PDA

View Full Version : Vikings Trade for Holcomb (formerly Holcomb interested in Vikings?)



Pages : [1] 2

Garland Greene
07-01-2007, 01:51 PM
http://vikings.scout.com/2/655760.html

Interesting read. Not sure about Holcomb, but if there are questions about TJack. I am sure the rumors will be starting the next couple of months.

COJOMAY
07-01-2007, 01:57 PM
This was brought up before. Probably because Chilly loves to get Eagle's castaways. I don't think it will happen. It seems like everyone thinks TJ needs a mentor. Well, supposedly Chilly is that mentor. He is a past QB coach and offensive coach. Why would TJ need another mentor. He had Johnson last year and it didn't seem to help. What we need more is to give TJ some protection, not a mentor. Nor mentor can help a QB always under pressure.

NodakPaul
07-01-2007, 02:11 PM
Also form the same link:

* The Wilf family was the subject of some discussion this week about their political contributions to Minnesota politics, crossing party lines and making contributions to candidates from both the DFL and IR parties. In all, the Wilfs gave $73,000 in political contributions last year.

Good old Zygi - greasing the wheels of politics. ;D

And...

The Vikings’ long waiting list for season tickets may be a thing of the past. During Saturday’s Metro-Outstate High School All-Star Game, several ads ran for the Vikings ticket plan, giving the option for fans to buy half-season, five-game packages – four regular-season and one preseason home game included in each package. How many of these are being made available and how many of them are season tickets that weren’t renewed by former season-ticket holders is uncertain, but the 10,000-deep waiting list would seem to be a thing of the past.


They actually did this last year too, and it looks like it is a trend across the NFL to boost ticket sales.
For the record, I don't think there has been a waiting list for season tickets for a few years anyway.

singersp
07-01-2007, 02:13 PM
Just a word of caution, when supplying links to Scout.com or Vikings Update, don't include text from the article.

I know they are watching us & have warned Webby in the past about copywrite & intellectual rights infringement, especially when the article was from a "subscription" article.

Garland Greene
07-01-2007, 02:17 PM
"singersp" wrote:


Just a word of caution, when supplying links to Scout.com or Vikings Update, don't include text from the article.

I know they are watching us & have warned Webby in the past about copywrite & intellectual rights infringement, especially when the article was from a "subscription" article.


Thanks I will take it out. They are having a fre preview until July 4th

singersp
07-01-2007, 03:08 PM
Analysis: Veteran QB Speculation
(http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=63&p=2&c=655588)


By Kevin Brown
Personnel Analyst
scout.com

Posted Jun 30, 2007

singersp
07-14-2007, 10:54 AM
Vikings not interested in Holcomb (http://daily.phanaticmag.com/2007/07/vikings-not-interested-in-holcomb.html)

Friday, July 13, 2007

By John McMullen
The Phanatic Magazine

Various media reports over the past several weeks have reported that the Minnesota Vikings are interested in Philadelphia Eagles backup quarterback Kelly Holcomb....

COJOMAY
07-14-2007, 10:58 AM
Chilly is satisfied where he is at. I hope he's right!

singersp
07-14-2007, 11:03 AM
That could all change after a couple preseason games but right now Childress doesn't want the pressure of a veteran quarterback with starting experience hampering Jackson's development.

This is why I think Childress will play T-Jack over Bollinger as our starter. I gather by this statement that Childress thinks he's ready to gain experience & will play him even if he feels Bollinger might give us the best chance to win a few games early.

In the long run, I feel Childress believes that T-Jack would surpass Bollinger.

If he were to start Bollinger first, at the point he sticks T-Jack in, that's when his learning curve begins as far as experience. You can't gain that riding the pine.

So why not stick him in early, so by mid-season, he has developed & improved?

If you stick him in around mid season, he might not be improved enough, by the time the playoffs roll around, should we make it.

Prophet
07-17-2007, 03:56 PM
KFFL
Vikings | Childress comments about Holcomb rumors
Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:02:27 -0700

Sean Jensen, of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, reports Minnesota Vikings head coach Brad Childress said the team is not singling out Philadelphia Eagles QB Kelly Holcomb as a possible addition to the team if he is released. "We keep that whole thing wide open, in terms of who we think is going to be waived at the defensive back position, or the offensive line. There's always people of interest. But I wouldn't single out Kelly Holcomb as someone who has been singled out. Obviously, the similarities that he mentioned are apparent. He's a good player, and a good player for a long time. But I haven't studied him that much lately," Childress said.

ejmat
07-17-2007, 04:19 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


KFFL
Vikings | Childress comments about Holcomb rumors
Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:02:27 -0700

Sean Jensen, of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, reports Minnesota Vikings head coach Brad Childress said the team is not singling out Philadelphia Eagles QB Kelly Holcomb as a possible addition to the team if he is released. "We keep that whole thing wide open, in terms of who we think is going to be waived at the defensive back position, or the offensive line. There's always people of interest. But I wouldn't single out Kelly Holcomb as someone who has been singled out. Obviously, the similarities that he mentioned are apparent. He's a good player, and a good player for a long time. But I haven't studied him that much lately," Childress said.




That doesn't sound like Childress rules him out.
We all know how quiet Childress is however when he rules someone out he's up front about it (such as Carr and Keyshawn).

Vikes_King
07-17-2007, 04:25 PM
But I wouldn't single out Kelly Holcomb as someone who has been singled out.

He's a good player, and a good player for a long time.

lol, i love chilly and his extensive vocabulary ^_^

singersp
08-22-2007, 07:16 AM
Vikings aren't only team with interest in Holcomb (http://www.startribune.com/510/story/1375784.html)

Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Kelly Holcomb, long considered the Vikings' safety net at the position, apparently has other suitors as well.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: August 21, 2007 – 8:29 PM

Marrdro
08-22-2007, 07:34 AM
Thanks Singer.
Nice read.


Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Kelly Holcomb, long considered the Vikings' safety net at the position, apparently has other suitors as well.

By who?


and it has been well known in league circles that Vikings officials are keeping tabs on his situation in Philadelphia. In fact, the Vikings are known to have made calls to more than one team to gauge the status of their quarterback depth.


Crop circles?
Again, who?
When did they call?
Don't get me wrong, I like the thought of someone else holding the clipboard by don't we think the timing is a bit rough here?

I guess if we look at the little history we do have on this staff they didn't hesitate to bring someone in (Bollinger) late in pre-season last year.
::)


"As long as he is playing for me, as I told him, that is what I expect to see from him when he gets by the boundary."

Old School........Smart ball........
Back doesn't loose his knees dealing it a bit instead of taking it.
;D


Former Vikings running back Darrin Nelson, now a member of the Stanford University athletic department, will be part of the Vikings' television announcing team for Saturday night's game

I always liked Darrin.
Still remember the play against the Redskins.
If only he would have caught the damn ball.
;D

ejmat
08-22-2007, 07:38 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Thanks Singer.
Nice read.


Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Kelly Holcomb, long considered the Vikings' safety net at the position, apparently has other suitors as well.

By who?


and it has been well known in league circles that Vikings officials are keeping tabs on his situation in Philadelphia. In fact, the Vikings are known to have made calls to more than one team to gauge the status of their quarterback depth.


Crop circles?
Again, who?
When did they call?
Don't get me wrong, I like the thought of someone else holding the clipboard by don't we think the timing is a bit rough here?

I guess if we look at the little history we do have on this staff they didn't hesitate to bring someone in (Bollinger) late in pre-season last year.

::)


"As long as he is playing for me, as I told him, that is what I expect to see from him when he gets by the boundary."

Old School........Smart ball........
Back doesn't loose his knees dealing it a bit instead of taking it.

;D


Former Vikings running back Darrin Nelson, now a member of the Stanford University athletic department, will be part of the Vikings' television announcing team for Saturday night's game

I always liked Darrin.
Still remember the play against the Redskins.
If only he would have caught the damn ball.
;D


You had to go and remind us of that Marr.
Thanks pal!
;D

Ltrey33
08-27-2007, 03:40 PM
I didn't want to start an entirely new thread in case it is bubkus...but...

I just saw on the bottom line on NFL Network that Adam Schefter is reporting that the Vikings have completed a trade for Kelly Holcomb.

Just FYI.

Purple Floyd
08-27-2007, 03:44 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Thanks Singer.
Nice read.


Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Kelly Holcomb, long considered the Vikings' safety net at the position, apparently has other suitors as well.

By who?


and it has been well known in league circles that Vikings officials are keeping tabs on his situation in Philadelphia. In fact, the Vikings are known to have made calls to more than one team to gauge the status of their quarterback depth.


Crop circles?
Again, who?
When did they call?
Don't get me wrong, I like the thought of someone else holding the clipboard by don't we think the timing is a bit rough here?

