smoot and Winfield. Hell, if Smoot plays as terribly as he did last year, we might have just signed our #2 CB.

Why is everyone so upset that Tank MIGHT have competition at the SS spot? How is this BAD?!? If Smith is better than Tank, we have an upgrade at SS and a GREAT backup in Tank.

Under Red, we didn't sign enough players, now some people think we're signing TOO MANY! There's no such thing as bad depth...

magicci
07-26-2006, 01:55 AM
no one said we are mad because we are signing too many. I love this lol. No one is mad we just cant wait to see how it all pans out!

vikinggreg
07-26-2006, 02:09 AM
"magicci" wrote:

no one said we are mad because we are signing too many. I love this lol. No one is mad we just cant wait to see how it all pans out!

Brett Farve is mad, he could hit a dozen picks in his 2 meetings with the Vikes secondary, now will that be a baker's dozen?

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 02:10 AM
"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Tank wasn't signed to play nickle, he was signed to play Strong Safety. Smith, on the other hand, will most likely play Nickle, and I'd MUCH rather have him in the Nickle then the rest of the unproven corners we have behind Smoot and Winfield. Hell, if Smoot plays as terribly as he did last year, we might have just signed our #2 CB.

Why is everyone so upset that Tank MIGHT have competition at the SS spot? How is this BAD?!? If Smith is better than Tank, we have an upgrade at SS and a GREAT backup in Tank.

Under Red, we didn't sign enough players, now some people think we're signing TOO MANY! There's no such thing as bad depth...

You tell 'em, Lou-a-vull man!!! :grin:

Speaking of which, I may be hitting your town for a weekend next month!

oddmanout22287
07-26-2006, 02:13 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Tank wasn't signed to play nickle, he was signed to play Strong Safety. Smith, on the other hand, will most likely play Nickle, and I'd MUCH rather have him in the Nickle then the rest of the unproven corners we have behind Smoot and Winfield. Hell, if Smoot plays as terribly as he did last year, we might have just signed our #2 CB.

Why is everyone so upset that Tank MIGHT have competition at the SS spot? How is this BAD?!? If Smith is better than Tank, we have an upgrade at SS and a GREAT backup in Tank.

Under Red, we didn't sign enough players, now some people think we're signing TOO MANY! There's no such thing as bad depth...

You tell 'em, Lou-a-vull man!!! :grin:

Speaking of which, I may be hitting your town for a weekend next month!

Glad you got the pronunciation down Cajun :grin:
I'll be back in college in Morris, MN next month, otherwise I'd show ya around town :cool:

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 02:13 AM
"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Tank wasn't signed to play nickle, he was signed to play Strong Safety. Smith, on the other hand, will most likely play Nickle, and I'd MUCH rather have him in the Nickle then the rest of the unproven corners we have behind Smoot and Winfield. Hell, if Smoot plays as terribly as he did last year, we might have just signed our #2 CB.

Why is everyone so upset that Tank MIGHT have competition at the SS spot? How is this BAD?!? If Smith is better than Tank, we have an upgrade at SS and a GREAT backup in Tank.

Under Red, we didn't sign enough players, now some people think we're signing TOO MANY! There's no such thing as bad depth...

You tell 'em, Lou-a-vull man!!! :grin:

Speaking of which, I may be hitting your town for a weekend next month!

Glad you got the pronunciation down Cajun :grin:
I'll be back in college in Morris, MN next month, otherwise I'd show ya around town :cool:

Too bad...when are you leaving?

magicci
07-26-2006, 02:19 AM
does anyone know around how much cap room we have left for the season?

Prophet
07-26-2006, 02:23 AM
This is going to be a fun season.

midgensa
07-26-2006, 02:23 AM
All the concern for Tank is a little odd I think ... bottom line is we are deep at DB now period ... from the lock starters in Winfield, Smoot, Sharper and Im guessing for the money Smith to the nickel/reserve folks in Griffin, Fox and Tank we are really set to be a VERY formidable defense now.

nephilimstorm
07-26-2006, 02:23 AM
This is gonna be interesting...Smith at nickel Smoot 'The field at corner sharper and tank williams at safety..guys i was a quaterback..id be afraid to even throw the f!!cking ball lol

Prophet
07-26-2006, 02:27 AM
KFFL
Vikings | Smith reunited with Tomlin
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:19:32 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Dwight Smith is expected to start at free safety with the Vikings. He is reunited with Mike Tomlin, the Vikings' defensive coordinator, who was Smith's secondary coach for four years with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Vikings | Sharper likely to start at strong safety
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:58 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Darren Sharper is likely to move to strong safety with the addition of FS Dwight Smith.

Vikings | Smith reaches three-year deal
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:21 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports the Minnesota Vikings have reached a three-year, $6.5 million deal with free agent FS Dwight Smith (Saints). He didn't receive a signing bonus as part of the contract, but he will be paid the $1.2 million he was scheduled to earn with the New Orleans Saints. Smith will receive a $615,000 roster bonus and $585,000 base salary. In 2007, he'll receive a $100,000 workout bonus, a $500,000 roster bonus and a $1.6 million base salary. In 2008, he'll have a $2.5 million base salary, $100,000 workout bonus and $500,000 roster bonus.

Vikings | T. Williams to reserve role
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:20:34 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings SS Tank Williams will play in a reserve role with the addition FS Dwight Smith, as FS Darren Sharper is expected to move to strong safety, where Williams was going to compete for a starting job.

Rastak
07-26-2006, 02:29 AM
"nephilimstorm" wrote:

This is gonna be interesting...Smith at nickel Smoot 'The field at corner sharper and tank williams at safety..guys i was a quaterback..id be afraid to even throw the f!!cking ball lol


This assumes the early reports of Sharper moving to SS and Smith starting at FS are wrong. Camp starts soon, I guess we'll find out for sure shortly.

NordicNed
07-26-2006, 02:29 AM
Hot Dam,

Nice to come home to some good news for once.......I can't wait for the season to start already.......

I just heard, Bret is thinking about retirement again....LOL

Prophet
07-26-2006, 02:32 AM
POSTED 7:16 p.m. EDT; LAST UPDATED 8:01 p.m. EDT, July 25, 2006

SMITH CHOOSES MINNY
Mike Florio (http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm)

Defensive back Dwight Smith, recently cut by the New Orleans Saints, has agreed to terms with the Vikings, a league source tells us.

Per the source, Smith will earn in Minnesota the same amounts due under three of the four remaining years of his Saints contract, which called for a $1.2 million base salary in 2006, a $1.6 million base salary, a $100,000 workout bonuses, and a $500,000 workout bonus in 2007, and a $2.5 million base salary, a $100,000 workout bonus, and a $500,000 workout bonus in 2008.

The only difference is that Smith will get $615,000 of his 2006 pay in the form of a roster bonus due in July 28, and the remaining $585,00 will be his base salary for 2006.

magicci
07-26-2006, 02:37 AM
i hope they put him on the vikes in madden!

vikeswin2005
07-26-2006, 02:37 AM
HELL YEAH!!!!!!!

nephilimstorm
07-26-2006, 02:48 AM
hey magicci..i doubt it kinda late...might have to sign him as a free agent

PurplePeopleEaters
07-26-2006, 02:49 AM
"Prophet" wrote:

KFFL
Vikings | Smith reunited with Tomlin
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:19:32 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Dwight Smith is expected to start at free safety with the Vikings. He is reunited with Mike Tomlin, the Vikings' defensive coordinator, who was Smith's secondary coach for four years with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Vikings | Sharper likely to start at strong safety
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:58 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Darren Sharper is likely to move to strong safety with the addition of FS Dwight Smith.

Vikings | Smith reaches three-year deal
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:21 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports the Minnesota Vikings have reached a three-year, $6.5 million deal with free agent FS Dwight Smith (Saints). He didn't receive a signing bonus as part of the contract, but he will be paid the $1.2 million he was scheduled to earn with the New Orleans Saints. Smith will receive a $615,000 roster bonus and $585,000 base salary. In 2007, he'll receive a $100,000 workout bonus, a $500,000 roster bonus and a $1.6 million base salary. In 2008, he'll have a $2.5 million base salary, $100,000 workout bonus and $500,000 roster bonus.

Vikings | T. Williams to reserve role
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:20:34 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings SS Tank Williams will play in a reserve role with the addition FS Dwight Smith, as FS Darren Sharper is expected to move to strong safety, where Williams was going to compete for a starting job.

Hey.. I didn't agree to all this. :shock: I'm not as happy about this move any more. Sharper at SS? He made the pro bowl at FS last year... what is childress thinking?


Well... he knows more than we do so I respect his judgement. I just hope this works out.

oddmanout22287
07-26-2006, 02:58 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Tank wasn't signed to play nickle, he was signed to play Strong Safety. Smith, on the other hand, will most likely play Nickle, and I'd MUCH rather have him in the Nickle then the rest of the unproven corners we have behind Smoot and Winfield. Hell, if Smoot plays as terribly as he did last year, we might have just signed our #2 CB.

Why is everyone so upset that Tank MIGHT have competition at the SS spot? How is this BAD?!? If Smith is better than Tank, we have an upgrade at SS and a GREAT backup in Tank.

Under Red, we didn't sign enough players, now some people think we're signing TOO MANY! There's no such thing as bad depth...

You tell 'em, Lou-a-vull man!!! :grin:

Speaking of which, I may be hitting your town for a weekend next month!

Glad you got the pronunciation down Cajun :grin:
I'll be back in college in Morris, MN next month, otherwise I'd show ya around town :cool:

Too bad...when are you leaving?
August 17th or 18th, haven't decided whether or not to take the 14 hour drive in one stretch or two.

Sharper's moving to SS? Well... that's odd... Why would you move an all-pro FS to another position?

briboy75
07-26-2006, 03:00 AM
Oh No!!!! WE HAVE TOO MUCH TALENT! How are we going to go to the superbowl with this much EXCESS talent at saftey? Don't you think we should leave some safties for the rest of the league?

Seriously, maybe the coaches didn't like what they saw from Tank. They didn't pay much for him. I think its a great move.

oddmanout22287
07-26-2006, 03:17 AM
"briboy75" wrote:

Oh No!!!! WE HAVE TOO MUCH TALENT! How are we going to go to the superbowl with this much EXCESS talent at saftey? Don't you think we should leave some safties for the rest of the league?

