PDA

View Full Version : This is the Perfect time to Start T jack



Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 12:02 AM
Not trying to start a fight but really, this is the weakest time of the year for ths vikings so Tavaris should have a easy time getting into our offense and for the people who want brad to keep starting so we can get a wildcard spot, whats the point? we arent a real playoff team :(
And another point brad has 4 TD's :| and 7 ints :| you cant do any worst than this its not possible so I dont see how starting a rookie would hurt us at all

Gift
10-31-2006, 12:04 AM
I am unhappy as anyone about today, but you cant trust your season when you are still very much in the hunt to a rookie.
Even more so when you have very winnable games ahead.

DustinDupont
10-31-2006, 12:05 AM
u got a good point and i love tarvaris but we need to start brad.. his a winner where ever he goes and he just had a bad game maybe a couple more games like this then you start talkin about changin it up a bit

Gift
10-31-2006, 12:06 AM
"DustinDupont" wrote:


u got a good point and i love tarvaris but we need to start brad.. his a winner where ever he goes and he just had a bad game maybe a couple more games like this then you start talkin about changin it up a bit
I say wait until we are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, then start the noob.

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 12:07 AM
I ask again how does it hurt us to start a rookie when brad is playing as bad as its possible to play? Tavaris could not possible play any worst than brad is right now.
And If you look at him he is built for this offense, he can run the west coast, but he also has the arm to be a great deep ball QB, and we have two WR's on this team who run 4.3 40's.
--- I would not mind waiting to see if brad had acouple more bad games like this but he has had 5 games like this already :( I love brad dont get me wrong 2 years younger he would be my choice to lead this team because he could throw it over 30 yards but right now he is just holding this offense back

LuckyVike
10-31-2006, 12:07 AM
Prepare to be crucified.
I'm saying it right now, the Brad backers will be there all season and if anyone says anything about a new Qb, the pooh will hit the fan.

Gift
10-31-2006, 12:10 AM
Brad give us the best chance to win, thats it.
I would like to see "T-Jack" get a drive or 2 a game to prep him, but Brad is #1 the rest of the way.

minvikes01
10-31-2006, 12:11 AM
With the teams coming up, we may be able to get a quick lead and get T-Jack some playing time ...
Maybe he'll show he is ready to start over johnson, but i doubt he is ready yet

V4L
10-31-2006, 12:13 AM
I guess I do agree man..

Brad's mistakes hold us back.. And his lack of
being able to do anything..

Tarvaris is a playmaker it looks like.. And if he can play semi-close to how he did in preseason he would make this offense so much better.. Even if he does make mistakes who cares? It was the D that won most of our game so far anyway.. Tarvaris can do what Brad can do.. Maybe better who knows?

Either way I really don't care.. Cuz I really doubt we will throw in T-Jack anyway.. Brooks will come in first.. If he even does




One Love

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 12:15 AM
I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..

Gift
10-31-2006, 12:19 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..
4-3, alot better than the 2-5 & 1-7 of teams that are starting rookies right now.
Thats how.

V4L
10-31-2006, 12:22 AM
"Gift" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..
4-3, alot better than the 2-5 & 1-7 of teams that are starting rookies right now.
Thats how.
.


And I bet if those teams started Brad they would also be 2-5 & 1-7 also





One Love

LuckyVike
10-31-2006, 12:25 AM
"V4L" wrote:


"Gift" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..
4-3, alot better than the 2-5 & 1-7 of teams that are starting rookies right now.
Thats how.
.


And I bet if those teams started Brad they would also be 2-5 & 1-7 also





One Love


No kidding.
I can't imagine Brad playing for the Titans or Cardinals... he'd be injured within 2 weeks with a QB rating of like 20.

kramer9guy
10-31-2006, 12:27 AM
Q:Where is JT O'Sullivan when you need him?


A:On the Patriots practice squad.

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 12:28 AM
"Gift" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..
4-3, alot better than the 2-5 & 1-7 of teams that are starting rookies right now.
Thats how.
if you put a good rookie qb on a team with talent and a good line they going to play alot better than one on those horrible teams thats a fact

Vikefanman2000
10-31-2006, 12:29 AM
The Sky is falling, The Sky is falling!!
:o
:o
:o

Geessss....
the reason that the youngsters are not starting is that they are not ready to start!
They WILL have their day....
but probably not this year.
Brad will do fine....
He wasnt a gun slinger a couple years ago when he won a Superbowl in TB....
he is the same ol' Brad.


Let the Defense do its thing...keep the game close...make the right decisions in the end to win games.

Dont burn the jerseys yet.....
If he flames out in November, than I will come running with a match and gasoline.....
BUT, when the Vikes are 8-3 after Thanksgiving...
Just look at tonights game as a bad game and a good lesson!