I guess if we look at the little history we do have on this staff they didn't hesitate to bring someone in (Bollinger) late in pre-season last year.
::)


"As long as he is playing for me, as I told him, that is what I expect to see from him when he gets by the boundary."

Old School........Smart ball........
Back doesn't loose his knees dealing it a bit instead of taking it.
;D


Former Vikings running back Darrin Nelson, now a member of the Stanford University athletic department, will be part of the Vikings' television announcing team for Saturday night's game

I always liked Darrin.
Still remember the play against the Redskins.
If only he would have caught the damn ball.
;D


You had to go and remind us of that Marr.
Thanks pal!
;D


One of the reasons I always hated him.

It sure was smart drafting him over Marcus Allen,that's for sure.


As to Holcolm, let him go to Atlanta. He doesn't have the time to come here and adjust to the offense anyway so he would be a liability at best

josdin00
08-27-2007, 03:46 PM
profootballtalk is reporting the same thing, though they're just citing the same source as you are. At least we know you're not the only one to have seen it.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm

Ltrey33
08-27-2007, 03:48 PM
So is Brooks cut? Or is Thigpen gone? I highly doubt the Vikes would keep 4 quarterbacks on the roster.

cogitans
08-27-2007, 03:49 PM
Ok. I can't say that it's a big surprise, now I just wonder how much we overpaid for him.

cogitans
08-27-2007, 03:51 PM
"Ltrey" wrote:


So is Brooks cut? Or is Thigpen gone? I highly doubt the Vikes would keep 4 quarterbacks on the roster.


I don't think Brooks is cut yet, but he will be eventually.

I don't recall who said it, but it's like a recap of last year. Bollinger part II

COJOMAY
08-27-2007, 03:51 PM
Fox Sports is reporting it, too. The Vikes let Henson go. Got him for a 6th rounds draft choice.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7160888

gregair13
08-27-2007, 03:55 PM
interesting

AngloVike
08-27-2007, 03:56 PM
From NFL.com


http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story?id=09000d5d801e194d&template=without-video&confirm=true

thevikingfan
08-27-2007, 03:56 PM
If i had to guess now i think it will be TJ holcomb bollinger in that order and thigpen on the practice squad

NodakPaul
08-27-2007, 03:57 PM
"thevikingfan" wrote:


If i had to guess now i think it will be TJ holcomb bollinger in that order and thigpen on the practice squad


I would actually say TJ - Holcomb - Thigpen.
Maybe try and trade Bollinger out for a low pick or just release him.

duvaldomo
08-27-2007, 04:09 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


If i had to guess now i think it will be TJ holcomb bollinger in that order and thigpen on the practice squad


I would actually say TJ - Holcomb - Thigpen.
Maybe try and trade Bollinger out for a low pick or just release him.


I agree, BB will be released I think

Zeus
08-27-2007, 04:13 PM
"AngloVike" wrote:


From NFL.com


http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story?id=09000d5d801e194d&template=without-video&confirm=true



Posted: 22 minutes ago
Vikings acquire QB Holcomb from Eagles
NFL.com


Kelly Holcomb, QB
Minnesota Vikings
Career Statistics
Yards: 5,403
TD/INT: 37/37
Rating: 79.9
NFL Network's Adam Schefter is reporting that the Vikings have acquired quarterback Kelly Holcomb from the Philadephia Eagles in exchange for a sixth round pick in 2008.

The veteran backup quarterback joined the Eagles this year but saw very limited action in the preseason as the team was crowded at the position with A.J. Feely and second-round pick Kevin Kolb backing up Donovan McNabb.

The Vikings wanted a veteran back up for Tavarias Jackson as Brooks Bollinger has been disappointing in the preseaon with a 30.4 passer rating.

Holcomb spent the 2006 season in Buffalo, but did not appear in any games. In 2005, he started eight games for the Bills and passed for 1,509 yards and 10 touchdowns.


Nice.
The NFL's own fucking website can't spell the guy's name right.
That's brilliant.

=Z=

NodakPaul
08-27-2007, 04:14 PM
"duvaldomo" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


If i had to guess now i think it will be TJ holcomb bollinger in that order and thigpen on the practice squad


I would actually say TJ - Holcomb - Thigpen.
Maybe try and trade Bollinger out for a low pick or just release him.


I agree, BB will be released I think


I will officially eat my crow if that happens though.
Yes, I was one of the few who, before the season started, said that I wouldnt' be surprised to see Brook Bollinger start for the first few games if TJack isn't ready.
It was never a knock on TJack, but rather just saying that it was possible that he would need some time working with the team.
I know admit that even if TJack wasn't ready (which I believe he is), Brooks probably wouldn't get the nod.
His play has been horse shit all preseason.
Sigh.
I'll take my crow deep fried with a side of cole slaw please... ;D

Purple Floyd
08-27-2007, 04:15 PM
I hope they stay with TJ, TT and BB as the QB's. I just don't think the server will be able to handle all of the "Bench TJ, Start Holcolm" threads once Jackson has a few bad games, Which he will IMO.

Purple Floyd
08-27-2007, 04:16 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"AngloVike" wrote:


From NFL.com


http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story?id=09000d5d801e194d&template=without-video&confirm=true



Posted: 22 minutes ago
Vikings acquire QB Holcomb from Eagles
NFL.com


Kelly Holcomb, QB
Minnesota Vikings
Career Statistics
Yards: 5,403
TD/INT: 37/37
Rating: 79.9
NFL Network's Adam Schefter is reporting that the Vikings have acquired quarterback Kelly Holcomb from the Philadephia Eagles in exchange for a sixth round pick in 2008.

The veteran backup quarterback joined the Eagles this year but saw very limited action in the preseason as the team was crowded at the position with A.J. Feely and second-round pick Kevin Kolb backing up Donovan McNabb.

The Vikings wanted a veteran back up for Tavarias Jackson as Brooks Bollinger has been disappointing in the preseaon with a 30.4 passer rating.

Holcomb spent the 2006 season in Buffalo, but did not appear in any games. In 2005, he started eight games for the Bills and passed for 1,509 yards and 10 touchdowns.


Nice.
The NFL's own fucking website can't spell the guy's name right.
That's brilliant.

=Z=


Damn, so much for my last post lol

cogitans
08-27-2007, 04:17 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"AngloVike" wrote:


From NFL.com


http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story?id=09000d5d801e194d&template=without-video&confirm=true



Posted: 22 minutes ago
Vikings acquire QB Holcomb from Eagles
NFL.com


Kelly Holcomb, QB
Minnesota Vikings
Career Statistics
Yards: 5,403
TD/INT: 37/37
Rating: 79.9
NFL Network's Adam Schefter is reporting that the Vikings have acquired quarterback Kelly Holcomb from the Philadephia Eagles in exchange for a sixth round pick in 2008.

The veteran backup quarterback joined the Eagles this year but saw very limited action in the preseason as the team was crowded at the position with A.J. Feely and second-round pick Kevin Kolb backing up Donovan McNabb.

The Vikings wanted a veteran back up for Tavarias Jackson as Brooks Bollinger has been disappointing in the preseaon with a 30.4 passer rating.

Holcomb spent the 2006 season in Buffalo, but did not appear in any games. In 2005, he started eight games for the Bills and passed for 1,509 yards and 10 touchdowns.


Nice.
The NFL's own fucking website can't spell the guy's name right.
That's brilliant.

=Z=


Nice catch. I guess there is nowhere for him to go but up.

DarrinNelsonguy
08-27-2007, 04:45 PM
Holcomb should give us at least a stable influence with a little experience. I still remember him in the playoff game for Cleveland a few years back.

COJOMAY
08-27-2007, 04:47 PM
ESPN who prides themselves at being the top NFL news source still doesn't have a word up on the Holcomb trade. All the other sites have beat them to the punch.
::)
They are so hot on the Vick story nothing else is news to them I guess.

Vikestand
08-27-2007, 04:51 PM
I am really happy with this move. I could not stand Brooks.....I actual thought Holcomb was a decent QB that never got a good chance on a good team...

DarrinNelsonguy
08-27-2007, 04:52 PM
"Vikestand" wrote:


I am really happy with this move. I could not stand Brooks.....I actual thought Holcomb was a decent QB that never got a good chance on a good team...


Brooks will still make the team it just means that Thigpen will be on the practice squad.

Vikes_King
08-27-2007, 04:52 PM
eh. we'll see on thursday! then i'll decide if i'm not as worried about having holcomb as our backup as i am having brooks

Ltrey33
08-27-2007, 05:01 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


ESPN who prides themselves at being the top NFL news source still doesn't have a word up on the Holcomb trade. All the other sites have beat them to the punch.
::)
They are so hot on the Vick story nothing else is news to them I guess.


Yeah...I am really tired of that story.