Seriously, maybe the coaches didn't like what they saw from Tank. They didn't pay much for him. I think its a great move.
You bring up an interesting point about Tank's pay. They only gave him a one year contract... Hold on, lemme go put on my tin foil hat. It's no secret NO wanted to trade Smith; perhaps the Vikings knew that NO would eventually release Smith, and he's been their man the whole time, and Tank was either trade bait or just insurance in case Smith didn't want to sign in MN.

Redmption
07-26-2006, 03:23 AM
I like the signing, just hope it didnt take away from the signing focus of TJ or CG

V4L
07-26-2006, 03:32 AM
Awesome move..

I just hope we figure out in training camp that Smith should play nickle and Darren at FS and Tank at SS

But i'm not complaining with the depth at all..

This allows Darren to play more at the line of scrimmage being the SS now and we can utilize his blitzing ability





One Love

ChiTownVike
07-26-2006, 03:49 AM
Nice! i have sorta hang a long and annoying day so I havent really been on.

Our seconday is lookin great

VikingsTw
07-26-2006, 03:51 AM
Did Sharper ever play SS in Green Bay?

EDIT: Just looked it up, played FS throughout career, i don't like this move, i say keep him at FS let Smith be the SS. Who knows though in this scheme it may not make much of a difference.

purplepride818
07-26-2006, 04:03 AM
"nephilimstorm" wrote:

hey magicci..i doubt it kinda late...might have to sign him as a free agent

they usually have roster updates on xbox live for sports games so you can update your roster during trade season

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 04:10 AM
Is Smith actually better than Tank?
Is he a hard hitter like Tank?

Someone answer please!

I like the move but I wasn't expecting Tank to be benched.... It is also rare to bring in a hard hitter type for nickel packages, so it really looks like Tank is getting the shaft here. I'm sure he thought he would start when he signed.

sodaknick
07-26-2006, 04:15 AM
Who's better? This is going to make for a great training camp (for a change). This year it's not going to be who sucks the most, it'll actually be who is the best. I'm fired up.

Vikes_King
07-26-2006, 04:22 AM
nice! =) ever since rumors started that we were looking into him, i've been saying dont get your hopes up; its not going to happen


im glad i was wrong

Ltrey33
07-26-2006, 04:24 AM
"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

KFFL
Vikings | Smith reunited with Tomlin
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:19:32 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Dwight Smith is expected to start at free safety with the Vikings. He is reunited with Mike Tomlin, the Vikings' defensive coordinator, who was Smith's secondary coach for four years with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Vikings | Sharper likely to start at strong safety
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:58 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Darren Sharper is likely to move to strong safety with the addition of FS Dwight Smith.

Vikings | Smith reaches three-year deal
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:21 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports the Minnesota Vikings have reached a three-year, $6.5 million deal with free agent FS Dwight Smith (Saints). He didn't receive a signing bonus as part of the contract, but he will be paid the $1.2 million he was scheduled to earn with the New Orleans Saints. Smith will receive a $615,000 roster bonus and $585,000 base salary. In 2007, he'll receive a $100,000 workout bonus, a $500,000 roster bonus and a $1.6 million base salary. In 2008, he'll have a $2.5 million base salary, $100,000 workout bonus and $500,000 roster bonus.

Vikings | T. Williams to reserve role
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:20:34 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings SS Tank Williams will play in a reserve role with the addition FS Dwight Smith, as FS Darren Sharper is expected to move to strong safety, where Williams was going to compete for a starting job.

Hey.. I didn't agree to all this. :shock: I'm not as happy about this move any more. Sharper at SS? He made the pro bowl at FS last year... what is childress thinking?


Well... he knows more than we do so I respect his judgement. I just hope this works out.

I'm happy about the signing, but Sharper's move to SS befuddles me.

PurplePeopleEaters
07-26-2006, 04:26 AM
"Ltrey33" wrote:

"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

KFFL
Vikings | Smith reunited with Tomlin
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:19:32 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Dwight Smith is expected to start at free safety with the Vikings. He is reunited with Mike Tomlin, the Vikings' defensive coordinator, who was Smith's secondary coach for four years with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Vikings | Sharper likely to start at strong safety
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:58 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Darren Sharper is likely to move to strong safety with the addition of FS Dwight Smith.

Vikings | Smith reaches three-year deal
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:21 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports the Minnesota Vikings have reached a three-year, $6.5 million deal with free agent FS Dwight Smith (Saints). He didn't receive a signing bonus as part of the contract, but he will be paid the $1.2 million he was scheduled to earn with the New Orleans Saints. Smith will receive a $615,000 roster bonus and $585,000 base salary. In 2007, he'll receive a $100,000 workout bonus, a $500,000 roster bonus and a $1.6 million base salary. In 2008, he'll have a $2.5 million base salary, $100,000 workout bonus and $500,000 roster bonus.

Vikings | T. Williams to reserve role
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:20:34 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings SS Tank Williams will play in a reserve role with the addition FS Dwight Smith, as FS Darren Sharper is expected to move to strong safety, where Williams was going to compete for a starting job.

Hey.. I didn't agree to all this. :shock: I'm not as happy about this move any more. Sharper at SS? He made the pro bowl at FS last year... what is childress thinking?


Well... he knows more than we do so I respect his judgement. I just hope this works out.

I'm happy about the signing, but Sharper's move to SS befuddles me.

Well I guess we'll find out in training camp. It never hurts to have more talnet... This spells bad news for Offord and Fox though. Funny how at the end of last season we though that Offord would start at SS. Now he's 3rd on the depth chart. Training camp sure will be exciting this year.

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 04:29 AM
PPE was right. Play Smith at Nickel and it solves everything. I think the coaches see a possible weakness at our LBs in coverage, meaning we will have to play more nickel to make up for this. This would also put more pressure on the D-Line, which must be able to stop the run with only two LBs behind them.

1. No need to move Sharper anywhere
2. No need to sit Tank.
3. Our Dime package will be SICK!
4. Defense wins championships.

DoubleDown11
07-26-2006, 04:30 AM
Can he play Middle LB?, seriously nice signing, hopefully Timlin can bring him back to the good ole days of Tampa 2!

olson_10
07-26-2006, 04:31 AM
our..secondary..is..absolutely..insane!!!! youve got 5 guys in that secondary that can all play at a pro bowl level..wow..this is amazing..now in case a starting corner goes down, we dont have to throw in a rookie or 'one play wonder' devonte edwards

oddmanout22287
07-26-2006, 04:45 AM
"V-Unit" wrote:

PPE was right. Play Smith at Nickel and it solves everything. I think the coaches see a possible weakness at our LBs in coverage, meaning we will have to play more nickel to make up for this. This would also put more pressure on the D-Line, which must be able to stop the run with only two LBs behind them.

1. No need to move Sharper anywhere
2. No need to sit Tank.
3. Our Dime package will be SICK!
4. Defense wins championships.

Took the words right out of my mouth man.

Mr. Purple
07-26-2006, 04:57 AM
"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

Tank wasn't signed to play nickle, he was signed to play Strong Safety. Smith, on the other hand, will most likely play Nickle, and I'd MUCH rather have him in the Nickle then the rest of the unproven corners we have behind Smoot and Winfield. Hell, if Smoot plays as terribly as he did last year, we might have just signed our #2 CB.

Why is everyone so upset that Tank MIGHT have competition at the SS spot? How is this BAD?!? If Smith is better than Tank, we have an upgrade at SS and a GREAT backup in Tank.

Under Red, we didn't sign enough players, now some people think we're signing TOO MANY! There's no such thing as bad depth...



PREACH ON! Childress has stated that he wants competition at every position, on all levels.Having solid depth late into the season will really help this team.

ejmat
07-26-2006, 04:59 AM
Ilike the signing and maybe if they play a lot of nickle packages it will make up for the lack of depth at LBer. I still think they need more help there but maybe the speed in the nickle package can make up for that.

I don't like moving Sharper unless he's okay with it.

Aberration
07-26-2006, 05:03 AM
How many DB's did we keep out of camp last year... thus who makes it?
Sharper, Tank, Smith, Offord, Fox, Griffin, Blue, Edwards, Whitaker, Winfield, Smoot.... 11? is it possible we cut a draft pick?

Vikes_King
07-26-2006, 05:06 AM
idk, i dont really see us cutting a draft pick, unfortunatly i'd say it'd be more likely for like... edwards or whitaker to get cut

who knows, we have a lot of talent in that set up......... any of them could at least play nickel

twill
07-26-2006, 05:07 AM
good signing.. i just want to sign greenway and TJ so they can both be in camp on time

BadlandsVikings
07-26-2006, 05:09 AM
They wouldn't have signed him if they didn't have a plan.

magicci
07-26-2006, 05:09 AM
lets send some rookies to the Practice Squad.

Aberration
07-26-2006, 05:12 AM
doubt we could send any of the rookies to the practice squad someone would just sign them to their roster and they would be gone, prob just means we will all know the last DB to make the roster instead of the 1 no name guy that seems to always make it

FuadFan
07-26-2006, 05:14 AM
"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

KFFL
Vikings | Smith reunited with Tomlin
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:19:32 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Dwight Smith is expected to start at free safety with the Vikings. He is reunited with Mike Tomlin, the Vikings' defensive coordinator, who was Smith's secondary coach for four years with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Vikings | Sharper likely to start at strong safety
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:58 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Darren Sharper is likely to move to strong safety with the addition of FS Dwight Smith.

Vikings | Smith reaches three-year deal
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:21 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports the Minnesota Vikings have reached a three-year, $6.5 million deal with free agent FS Dwight Smith (Saints). He didn't receive a signing bonus as part of the contract, but he will be paid the $1.2 million he was scheduled to earn with the New Orleans Saints. Smith will receive a $615,000 roster bonus and $585,000 base salary. In 2007, he'll receive a $100,000 workout bonus, a $500,000 roster bonus and a $1.6 million base salary. In 2008, he'll have a $2.5 million base salary, $100,000 workout bonus and $500,000 roster bonus.

Vikings | T. Williams to reserve role
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:20:34 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings SS Tank Williams will play in a reserve role with the addition FS Dwight Smith, as FS Darren Sharper is expected to move to strong safety, where Williams was going to compete for a starting job.

Hey.. I didn't agree to all this. :shock: I'm not as happy about this move any more. Sharper at SS? He made the pro bowl at FS last year... what is childress thinking?


Well... he knows more than we do so I respect his judgement. I just hope this works out.