Gift
10-31-2006, 12:30 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


"Gift" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..
4-3, alot better than the 2-5 & 1-7 of teams that are starting rookies right now.
Thats how.
if you put a good rookie qb on a team with talent and a good line they going to play alot better than one on those horrible teams thats a fact
AZ has tons of talent, still 1-7.

kramer9guy
10-31-2006, 12:31 AM
"Vikefanman2000" wrote:


The Sky is falling, The Sky is falling!!
:o
:o
:o

Geessss....
the reason that the youngsters are not starting is that they are not ready to start!
They WILL have their day....
but probably not this year.
Brad will do fine....
He wasnt a gun slinger a couple years ago when he won a Superbowl in TB....
he is the same ol' Brad.


Let the Defense do its thing...keep the game close...make the right decisions in the end to win games.

Dont burn the jerseys yet.....
If he flames out in November, than I will come running with a match and gasoline.....
BUT, when the Vikes are 8-3 after Thanksgiving...
Just look at tonights game as a bad game and a good lesson!


Well said VFM2000, well said.

Caine
10-31-2006, 12:31 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..


First of all, the WORST possible thing we could do is start Tarvaris now...and I'll tell you why.

1:
Our O-Line has yet to prove they can dominate anyone.
McKinnie and Johnson were beaten so badly tonight, they will have to be checked into a shelter for abused linemen.
Do you want the Rookie to spend his first few games running for his life?

2:
Our Receivers aren't that good.
If they were, we'd take more shots downfield...we don't.
That's for 1 of 2 reasons.
Either A) Brad is inept and can't see them, or B) They aren't getting open.
Our longest pass tonight was Mewelde Moore's screen (55 yards)...the next longest was 22, then 20, then 15, then 13.
How many of those were YAC?


3:
Our playcalling sucks.
Brad Childress is DETERMINED to do it HIS way...and that will not work.
We haven't had an Offense all season (Except versus Seattle)...will we suddenly develope one if Tarvaris starts?
Nope.
Instead, we'll shoestring the poor kid into a hyper-conservative system that doesn't ALLOW him to be effective.
We need a REAL OC, and Childress needs to quit calling plays.

So, if you start Jackson now, you're doing 3 things.

1:
Declaring for all to see that we have given up hope of having a successful season.

2:
Subjecting him - before he's ready - to a confidence-breaking situation that could ruin him for his career (Anyone remember Cade McNown?).

3:
Creating more controversy in the locker room than there will be already.

Tarvaris isn't ready...it's that simple...and neither are we.

It would be completely different if we had the tools around him to help him BE successful, but until the other components of our Offense remember that they have to play EVERY week, that won't happen.

Right now, I'm sick to my stomach with Brad Johnson's performance this season.
I look at the rest of our schedule and see teams we should beat, but I fear our COMPLETE lack of Offense could lead to us being beaten instead (Buffalo beat us, Detroit had us beat).
Brad Johnson is NOT the problem...neither is he the solution.
But ruining Jackson doesn't help our situation any.

Caine

kramer9guy
10-31-2006, 12:32 AM
"Caine" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..


First of all, the WORST possible thing we could do is start Tarvaris now...and I'll tell you why.

1:
Our O-Line has yet to prove they can dominate anyone.
McKinnie and Johnson were beaten so badly tonight, they will have to be checked into a shelter for abused linemen.
Do you want the Rookie to spend his first few games running for his life?

2:
Our Receivers aren't that good.
If they were, we'd take more shots downfield...we don't.
That's for 1 of 2 reasons.
Either A) Brad is inept and can't see them, or B) They aren't getting open.
Our longest pass tonight was Mewelde Moore's screen (55 yards)...the next longest was 22, then 20, then 15, then 13.
How many of those were YAC?


3:
Our playcalling sucks.
Brad Childress is DETERMINED to do it HIS way...and that will not work.
We haven't had an Offense all season (Except versus Seattle)...will we suddenly develope one if Tarvaris starts?
Nope.
Instead, we'll shoestring the poor kid into a hyper-conservative system that doesn't ALLOW him to be effective.
We need a REAL OC, and Childress needs to quit calling plays.

So, if you start Jackson now, you're doing 3 things.

1:
Declaring for all to see that we have given up hope of having a successful season.

2:
Subjecting him - before he's ready - to a confidence-breaking situation that could ruin him for his career (Anyone remember Cade McNown?).

3:
Creating more controversy in the locker room than there will be already.

Tarvaris isn't ready...it's that simple...and neither are we.

It would be completely different if we had the tools around him to help him BE successful, but until the other components of our Offense remember that they have to play EVERY week, that won't happen.

Right now, I'm sick to my stomach with Brad Johnson's performance this season.
I look at the rest of our schedule and see teams we should beat, but I fear our COMPLETE lack of Offense could lead to us being beaten instead (Buffalo beat us, Detroit had us beat).
Brad Johnson is NOT the problem...neither is he the solution.
But ruining Jackson doesn't help our situation any.

Caine


Not to sound like a broken record, but well said Caine...well said.

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 12:33 AM
"Gift" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


"Gift" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..
4-3, alot better than the 2-5 & 1-7 of teams that are starting rookies right now.
Thats how.
if you put a good rookie qb on a team with talent and a good line they going to play alot better than one on those horrible teams thats a fact
AZ has tons of talent, still 1-7.

and the worst offensive line in the league...