Vikestand
08-27-2007, 05:48 PM
The way I have been hearing it was that Brooks is out the door....Or on the practice squad....

Purple Floyd
08-27-2007, 06:04 PM
Maybe we can trade Bollinger to Atlanta.

Marrdro
08-27-2007, 06:19 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


Fox Sports is reporting it, too. The Vikes let Henson go. Got him for a 6th rounds draft choice.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7160888

Damn Childress guy.
Always brining in those damn Eagle rejects.

At least TJ will have someone to learn from.
Hope it isn't to late to get him in to make sure TJ does gooder than good this year.

ejmat
08-27-2007, 06:40 PM
It's a good move.
BB has looked aweful.
It would be nice to trade him to Atlanta and get that 6th round draft choice back.

DaVizzles
08-27-2007, 06:41 PM
Hey Marrado have you ever seen Holcomb play? Because i always hear you ripping on him. I feel much more comforatable with our team now just because of this pickup, i think this is gonna be a very useful pickup. He is a good guy and a good leader unlike shy old Brooks Bollinger. Holcomb has a cannon unlike Bollinger and he has proven he can be a solid QB unlike Bollinger. Real good pickup just in case T-Jack gets hurt we still have a chance to make the playoffs.

PurplePeopleEaters
08-27-2007, 06:43 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


Fox Sports is reporting it, too. The Vikes let Henson go. Got him for a 6th rounds draft choice.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7160888

Damn Childress guy.
Always brining in those damn Eagle rejects.

At least TJ will have someone to learn from.
Hope it isn't to late to get him in to make sure TJ does gooder than good this year.



Childress and Holcombe never were on the same team. He just saw a guy he wanted and went out and got him.. The eagles thing had nothing to do with it other than it being easy to deal with reid.

V-Unit
08-27-2007, 07:03 PM
YES!
Childress' moves of Ferguson and Holcomb make McMullen and McMahon look like somebody else was coaching the team last year. Hopefully that trend will continue.

DaVizzles
08-27-2007, 07:06 PM
"V" wrote:


YES!
Childress' moves of Ferguson and Holcomb make McMullen and McMahon look like somebody else was coaching the team last year. Hopefully that trend will continue.



LOL.........Mike McMahon what a bad pickup he was. Is he even in the league anymore?

ForceOfNorse
08-27-2007, 07:10 PM
Hey, at least Chili reverted toward the idea that Thigpen is looking like a practice squad guy, with today's acquisition of Holcomb.
That pretty much means that it'll come down to Holcomb = #2,
Bollinger #3, and Henson will be looking for another job.

I'm not a Henson Hater, but I just don't think he's got it.

Marrdro
08-27-2007, 07:18 PM
"DaVizzles" wrote:


Hey Marrado have you ever seen Holcomb play? Because i always hear you ripping on him. I feel much more comforatable with our team now just because of this pickup, i think this is gonna be a very useful pickup. He is a good guy and a good leader unlike shy old Brooks Bollinger. Holcomb has a cannon unlike Bollinger and he has proven he can be a solid QB unlike Bollinger. Real good pickup just in case T-Jack gets hurt we still have a chance to make the playoffs.

DaViz,


Look closely at my post........

First I blame Childress, you ever seen me do that before?
Second I then say that TJ will have someone to learn from, have you ever seen me say anything other that players learn from coaches?
Third you see me use a word "Gooder".
I do make a few mistakes spelling but comeon my friend.....

I, for one am happy that BB isn't the only option behind TJ.
If the coaching staff thinks that Holcomb is the man, then just like Ferguson and Evans, I welcome them to the team and will support them 100%.

A bit of levity is in order here I think.
I am allowed to have a bit of fun also.....
;D

Marrdro
08-27-2007, 07:21 PM
"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


Fox Sports is reporting it, too. The Vikes let Henson go. Got him for a 6th rounds draft choice.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7160888

gol 'darnit Childress guy.
Always brining in those gol 'darnit Eagle rejects.

At least TJ will have someone to learn from.
Hope it isn't to late to get him in to make sure TJ does gooder than good this year.



Childress and Holcombe never were on the same team. He just saw a guy he wanted and went out and got him.. The eagles thing had nothing to do with it other than it being easy to deal with reid.

PPE, see my post above to Daviz.
I'm not serious all the time.
I like to have a bit of fun to if I'm allowed.
Next time I will include the smileys and the "Sarcasim on" Sarcasim Off" stuff Purplexing used to do.
;D

Mikecarter81
08-27-2007, 07:22 PM
I like Holcomb, a good back up.
I think they will actually keep Thigpen and cut BB.

Mike

NodakPaul
08-27-2007, 07:35 PM
"DaVizzles" wrote:


Hey Marrado have you ever seen Holcomb play? Because i always hear you ripping on him. I feel much more comforatable with our team now just because of this pickup, i think this is gonna be a very useful pickup. He is a good guy and a good leader unlike shy old Brooks Bollinger. Holcomb has a cannon unlike Bollinger and he has proven he can be a solid QB unlike Bollinger. Real good pickup just in case T-Jack gets hurt we still have a chance to make the playoffs.


For the record, BB is a pretty damn good person too.
Just not that great of a QB unfortunately. ;)
I agree that Holcomb was a good pickup.

MaxVike
08-27-2007, 07:44 PM
I like the kid, Thigpen, but, this is one of many necessary moves.


Next, we need an O-Lineman, and LBer depth.
Possibly a return man, although I would be less likely to disrupt the roster for this spot.

Thigpen:
Bio and Scouting -
http://vikings.scout.com/2/640083.html

Holcomb:
Scouting -
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/players/scouting?statsId=3873
Stats - http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=1162

jessejames09
08-27-2007, 08:26 PM
I didn't know about this until an hour and a half later.

Can we go back to the old way, if a player signs, make a thread. Most members would come to a thread titled "Vikings Trade For Holcomb" in a second if it is news to them.

If you don't know they signed him you think "ok more peoples views on how bad our QB's suck."

At least change this the the official kelly holcomb thread.

That is all.

NodakPaul
08-27-2007, 08:32 PM
"jessejames09" wrote:


I didn't know about this until an hour and a half later.

Can we go back to the old way, if a player signs, make a thread. Most members would come to a thread titled "Vikings Trade For Holcomb" in a second if it is news to them.

If you don't know they signed him you think "ok more peoples views on how bad our QB's suck."

At least change this the the official kelly holcomb thread.

That is all.


Probably a good idea to at least change the title.
When I first saw this title, I was thinking - "This old rumor again..." :)

Ltrey33
08-27-2007, 08:35 PM
"jessejames09" wrote:


I didn't know about this until an hour and a half later.

Can we go back to the old way, if a player signs, make a thread. Most members would come to a thread titled "Vikings Trade For Holcomb" in a second if it is news to them.

If you don't know they signed him you think "ok more peoples views on how bad our QB's suck."

At least change this the the official kelly holcomb thread.

That is all.


That is a good idea, and I was actually contemplating it before you said something.

I originally posted in here because I did not have an article or a good source other than Adam Schefter, and after the whole thing at the start of free agency this year, I don't post anything unless there is print to back it up!

So yes, now that this has turned into the Kelly Holcomb thread, I will change the title.

COJOMAY
08-27-2007, 08:35 PM
PFT is now announcing that the 6th round pick from the Vikings for Holcomb is for 2009, not 2008.

jessejames09
08-27-2007, 08:38 PM
Yes! this is a very valuable lesson. If you don't like something just bitch and moanuntil it is changed.

J/k thanks Ltrey.

COJOMAY
08-27-2007, 08:58 PM
From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.

JDogg926
08-27-2007, 09:03 PM
Holcomb's got about all you can ask for in a backup QB.
Definitely happy with that move.

cajunvike
08-27-2007, 11:45 PM
http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story?id=09000d5d801e194d&template=without-video&confirm=true

It's about time!!!

marstc09
08-27-2007, 11:46 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story?id=09000d5d801e194d&template=without-video&confirm=true

It's about time!!!


Can we please release Bollinger NOW!

Purple Floyd
08-27-2007, 11:52 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.



Summbeeatch, they are keeping Bollinger and potentially losing Thigpen. Crap

olson_10
08-27-2007, 11:56 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.



Summbeeatch, they are keeping Bollinger and potentially losing Thigpen. Crap

it says he will probably stay on the practice squad..i cant imagine any other teams going after him..next season theyl cut bollinger and thigpen will be on the active roster

jargomcfargo
08-28-2007, 12:11 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.



Summbeeatch, they are keeping Bollinger and potentially losing Thigpen. Crap


That just makes no sense. If they want to keep Bollinger, make him a coach. He's not a player.

singersp
08-28-2007, 12:12 AM
"olson_10" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.