Well right now that is just the opinion of Len Pasquarelli in writing there we don't really know what the role of Smith will be however I would assume that other teams might have wanted him to start so he may just get to. The Tampa 2 is supposed to make it so a FS is just fine playing as a SS so it might not matter and I'm sure Sharper won't be too bothered by making the move.

BigMoInAZ
07-26-2006, 05:21 AM
Smith signin brings to total 15 DBs in camp! Who was worried about depth?

Vikes_King
07-26-2006, 05:23 AM
"BigMoInAZ" wrote:

Smith signin brings to total 15 DBs in camp! Who was worried about depth?

Brett Favre

jdvike
07-26-2006, 06:18 AM
An embarrassment of riches.......I LOVE IT.

MplsViking
07-26-2006, 06:33 AM
Actually a couple of days ago sharper was on espn hotlist and he said if the vikings signed smith he wouldnt be switchin positions... but who knows?

Vikes_King
07-26-2006, 06:38 AM
i dont want sharper moved anywhere, smith is a better SS

ejmat
07-26-2006, 06:52 AM
I would venture to say the names that get cut are: Offord (because of his off field struggles) and Fox. Wish we had this much depth at LBer.

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 07:12 AM
"ejmat" wrote:

I would venture to say the names that get cut are Offord (because of his off field struggles) and Fox. Wish we had this much depth at LBer.Maybe we could convert Blue to LB and keep Offord. It looks like Fox may never get a fair shot with the Vikings.

magicci
07-26-2006, 08:07 AM
yeah i really wanted to see what Fox could do. I remember ppl saying he was our future at safety.

CalifornianVikingz
07-26-2006, 08:10 AM
If we keep fox, nonetheless we are going to be dominant in the Nickelback. And when you use Nickelback you use one less linebacker so we can be more effective with our linebackers.

Braddock
07-26-2006, 08:22 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:

Good...now we can sign you-know-who!

T.O.??

Braddock
07-26-2006, 08:27 AM
"purpleFavreEaters" wrote:

I am a little upset about this to be honest. Tank Would have been just fine this eason at nickle. There was absoulutly no reason we should have wasted that money on signing smith, that money could have went towards but better options we are much weaker at. For example QB. Man I cannot wait to see what happens when over the hill brad gets hurt and we have to really on Mike freaking McMahon.This was a huge a mistake. Granted is is nice to have him but completely unneccesary.

If B.J. lasts more than 7 games, look for T-Jack to come out swingin baby!!

Braddock
07-26-2006, 08:34 AM
"Vikes_King" wrote:

"BigMoInAZ" wrote:

Smith signin brings to total 15 DBs in camp! Who was worried about depth?

Brett Favre

lol

digital420
07-26-2006, 08:39 AM
I really hope that D.s doesn't get irked by this move. Though i do agree that in the tampa 2 system the FS and the SS have not the normal roles so we'll have to see what happens here.. other then that.. i luv the depth that we have brought into this Defence!!!

DiGiTaL

Mr. Purple
07-26-2006, 10:31 AM
http://www.startribune.com/510/story/574434.html





Smith, 27, will compete with free-agent acquisition Tank Williams for a starting safety spot. Smith almost certainly will have the edge on Williams because of his familiarity with the Tampa-2 scheme that Tomlin is installing. If Smith starts, Darren Sharper likely would be moved to strong safety. Smith also can play cornerback and could be used in that role in the nickel defense.




I wonder how DSharp at SS is gonna work out?I'm thinking that even tho we're hearing Sharper at SS, he will still play FS in a way. The cover 2 uses both of its safties like Free Safties.

singersp
07-26-2006, 12:05 PM
Another article on the Dwight Smith signing;

Vikings bolster secondary with Dwight Smith

Sports Ticker
7/25/2006 8:35:22 PM

EDEN PRAIRIE, Minnesota (Ticker) - Less than a week before the start of training camp, the Minnesota Vikings made a move to bolster their secondary.

The Vikings on Tuesday agreed to terms with free safety Dwight Smith.

Terms were not disclosed, but ESPN.com reported Smith's deal is for three years and worth $6.5 million.

Smith, 27, found a new team just four days after being released by the New Orleans Saints. He registered 86 tackles, one sack and two interceptions in 15 games last season.

In Minnesota, Smith will form a solid 1-2 punch with Pro Bowl strong safety Darren Sharper.

"There's no such thing as having too many good players," Vikings first-year coach Brad Childress said. "We're glad to add a player of Dwight's quality to our defense."

Smith also will be reuniting with Vikings defensive coordinator Mike Tomlin, who was his secondary coach with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for four seasons.

In 78 career games, Smith has recorded 309 tackles and 14 interceptions. He returned two interceptions for touchdowns in Tampa Bay's victory over Oakland in Super Bowl XXXVII.

Veterans report to training camp for the Vikings on Sunday.

Vikings bolster secondary with Dwight Smith (http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/news_story.asp?id=172352)

singersp
07-26-2006, 12:34 PM
DB Dwight Smith Signs
Vikings.com (http://www.vikings.com/news_detail_objectname_DSmithSigns72506.html)

singersp
07-26-2006, 12:38 PM
Vikings, Smith Agree to Terms (http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=116&p=2&c=549707)

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 12:40 PM
I'm not overly concerned about who will sit and who will be let go. The deal for Smith is pretty light on the pay scale this year. In 2007 he has some potential to hit bigger money.

There is no reason we can't hold onto a lot of our secondary people. They will just play on special teams. Look for us to not carry over 6 TE's lol. Fox, Blue, Offord..........they could easily find themselves playing special teams and to be honest that isn't a bad thing.

singersp
07-26-2006, 12:46 PM
Smith the final piece to Vikings puzzle

By Eric Krupka on July 26, 2006 12:29 AM
realfootball365.com

It's been a long time since I could say this, and truly believe it. Here goes...opposing quarterbacks should be very afraid of the Minnesota Vikings ' defense. For many, it feels like an eternity since the defense could put pressure on the oppositions' offense, rather than its own, to score points.

After boasting one of the worst pass coverage units for years, slowly but surely the organization has brought in the personnel needed to revamp a once porous defensive backfield. It started two years ago, when the team made a last-second move to essentially steal free agent cornerback Antoine Winfield from underneath the New York Jets ' nose. Prior to last season, the Vikings added Pro Bowl-caliber cornerback Fred Smoot and Pro Bowl safety Darren Sharper to the mix. Then this offseason, they continued to put the pieces together, signing free agent safety Tank Williams to a one-year contract, and drafting cornerback Cedric Griffin in the second round.

If all that wasn't enough, on Tuesday, the Vikings added another impact player to their already deep secondary, agreeing to a three-year, $6.5 million contract with free safety Dwight Smith. Defensive coordinator Mike Tomilin and vice president of player personnel Rick Spielman view their newest addition as the final piece to a puzzle, which is an outstanding defensive backfield.

Widely regarded as a standout safety, Smith was released by the New Orleans Saints last Thursday in their quest to turnover the defensive roster. To be fair to the Saints, they did try and trade the 27-year-old before releasing him, but couldn't find any deals to their liking. Smith didn't fit the defensive scheme in New Orleans, but he's hoping to experience a career rebound in Minneapolis now that he's back in the "Tampa 2."

The Saints' loss is certainly the Vikings big coup. By joining the Vikings, the Akron product will be reunited with his former secondary coach of four seasons from Tampa Bay in Tomlin. Smith was a third-round pick in 2001, and developed nicely under his new coordinators tutelage. He is an excellent defender against both the run and pass, and has elite cover skills.

The safety tandem of Smith and Sharper is arguably the best in the NFL, and certainly gives the division-rival Chicago Bears ' duo of Mike Brown and Nathan Vasher a run for their money.

On paper, the Vikings' secondary looks to be second to none. Of course, being a paper champion and a real champion is another story, but I think it's safe to say the play on the field this season should prove that the team's secondary is elite, with Smith completing the puzzle.

-Eric Krupka can be reached at ekrupka@realfootball365.com

Smith the final piece to Vikings puzzle (http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/articles/2006/07/dwight-smith-vikings260706.html)

Prophet
07-26-2006, 01:27 PM
"Ltrey33" wrote:

"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

KFFL
Vikings | Smith reunited with Tomlin
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:19:32 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Dwight Smith is expected to start at free safety with the Vikings. He is reunited with Mike Tomlin, the Vikings' defensive coordinator, who was Smith's secondary coach for four years with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Vikings | Sharper likely to start at strong safety
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:58 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings FS Darren Sharper is likely to move to strong safety with the addition of FS Dwight Smith.

Vikings | Smith reaches three-year deal
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:18:21 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports the Minnesota Vikings have reached a three-year, $6.5 million deal with free agent FS Dwight Smith (Saints). He didn't receive a signing bonus as part of the contract, but he will be paid the $1.2 million he was scheduled to earn with the New Orleans Saints. Smith will receive a $615,000 roster bonus and $585,000 base salary. In 2007, he'll receive a $100,000 workout bonus, a $500,000 roster bonus and a $1.6 million base salary. In 2008, he'll have a $2.5 million base salary, $100,000 workout bonus and $500,000 roster bonus.

Vikings | T. Williams to reserve role
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:20:34 -0700

ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli reports Minnesota Vikings SS Tank Williams will play in a reserve role with the addition FS Dwight Smith, as FS Darren Sharper is expected to move to strong safety, where Williams was going to compete for a starting job.

Hey.. I didn't agree to all this. :shock: I'm not as happy about this move any more. Sharper at SS? He made the pro bowl at FS last year... what is childress thinking?


Well... he knows more than we do so I respect his judgement. I just hope this works out.

I'm happy about the signing, but Sharper's move to SS befuddles me.

You have to remember that Pastabelly is the person saying Sharper is likely to move. He has little to no credibility.

UndisputedVike
07-26-2006, 02:05 PM
Uhmm, I have a feeling putting Sharper at SS will prove disastrous, he's a ball hawk why mess with that... I thought the Sharper/Tank Williams tandem would have been very solid.

I don't see Sharper being very productive at SS, and being up at the line isn't going to help a man at his age, he is getting some mileage on him, really not agreeing with that at all.

Though I think this is a great pickup, he will be a great addition in depth, I agree though we should use him as a Nickel or Dime back, maybe when Sharper hangs it up he will fill the FS spot.

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 02:11 PM
The best thing about Tank Williams is his name is Tank.

If we can have Dwight at saftey it would be way better for the team then having Williams there.

Prophet
07-26-2006, 02:18 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

The best thing about Tank Williams is his name is Tank.