V4L
10-31-2006, 12:34 AM
Nice post Caine..

But how do we all know Tarvaris isn't "ready"?

Many QB's have started right out of the gate and have been really successful.. Many have also failed.. But can you blame that on being thrown into the game too early? Who knows?

I really don't care what we do.. If we do make a move I would imagine it would be Brooks.. But I don't see it happening






One Love

Vikefanman2000
10-31-2006, 12:34 AM
"Caine" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..


First of all, the WORST possible thing we could do is start Tarvaris now...and I'll tell you why.

1:
Our O-Line has yet to prove they can dominate anyone.
McKinnie and Johnson were beaten so badly tonight, they will have to be checked into a shelter for abused linemen.
Do you want the Rookie to spend his first few games running for his life?

2:
Our Receivers aren't that good.
If they were, we'd take more shots downfield...we don't.
That's for 1 of 2 reasons.
Either A) Brad is inept and can't see them, or B) They aren't getting open.
Our longest pass tonight was Mewelde Moore's screen (55 yards)...the next longest was 22, then 20, then 15, then 13.
How many of those were YAC?


3:
Our playcalling sucks.
Brad Childress is DETERMINED to do it HIS way...and that will not work.
We haven't had an Offense all season (Except versus Seattle)...will we suddenly develope one if Tarvaris starts?
Nope.
Instead, we'll shoestring the poor kid into a hyper-conservative system that doesn't ALLOW him to be effective.
We need a REAL OC, and Childress needs to quit calling plays.

So, if you start Jackson now, you're doing 3 things.

1:
Declaring for all to see that we have given up hope of having a successful season.

2:
Subjecting him - before he's ready - to a confidence-breaking situation that could ruin him for his career (Anyone remember Cade McNown?).

3:
Creating more controversy in the locker room than there will be already.

Tarvaris isn't ready...it's that simple...and neither are we.

It would be completely different if we had the tools around him to help him BE successful, but until the other components of our Offense remember that they have to play EVERY week, that won't happen.

Right now, I'm sick to my stomach with Brad Johnson's performance this season.
I look at the rest of our schedule and see teams we should beat, but I fear our COMPLETE lack of Offense could lead to us being beaten instead (Buffalo beat us, Detroit had us beat).
Brad Johnson is NOT the problem...neither is he the solution.
But ruining Jackson doesn't help our situation any.

Caine


I mostly agree!
;D

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 12:37 AM
"Caine" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..


First of all, the WORST possible thing we could do is start Tarvaris now...and I'll tell you why.

1:
Our O-Line has yet to prove they can dominate anyone.
McKinnie and Johnson were beaten so badly tonight, they will have to be checked into a shelter for abused linemen.
Do you want the Rookie to spend his first few games running for his life?

2:
Our Receivers aren't that good.
If they were, we'd take more shots downfield...we don't.
That's for 1 of 2 reasons.
Either A) Brad is inept and can't see them, or B) They aren't getting open.
Our longest pass tonight was Mewelde Moore's screen (55 yards)...the next longest was 22, then 20, then 15, then 13.
How many of those were YAC?


3:
Our playcalling sucks.
Brad Childress is DETERMINED to do it HIS way...and that will not work.
We haven't had an Offense all season (Except versus Seattle)...will we suddenly develope one if Tarvaris starts?
Nope.
Instead, we'll shoestring the poor kid into a hyper-conservative system that doesn't ALLOW him to be effective.
We need a REAL OC, and Childress needs to quit calling plays.

So, if you start Jackson now, you're doing 3 things.

1:
Declaring for all to see that we have given up hope of having a successful season.

2:
Subjecting him - before he's ready - to a confidence-breaking situation that could ruin him for his career (Anyone remember Cade McNown?).

3:
Creating more controversy in the locker room than there will be already.

Tarvaris isn't ready...it's that simple...and neither are we.

It would be completely different if we had the tools around him to help him BE successful, but until the other components of our Offense remember that they have to play EVERY week, that won't happen.

Right now, I'm sick to my stomach with Brad Johnson's performance this season.
I look at the rest of our schedule and see teams we should beat, but I fear our COMPLETE lack of Offense could lead to us being beaten instead (Buffalo beat us, Detroit had us beat).
Brad Johnson is NOT the problem...neither is he the solution.
But ruining Jackson doesn't help our situation any.

Caine

our O line doesnt have to be great for T jack, maybe you didnt hear but he isnt a statue in the pocket like brad johnson is.
And watch the film, I've never seen more guys wide open deep than troy and beth tonight lol they were under thrown over 3 times tonight when they could have had TD's with a good throw, I'm not saying they are great but they can get the job done plus we have wiggins and taylor who are good receiving weapons

And I agree our playing sucks, but thats because its built for brad johnson who cant usually throw the ball farther than 20 yards without it being picked off, so of course its going to be dink and dunk right now.

and how do you get ready to start when you dont play in any real games? The guy has to play at some time, why not when we are facing terrible teams?

and once again I repeat how do you declare your giving up on the season when your starting qb is playing as bad as he possibly can? he is the reason why we have lost 3 games so far, not the defense not the WR's but him, and he's not the reason why we have won any of them

audioghost
10-31-2006, 12:44 AM
You know what...give the kid a chance....