Summbeeatch, they are keeping Bollinger and potentially losing Thigpen. Crap

it says he will probably stay on the practice squad..i cant imagine any other teams going after him..next season theyl cut bollinger and thigpen will be on the active roster


I can. I also remember people saying that about Tomlin as well.
;)

Purple Floyd
08-28-2007, 12:23 AM
"olson_10" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.



Summbeeatch, they are keeping Bollinger and potentially losing Thigpen. Crap

it says he will probably stay on the practice squad..i cant imagine any other teams going after him..next season theyl cut bollinger and thigpen will be on the active roster


If you are going to cut Bollinger next year in favor of Thigpen, why would you not just cut him now? There will be teams looking for QB's and if a team sees something in his film from the preseason they may very well sign him. Seattle may do it just for spite.

ColoradoViking
08-28-2007, 12:40 AM
Obviously the coaches know a lot more than I do, but how much does it count that I just hate seeing BBoll play football? I
cringe when I say him play. I really want to see the Dakota boys do well, but dang he just looks like he doesn't belong.
There is
something solid and fiery that I saw in Thigpen that I liked.
I don't know nuthin about Holcomb but 21 starts in 12 years is about the least experience you could find in a 'veteran' QB.. Some of you guys think you like the way he looks though? why? I am just wondering.

cajunvike
08-28-2007, 12:57 AM
"ColoradoViking" wrote:


Obviously the coaches know a lot more than I do, but how much does it count that I just hate seeing BBoll play football? I
cringe when I say him play. I really want to see the Dakota boys do well, but dang he just looks like he doesn't belong.
There is
something solid and fiery that I saw in Thigpen that I liked.
I don't know nuthin about Holcomb but 21 starts in 12 years is about the least experience you could find in a 'veteran' QB.. Some of you guys think you like the way he looks though? why? I am just wondering.


We should trade Bollinger to the Panthers....they just lost their third stringer (Basin-ass) and they seem to like QBs from Wisconsin!

jkjuggalo
08-28-2007, 12:58 AM
If I'm not mistaken, Holcomb was the last QB to lead the Browns into the playoffs, and he played a hell of a game against the Steelers.
I remember it well because I watched it when I was in Michigan for my grandparents 50th anniversary.
Holcomb is a quality backup w/ a big arm and more experience than all our QB's combined, so I for one love this trade.

cajunvike
08-28-2007, 01:03 AM
"jkjuggalo" wrote:


If I'm not mistaken, Holcomb was the last QB to lead the Browns into the playoffs, and he played a hell of a game against the Steelers.
I remember it well because I watched it when I was in Michigan for my grandparents 50th anniversary.
Holcomb is a quality backup w/ a big arm and more experience than all our QB's combined, so I for one love this trade.


Good call, Jugz!!!

V-Unit
08-28-2007, 01:14 AM
I agree that it would make more sense to get rid of Bollinger.

cajunvike
08-28-2007, 01:18 AM
"V" wrote:


I agree that it would make more sense to get rid of Bollinger.



Chilly and Bevell aren't gonna do it...thankfully Holcomb will come in and at least bump Bollinger down to third string...and Thigpen will probably survive on our practice squad for a year.

V-Unit
08-28-2007, 01:31 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I agree that it would make more sense to get rid of Bollinger.



Chilly and Bevell aren't gonna do it...thankfully Holcomb will come in and at least bump Bollinger down to third string...and Thigpen will probably survive on our practice squad for a year.


Doesn't really make sense to me. It is clear that Bollinger is the one who is underacheiving and that Holcomb was brought in to replace him as the 2nd string QB. Thefact that the rookie Thigpen gets screwed because of Bollinger's lackluster play is pretty silly IMO.

cajunvike
08-28-2007, 01:48 AM
"V" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I agree that it would make more sense to get rid of Bollinger.



Chilly and Bevell aren't gonna do it...thankfully Holcomb will come in and at least bump Bollinger down to third string...and Thigpen will probably survive on our practice squad for a year.


Doesn't really make sense to me. It is clear that Bollinger is the one who is underacheiving and that Holcomb was brought in to replace him as the 2nd string QB. Thefact that the rookie Thigpen gets screwed because of Bollinger's lackluster play is pretty silly IMO.


Yeah...but Chilly is probably covering his butt for THIS season....Thigpen is a more long range project...and Chilly might not have the time to develop ANOTHER project...seeing as he is putting alot of his eggs in TJack's basket.

bigbadragz
08-28-2007, 02:00 AM
there is no way i can see this move effecting thigpen.
i dont think he was ever expected to make the active roster, they probably always had him targeted for the practice squad.
this is a direct reflection on bollinger which should have been recognized earlier.
this is why i never believed that bullcrap that it was a competition.
if anything now bollinger will hold his spot until they see what they have in holcomb knowledge wise.
we might have to live with bollinger on the roster nonetheless, eventually being pushed down to number 3 once holcomb gets acclimated.

cogitans
08-28-2007, 04:58 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.



Summbeeatch, they are keeping Bollinger and potentially losing Thigpen. Crap

it says he will probably stay on the practice squad..i cant imagine any other teams going after him..next season theyl cut bollinger and thigpen will be on the active roster


I can. I also remember people saying that about Tomlin as well.
;)
I do remember that as one of your biggest 'victories' on here. You rode that move of Tomlin getting the gig from start to finish.

cogitans
08-28-2007, 05:01 AM
It's strange about the Thigpen situation.

You'd normally rather have a young developmental guy as your clipboard holder. I'd hope they could find someone to take Bollinger for something in return to the Vikings.

It makes no sense to have that old of a guy as the 3rd stringer that with almost all certainty will never see the field.

cogitans
08-28-2007, 05:08 AM
Vikings: Holcomb enters fray as possible backup QB (http://www.startribune.com/vikings/story/1386512.html)

By Mark Craig, Star Tribune


After an offseason in which they passed on players such as Matt Schaub and David Carr, the Vikings finally bolstered their inexperienced quarterback position Monday by trading a sixth-round draft pick in 2009 to the Philadelphia Eagles for Kelly Holcomb, a 12th-year NFL veteran with 22 starts, including one playoff game...

cogitans
08-28-2007, 05:10 AM
VIKINGS QB DERBY: Holcomb sees himself as a mentor (http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_6735889)

BY SEAN JENSEN
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 08/28/2007 12:24:40 AM CDT

Although this is his 12th NFL season, veteran quarterback Kelly Holcomb isn't delusional or illogical about where he is in his career.

singersp
08-28-2007, 05:55 AM
"cogitans" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


From "Access Vikings" in the Star/Tribune:

The move comes two days after backup Brooks Bollinger struggled against Seattle. Childress, however, said Bollinger definitely would have a spot on the 53-man roster. “Probably what it means is Tyler Thigpen would be a potential practice squad [guy],” Childress said.

Holcomb, 34, is in his 11th NFL season. He started eight games for Cleveland in 2003. Holcomb is expected to arrive in the Twin Cities tonight and will need to pass a physical.

Bollinger and Holcomb are both expected to play in Thursday night’s exhibition finale against Dallas at the Metrodome.



Summbeeatch, they are keeping Bollinger and potentially losing Thigpen. Crap

it says he will probably stay on the practice squad..i cant imagine any other teams going after him..next season theyl cut bollinger and thigpen will be on the active roster


I can. I also remember people saying that about Tomlin as well.
;)
I do remember that as one of your biggest 'victories' on here. You rode that move of Tomlin getting the gig from start to finish.


Teams that didn't have a good draft class like we did or are short in the QB dept, might be a good surrogate team for Thigpen. Atlanta comes to mind as one.

vikingivan
08-28-2007, 06:04 AM
I feel alot better with Holcomb as the backup then I did with Bollinger.
Like they say in Dances with Wolves.
Good trade.

mountainviking
08-28-2007, 11:47 AM
Hell Yeah!!
Welcome Holcomb!!

For a sixth?
Not bad at all.
I think he's a major improvement at backup with a better chance to start than Bollinger ever had (down the road after he's acclimated to the system.) IF TJack isn't improving as hoped...

Too bad we gave the JETS Mosley, he was looking like good depth behind the Williams boys!

Got to agree, I'd rather see Thigpen stick than Bollinger, but with Brooks' experience in our system, he probably has the inside track.
And, there are a few teams who could use another QB option, ATL and KC probably top the list...so there's no guarantee Thigpen clears waivers...?

spunk_goblin
08-28-2007, 11:58 AM
Is there anybody that doesn't like this trade? Bottoml ine is we needed an experienced QB to show T-Jack the ropes and step in if needed, and that's exactly what we got. No complaints from me at all.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 12:03 PM
I lived in Cleveland during the whole Tim Couch/Kelly Holcomb argument. Frankly, the guy never did anything that impressed me. However, he has been around the league and has a lot of game-time experience. Although I hear Brooks is a good guy (and he will probably get cut), I welcome Holcomb... Now lets just hope he doesn't have to play.

spunk_goblin
08-28-2007, 12:06 PM
Yeah, I thikn everyone would love it if Kelly didn't have to play, cos that would mean T-Jack would be producing the goods.