If we can have Dwight at saftey it would be way better for the team then having Williams there.

LMAO. It is true. A guy that works for me is buddies with Tank. They grew up in the same town, played ball together, hang out with each others families, etc. Haven't talked to him since the D. Smith deal went down. I love the name Tank, there is no way you can be a wimp with that name...if you were you would be dead.

ItalianStallion
07-26-2006, 02:19 PM
I think our success this year depends mostly on how quickly and effective our players pick up the new systems being implemented, and it never hurts to add a player who knows, and has been successful in your defensive system.

Zeus
07-26-2006, 02:24 PM
"Prophet" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

The best thing about Tank Williams is his name is Tank.

If we can have Dwight at saftey it would be way better for the team then having Williams there.

LMAO. It is true. A guy that works for me is buddies with Tank. They grew up in the same town, played ball together, hang out with each others families, etc. Haven't talked to him since the D. Smith deal went down. I love the name Tank, there is no way you can be a wimp with that name...if you were you would be dead.

Thing about Tank is, he only signed a 1-year deal. If it had (or does) worked out that he's the stud who put us over the top, the $$$ to sign him next year would be much bigger than what we're putting out there for Dwight Smith.

=Z=
(I also don't like the sound of Sharper at SS)

whackthepack
07-26-2006, 02:43 PM
I have seen no quotes by any Viking's coaches saying that Darren Sharper is being moved to Strong Safety! It is the media saying this and I doubt that he will be moved, my opinion is the Vikings are going to have Tank and Smith battle it out for the starting job at SS. I do not see anything wrong with this and if Tank wants to be the starter then win the job, and the same with Smith.

I think that Fox will end up on the practice squad and I don't see any teams picking him up after he was out all of last season with a broken arm.


There are some other possibilities and the Vikes could try try and move Tank to middle linebacker and 6' 3" and about 220lbs so he has the size.

skum
07-26-2006, 02:54 PM
First of all.. From what ive heard, in a cover-2 (tampa 2 defence), the Safety positions are less different from a 4-3 .. and of course every Defensive Position is more about coverage.. If Sharper should move to SS it wouldnt be a disaster..

However, i am pretty sure that they signed Tank to start.. I dont think that Smith will play safety..

Also, didnt Dwight Smith play Nickleback in TB?.. I i think he did..

Now.. to the roster..

There is plenty of room for both Ronyell and Dovonte..


---------------------
Camp Roster:

http://www.kfan.com/pages/vikings/camp2006/roster.html

Nealy, Stinson, Kyle Smith, Cobbs already cut

1. Brad Johnson
2. Tarvaris Jackson
3. Mike McMahon
4. Chester Taylor
5. Mewelde Moore
6. Ciatrick Fason
7. Taurean Henderson
8. Tony Richardson
9. Richard Owens
10. Marcus Robinson
11. Koren Robinson
12. Travis Taylor
13. Troy Williamson
14. Billy McMullen
15. Jermaine Wiggins
16. Jim Kleinsasser
17. Matt Birk
18. Jason Whittle
19. Ryan Cook
20. Steve Hucthinson
21. Artis Hicks
22. Chris Liwienski
23. Adam Goldberg
24. Anthony Herrera
25. Kenechi Udeze
26. Erasmus James
27. Darrion Scott
28. DeQuincy Scott
28. Ray Edwards
29. Kevin Williams
30. Pat Williams
31. CJ Mosley
32. Ben Leber
33. EJ Henderson
34. Dontarrious Thomas
35. Napoleon Harris
36. Chad Greenway
37. Antoine Winfield
38. Fred Smoot
39. Dovonte Edwards
40. Cedric Griffin
41. Dustin Fox
42. Ronyell Whittaker
43. Darren Sharper
44. Dwight Smith
45. Tank Williams
46. Willie Offord
47. Greg Blue
48. Chris Kluwe
49. Ryan Longwell
50. Cullen Loeffler

EDIT: LOL Forget O-Tackles

51. Bryant McKinnie
52. Marcus Johnson
53. Mark Rosenthal

54. Spencer Johson
55. Heath Farwell/Charles Gordon/Kasper .. one spot only

That Gives us
3 QB's.. JTO cut
4 RB's Echema,Mathis Cut
2 Fullbacks Goodspeed IR, Jackson Cut
5 Wide Recievers, Hosack, Hoag, Jones, Kasper, Smith, Carter, Davis, Kight, CUT
2 Tight Ends, Angulo, Dugan cut
3 Centers, (incl. Whittle UTIL OL) Palermo cut
6 OG's (incl Whittle) - and even more with Cook also at G maybe
3 Tackles, however some guards can move out there in case of injured.. Wilson, BUbin, Penn cut
5 DE's. Taylor, Smith, Micthell cut
4 DT's Hopoi, Kolodziej, cut
6 LB's Lawrence, McKenzie, Davis, cut
6 CB's Dozier cut
4 S's Hunter cut
1 Punter.. Torp cut
1 Kicker..

No worry guys

DID I FORGET ANYONE??

Zeus
07-26-2006, 02:57 PM
"skum" wrote:


10. Marcus Robinson
11. Koren Robinson
12. Travis Taylor
13. Troy Williamson
14. Billy McMullen

That Gives us
5 Wide Recievers, Hosack, Hoag, Jones, Kasper, Smith, Carter, Davis, Kight, CUT
DID I FORGET ANYONE??

There is no way that the Vikings carry only 5 WRs. 6 minimum - wouldn't surprise me to see 7 on the active roster and 1 on the Practice Squad.

=Z=

UndisputedVike
07-26-2006, 03:03 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

The best thing about Tank Williams is his name is Tank.

If we can have Dwight at saftey it would be way better for the team then having Williams there.

I don't see how you can say that...he hasn't even played a down yet, there is no way know at this point if Smith would be better.

skum
07-26-2006, 03:49 PM
"AWZeus" wrote:

"skum" wrote:


10. Marcus Robinson
11. Koren Robinson
12. Travis Taylor
13. Troy Williamson
14. Billy McMullen

That Gives us
5 Wide Recievers, Hosack, Hoag, Jones, Kasper, Smith, Carter, Davis, Kight, CUT
DID I FORGET ANYONE??

There is no way that the Vikings carry only 5 WRs. 6 minimum - wouldn't surprise me to see 7 on the active roster and 1 on the Practice Squad.

=Z=

Maybe Kasper or Hosack will get the 55th spot

stjmnsota
07-26-2006, 03:53 PM
Why are the Vikes loading the secondary so much when it is already pretty solid? Who is going to be cut? I like the idea of getting solid veterans back there, but I also like some of the young talent the Vikes have to build. But someone will likely be cut, right?

Couldn't the Vikes stand to pick up a veteran linebacker? Maybe not so much to play every down, but to balance out the young LB core? Be a leader to the young talent?

Is there any LB's available out there right now?

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 04:04 PM
"stjmnsota" wrote:

Why are the Vikes loading the secondary so much when it is already pretty solid? Who is going to be cut? I like the idea of getting solid veterans back there, but I also like some of the young talent the Vikes have to build. But someone will likely be cut, right?

Couldn't the Vikes stand to pick up a veteran linebacker? Maybe not so much to play every down, but to balance out the young LB core? Be a leader to the young talent?

Are there any LB's available out there right now?

Hmmmm.....I wonder????? :lol:

Prophet
07-26-2006, 04:07 PM
lol, don't get Cajun started. Sign Junior Seau on the cheap, he's suppose to be announcing his retirement soon.

happy camper
07-26-2006, 04:09 PM
people are overreacting about the sharper thing.

if it is going to be a disaster, we will know in training camp. in that event, we would change it. just chill.

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 04:27 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

The best thing about Tank Williams is his name is Tank.

If we can have Dwight at saftey it would be way better for the team then having Williams there.

I don't see how you can say that...he hasn't even played a down yet, there is no way know at this point if Smith would be better.

You have their whole careers thus far to compare their production. Not to mention you have Smith's production coming in part during a time when he was coached by our defensive cordinator.

For all of you thinking Smith wasn't signed to start at saftey your smoking crack. He's a more prooven vet with more experience including a huge game in the superbowl, better numbers and success under Tomlins cover 2.

Tank is warming the bench. Quote it, print it, yell it from the rooftop.

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 04:31 PM
"Prophet" wrote:

lol, don't get Cajun started. Sign Junior Seau on the cheap, he's suppose to be announcing his retirement soon.

Definitely NOT Junior Say-Ow!!!

Prophet
07-26-2006, 04:40 PM
Details not disclosed? There must be a lot of leaks or BSing going on based on all the details of the contract in this thread.

============================================

KFFL
Vikings | D. Smith officially signs
Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:24:28 -0700

Updating previous reports, Vikings.com reports the Minnesota Vikings have officially signed SS Dwight Smith (Saints). Details of the contract were not disclosed.

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 04:46 PM
Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

Mr. Purple
07-26-2006, 04:46 PM
"Prophet" wrote:

Details not disclosed? There must be a lot of leaks or BSing going on based on all the details of the contract in this thread.

============================================

KFFL
Vikings | D. Smith officially signs
Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:24:28 -0700

Updating previous reports, Vikings.com reports the Minnesota Vikings have officially signed SS Dwight Smith (Saints). Details of the contract were not disclosed.


SS Dwight Smith? Maybe hes gonna play SS which is more like a FS in our system.I dont think we'll be seing Sharper switching his position.

ItalianStallion
07-26-2006, 04:47 PM
"magicci" wrote:

lets send some rookies to the Practice Squad.

Who? Cedric Griffin? The guy was a second rounder, I would hope he is at least a dime corner or even a special teams player. He won't improve without game experience.

In all likelyhood Whittaker and/or Edwards is headed for the practice squad.

Aberration
07-26-2006, 04:56 PM
most likely it's going to be fox vs edwards vs whittaker for the last spot... could they air a death match?

and for fun this is from si.com the rumor page Scorecard Daily (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/scorecard/07/26/truth.rumors.nfl/index.html)
"According to Chargers GM A.J. Smith, no offers have arrived for LB Donnie Edwards, although New Orleans is said to be interested. Smith isn't actively shopping him. -- San Diego Union-Tribune"

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 04:57 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:

"magicci" wrote:

lets send some rookies to the Practice Squad.

Who? Cedric Griffin? The guy was a second rounder, I would hope he is at least a dime corner or even a special teams player. He won't improve without game experience.

In all likelyhood Whittaker and/or Edwards is headed for the practice squad.

say goodbye smoot!