Garbage time in this game against the Pats would have been the perfect time to see what T-Jack can do...but no they put in friggin journeyman Brooks Ball-licker...which i thought was retarted....who are we grooming to be the QB of the future here? Get Jackson some in-game experience...

Other than that, we have to play 4 HORRIBLE teams and if we can beat Carolina and Seattle with Johnson, having a playmaker in there could at least do SOMETHING...

Look, Brad Johnson is facing intense pressure to make things happen and he's making mistakes left and right...more INTs than TDs....give our rook a chance to show us what he's got against the 49ers....

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 12:47 AM
Once again, not trying to pick any fights, just joined here, just posting that I think its a risk worth taking, I honestly dont think brad will freak out about backing up the kid and helping him if it means us playing better, he is just that type of guy

V4L
10-31-2006, 12:48 AM
"audioghost" wrote:


You know what...give the kid a chance....

Garbage time in this game against the Pats would have been the perfect time to see what T-Jack can do...but no they put in friggin journeyman Brooks Ball-licker...which i thought was retarted....who are we grooming to be the QB of the future here? Get Jackson some in-game experience...

Other than that, we have to play 4 HORRIBLE teams and if we can beat Carolina and Seattle with Johnson, having a playmaker in there could at least do SOMETHING...

Look, Brad Johnson is facing intense pressure to make things happen and he's making mistakes left and right...more INTs than TDs....give our rook a chance to show us what he's got against the 49ers....



Haha.. I like ur Army that u got in ur sig.. B-rad and T-willy suck :P






One Love

Caine
10-31-2006, 12:54 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


"Caine" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


I'm not going to try and convince you, its not my job I just dont see how brad gives us a better chance to win when he is playing like he has this season..


First of all, the WORST possible thing we could do is start Tarvaris now...and I'll tell you why.

1:
Our O-Line has yet to prove they can dominate anyone.
McKinnie and Johnson were beaten so badly tonight, they will have to be checked into a shelter for abused linemen.
Do you want the Rookie to spend his first few games running for his life?

2:
Our Receivers aren't that good.
If they were, we'd take more shots downfield...we don't.
That's for 1 of 2 reasons.
Either A) Brad is inept and can't see them, or B) They aren't getting open.
Our longest pass tonight was Mewelde Moore's screen (55 yards)...the next longest was 22, then 20, then 15, then 13.
How many of those were YAC?


3:
Our playcalling sucks.
Brad Childress is DETERMINED to do it HIS way...and that will not work.
We haven't had an Offense all season (Except versus Seattle)...will we suddenly develope one if Tarvaris starts?
Nope.
Instead, we'll shoestring the poor kid into a hyper-conservative system that doesn't ALLOW him to be effective.
We need a REAL OC, and Childress needs to quit calling plays.

So, if you start Jackson now, you're doing 3 things.

1:
Declaring for all to see that we have given up hope of having a successful season.

2:
Subjecting him - before he's ready - to a confidence-breaking situation that could ruin him for his career (Anyone remember Cade McNown?).

3:
Creating more controversy in the locker room than there will be already.

Tarvaris isn't ready...it's that simple...and neither are we.

It would be completely different if we had the tools around him to help him BE successful, but until the other components of our Offense remember that they have to play EVERY week, that won't happen.

Right now, I'm sick to my stomach with Brad Johnson's performance this season.
I look at the rest of our schedule and see teams we should beat, but I fear our COMPLETE lack of Offense could lead to us being beaten instead (Buffalo beat us, Detroit had us beat).
Brad Johnson is NOT the problem...neither is he the solution.
But ruining Jackson doesn't help our situation any.

Caine

our O line doesnt have to be great for T jack, maybe you didnt hear but he isnt a statue in the pocket like brad johnson is.
And watch the film, I've never seen more guys wide open deep than troy and beth tonight lol they were under thrown over 3 times tonight when they could have had TD's with a good throw, I'm not saying they are great but they can get the job done plus we have wiggins and taylor who are good receiving weapons

And I agree our playing sucks, but thats because its built for brad johnson who cant usually throw the ball farther than 20 yards without it being picked off, so of course its going to be dink and dunk right now.

and how do you get ready to start when you dont play in any real games? The guy has to play at some time, why not when we are facing terrible teams?

and once again I repeat how do you declare your giving up on the season when your starting qb is playing as bad as he possibly can? he is the reason why we have lost 3 games so far, not the defense not the WR's but him, and he's not the reason why we have won any of them


First of all, when you're 4-3, you aren't playing as bad as you possibly can.
That happens when you're 1-6...or maybe 2-5.


Second, if the deep guys are open and Brad isn't seeing them - or can't get the ball there - then why are those routes scripted in?
In fact, Brad CAN get the ball there, but not when McKinnie and Johnson (Marcus) are more like revolving doors than Offensive Tackles.