NordicNed
08-28-2007, 12:13 PM
Welcome to the Vikes KH.......



I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 12:32 PM
"NordicNed" wrote:


Welcome to the Vikes KH.......




I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 12:40 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


Welcome to the Vikes KH.......



I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

NodakPaul
08-28-2007, 12:43 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


Welcome to the Vikes KH.......



I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


I don't share your view here.
There is no way that Holcomb would have been cut with four different teams looking at him.
I don't think ESPN ever named the other two teams (if they were even real - could have been hype), but at the very least we know that the falcons were looking at him.
The falcons are in worse QB shape than any other team in the NFL, so it is rather obvious that they were considering Holcomb.
And to be honest, a sixth round draft choice in 2009 sounds like a fairly reasonable price for a reliable back up.

NodakPaul
08-28-2007, 12:45 PM
"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


Welcome to the Vikes KH.......



I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.


LMAO.
JTO?
Are you kidding me?
The NFLE was a joke, and right now he is playing against third string defenses.
Believe me, JTO was not prize that Childress let go.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 12:52 PM
"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


Welcome to the Vikes KH.......




I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

Yea he's tearing it up......
Completions Attempts Yards TD INT


39






60



500
2

3

http://www.nfl.com/players/gamelogs?id=OSU394627
(http://www.nfl.com/players/gamelogs?id=OSU394627)

I like it when someone blames Childress. Its like it is a secret code for My opinion is worthless because I don't know what I'm talking about...Happy Camper

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 12:55 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


I don't share your view here.
There is no way that Holcomb would have been cut with four different teams looking at him.
I don't think ESPN ever named the other two teams (if they were even real - could have been hype), but at the very least we know that the falcons were looking at him.
The falcons are in worse QB shape than any other team in the NFL, so it is rather obvious that they were considering Holcomb.

And to be honest, a sixth round draft choice in 2009 sounds like a fairly reasonable price for a reliable back up.


Wasn't that what Bollinger was deemed as by Childress for the past year?

To be honest I can't really speak as to what would or wouldn't have have happened.
It was just my opinion that with Holcomb as #4 on the eagles depth chart, he would not have made the team.
Whether or not there was interest from other teams is speculative, but what was clear is that nobody else but us was parting with a 6th round pick to get a one year rent-a-player.

ejmat
08-28-2007, 01:30 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


I don't share your view here.
There is no way that Holcomb would have been cut with four different teams looking at him.
I don't think ESPN ever named the other two teams (if they were even real - could have been hype), but at the very least we know that the falcons were looking at him.
The falcons are in worse QB shape than any other team in the NFL, so it is rather obvious that they were considering Holcomb.

And to be honest, a sixth round draft choice in 2009 sounds like a fairly reasonable price for a reliable back up.


Wasn't that what Bollinger was deemed as by Childress for the past year?

To be honest I can't really speak as to what would or wouldn't have have happened.
It was just my opinion that with Holcomb as #4 on the eagles depth chart, he would not have made the team.
Whether or not there was interest from other teams is speculative, but what was clear is that nobody else but us was parting with a 6th round pick to get a one year rent-a-player.


I had thought it was confirmed that at least Atlanta (an d others) were looking at him as well.
I may be wrong but I'm pretty sure I heard that.

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 01:38 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


I don't share your view here.
There is no way that Holcomb would have been cut with four different teams looking at him.
I don't think ESPN ever named the other two teams (if they were even real - could have been hype), but at the very least we know that the falcons were looking at him.
The falcons are in worse QB shape than any other team in the NFL, so it is rather obvious that they were considering Holcomb.

And to be honest, a sixth round draft choice in 2009 sounds like a fairly reasonable price for a reliable back up.


Wasn't that what Bollinger was deemed as by Childress for the past year?

To be honest I can't really speak as to what would or wouldn't have have happened.
It was just my opinion that with Holcomb as #4 on the eagles depth chart, he would not have made the team.
Whether or not there was interest from other teams is speculative, but what was clear is that nobody else but us was parting with a 6th round pick to get a one year rent-a-player.


I had thought it was confirmed that at least Atlanta (an d others) were looking at him as well.
I may be wrong but I'm pretty sure I heard that.


That was reported but if I'm not mistaken it wasn't confirmed by any official source.

ejmat
08-28-2007, 01:39 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


I don't share your view here.
There is no way that Holcomb would have been cut with four different teams looking at him.
I don't think ESPN ever named the other two teams (if they were even real - could have been hype), but at the very least we know that the falcons were looking at him.
The falcons are in worse QB shape than any other team in the NFL, so it is rather obvious that they were considering Holcomb.

And to be honest, a sixth round draft choice in 2009 sounds like a fairly reasonable price for a reliable back up.


Wasn't that what Bollinger was deemed as by Childress for the past year?

To be honest I can't really speak as to what would or wouldn't have have happened.
It was just my opinion that with Holcomb as #4 on the eagles depth chart, he would not have made the team.
Whether or not there was interest from other teams is speculative, but what was clear is that nobody else but us was parting with a 6th round pick to get a one year rent-a-player.


I had thought it was confirmed that at least Atlanta (an d others) were looking at him as well.
I may be wrong but I'm pretty sure I heard that.


That was reported but if I'm not mistaken it wasn't confirmed by any official source.


I can live with that.
It's not important anyway.
We have him and he is a good back up.

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 01:59 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


I can live with that.
It's not important anyway.
We have him and he is a good back up.


Like Bollinger was ? :P

Zeus
08-28-2007, 02:00 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


I can live with that.
It's not important anyway.
We have him and he is a good back up.


Like Bollinger was ? :P


In the one bit of meaningful game action that Brooks Bollinger has seen as a Minnesota Viking, yes, he did pretty good.
Not his fault he got his shoulder crushed so quickly.

=Z=

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 02:13 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


Welcome to the Vikes KH.......



I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

Yea he's tearing it up......
Completions Attempts Yards TD INT


39






60



500
2

3


And how many TD passes vs. Picks to Vikings QB's have. LOL, just to inform you, we have ZERO TD passes, except for our WR Wade. Please, don't act like you "put me in my place" all you did was prove my point. He's having a better preseason than any of our quarterbacks.

And don't throw in the fact that T-Jack hasn't thrown a pick, because he hasn't thrown a TD either, let alone 2 of them.

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 02:20 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


I can live with that.
It's not important anyway.
We have him and he is a good back up.


Like Bollinger was ? :P


In the one bit of meaningful game action that Brooks Bollinger has seen as a Minnesota Viking, yes, he did pretty good.
Not his fault he got his shoulder crushed so quickly.

=Z=


Too bad it seems that it hasn't shown up this year...

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 02:21 PM
"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


Welcome to the Vikes KH.......




I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

Yea he's tearing it up......
Completions Attempts Yards TD INT


39







60



500

2

3


And how many TD passes vs. Picks to Vikings QB's have. LOL, just to inform you, we have ZERO TD passes, except for our WR Wade. Please, don't act like you "put me in my place" all you did was prove my point. He's having a better preseason than any of our quarterbacks.

And don't throw in the fact that T-Jack hasn't thrown a pick, because he hasn't thrown a TD either, let alone 2 of them.

What is it about you????
Didn't know you wanted to be put in your place.


To use your words. "is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year"

Your telling me that a QB that has a worse TD to INT ratio is having a d@mn good preseason?
Hell I bet you even liked Culpepper what with all the fumbling and INTS.

Post something with logic here or is it all about posting something that doesn't make sense and then come off with some stuff about not being put in your place like this is a huge competition that someone actually wins.


gol 'darnit man.

::)

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 02:23 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:




Welcome to the Vikes KH.......



I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

Yea he's tearing it up......
Completions Attempts Yards TD INT


39






60



500
2

3


And how many TD passes vs. Picks to Vikings QB's have. LOL, just to inform you, we have ZERO TD passes, except for our WR Wade. Please, don't act like you "put me in my place" all you did was prove my point. He's having a better preseason than any of our quarterbacks.

And don't throw in the fact that T-Jack hasn't thrown a pick, because he hasn't thrown a TD either, let alone 2 of them.

What is it about you????
Didn't know you wanted to be put in your place.


To use your words. "is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year"

Your telling me that a QB that has a worse TD to INT ratio is is a d@mn good preseason?
Hell I bet you even liked Culpepper what with all the fumbling and INTS.

Post something with logic here or is it all about posting something that doesn't make sense and then come off with some stuff about not being put in your place like this is a huge competition that someone actually wins.


gol 'darnit man.
::)


http://www.nfl.com/stats/player

Is that logic enough? I can't read real well... who does it say is #1 in passing yards this preseason?