Goodbye smoot!

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 04:57 PM
"petrodemos" wrote:

Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 05:03 PM
"V-Unit" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong

Cover Green: Six man pressure, zero coverage, and it alerts the players that all three middle linebackers are blitzing.

Corner: Both have the #1 receivers
Dog: Both have the #2 receivers
Free Safety: Has the back, #3 receiver
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Blitz “B” gap weak
Mike: Blitz “A” gap weak

Prophet
07-26-2006, 05:08 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong

Cover Green: Six man pressure, zero coverage, and it alerts the players that all three middle linebackers are blitzing.

Corner: Both have the #1 receivers
Dog: Both have the #2 receivers
Free Safety: Has the back, #3 receiver
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Blitz “B” gap weak
Mike: Blitz “A” gap weak

I bet releasing all that information from your brain gave you the same satisfaction as a healthy dump.

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 05:17 PM
"V-Unit" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

the two hard hitters at the ends could be the run stoppers taking the pressure off the LBs who are faster and better tacklers than the current LB staff. but thats JMO. adds good blitzing options too.

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 05:22 PM
"Prophet" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong

Cover Green: Six man pressure, zero coverage, and it alerts the players that all three middle linebackers are blitzing.

Corner: Both have the #1 receivers
Dog: Both have the #2 receivers
Free Safety: Has the back, #3 receiver
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Blitz “B” gap weak
Mike: Blitz “A” gap weak

I bet releasing all that information from your brain gave you the same satisfaction as a healthy dump.

i dont even know what half that means.... the dog covers the #2 receivers? so thers 2 #2 receivers?....
Tampa 2 is a renowned defense, would be nice to see a different scheme named and originated with the new viking defense. we have no MLB, and its been a concern for 10 years now (or close to), maybe a cover 3 will take the pressure off. im looking to get the best players on the field for most of the playing time.

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 05:23 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:


Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong


Isn't that package for 3 DL? Above I see 2 CB, 2 SS (Dogs), 1 FS, and 3 LB (Bats and Mike) making for 8 total position players. Is that right?
You are too smart for me.

Petro is talking about a nickel package featuring 3 S instead of 3 CB.

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 05:28 PM
"petrodemos" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong

Cover Green: Six man pressure, zero coverage, and it alerts the players that all three middle linebackers are blitzing.

Corner: Both have the #1 receivers
Dog: Both have the #2 receivers
Free Safety: Has the back, #3 receiver
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Blitz “B” gap weak
Mike: Blitz “A” gap weak

I bet releasing all that information from your brain gave you the same satisfaction as a healthy dump.

i dont even know what half that means.... the dog covers the #2 receivers? so thers 2 #2 receivers?....
Tampa 2 is a renowned defense, would be nice to see a different scheme named and originated with the new viking defense. we have no MLB, and its been a concern for 10 years now (or close to), maybe a cover 3 will take the pressure off. im looking to get the best players on the field for most of the playing time.

Cover green is an all out blitz. You run cover green periodically when you run a cover three. The recievers is plural because it means if someone goes in motion they will stick to them. That is only in cover green.

Cover 3 is a zone. They curl to the flat in a 3.
Cover 3 has so many holes that any team with a decent offensive line is going to eat you up for breakfast. If their line gives the QB time, and he can hit the broad side of a barn your in for a long day.

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 05:31 PM
"V-Unit" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:


Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong


Isn't that package for 3 DL? Above I see 2 CB, 2 SS (Dogs), 1 FS, and 3 LB (Bats and Mike) making for 8 total position players. Is that right?
You are too smart for me.

Petro is talking about a nickel package featuring 3 S instead of 3 CB.

How can you run a cover 3 with 4 down lineman?

4DL
2CB
2LB
3S

I don't know if I have ever seen a cover 3 ran with 4 down lineman. The middle of the field would be too vunerable.

Top_Speed
07-26-2006, 05:34 PM
"petrodemos" wrote:

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

"magicci" wrote:

lets send some rookies to the Practice Squad.

Who? Cedric Griffin? The guy was a second rounder, I would hope he is at least a dime corner or even a special teams player. He won't improve without game experience.

In all likelyhood Whittaker and/or Edwards is headed for the practice squad.

say goodbye smoot!

Goodbye smoot!

Can't boot the Smoot (yet anyway). We have to give him a chance to come back and redeem himself. Plus I think he will count (a boat load of $) towards our cap.

I really like the young guys coming up (Edwards, Whitaker). If we try to pass them to the p-squad they are definately snatched up by someone else.

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 05:43 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:


Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong


Isn't that package for 3 DL? Above I see 2 CB, 2 SS (Dogs), 1 FS, and 3 LB (Bats and Mike) making for 8 total position players. Is that right?
You are too smart for me.

Petro is talking about a nickel package featuring 3 S instead of 3 CB.

How can you run a cover 3 with 4 down lineman?

4DL
2CB
2LB
3S

I don't know if I have ever seen a cover 3 ran with 4 down lineman. The middle of the field would be too vunerable.

V-unit is right what i was thinking. and 2 safeties would help out the LB more instead of the CBs. either one or two safeties could drop back, so really the cover 3 would give options to a cover 2 or cover 1 without giving it away to the offense. i dont know, maybe del rio is right and the middle will be open for the picking...

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 05:45 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:


Cover 3 Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak Has the middle hook area
Mike Blitz “A” gap strong


Isn't that package for 3 DL? Above I see 2 CB, 2 SS (Dogs), 1 FS, and 3 LB (Bats and Mike) making for 8 total position players. Is that right?
You are too smart for me.

Petro is talking about a nickel package featuring 3 S instead of 3 CB.

How can you run a cover 3 with 4 down lineman?

4DL
2CB
2LB
3S

I don't know if I have ever seen a cover 3 ran with 4 down lineman. The middle of the field would be too vunerable.Exactly! that's why I said it would put way too much pressure on the LBs. Petro suggested the scheme to put the "best players on the field," but a cover 3 as he suggested would expose our weaknesses, not hide them. The LBs would given too much field to cover and all blitzes would come from the secondary, which is not one of Winfield's or Smoot's strengths.

Although we would have great coverage on the sidelines and deep passes, teams would just run the ball and use dip and dunk passes on us all day. Any LB blitz would leave us open to a quick slant or a ahort TE In and routes like that.

I think Tomlin will be quick to switch to the nickel, but having the nickel as our base defense is impossible.

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 05:49 PM
"Top_Speed" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

"magicci" wrote:

lets send some rookies to the Practice Squad.

Who? Cedric Griffin? The guy was a second rounder, I would hope he is at least a dime corner or even a special teams player. He won't improve without game experience.

In all likelyhood Whittaker and/or Edwards is headed for the practice squad.

say goodbye smoot!

Goodbye smoot!
i
Can't boot the Smoot (yet anyway). We have to give him a chance to come back and redeem himself. Plus I think he will count (a boat load of $) towards our cap.

I really like the young guys coming up (Edwards, Whitaker). If we try to pass them to the p-squad they are definately snatched up by someone else.

if im correct i heard smoot has been working out hard and gaining a couple pounds.....make him a safety and add him to the new cover 3????

i just havent been sold on smoots abilities. i wouldnt be surprised if one of those rookies outperforms him and takes his job mid season. (Now THATS some crow eating i will be doing later in the year)

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 05:58 PM
"V-Unit" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:


Cover 3 Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak Has the middle hook area
Mike Blitz “A” gap strong


Isn't that package for 3 DL? Above I see 2 CB, 2 SS (Dogs), 1 FS, and 3 LB (Bats and Mike) making for 8 total position players. Is that right?
You are too smart for me.

Petro is talking about a nickel package featuring 3 S instead of 3 CB.

How can you run a cover 3 with 4 down lineman?

4DL
2CB
2LB
3S

I don't know if I have ever seen a cover 3 ran with 4 down lineman. The middle of the field would be too vunerable.Exactly! that's why I said it would put way too much pressure on the LBs. Petro suggested the scheme to put the "best players on the field," but a cover 3 as he suggested would expose our weaknesses, not hide them. The LBs would given too much field to cover and all blitzes would come from the secondary, which is not one of Winfield's or Smoot's strengths.

Although we would have great coverage on the sidelines and deep passes, teams would just run the ball and use dip and dunk passes on us all day. Any LB blitz would leave us open to a quick slant or a ahort TE In and routes like that.

I think Tomlin will be quick to switch to the nickel, but having the nickel as our base defense is impossible.

im not giving up :cool:
iv seen people suggest some of our safeties could be MLB, so why not have those hybrid safeties on the field.

There are for sure more options for the defense now that Smith is a Viking. and the fact hes not a Packer is an added bonus! (those guys have really done nothing but get worse in the offseason - Woodson was seen as a minor improvement on the team by espn)

ejmat
07-26-2006, 06:09 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

The best thing about Tank Williams is his name is Tank.

If we can have Dwight at saftey it would be way better for the team then having Williams there.

I don't see how you can say that...he hasn't even played a down yet, there is no way know at this point if Smith would be better.

HUH???????????????

He's a vet not a rookie. I am happy we have both Tank and Smith. However, I wish we would look into a veteren LBer.

Zeus
07-26-2006, 06:14 PM
"Prophet" wrote:

I bet releasing all that information from your brain gave you the same satisfaction as a healthy dump.

Ain't much better.

=Z=

spunk_goblin
07-26-2006, 06:44 PM
Certainly a good signing, in my opinion, can play more than one position if needed too

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 07:04 PM
"petrodemos" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:


Cover 3 Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak Has the middle hook area
Mike Blitz “A” gap strong


Isn't that package for 3 DL? Above I see 2 CB, 2 SS (Dogs), 1 FS, and 3 LB (Bats and Mike) making for 8 total position players. Is that right?
You are too smart for me.

Petro is talking about a nickel package featuring 3 S instead of 3 CB.

How can you run a cover 3 with 4 down lineman?

4DL
2CB
2LB
3S

I don't know if I have ever seen a cover 3 ran with 4 down lineman. The middle of the field would be too vunerable.Exactly! that's why I said it would put way too much pressure on the LBs. Petro suggested the scheme to put the "best players on the field," but a cover 3 as he suggested would expose our weaknesses, not hide them. The LBs would given too much field to cover and all blitzes would come from the secondary, which is not one of Winfield's or Smoot's strengths.