Third, if you want the offense to change to a run-n-gun style - like Atlanta's - take a look at how many Superbowls Micheal Vick has won.
Tarvaris is more mobile than Johnson, that goes without saying.
tarvaris has a stronger arm than Johnson....I'll stipulate to that.
But so does Bollinger...on both counts.
Should we start Brooks instead?
After all, he has real NFL experience unlike Tarvaris.

Not on your life.

Fourth, our Offense wasn't "built for Brad Johnson".
Brad Johnson happens to be very familiar with it because he ran something very similar in Tampa Bay.
Everyone uses something from this offensive style.
But the PROBLEM is the play calling.
Childress needs to get a real OC in there and stop calling plays.
His hyper-conservative style, coupled with an immobile Qb with an iffy arm are simply allowing Defenses to feast on us.
And, as we saw tonight, the Defense can't so it for us every game (Although they tried).

Nope, again, it makes NO sense to start Jackson now.
It makes much more sense to ride the pony we have until the season is over, re-evaluate, and move forward in the off season.

Maybe I'd consider giving him a few starts....once we're mathematically eliminated from play-off contention.
But, with our remaining schedule, I don't see that happening.

Caine

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 01:07 AM
yes brad is playing awful the reason why we have a winning record to this point is because the defense and taylor have been playing great you cant even try to argue this point, watch the games look at the stats

And yes this offense has been built for johnson, I've even heard it said acouple times by childress lol

I never said I wanted a run and gun offense, tavaris can be a very good pocket qb, who avoids the rush and I just want a qb in there who can throw the bullet passes to the 15 yard range so our WR's can make a play after the catch, and a qb who can throw the deep ball accurate

And the deep routes are put in to try and scare the defense so they back off the line so we can run the ball easier, But now teams arent even scared of it anymore, they know brad cant get the ball there so they just keep their covg 1 on 1 every time

tybrones87
10-31-2006, 01:21 AM
Haha I love it. After one loss you all are calling for the 3rd stringer. ??? One bad game against one of the leagues best teams and everybody goes nuts, nice thinking all. :-

cajunvike
10-31-2006, 01:24 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


Not trying to start a fight but really, this is the weakest time of the year for ths vikings so Tavaris should have a easy time getting into our offense and for the people who want brad to keep starting so we can get a wildcard spot, whats the point? we arent a real playoff team :(
And another point brad has 4 TD's :| and 7 ints :| you cant do any worst than this its not possible so I dont see how starting a rookie would hurt us at all


NOT!!!

Caine
10-31-2006, 01:24 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


yes brad is playing awful the reason why we have a winning record to this point is because the defense and taylor have been playing great you cant even try to argue this point, watch the games look at the stats

Sure I can.
The reason(s) the Offense stinks are as follows:

1:
O-Line hasn't played to expectations.
2:
WR Corps lacks ability to make plays with any consistancy.
3:
Brad Childress calls hyper-conservative plays.
4:
Brad Johnson isn't a Pro-Bowl caliber QB anymore.

If you put ANY QB into that mess, you wind up with....a mess.


Face it, we do not have the receivers to make Johnson a dangerous QB.
We do not have the QB to make our WR's dangerous.
You need one or the other.
Brady makes his Receivers dangerous...and his O-Line helped him out big time tonight by keeping the rush contained.


So, is Johnson playing horrible, or is the situation not condusive to Pro-Bowl play?
I'm sticking with the latter.
Johnson had 3 int's tonight.
Take tonight away and he's ineffective, but not horrible.
Remember, I never said Johnson was great, and I never claimed he was blameless...I simply stated that we have no one on our roster who is capable of doing any better.
Further, by placing jackson into this mess, you run the risk of damaging his development.

"Flaminglover]And" wrote:



Childress has also stated, several times, that Tarvaris needs work before he's ready to play.
Odd how you take one as gospel and the other as mistaken opinion...

"Flaminglover]I" wrote:
[quote]

To do that, our WR's have to catch the ball...something Williamson has a tough time doing.
Johnson hit him, in stride, deep down the left sideline...and Williamson missed it.
Is that Brad's fault?


We do not have a good WR corps right now.
If we had a legit #1 receiver and we lost a couple more games, MAYBE I'd consider a change.
But, we don't.
Favre struggled last season with no receivers.
Brady struggled earlier this season with "no" receivers (Obviously, he didn't struggle tonight...we made them look fantastic).

Give Tarvaris either a line or some receivers before you throw him to the wolves.

[quote author=Flaminglover]And the deep routes are put in to try and scare the defense so they back off the line so we can run the ball easier, But now teams arent even scared of it anymore, they know brad cant get the ball there so they just keep their covg 1 on 1 every time


I already covered one deep route taht was thrown to and hit in stride...and dropped.
Plenty of shots are being taken, they're simply not connecting regularly.
Whose fault is it?
I don't know.
It's EASY to blame Brad, but maybe it's the receivers?
Childress - hopefully - knows better than we do.

Me?
I still think it's the play calling, the line, the receivers, and then Johnson...in that order.