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 02:27 PM
"C" wrote:



http://www.nfl.com/stats/player

Is that logic enough? I can't read real well... who does it say is #1 in passing yards this preseason?


I wouldn't put much weight into that, mostly because backup get more playing time.
At the very most JTO is king of the 3rd stringers.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 02:29 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"C" wrote:



http://www.nfl.com/stats/player

Is that logic enough? I can't read real well... who does it say is #1 in passing yards this preseason?


I wouldn't put much weight into that, mostly because backup get more playing time.
At the very most JTO is king of the 3rd stringers.


We cut him i favor of players such as Drew Henson and Brooks Bolinger... looks like he's doing much better than either of those two.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 02:34 PM
"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:






Welcome to the Vikes KH.......




I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

Yea he's tearing it up......
Completions Attempts Yards TD INT


39







60



500

2

3


And how many TD passes vs. Picks to Vikings QB's have. LOL, just to inform you, we have ZERO TD passes, except for our WR Wade. Please, don't act like you "put me in my place" all you did was prove my point. He's having a better preseason than any of our quarterbacks.

And don't throw in the fact that T-Jack hasn't thrown a pick, because he hasn't thrown a TD either, let alone 2 of them.

What is it about you????
Didn't know you wanted to be put in your place.


To use your words. "is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year"

Your telling me that a QB that has a worse TD to INT ratio is is a d@mn good preseason?
Hell I bet you even liked Culpepper what with all the fumbling and INTS.

Post something with logic here or is it all about posting something that doesn't make sense and then come off with some stuff about not being put in your place like this is a huge competition that someone actually wins.


gol 'darnit man.

::)


http://www.nfl.com/stats/player

Is that logic enough? I can't read real well... who does it say is #1 in passing yards this preseason?

Your kidding right.

No its not logic.
Even Brady Quinn is doing good against players that will be bagging groceries in a few weeks.

If not and following your rationale these guys are stars.......

Jarrett Bush, tied for the lead in INT's.
Lets shit can some of our secondary and pick him up.
http://www.nfl.com/players/jarrettbush/careerstats?id=BUS248356
Shaun McDonald, He's leading the league
http://www.nfl.com/players/shaunmcdonald/careerstats?id=MCD549659
Adimchinobe Echemandu He's leading the league in rushing.
http://www.nfl.com/players/adimchinobeechemandu/careerstats?id=ECH077866

You do know that its preseason right?
::)

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 02:36 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:



I like it when someone blames Childress. Its like it is a secret code for My opinion is worthless because I don't know what I'm talking about...Happy Camper


Did you watch a Vikings game last season? What has he done to deserve our respect?
::)

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 02:40 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:








Welcome to the Vikes KH.......



I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

Yea he's tearing it up......
Completions Attempts Yards TD INT


39






60



500
2

3


And how many TD passes vs. Picks to Vikings QB's have. LOL, just to inform you, we have ZERO TD passes, except for our WR Wade. Please, don't act like you "put me in my place" all you did was prove my point. He's having a better preseason than any of our quarterbacks.

And don't throw in the fact that T-Jack hasn't thrown a pick, because he hasn't thrown a TD either, let alone 2 of them.

What is it about you????
Didn't know you wanted to be put in your place.


To use your words. "is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year"

Your telling me that a QB that has a worse TD to INT ratio is is a d@mn good preseason?
Hell I bet you even liked Culpepper what with all the fumbling and INTS.

Post something with logic here or is it all about posting something that doesn't make sense and then come off with some stuff about not being put in your place like this is a huge competition that someone actually wins.


gol 'darnit man.
::)


http://www.nfl.com/stats/player

Is that logic enough? I can't read real well... who does it say is #1 in passing yards this preseason?

Your kidding right.

No its not logic.
Even Brady Quinn is doing good against players that will be bagging groceries in a few weeks.

If not and following your rationale these guys are stars.......

Jarrett Bush, tied for the lead in INT's.
Lets pooh can some of our secondary and pick him up.
http://www.nfl.com/players/jarrettbush/careerstats?id=BUS248356
Shaun McDonald, He's leading the league
http://www.nfl.com/players/shaunmcdonald/careerstats?id=MCD549659
Adimchinobe Echemandu He's leading the league in rushing.
http://www.nfl.com/players/adimchinobeechemandu/careerstats?id=ECH077866

You do know that its preseason right?
::)


He's still better than Bollinger or Henson, which was my point to begin with...

We cut JT, traded for Bollinger...

Now Bollinger is gone...

The whole point was Childress' QB evaluation coming into question, which you have yet to touch on. Go back through the thread a little before just spouting off like you're King Sh*t of Turd Mountain.

The truth is, JT had a great season over in Europe and is having a better preseason than anyone he was cut in favor for (hence, a pretty d@mn good preseason).

Zeus
08-28-2007, 02:42 PM
"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



I like it when someone blames Childress. Its like it is a secret code for My opinion is worthless because I don't know what I'm talking about...Happy Camper


Did you watch a Vikings game last season? What has he done to deserve our respect?
::)


He's the coach of the team you are supposed to love.
That alone should be enough for you to respect him.

That he knows more about football than all of PPO combined is also enough for him to receive respect from the fans.

=Z=

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 02:45 PM
"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



I like it when someone blames Childress. Its like it is a secret code for My opinion is worthless because I don't know what I'm talking about...Happy Camper


Did you watch a Vikings game last season? What has he done to deserve our respect?
::)

Ahhhh a different tact in what you believe is a competition.

Hmmmmmm.
You keep dwelling on just last season.
I for one like what he has done overall since he took over as the head coach.

We now are not the NFC version of the Bengals.
We have had 1 possibly two good FA periods (Depending on your knowledge level of football)
We have had 1 possibly two excellent drafts.
We now have a respectable Defense.
We now have a very formidable running attack.

I would go down the line about my optimism for our offense but I believe that would be lost on you as it has been discussed in several threads over the summer.

Why don't you respect him?

Let me guess?

Shitcanned a QB that couldn't hang onto the ball, only threw INT's after Carter and Moss left and wasn't ready to take the field last year cause he was rehabing in Fl in a strip mall.
Also said QB wasn't gonna play unless the team gave him more money.

Doesn't throw the ball deep (Randy Ratio) every other play to that you can watch it on sportscenter.

Ruined your Madden team by bringing in a bunch of nobodys who don't have high Madden ratings.

Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 02:45 PM
Meh, JTO is no real loss.
Personally I'd rather have someone like Thigpen as our #3, but he's likely headed for the practice squad.
If Bollinger stays on as #3 I'd be ok with that.

Truth be told I never put much weight into a player's preseason performance, unless you're throwing to the other team's backups, then it's a cause for conern.
Success in the preseason is never a reliable indicator of regular season success.

MN INT KINKG21
08-28-2007, 02:49 PM
C mac D are you serious ???
there is a reason why JT played in NFL europe last year. Also like many have said before, he is going against guys who wont even make the team.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 02:50 PM
"MN" wrote:


C mac D are you serious ???
there is a reason why JT played in NFL europe last year. Also like many have said before, he is going against guys who wont even make the team.


Wasn't Bollinger going against guys that "aren't going to make the team"? He did worse than JT. Bollinger only threw picks.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 02:51 PM
"MN" wrote:


C mac D are you serious ???
there is a reason why JT played in NFL europe last year. Also like many have said before, he is going against guys who wont even make the team.

Don't worry my friend.
I can't believe he is really serious.
Probably sitting at his puter just like me trying to kill time.

If he isn't serious, WOW.
;D

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 02:54 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"MN" wrote:


C mac D are you serious ???
there is a reason why JT played in NFL europe last year. Also like many have said before, he is going against guys who wont even make the team.

Don't worry my friend.
I can't believe he is really serious. Probably sitting at his puter just like me trying to kill time.

If he isn't serious, WOW.
;D


This is true, and the day is going by pretty slow.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 02:59 PM
"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:










Welcome to the Vikes KH.......




I think this is a wise and solid move on our part......


I think at some point we need to call into question Childress' talent evaluation for QBs.
On two occasions (Bollinger, who he traded for, and McMahon) he has hurt this team by picking up quarterbacks that simply aren't good, claiming he has faith in his decision, watched them play poorly in the preseason, and then has been forced to "admit" his confidence was misplaced by trading away draft picks for a stopgap qb.

Holcomb would have been cut, no doubt.
If he was going to be traded to another team (falcons?), we could have got him for less than a 6th rounder.

In 2 offseasons and 1 full season pretty much every decision Childress has made with his QBs has been a bad one....Lets just hope Tarvaris isn't one of them.


All good points...

Also, Childress cut J.T. O'Sullivan last preseason, and then he went on to have a great year in the European leagues and is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year. Guess we'll just have to see.