Although we would have great coverage on the sidelines and deep passes, teams would just run the ball and use dip and dunk passes on us all day. Any LB blitz would leave us open to a quick slant or a ahort TE In and routes like that.

I think Tomlin will be quick to switch to the nickel, but having the nickel as our base defense is impossible.

im not giving up :cool:
iv seen people suggest some of our safeties could be MLB, so why not have those hybrid safeties on the field.

There are for sure more options for the defense now that Smith is a Viking. and the fact hes not a Packer is an added bonus! (those guys have really done nothing but get worse in the offseason - Woodson was seen as a minor improvement on the team by espn)

What you want is a 4-3 where the LB's cover almost every down. We already have variations of that.

If you are talking a pure cover three with 3 safties the only way you pull it of is with 3 down lineman and even then the TE is your worst enemy. Teams will spread you to the sideline and use their TE's and HB's to murder you. Hell even a simple QB draw becomes a 15yd gain.

Oh and Smoot will never play saftey that guy is the worst tackler I have ever seen. He throws his body around with no form at all. When he tries to tackle it looks like rosie odonel diving for a jelly filled Firestone.

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 07:05 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

"V-Unit" wrote:


Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong

Cover Green: Six man pressure, zero coverage, and it alerts the players that all three middle linebackers are blitzing.

Corner: Both have the #1 receivers
Dog: Both have the #2 receivers
Free Safety: Has the back, #3 receiver
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Blitz “B” gap weak
Mike: Blitz “A” gap weak

I bet releasing all that information from your brain gave you the same satisfaction as a healthy dump.

i dont even know what half that means.... the dog covers the #2 receivers? so thers 2 #2 receivers?....
Tampa 2 is a renowned defense, would be nice to see a different scheme named and originated with the new viking defense. we have no MLB, and its been a concern for 10 years now (or close to), maybe a cover 3 will take the pressure off. im looking to get the best players on the field for most of the playing time.

Cover green is an all out blitz. You run cover green periodically when you run a cover three. The recievers is plural because it means if someone goes in motion they will stick to them. That is only in cover green.

Cover 3 is a zone. They curl to the flat in a 3.
Cover 3 has so many holes that any team with a decent offensive line is going to eat you up for breakfast. If their line gives the QB time, and he can hit the broad side of a barn your in for a long day.

Wouldn't it just be easier to sign Donnie Edwards and play a straight Cover 2? :evil4:

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 07:09 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

"petrodemos" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:



Cover 3.
Sharper, Williams/or other and Smith, in which Smith and Williams drop back or blitz from the left or right almost hybrid like LBs and Sharper keeps his ball hawking abilities at Safety. there going to rewrite the defensive positions, call it the Viking Cover 3, Left Safety Middle Safety and Right Safety.

its about time a new defensive scheme originates from minnesota.

So let me get this straight......you are suggesting we play nickel ALL the time and not just nickel, three-safety nickel. That would imply putting a ton of pressure on the LBs, and Smoot and Winfield are too good to be assigned to the flats all day long.

Who would play at "Center Safety"? The hard-hitter or the veteran ballhawk?
Smith behind Smoot and Williams behind Winfield...S&S, W&W...I dunno where I'm going with this. I wonder if this formation would be possible in Madden...........

Cover 3: Five man pressure, fire zone concept, and it alerts the players that the two inside linebackers are blitzing with 3 deep coverage behind it.

Corner: Both have deep outside 1/3
Dog: Both have the curl to flat to their side
Free Safety: Has the deep middle 1/3, but will shade to the split #2 receiver side to help the dog if necessary
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Has the middle hook area
Mike: Blitz “A” gap strong

Cover Green: Six man pressure, zero coverage, and it alerts the players that all three middle linebackers are blitzing.

Corner: Both have the #1 receivers
Dog: Both have the #2 receivers
Free Safety: Has the back, #3 receiver
Bat Strong: Blitz “B” gap strong
Bat Weak: Blitz “B” gap weak
Mike: Blitz “A” gap weak

I bet releasing all that information from your brain gave you the same satisfaction as a healthy dump.

i dont even know what half that means.... the dog covers the #2 receivers? so thers 2 #2 receivers?....
Tampa 2 is a renowned defense, would be nice to see a different scheme named and originated with the new viking defense. we have no MLB, and its been a concern for 10 years now (or close to), maybe a cover 3 will take the pressure off. im looking to get the best players on the field for most of the playing time.

Cover green is an all out blitz. You run cover green periodically when you run a cover three. The recievers is plural because it means if someone goes in motion they will stick to them. That is only in cover green.

Cover 3 is a zone. They curl to the flat in a 3.
Cover 3 has so many holes that any team with a decent offensive line is going to eat you up for breakfast. If their line gives the QB time, and he can hit the broad side of a barn your in for a long day.

Wouldn't it just be easier to sign Donnie Edwards and play a straight Cover 2? :evil4:


Short answer: Yes

Long Answer: Yes sir

PurplePeopleEaters89
07-26-2006, 07:27 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:

Good...now we can sign you-know-who!


bring on Donnie Edwards!!! :grin:

Deadly_Diabetic
07-26-2006, 07:51 PM
I've seen it thrown out there but none (of the football strategy gurus) have addressed it: Could Tank be realistically converted to the Mike in our system?

He seems to have a reputation as an enforcer, seems to have the size, and I can't imagine that if he had the coverage skills to be our starting safety that he wouldn't have the coverage skills needed at the LB position; BUT I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the transition in my mind because I don't have any experience. Could someone talk about how difficult (or easy) a transition like that would be?

Just curious...

-DD

Slade
07-26-2006, 08:06 PM
I love this move! AW, Smoot, DSharp,Tank & now DSmith??? Outstanding!!

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 08:34 PM
"Deadly_Diabetic" wrote:

I've seen it thrown out there but none (of the football strategy gurus) have addressed it: Could Tank be realistically converted to the Mike in our system?

He seems to have a reputation as an enforcer, seems to have the size, and I can't imagine that if he had the coverage skills to be our starting safety that he wouldn't have the coverage skills needed at the LB position; BUT I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the transition in my mind because I don't have any experience. Could someone talk about how difficult (or easy) a transition like that would be?

Just curious...

-DD

Tank would have to put on about 30 pounds of muscle in order to realistically be the right size to play MLB. Urlacher made the transition from SS to MLB from college to the pros, but he had to add muscle as well. I doubt that we will see Tank doing that this season...or maybe ever!

olson_10
07-26-2006, 08:38 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"Deadly_Diabetic" wrote:

I've seen it thrown out there but none (of the football strategy gurus) have addressed it: Could Tank be realistically converted to the Mike in our system?

He seems to have a reputation as an enforcer, seems to have the size, and I can't imagine that if he had the coverage skills to be our starting safety that he wouldn't have the coverage skills needed at the LB position; BUT I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the transition in my mind because I don't have any experience. Could someone talk about how difficult (or easy) a transition like that would be?

Just curious...

-DD

Tank would have to put on about 30 pounds of muscle in order to realistically be the right size to play MLB. Urlacher made the transition from SS to MLB from college to the pros, but he had to add muscle as well. I doubt that we will see Tank doing that this season...or maybe ever!
let tank start, and have smith be the nickle..that is a sick secondary, and we have some crazy depth..what if somebody gets hurt? tank has to lose 30 lbs over a 10 minute time span to come back to safety? lol just leave things alone, and let smith play nickle..if there is an injury at safety, we have smith, offord as backups..if theres an injury at corner, we have smith, edwards, griffin..cant go wrong

Del Rio
07-26-2006, 08:48 PM
"olson_10" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"Deadly_Diabetic" wrote:

I've seen it thrown out there but none (of the football strategy gurus) have addressed it: Could Tank be realistically converted to the Mike in our system?

He seems to have a reputation as an enforcer, seems to have the size, and I can't imagine that if he had the coverage skills to be our starting safety that he wouldn't have the coverage skills needed at the LB position; BUT I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the transition in my mind because I don't have any experience. Could someone talk about how difficult (or easy) a transition like that would be?

Just curious...

-DD

Tank would have to put on about 30 pounds of muscle in order to realistically be the right size to play MLB. Urlacher made the transition from SS to MLB from college to the pros, but he had to add muscle as well. I doubt that we will see Tank doing that this season...or maybe ever!
let tank start, and have smith be the nickle..that is a sick secondary, and we have some crazy depth..what if somebody gets hurt? tank has to lose 30 lbs over a 10 minute time span to come back to safety? lol just leave things alone, and let smith play nickle..if there is an injury at safety, we have smith, offord as backups..if theres an injury at corner, we have smith, edwards, griffin..cant go wrong

I guarantee Smith is going to be our starter. He is not going to be playing Nickle.

Tank could possibly play LB, not MLB. The reason I say this is Middle Linebacker is a position that requires more then simply size. It is a position that requires you know your job and everyone elses. This is his first season with this defense. That compounds the issue of his inexperience at the position.

Then you have a huge difference in the time he has to react to the ball. The reads are similar. Most MLB's like to read the guard. The great MLB's read the whole line in an instant. Safties generally Read the TE. We are talking about the split second after the ball is snapped here. The read that is made to address the play as a run or a pass.

LB's have far less time to react then a saftey does. I'm not saying a saftey can't make the transition. All i am saying is you need more then the ability to hit and be a similar size to other LB's. It's a position that requires complete knowledge of the defense and reactions that are instant.

The ability to have an instant reaction comes from experience. I would guess that converting a guy who has all his reactions and reflexes honed in on playing saftey in the NFL for the last 5 years to MLB would be pretty time consuming.

Deadly_Diabetic
07-26-2006, 08:51 PM
Great explination! Thanks DR!!!

-DD

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 10:10 PM
We are not going to sign Donnie Edwards.

If anything we would make a trade for him. The only position the Chargers would trade for would probably be secondary or QB and I don't think the Vikings are ready to give p either. We are thin at QB and we have spent the last 3 offseasons making sure we are as deep as possible at DB, Smith being the latest addition.

Edwards ain't happening. I am more willing to put my faith in Tomlin to develop these young LBs. Just as I think Childress has his projects in Taylor and Jackson, Tomlin has his projects in Greenway, Thomas, Henderson, Harris, and Leber. It is very possible that the success of these projects will be crucial for the success of the team, both now and in the future.

oddmanout22287
07-26-2006, 10:33 PM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"olson_10" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"Deadly_Diabetic" wrote:

I've seen it thrown out there but none (of the football strategy gurus) have addressed it: Could Tank be realistically converted to the Mike in our system?