Caine

Flaminglover
10-31-2006, 01:42 AM
... I'm not even gonna try any more, your in love with brad johnson its pointless you think he was playing good before this game and thats just a lie, I cant talk to someone when they are being biased about a player, its the rest of the teams fault that brad isnt putting up probowl numbers, and 4 TD's thru 7 games is great I totaly agree

cajunvike
10-31-2006, 01:58 AM
I pretty much agree with Caine...except that I would blame the WRs a little more than the OL...since the drops couldn't happen if Brad didn't have enough time to deliver the ball.

VikingsTw
10-31-2006, 02:10 AM
If i where the coach more than likely i would stick with brad just for the simple reason that we are above .500 at 4-3. He puts up another performance like this next weak then your have to make a change, this game was bad. Besides T-Jack was just injured and missed all that practive time.

I will say though if they did start T Jack, i think it would be one of the most anticipated games i've ever seen as a viking fan(Stoked). I'm pumped for this kid, aside from just having a strong arm, i believe he would give our offense a nice boost simple because he can scramble and make plays outside of the pocket. Childress isn't stupid he knows why he drafted T Jack, cause he fits our offense that brad doesn't. He's gonna be here for five years, he wants his QB. I don't see this guy stopping anytime soon but every year he played he got better and better, u gotta love that.

Jackson is our future but i don't know if now is the time, put yourself in the coaches shoes, what if u did start T-Jack and blew our 4-3 record. Childress would be under a huge amount of chritisism. Wait a week or two see if he gets it together, then make a decision from there. Honestly i don't know how it could get any worse on offense, you got of the best RB combos in the NFL, some 4.3 WR's and you can't score any TD's. Whos fault is that?

If Childress had balls like Parcells he might make a QB change. I don't see it happening though. There situation was very similair to ours, starting QB's playing like shit. Both teams had backup QB's that played extremely well in the preseason.

midgensa
10-31-2006, 03:46 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


I ask again how does it hurt us to start a rookie when brad is playing as bad as its possible to play? Tavaris could not possible play any worst than brad is right now.
And If you look at him he is built for this offense, he can run the west coast, but he also has the arm to be a great deep ball QB, and we have two WR's on this team who run 4.3 40's.
--- I would not mind waiting to see if brad had acouple more bad games like this but he has had 5 games like this already :( I love brad dont get me wrong 2 years younger he would be my choice to lead this team because he could throw it over 30 yards but right now he is just holding this offense back


Tarvaris could definitely play even worse than Brad (and right off the bat let me tell you I CAN'T STAND BRAD JOHNSON) None-the-less at this point in the season we cannot put in a raw rookie who did not even play Division !-A football. Honestly if a move is to be made it will be to Bollinger. With four very winnable games in November and 7 very winnable games left on the schedule then Brad has to be the man as we hope our defense holds forum.

ultravikingfan
10-31-2006, 05:11 AM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


... I'm not even gonna try any more, your in love with brad johnson its pointless you think he was playing good before this game and thats just a lie, I cant talk to someone when they are being biased about a player, its the rest of the teams fault that brad isnt putting up probowl numbers, and 4 TD's thru 7 games is great I totaly agree


What did you expect?
You sign up tonight and start a highly controversial topic.
Plus we just lost and bad at that.
I hope you did not expect everybody to agree with you.

I'll give you this; at least the member you are going back and forth with is intelligent and keeping this good.
These are some of the best threads to read with 2 members intelligently giving their views.

Big C
10-31-2006, 07:23 AM
BJ can't throw more than 15 yards, the play calling is horrible, the o-line can't protect Brad, the WRs can't hold on to catches, so on and so forth.

Expect this miserable offense the rest of the season. It will be this lousy no matter who the QB is. We're still in playoff race. BJ still gives us a better chance than Bollinger or TJ. Especially with the next 4 games.

Del Rio
10-31-2006, 08:05 AM
Brad Johnson played a horrible game. That being said T-Jack isn't even our second string QB. Either he needs to work harder to move up to #2 or everyone needs to put that on the back burner.

Redmption
10-31-2006, 08:30 AM
Yeah if TJack is the future QB why didnt he go in the game instead of Bollinger??

cogitans
10-31-2006, 08:32 AM
"Redmption" wrote:


Yeah if TJack is the future QB why didnt he go in the game instead of Bollinger??


Just to clear this up, TJack was not activated for the game.

The guy that is listed as 3rd/reserve QB can only get in the game if the two other QBs is unable to play.

snowinapril
10-31-2006, 08:53 AM
No way, I am not giving up on this season yet.
BJ still gives us the best option to win.

nextvikingsstar
10-31-2006, 09:30 AM
ok so we have one team with a winning record on our team and your calling for a third string qb...yeah tj is the future but he needs some time to learn, watching johnson will help.....johnson is our guy....the defense he faced was good, we had a couple calls not go our way and they were a better team, the vikings are fine.........

nextvikingsstar
10-31-2006, 09:31 AM
ok so we have one team with a winning record on our team and your calling for a third string qb...yeah tj is the future but he needs some time to learn, watching johnson will help.....johnson is our guy....the defense he faced was good, we had a couple calls not go our way and they were a better team, the vikings are fine.........the patriots are better tehn the bears, im not sold on the bears yet, there d is tight but rex is still garbage....tehy havent beaten anyone yet.....the pats are the 2nd best team behind thecolts

mr.woo
10-31-2006, 09:36 AM
"nextvikingsstar" wrote:


ok so we have one team with a winning record on our team and your calling for a third string qb...yeah tj is the future but he needs some time to learn, watching johnson will help.....johnson is our guy....the defense he faced was good, we had a couple calls not go our way and they were a better team, the vikings are fine.........


how will it help to go out there and watch brad make horrible decisions and throw 4 intertceptions?
the only thing hes learning is not to spaz out in big games.