I really don't think Childress is that good of a coach. There is a reason Andy Reid took over playcalling in Philly.

Yea he's tearing it up......
Completions Attempts Yards TD INT


39







60



500

2

3


And how many TD passes vs. Picks to Vikings QB's have. LOL, just to inform you, we have ZERO TD passes, except for our WR Wade. Please, don't act like you "put me in my place" all you did was prove my point. He's having a better preseason than any of our quarterbacks.

And don't throw in the fact that T-Jack hasn't thrown a pick, because he hasn't thrown a TD either, let alone 2 of them.

What is it about you????
Didn't know you wanted to be put in your place.


To use your words. "is having a pretty d@mn good preseason this year"

Your telling me that a QB that has a worse TD to INT ratio is is a d@mn good preseason?
Hell I bet you even liked Culpepper what with all the fumbling and INTS.

Post something with logic here or is it all about posting something that doesn't make sense and then come off with some stuff about not being put in your place like this is a huge competition that someone actually wins.


gol 'darnit man.

::)


http://www.nfl.com/stats/player

Is that logic enough? I can't read real well... who does it say is #1 in passing yards this preseason?

Your kidding right.

No its not logic.
Even Brady Quinn is doing good against players that will be bagging groceries in a few weeks.

If not and following your rationale these guys are stars.......

Jarrett Bush, tied for the lead in INT's.
Lets pooh can some of our secondary and pick him up.
http://www.nfl.com/players/jarrettbush/careerstats?id=BUS248356
Shaun McDonald, He's leading the league
http://www.nfl.com/players/shaunmcdonald/careerstats?id=MCD549659
Adimchinobe Echemandu He's leading the league in rushing.
http://www.nfl.com/players/adimchinobeechemandu/careerstats?id=ECH077866

You do know that its preseason right?
::)


He's still better than Bollinger or Henson, which was my point to begin with...

We cut JT, traded for Bollinger...

Now Bollinger is gone...

The whole point was Childress' QB evaluation coming into question, which you have yet to touch on. Go back through the thread a little before just spouting off like you're King Sh*t of Turd Mountain.

The truth is, JT had a great season over in Europe and is having a better preseason than anyone he was cut in favor for (hence, a pretty d@mn good preseason).

You know that a NFL Coaching staff is made up of more than just a HC don't you.
Heck it even has a scouting department that goes out and finds the type of player that will fit the coaches scheme.
Seriously, you know that right......... :o

Anyway, back to the point you said I didn't adress......

How has he done with all the other guys he has brought in?
How have all the guys done that he has let loose?
Seems like just about every FA brought in last year is producing.
Seems like every player from last years draft is doing pretty damn good.
Seems like we have a pretty decent draft class this year (at least on paper) and our FA signings, although not a bunch of "Proven" "Big Name" FA's that would make your Madden roster better.

I might be smelling a bit of a hater here if you are you gonna base your respect of a coach on just a player/personnel move?
Let me guess, JT went to your favorite college or you had him on your Madden roster.

Comeon man.
Switch your tact again.
You left the "He is leading the NFL" argument pretty quick.
:o

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 03:01 PM
"C" wrote:


"MN" wrote:


C mac D are you serious ???
there is a reason why JT played in NFL europe last year. Also like many have said before, he is going against guys who wont even make the team.


Wasn't Bollinger going against guys that "aren't going to make the team"? He did worse than JT. Bollinger only threw picks.

And the coach you don't respect did what? Stuck with Bollinger or did he bring someone in to fix the problem.

A coaching staff can't be right on every move/decision.
They need to be pretty damn close, but never gonna be 100% correct.

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 03:08 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 03:09 PM
Just stirring the pot

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 03:16 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.

I saw ya out there lurking my friend.
Thought you would jump into the fray sooner.
;D

All good points.

In the Chillers defense (you know I will stick up for him
;D), even with our anemic Offense, 6 of our 10 losses were by less than a TD. Quite an accomplishment considering that he was breaking in a new staff and implementing a new scheme. Some people discount that, however, I am one that doesn't.

Additionall, how good was the Defense under Tice and his staff?
Seems to me we couldn't win on the road or on natural grass and we always had a good start but could never win out with that 9-7 team.

sleepagent
08-28-2007, 03:17 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


This is my issue with BC.
He hasn't shown this "Offensive Guru" tendancy that we are all hoping for to lead us to the promised land.
He took a great offense and tore it apart.
TICE (whom I am not a fan of) was all set to work on the defense when he got let go.

We are all hoping for success this season as we are all Viking Fans, but BC hasn't impressed me as the man to do it . . . so far.
As I said in other threads . . . I hope to eat crow!

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 03:17 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 03:21 PM
"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

I guess its time for me to go home.
You are now letting others voice your opinions or are you put in your place now my friend.
;D

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 03:29 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

I guess its time for me to go home.
You are now letting others voice your opinions or are you put in your place now my friend.
;D


Don't be so sensitive, just drink some cranberry juice.

jmcdon00
08-28-2007, 03:34 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

I guess its time for me to go home.
You are now letting others voice your opinions or are you put in your place now my friend.

;D

Marrdro, do your eyes ever get sore from looking through the purple glasses all the time? It is not unreasonable that some people are going to be unhappy with Chilli, his first season he went 6-10.

Ltrey33
08-28-2007, 03:39 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


But you can also factor in the fact that it was a brand new system, with brand new coaches and a team with several key players that did not fit into what Childress's offense demands. Then add in the Koren Robinson situation, the Culpepper situation, Erasmus James' injury, Greenway's injury, Marcus Robinson not getting along, Troy Williamson's drops, etc. and you have a team that dealt with a lot of adversity right off the bat. They also dealt with a lot of things that were contrary to what had happened the year before, i.e. Brad Johnson sucking and looking like an old man.

IMO, there are plenty of points to be made for both sides, but comparing Tice and Childress is fruitless. Sure, it was mostly the same roster, but it was a different team culture, different coaches, a different schedule and a different scheme.

Plus, many of you are judging Childress from one 6-10 season. Tice had one year of 6-10 (his first year, oh my gosh!) and a few .500 seasons and only one playoff birth.

He hasn't been overwhelming, but he doesn't deserve every piece of the blame either.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 03:44 PM
Childress looks like the Uncle that family members tell their kids to stay away from.

V-Unit
08-28-2007, 04:01 PM
Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 04:07 PM
"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.


Holy Sh*t... someone out there knows what I was trying to say... and said it a lot better...

Who cares what they say in Dallas, they all have their d*cks in cattle anyways.

jmcdon00
08-28-2007, 04:12 PM
"C" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.


Holy Sh*t... someone out there knows what I was trying to say... and said it a lot better...

Who cares what they say in Dallas, they all have their d*cks in cattle anyways.

I'll save my comment until week 5. ;D

marstc09
08-28-2007, 04:13 PM
"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.


I would almost bet money on Jackson never getting benched this year!

jmcdon00
08-28-2007, 04:18 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.


I would almost bet money on Jackson never getting benched this year!

I doubt he will be benched, but injuries are not uncommon at the qb position. Still it is a dumb comment because he might be starting by week 2 if Jackson gets injured in week 1.
I think there is a good chance that at some point this season whoever is the back-up will get some playing time. If we are going to be in the hunt for a play-off spot I hope it is not Bollinger who looked very bad this preseason.

NodakPaul
08-28-2007, 04:18 PM
"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.


No no no no no no no no NO!

Tice did NOT have a winning record.
I hate it when people try and say that.
Tice was not a winning coach.
He was a .500 coach, and only managed that by implementing the exact same schemes that Green was using.
He had a personality, I will give you that.
He was a genuinely likable guy.

Childress took a team and installed new offensive and defensive schemes.
And yes, he was involved in the defensive schemes.
He is the head coach after all.
New schemes tend to equate to an adjustment period.
Especially when the schemes were so radically different from what we had seen before.
If you want to compare Tice to Childress, then compare their first years.
Tice went 5-11.
Childress went 6-10.
Let's take a look at Childress's overall record in four years like Tice had.

NodakPaul
08-28-2007, 04:20 PM
"C" wrote:


Childress looks like the Uncle that family members tell their kids to stay away from.


Yeah, that is a great football argument there.
::)
Sorry, I thought we were actually discussion attributes that had merit, not what your uncle looks like.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 04:22 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"C" wrote:


Childress looks like the Uncle that family members tell their kids to stay away from.


Yeah, that is a great football argument there.
::)
Sorry, I thought we were actually discussion attributes that had merit, not what your uncle looks like.


I think it's the most concrete argument yet... I mean, you can argue all you want about which coach or player messed up a play, but no matter what... Childress looks like the creepy Uncle.

Lighten up.