He seems to have a reputation as an enforcer, seems to have the size, and I can't imagine that if he had the coverage skills to be our starting safety that he wouldn't have the coverage skills needed at the LB position; BUT I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the transition in my mind because I don't have any experience. Could someone talk about how difficult (or easy) a transition like that would be?

Just curious...

-DD



Tank would have to put on about 30 pounds of muscle in order to realistically be the right size to play MLB. Urlacher made the transition from SS to MLB from college to the pros, but he had to add muscle as well. I doubt that we will see Tank doing that this season...or maybe ever!
let tank start, and have smith be the nickle..that is a sick secondary, and we have some crazy depth..what if somebody gets hurt? tank has to lose 30 lbs over a 10 minute time span to come back to safety? lol just leave things alone, and let smith play nickle..if there is an injury at safety, we have smith, offord as backups..if theres an injury at corner, we have smith, edwards, griffin..cant go wrong

I guarantee Smith is going to be our starter. He is not going to be playing Nickle.

Tank could possibly play LB, not MLB. The reason I say this is Middle Linebacker is a position that requires more then simply size. It is a position that requires you know your job and everyone elses. This is his first season with this defense. That compounds the issue of his inexperience at the position.

Then you have a huge difference in the time he has to react to the ball. The reads are similar. Most MLB's like to read the guard. The great MLB's read the whole line in an instant. Safties generally Read the TE. We are talking about the split second after the ball is snapped here. The read that is made to address the play as a run or a pass.

LB's have far less time to react then a saftey does. I'm not saying a saftey can't make the transition. All i am saying is you need more then the ability to hit and be a similar size to other LB's. It's a position that requires complete knowledge of the defense and reactions that are instant.

The ability to have an instant reaction comes from experience. I would guess that converting a guy who has all his reactions and reflexes honed in on playing saftey in the NFL for the last 5 years to MLB would be pretty time consuming.

Del, I could listen to you talk football all day man :lol:
So you see Tank as a glorified back-up and nothing more?

petrodemos
07-26-2006, 10:33 PM
okay v-unit, how about this then...smoot for donnie....

oooh shnap.

i dont want a project for MLB. how many projects have FAILED, and now we want to put the failed projects in again. if they do it, il hope nothing but the best that this new coaching staff can get them to succeed. but i think there already swamped with instituting their own style and plan.

cajunvike
07-26-2006, 10:35 PM
"V-Unit" wrote:

We are not going to sign Donnie Edwards.

If anything we would make a trade for him. The only position the Chargers would trade for would probably be secondary or QB and I don't think the Vikings are ready to give p either. We are thin at QB and we have spent the last 3 offseasons making sure we are as deep as possible at DB, Smith being the latest addition.

Edwards ain't happening. I am more willing to put my faith in Tomlin to develop these young LBs. Just as I think Childress has his projects in Taylor and Jackson, Tomlin has his projects in Greenway, Thomas, Henderson, Harris, and Leber. It is very possible that the success of these projects will be crucial for the success of the team, both now and in the future.

I say we trade Tank and Nap to the Chargers for Edwards...two decent players for one better player (albeit older)...that would give both EJ and DT plenty of time to get up to speed...and would eliminate the controversy that is sure to happen regarding the secondary.

V-Unit
07-26-2006, 10:55 PM
I know you hate Smoot Petro but our other options to replace him are subpar. Starting Griffin or Edwards not only is risky but hurts their development. Whitaker maybe but he is an average starter at best. Smoot isn't even that bad, but bad coaching put him in the position to fail.

Yes Cajun, trading away depth at our thinnest position for an experienced (but aging) veteran who is coming back from injury would solve everthing....

petrodemos
07-27-2006, 02:06 AM
"V-Unit" wrote:

I know you hate Smoot Petro but our other options to replace him are subpar. Starting Griffin or Edwards not only is risky but hurts their development. Whitaker maybe but he is an average starter at best. Smoot isn't even that bad, but bad coaching put him in the position to fail.

Yes Cajun, trading away depth at our thinnest position for an experienced (but aging) veteran who is coming back from injury would solve everthing....

i wouldnt say "hate", that may be too strong of a word. im certainly not sold on his ability, so many here are confiden were set with our 2 CB for the rest of this season. i believe he most likely will start, but mid-season i wouldnt be surprised to see him benched once again. smoot is the one thats in real trouble here with the signing of D. Smith who can play corner and is a better tackler.

VKG4LFE
07-27-2006, 02:07 AM
How old is he? How long has he been in the league? One concern. Why are the sAIN'T's cutting him?

petrodemos
07-27-2006, 02:17 AM
true enough, bucs and ravens were interested in im, but they were only interested in 1 year deals. hes 27, thats what 3 years younger than sharper? and a bit undersized (uhoh smoot)

VKG4LFE
07-27-2006, 02:36 AM
I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

NodakPaul
07-27-2006, 02:40 AM
"VKG4LFE" wrote:

I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

Of course you are. Anyone who refuses to believe that the coaching had more to do with Smoot's performance than anything else would still be nervous. :wink:

I am looking forward to the match up, just so we can silence the Smoot haters one and for all...

VikingsTw
07-27-2006, 02:45 AM
"VKG4LFE" wrote:

How old is he? How long has he been in the league? One concern. Why are the sAIN'T's cutting him?

Reggie Bush is gonna bank it.


Like DR, i agree we signed smith to start, no doubt.

On the other hand our specail teams is gonna be nasty, Blue, Offord, Tank, Griffin, just to name a few. Thats why i love the depth, keep Winfield OFF the field for specail teams, i don't want to see him out there anymore. His only focus should be leading the defense in tackles and INT's not specail teams.

sleepagent
07-27-2006, 03:12 AM
"VikingsTw" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

How old is he? How long has he been in the league? One concern. Why are the sAIN'T's cutting him?

Reggie Bush is gonna bank it.


Like DR, i agree we signed smith to start, no doubt.

On the other hand our specail teams is gonna be nasty, Blue, Offord, Tank, Griffin, just to name a few. Thats why i love the depth, keep Winfield OFF the field for specail teams, i don't want to see him out there anymore. His only focus should be leading the defense in tackles and INT's not specail teams.

Well said.

There isn't such a thing as being too deep. Injuries can derail a season in the blink of an eye.

Good signing.

NodakPaul
07-27-2006, 03:13 AM
I agree that we signed Smith to start. I see him starting at SS, with Sharper at FS. Just because some ESPN ass thinks Sharper might move doesn't mean that he will.

Besides, as has been started several times, the differences between FS and SS are minimized in the cover 2. So Smith can make the move rather easily.

I think Tomlin is putting a scary secondary together...

Del Rio
07-27-2006, 03:38 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

Of course you are. Anyone who refuses to believe that the coaching had more to do with Smoot's performance than anything else would still be nervous. :wink:

I am looking forward to the match up, just so we can silence the Smoot haters one and for all...

I dont like Fred Smoot AND I definately know that his play suffered because of coaching.

I also know his play suffered because old Champ Bailey wasn't watching his ass. There is a reason our Safties have been a priority this year.

Fred Smoot takes risks, he's a loud mouth guy who has horrible tackling technique who makes a name on making big plays by taking risks. Now before you flame me for flaming Smoot...... :razz: ........this is probably a great thing for us this year. If we have two very solid safties if not more, Fred Smoot is going to create some serious problems for our opponents.

I'm not a fan of his play style, that being said instead of forcing him to change HIS style ( COTTRELL ) the coach seems to be fitting pieces around that will play to strengthen his style (TOMLIN) so on paper at least I like what I am seeing.

Weather that translates to success or not is yet to be seen, but it seems like Smoot could have a very big year.

Del Rio
07-27-2006, 03:45 AM
"oddmanout22287" wrote:

"Del Rio" wrote:

"olson_10" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"Deadly_Diabetic" wrote:

I've seen it thrown out there but none (of the football strategy gurus) have addressed it: Could Tank be realistically converted to the Mike in our system?

He seems to have a reputation as an enforcer, seems to have the size, and I can't imagine that if he had the coverage skills to be our starting safety that he wouldn't have the coverage skills needed at the LB position; BUT I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the transition in my mind because I don't have any experience. Could someone talk about how difficult (or easy) a transition like that would be?

Just curious...

-DD



Tank would have to put on about 30 pounds of muscle in order to realistically be the right size to play MLB. Urlacher made the transition from SS to MLB from college to the pros, but he had to add muscle as well. I doubt that we will see Tank doing that this season...or maybe ever!
let tank start, and have smith be the nickle..that is a sick secondary, and we have some crazy depth..what if somebody gets hurt? tank has to lose 30 lbs over a 10 minute time span to come back to safety? lol just leave things alone, and let smith play nickle..if there is an injury at safety, we have smith, offord as backups..if theres an injury at corner, we have smith, edwards, griffin..cant go wrong

I guarantee Smith is going to be our starter. He is not going to be playing Nickle.

Tank could possibly play LB, not MLB. The reason I say this is Middle Linebacker is a position that requires more then simply size. It is a position that requires you know your job and everyone elses. This is his first season with this defense. That compounds the issue of his inexperience at the position.

Then you have a huge difference in the time he has to react to the ball. The reads are similar. Most MLB's like to read the guard. The great MLB's read the whole line in an instant. Safties generally Read the TE. We are talking about the split second after the ball is snapped here. The read that is made to address the play as a run or a pass.

LB's have far less time to react then a saftey does. I'm not saying a saftey can't make the transition. All i am saying is you need more then the ability to hit and be a similar size to other LB's. It's a position that requires complete knowledge of the defense and reactions that are instant.

The ability to have an instant reaction comes from experience. I would guess that converting a guy who has all his reactions and reflexes honed in on playing saftey in the NFL for the last 5 years to MLB would be pretty time consuming.

Del, I could listen to you talk football all day man :lol:
So you see Tank as a glorified back-up and nothing more?

Yes and No.
I can't say he is destined to be a backup. All I know is it is highly unlikely he will start with Smith being added. Honest to god I think he is now the official shark on special teams.

Our team calls the position a shark, it has other names but what it is......is the crazy guy that can hit, can run, and has a nose for the ball that plays on special teams. The Wedge breaker, the hammer, the brick....... the only guy on kickoff and punts that has plays designed for him to help him get a shot on the ball carrier to knock the ball out or at least rip his face off.

If you guys remember Walsh he was the shark. He was small, but he was a beast. You kept hearing his name because he was good sure, but you also heard his name more then most because he has plays designed to free him up to get a shot on the ball.