PurpleRide
10-31-2006, 09:57 AM
"snowinapril" wrote:


No way, I am not giving up on this season yet.
BJ still gives us the best option to win.


Win what?? against the niners and the lions?
I said this statement before the season started and i will stick with it.
He cannot win games for this team, he proved it last night.
He did nothing all year, the D is the reason we have 4 wins, johnson sucks.

The QB out of tampa is having a ok year, I think he has more TD's than johnson and he hasnt been playing all year.
Oh yeah he is a rookie.
Johnson has no arm, teams do not have to worry about the deep ball or even a pass over the middle.
He is affraid to take a chance.
That was the worse game I have watched a vikings QB play ever.
EVER.
I knew johnson wouldnt matter when we needed a QB to step up.
Put TJ in, this team had no chance to win the SB before the season started, lets put in the future so we can atleast have a threat on the O side of the ball

skum
10-31-2006, 10:18 AM
"cogitans" wrote:


"Redmption" wrote:


Yeah if TJack is the future QB why didnt he go in the game instead of Bollinger??


Just to clear this up, TJack was not activated for the game.

The guy that is listed as 3rd/reserve QB can only get in the game if the two other QBs is unable to play.


He was dressed and doing warmup along with Chester Taylor and some of the WR's i saw.. So i think he was activated..

Anyways.. T-Jack wasnt ready to come in, and isnt ready yet.. If Brad Johnson cant read a defense like this - what makes you think that TJ could..??!.. One of his negatives when drafted was that he was very raw and needed polishing - but he had the tools to be a starter in the NFL..

We are 4-3.. This was the only game Brad hasnt given us a chance to win.. - So why shouldnt he start.. You saw what happened when we put in our 2nd stringer.. sacked 3 times and picked of in the endzone.. not much better.. If T-Jack was better than Bollinger - he would be the 2nd stringer.. and i guess he's not.. Also he has missed some weeks for practice while he was having surgery..

Comeon - Stop calling for Brad's head.. Im really surprised how many that goes apeshit on the team after we lost to the Patriots.. they are 6-1 now.. and they got a nasty defense, and arguably the best QB in the game... Brady and Bellichick picked the pass D apart... Alex Smith and Norv Turner cant do that.. We still have a playoff having won 4 games in a tough start.. Washington, Carolina, Patriots, Seahawks, @Bills and vs Detriot.. Lets go Vikings, get your heads up.. Brad gives us the best chance to win at this point.. The coaches will learn from their mistakes and we are a developing team.. maybe we needed this loss to get even better.?!

You cant expect any team(other than the Colts at home maybe) to defeat the Patriots - they will proberly be favoured in any other game.. I also believe that they are going to the somewhat the same thing with the Bears as they did to us..

cogitans
10-31-2006, 10:26 AM
"skum" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"Redmption" wrote:


Yeah if TJack is the future QB why didnt he go in the game instead of Bollinger??


Just to clear this up, TJack was not activated for the game.

The guy that is listed as 3rd/reserve QB can only get in the game if the two other QBs is unable to play.


He was dressed and doing warmup along with Chester Taylor and some of the WR's i saw.. So i think he was activated..


He was. As the 3rd QB. That is the 46th position on the active roster. And there is limits to when he is allowed to enter the game

Caine
11-02-2006, 04:58 PM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


... I'm not even gonna try any more, your in love with brad johnson its pointless you think he was playing good before this game and thats just a lie, I cant talk to someone when they are being biased about a player, its the rest of the teams fault that brad isnt putting up probowl numbers, and 4 TD's thru 7 games is great I totaly agree


I'm in love with Brad Johnson???????


..and you suffer from cranial-rectal intrusion.

I would dearly LOVE to see Brad Johnson moved back to the Back-up position.
I do NOT think he can take us to the "promised land", and I am fairly convinced that his skills have deteriorated further than he is willing to admit.
The reason I believe this is that in EVERY high-presure game he has started over the past 2 seasons, he has folded.
The only reason he was effective versus Seattle is the O-Line gave him time.

So, for you to assume that because I think your idea to be the height of idiocy I am in love with Brad Johnson is further proof that not only is your idea idiotic, you are comming dangerously close to being categorized in the same light.

If you had a VIABLE alternative to Brad Johnson, I'd be all for it...but you don't.
Zygi Wilf ensured that there would be no QB controversy when he elected to low-ball all potential QB's who were available, not wanting to pay them more than Brad.
In short, he pulled a Red *pokes porcupines* McCombs on us.