Again Tank could win a position to start, but it is going to be rough. It's up to him. He definately is not a bad player I just don't think with the roster as it is now he has a good shot at starting. Sounds like to me if he embraces the role of a backup Saftey and the main attraction on special teams he could be very dangerous.

Vikes_King
07-27-2006, 03:52 AM
[quote]Sounds like to me if he embraces the role of a backup Saftey and the main attraction on special teams he could be very dangerous.[/quote

lets hope so! you make some damn good points all the time Del

FuadFan
07-27-2006, 03:53 AM
"VikingsTw" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

How old is he? How long has he been in the league? One concern. Why are the sAIN'T's cutting him?

Reggie Bush is gonna bank it.


Like DR, i agree we signed smith to start, no doubt.

On the other hand our specail teams is gonna be nasty, Blue, Offord, Tank, Griffin, just to name a few. Thats why i love the depth, keep Winfield OFF the field for specail teams, i don't want to see him out there anymore. His only focus should be leading the defense in tackles and INT's not specail teams.

Blue will be cut, both Tank and Offord are better safeties then him right now unless Tank is moved to try to play linebacker Blue will be a practice squad player at best.

Vikes_King
07-27-2006, 03:56 AM
i really dont see blue being cut, we didnt draft him for nothing, he has potential

NodakPaul
07-27-2006, 03:58 AM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

Of course you are. Anyone who refuses to believe that the coaching had more to do with Smoot's performance than anything else would still be nervous. :wink:

I am looking forward to the match up, just so we can silence the Smoot haters one and for all...

I dont like Fred Smoot AND I definately know that his play suffered because of coaching.

I also know his play suffered because old Champ Bailey wasn't watching his jiggly butt. There is a reason our Safties have been a priority this year.

Fred Smoot takes risks, he's a loud mouth guy who has horrible tackling technique who makes a name on making big plays by taking risks. Now before you flame me for flaming Smoot...... :razz: ........this is probably a great thing for us this year. If we have two very solid safties if not more, Fred Smoot is going to create some serious problems for our opponents.

I'm not a fan of his play style, that being said instead of forcing him to change HIS style ( COTTRELL ) the coach seems to be fitting pieces around that will play to strengthen his style (TOMLIN) so on paper at least I like what I am seeing.

Weather that translates to success or not is yet to be seen, but it seems like Smoot could have a very big year.

You hit the nail on the head, as always Del. Perfect description of the good and bad of Smoot.

FuadFan
07-27-2006, 04:16 AM
"Vikes_King" wrote:

i really dont see blue being cut, we didnt draft him for nothing, he has potential

We didn't have Dwight Smith under contract during the draft either. I don't see us keeping five safeties on the roster and besides that even if we did he would be deactivated every week anyway so I'd rather have that depth at other areas.

PurplePeopleEaters
07-27-2006, 04:21 AM
"Del Rio" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

Of course you are. Anyone who refuses to believe that the coaching had more to do with Smoot's performance than anything else would still be nervous. :wink:

I am looking forward to the match up, just so we can silence the Smoot haters one and for all...

I dont like Fred Smoot AND I definately know that his play suffered because of coaching.

I also know his play suffered because old Champ Bailey wasn't watching his jiggly butt. There is a reason our Safties have been a priority this year.

Fred Smoot takes risks, he's a loud mouth guy who has horrible tackling technique who makes a name on making big plays by taking risks. Now before you flame me for flaming Smoot...... :razz: ........this is probably a great thing for us this year. If we have two very solid safties if not more, Fred Smoot is going to create some serious problems for our opponents.

I'm not a fan of his play style, that being said instead of forcing him to change HIS style ( COTTRELL ) the coach seems to be fitting pieces around that will play to strengthen his style (TOMLIN) so on paper at least I like what I am seeing.

Weather that translates to success or not is yet to be seen, but it seems like Smoot could have a very big year.

Couldn't have said it any better.

ZDoy379
07-27-2006, 04:28 AM
dwight smith is a fs and so is sharper. what are we gonna use dwight smith for? is he gonna play ss and tank williams will be the nickel or vice versa? tell me whats going to happen i wasnt here so idk what is going on

NodakPaul
07-27-2006, 04:34 AM
"ZDoy379" wrote:

dwight smith is a fs and so is sharper. what are we gonna use dwight smith for? is he gonna play ss and tank williams will be the nickel or vice versa? tell me whats going to happen i wasnt here so idk what is going on

There is no definate word yet, but the general feeling is that either Smith or Sharper will move to SS. Somewhere earlier in this thread, there was a quote from vikings.com saying we signed SS Dwight Smith. Vikings.com has since changed it to read DB Dwight Smith.

My guess is that Sharper and Smith will play a little of each in training camp to see who can handle the transition better, with Sharper getting more time at FS. I think Smith will be the SS when all is said and done.

Howver, don't count out Tank jsut yet. I definately think Smith has the edge and is penciled in as the starter right now, but Childress wants to see competition during camp, so he could have all of them fighting for their roles.

shawn9876uss
07-27-2006, 05:06 AM
I think that smith is an upgrade to tank

Top_Speed
07-27-2006, 02:29 PM
"VKG4LFE" wrote:

I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

I'm looking forward to it as so should he (smoot). This is his time to get some embrarassing moments wiped out or at least smothered (like he needs to do to smith).

Revenge Time!!!!
(if not and with our cover 2 help?) I say Boot the Smoot cuz this has to be the ultimate motivation and if he can't handle it? Bye.

ejmat
07-27-2006, 06:04 PM
I agree with Del Rio's analogy of Smoot. He does take risks (somewhat like Deion Sanders did). I wasn't a big fan of Sanders because I don't think he was an all around great player. He couldn't tackle a 90 lb pop warner player. However, his coverage was outstanding. Back to Smoot. I think the coaching and the help around him will make him a better player. The guy does have talent. He just needs to shut up and put up.

olson_10
07-27-2006, 06:09 PM
"FuadFan" wrote:

"VikingsTw" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

How old is he? How long has he been in the league? One concern. Why are the sAIN'T's cutting him?

Reggie Bush is gonna bank it.


Like DR, i agree we signed smith to start, no doubt.

On the other hand our specail teams is gonna be nasty, Blue, Offord, Tank, Griffin, just to name a few. Thats why i love the depth, keep Winfield OFF the field for specail teams, i don't want to see him out there anymore. His only focus should be leading the defense in tackles and INT's not specail teams.

Blue will be cut, both Tank and Offord are better safeties then him right now unless Tank is moved to try to play linebacker Blue will be a practice squad player at best.
maybe its blue that will make the move to linebacker..i see that being much more likely than tank making that move

Mr. Purple
07-27-2006, 06:35 PM
I too feel Blue has potential as a LB.Why in the world would we cut Blue?We may have drafted him in the 5th, but he has LOTS of potential IMO.I still cant beleive we got him actually.Either way, Blue and Tank have the potential for LB, does that mean they will? No, but we'll see.

ejmat
07-27-2006, 07:11 PM
I agree with Del Rio's analogy of Smoot. He does take risks (somewhat like Deion Sanders did). I wasn't a big fan of Sanders because I don't think he was an all around great player. He couldn't tackle a 90 lb pop warner player. However, his coverage was outstanding. Back to Smoot. I think the coaching and the help around him will make him a better player. The guy does have talent. He just needs to shut up and put up.

cajunvike
07-27-2006, 07:29 PM
Blue would also have to put on about 30 pounds...with NO loss of speed to be effective at LB. Probably NOT gonna happen either.

Prophet
07-29-2006, 11:49 AM
KFFL
Vikings | Offord switched back to strong safety
Fri, 28 Jul 2006 21:58:50 -0700

Mark Craig and Judd Zulgad, of the Star Tribune, reports Minnesota Vikings S Willie Offord has been switched back to strong safety after the team signed free agent FS Dwight Smith. Defensive coordinator Mike Tomlin said Smith will learn both safety positions.

Braddock
07-29-2006, 11:04 PM
"WilliamsonOfTroy" wrote:

I too feel Blue has potential as a LB.Why in the world would we cut Blue?We may have drafted him in the 5th, but he has LOTS of potential IMO.I still cant beleive we got him actually.Either way, Blue and Tank have the potential for LB, does that mean they will? No, but we'll see.

Potential, potential, potential. I want to see results. If we're after a championship, we need to know what we're getting and make sure it's true talent. This banking on potential business is risky and the odds are more or less against us in that regard. Banking on potential is only sure of one thing, an excuse for losses when we say "They didn't live up to their potential, it's their fault."

ejmat
07-29-2006, 11:44 PM
Cajun, where's Donnie Edwards????? I think we need him.

VKG4LFE
07-30-2006, 01:39 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

Of course you are. Anyone who refuses to believe that the coaching had more to do with Smoot's performance than anything else would still be nervous. :wink:

I am looking forward to the match up, just so we can silence the Smoot haters one and for all...


Ok you lost me. I don't know if I should take this as a cut down or what?

I'm nervous because last year Smith OWNED Smoot and our Dbacks. What's he gonna do this year with MeShawn on the other side? I have faith in our D and hopefully Smoot and the DBs will be uber motivated, but I'll probably have nightmares leading up to this game!

Top_Speed
07-31-2006, 01:56 PM
Smith owned not only our DB's but actually everybody elses as well.

Hi-talent (awesome) wide receivers only get shut down by Hi-talent (awesome) DB's. Question is do we have any?

whackthepack
07-31-2006, 02:42 PM
"VKG4LFE" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"VKG4LFE" wrote:

I'm already nervous for the game against Carolina this year with Steve Smith going up against Smoot again!!

Of course you are. Anyone who refuses to believe that the coaching had more to do with Smoot's performance than anything else would still be nervous. :wink:

I am looking forward to the match up, just so we can silence the Smoot haters one and for all...


Ok you lost me. I don't know if I should take this as a cut down or what?

I'm nervous because last year Smith OWNED Smoot and our Dbacks. What's he gonna do this year with MeShawn on the other side? I have faith in our D and hopefully Smoot and the DBs will be uber motivated, but I'll probably have nightmares leading up to this game!


That had a lot to do with the scheme that Cottrell was playing, they left Smott (who was coming back from an injury) on Smith with nobody over the top to help him. That would be like having man to man coverage on Randy Moss, and when he is tearing you apart just continue to do same thing the rest of the game.

That is why when Tice and Cottrell were fired it was on of the best days in Viking history.