No one currently on our roster will do any better than BJ.
NO ONE.
Because Tarvaris looked good in pre-season, versus vanilla defenses and 2nd and 3rd stringers, does NOT mean he is ready for the big dance.
None of the coaching staff believe he is...do you know something they don't?

You really need to look at the totality of the situation.
You have elected not to do so...and catagorize anyone who disagrees with your short sighted and flawed thinking as a Brad Lover.
In essence, you're one of those "My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts" people.


Caine

KrackerJack
11-02-2006, 05:16 PM
...Okay first of all, i don't know...how are we supposed to know if he is ready? we're not Childress, he has the biggest say and sees a lot more of his play than any of us do...i have no doubt that he is our future QB, but if Childress has him at 3rd string i'm pretty sure there is a reason....in time though...in time.

josdin00
11-02-2006, 05:36 PM
"cogitans" wrote:


"Redmption" wrote:


Yeah if TJack is the future QB why didnt he go in the game instead of Bollinger??


Just to clear this up, TJack was not activated for the game.

The guy that is listed as 3rd/reserve QB can only get in the game if the two other QBs is unable to play.


Actually, he can come in and play at any time. The only problem is, if he does, neither the 1st or 2nd string QB can come back in the game. That's why you never see the 3rd string QB as a holder on kicks. As soon as he'd come in, the first two guys are gone.

I believe this rule is waived in the 4th quarter, however, and the 3rd stringer can come in at any time. Let me add the disclaimer that I know this was true a few years ago, but I do not know if those rules have changed.

cogitans
11-02-2006, 05:42 PM
"josdin00" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"Redmption" wrote:


Yeah if TJack is the future QB why didnt he go in the game instead of Bollinger??


Just to clear this up, TJack was not activated for the game.

The guy that is listed as 3rd/reserve QB can only get in the game if the two other QBs is unable to play.


Actually, he can come in and play at any time. The only problem is, if he does, neither the 1st or 2nd string QB can come back in the game. That's why you never see the 3rd string QB as a holder on kicks. As soon as he'd come in, the first two guys are gone.

I believe this rule is waived in the 4th quarter, however, and the 3rd stringer can come in at any time. Let me add the disclaimer that I know this was true a few years ago, but I do not know if those rules have changed.


Thank you for clearing it up.

I thought I had it, but your explanation is the right one. Not that it makes much of a diference, yet what I said were not entirely true

Ltrey33
11-02-2006, 05:45 PM
"mr.woo" wrote:


"nextvikingsstar" wrote:


ok so we have one team with a winning record on our team and your calling for a third string qb...yeah tj is the future but he needs some time to learn, watching johnson will help.....johnson is our guy....the defense he faced was good, we had a couple calls not go our way and they were a better team, the vikings are fine.........


how will it help to go out there and watch brad make horrible decisions and throw 4 intertceptions?
the only thing hes learning is not to spaz out in big games.


Watching Brad WILL help regardless of how he plays. Brad has a lot of knowledge that he could impart upon someone, and watching him and listening to a veteran in meetings will certainly help, regardless of how Brad plays on Sunday.

josdin00
11-02-2006, 05:49 PM
What can I say? I have a good memory when it comes to obscure NFL rules.

It comes in handy when watching games with the Bears fans I have ended up surrounding myself with. When calls go against the Bears, and I'm ready with the exact explanation of why the refs were right, and their team isn't just getting screwed, it goes over rather nicely. I'm usually thanked well.


That is, if 'thanked' means cussed out and told to shut up, among other things.






It's fun.

scottishvike
11-02-2006, 05:59 PM
Ok it was a bad loss, but IMO benching Brad at this stage would be crazy, if we fall out of play-off contention ring the changes but not now. I also think one of the reasons Johnson looked bad on MNF was when we were chasing a big deficit the running game seemed to be abandoned altogether.
The way we have been winning matches is to keep it tight, run the ball, use up the clock, keep the chains moving plus obviously special teams and Defence. Whenever we have to start throwing the ball practically every down to catch up, we are going to struggle.

Mr Anderson
11-02-2006, 06:43 PM
You can do much worse that 4-7 especially since 3 of which came in one game.


Alex Smith was 1TD 11 Ints last year, Joe Namath's career TD to INT is 173 to 220, so you can do much worse, AND MAKE THE HALL OF FAME.

He's made mistakes to try and make big plays that weren't there and the ball got picked off, but he can manage an offense as well as anyone, so I would never bench him.

ultravikingfan
11-05-2006, 05:59 PM
"Flaminglover" wrote:


yeah I'm bumping this since my thread is locked


It was merged with another thread.
It says "Merged"

Gift
11-05-2006, 06:01 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


yeah I'm bumping this since my thread is locked


It was merged with another thread.
It says "Merged"
must kinda suck to have to "work" during the games. :-

Webby
11-05-2006, 06:18 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"Flaminglover" wrote:


yeah I'm bumping this since my thread is locked


It was merged with another thread.
It says "Merged"


I deleted his remarks that are as usual, uninformed.