NodakPaul
08-28-2007, 04:27 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

I guess its time for me to go home.
You are now letting others voice your opinions or are you put in your place now my friend.
;D

Marrdro, do your eyes ever get sore from looking through the purple glasses all the time? It is not unreasonable that some people are going to be unhappy with Chilli, his first season he went 6-10.


No, it isn't unreasonable for people to be unhappy with a 6-10 season.
I was unhappy with a 6-10 season.
But it is unreasonable, or at the very least short sighted, to base all judgments on Childress based on his rookie season as a head coach (Or according to some resemblance to a family uncle, as another astute poster chose to do).

Picking and choosing just the negatives to base a judgment on someone is as bad a picking and choosing just the positives.
It presents a very skewed outlook, and causes people to come in here and make assertions like Childress can't evaluate QB talent because he cut JTO last year.
What does JTO's performance against NFLE and third stringers have to do with any bearing on Childress ability to judge talent.
Last year, JTO was easily the worst of our four QBs.
Bj was the veteran starter, BB was the stop gate back up, and TJack was the QB of the future who was supposed to be able to sit and learn for a couple of years.
Fate stepped in, and he is starting sooner than anyone expected.
But that doesn't mean that JTO was ever a viable option for us at QB last year.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 04:28 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


No, it isn't unreasonable for people to be unhappy with a 6-10 season.
I was unhappy with a 6-10 season.
But it is unreasonable, or at the very least short sighted, to base all judgments on Childress based on his rookie season as a head coach (Or according to some resemblance to a family uncle, as another astute poster chose to do).

Picking and choosing just the negatives to base a judgment on someone is as bad a picking and choosing just the positives.
It presents a very skewed outlook, and causes people to come in here and make assertions like Childress can't evaluate QB talent because he cut JTO last year.
What does JTO's performance against NFLE and third stringers have to do with any bearing on Childress ability to judge talent.
Last year, JTO was easily the worst of our four QBs.
Bj was the veteran starter, BB was the stop gate back up, and TJack was the QB of the future who was supposed to be able to sit and learn for a couple of years.
Fate stepped in, and he is starting sooner than anyone expected.
But that doesn't mean that JTO was ever a viable option for us at QB last year.


You are that creepy Uncle... aren't you?

ItalianStallion
08-28-2007, 04:40 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.


No no no no no no no no NO!

Tice did NOT have a winning record.
I hate it when people try and say that.
Tice was not a winning coach.
He was a .500 coach, and only managed that by implementing the exact same schemes that Green was using.
He had a personality, I will give you that.
He was a genuinely likable guy.

Childress took a team and installed new offensive and defensive schemes.
And yes, he was involved in the defensive schemes.
He is the head coach after all.
New schemes tend to equate to an adjustment period.
Especially when the schemes were so radically different from what we had seen before.
If you want to compare Tice to Childress, then compare their first years.
Tice went 5-11.
Childress went 6-10.
Let's take a look at Childress's overall record in four years like Tice had.


Tice went 6-10 in his first season, not 5-11, and the team he inherited went 5-11 in the previous season, not 9-7.

But that neither here nor there.
Childress is not the only problem we had last year, he just hasn't really done anything so far to put our team in a better position to win than we were before he got here.
I mean he may have gotten rid of problem players, which needed to be done.
As a coach you ahve the options of a) Putting the system ahead of the talent, attempting to find players that fit the system or b) Adjusting the system to the talents of your players, putting a priority on "pure talent" rather than "system talent".
Clearly Childress went with option a) last year, and it didn't work out.
Whether or not it was because of his coaching of the system or that the players didn't fit is debateable.
We'll see this year (After having two offseasons to pick up the players he wants) if the offense will be successful.
I hope it is, but I also have doubts with his system, and if there is one thing that distinguishes great coaches and bad coaches it's how flexible they are, how well the adjust and gameplan in order to win games.
To be honest, I didn't see much adjustment throughout the season on Childress' part.

NodakPaul
08-28-2007, 04:56 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Tice went 6-10 in his first season, not 5-11, and the team he inherited went 5-11 in the previous season, not 9-7.

I stand corrected on his first season record.
I have a hard time agreeing with the notion that the team that Childress inherited (no QB, WRs in shambles) was more talented than the one that Tice inherited (Culpepper, Moss, etc).

"ItalianStallion" wrote:


But that neither here nor there.
Childress is not the only problem we had last year, he just hasn't really done anything so far to put our team in a better position to win than we were before he got here.
I mean he may have gotten rid of problem players, which needed to be done.
As a coach you ahve the options of a) Putting the system ahead of the talent, attempting to find players that fit the system or b) Adjusting the system to the talents of your players, putting a priority on "pure talent" rather than "system talent".
Clearly Childress went with option a) last year, and it didn't work out.
Whether or not it was because of his coaching of the system or that the players didn't fit is debateable.
We'll see this year (After having two offseasons to pick up the players he wants) if the offense will be successful.
I hope it is, but I also have doubts with his system, and if there is one thing that distinguishes great coaches and bad coaches it's how flexible they are, how well the adjust and gameplan in order to win games.
To be honest, I didn't see much adjustment throughout the season on Childress' part.


I do agree with you that Childress went with option a.
I also believe that it was the correct choice.
Our existing system was a proven failure.
Or at best, it was a proven level of mediocrity.
I was and still am willing to risk mediocrity for a chance at greatness.
Does that mean that we may fail? Of course.
But with out invoking some kind of change, we were never going to get anywhere.
Childress came in and brought a his idea for O and D schemes with him.
The players he inherited did not fit very well, and we have seen some massive turn over.
You are correct in saying that this year is much more indicative of Childress's coaching abilities than last, and I too hope he does better.
If we have another losing season, then I can concede.
But if we have a winning season, I expect the same from all the Childress haters (although I won't hold my breath ;)).

Your final point is right on.
Great coaches can gameplan and adjust during the game, and this is one of the areas that Childress was woeful in last year.
I am hoping that he has learned from his rookie mistakes.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 05:54 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

I guess its time for me to go home.
You are now letting others voice your opinions or are you put in your place now my friend.

;D

Marrdro, do your eyes ever get sore from looking through the purple glasses all the time? It is not unreasonable that some people are going to be unhappy with Chilli, his first season he went 6-10.

I have no issues with people giving me a logical argument with respect to the abilities and performance of our HC but did you go back and read some of his logic/arguments that our friend took.

JT is leading the league in passing...... :o
You know that will get me excited.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 05:56 PM
"C" wrote:


Childress looks like the Uncle that family members tell their kids to stay away from.

Yet another example of your deep thoughts related to our head coach that are directly related to not only football but the discussion at hand.


Your silly my friend.
;D

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 05:58 PM
"C" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.


Holy Sh*t... someone out there knows what I was trying to say... and said it a lot better...

Who cares what they say in Dallas, they all have their d*cks in cattle anyways.

You tried to say that?
Let me go back and re-read your posts in this thread.

jmcdon00
08-28-2007, 06:00 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:




Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

I guess its time for me to go home.
You are now letting others voice your opinions or are you put in your place now my friend.

;D

Marrdro, do your eyes ever get sore from looking through the purple glasses all the time? It is not unreasonable that some people are going to be unhappy with Chilli, his first season he went 6-10.

I have no issues with people giving me a logical argument with respect to the abilities and performance of our HC but did you go back and read some of his logic/arguments that our friend took.

JT is leading the league in passing...... :o
You know that will get me excited.


I just can't help but root for the underdog, no matter how stupid they may be. Looking at the league leaders in pre-season might be the funniest source to back up an argument ever.
On a positive note, AP is 3rd in rushing for the entire league!!!
Keep up the good posting

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 06:01 PM
"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.

Comeon V, you know that Childress isn't the only one that makes the decisions for this staff. It isn't like he is a little Hitler running around up there making all the decisions.

Secondly, Do you really think that this staff will never make a mistake when it comes to personnel moves.
Some guys work out, some won't.
As far as I'm concerned, a heck of alot more have made it for this STAFF (not Childress) than haven't.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 06:03 PM
"C" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


No, it isn't unreasonable for people to be unhappy with a 6-10 season.
I was unhappy with a 6-10 season.
But it is unreasonable, or at the very least short sighted, to base all judgments on Childress based on his rookie season as a head coach (Or according to some resemblance to a family uncle, as another astute poster chose to do).

Picking and choosing just the negatives to base a judgment on someone is as bad a picking and choosing just the positives.
It presents a very skewed outlook, and causes people to come in here and make assertions like Childress can't evaluate QB talent because he cut JTO last year.
What does JTO's performance against NFLE and third stringers have to do with any bearing on Childress ability to judge talent.
Last year, JTO was easily the worst of our four QBs.
Bj was the veteran starter, BB was the stop gate back up, and TJack was the QB of the future who was supposed to be able to sit and learn for a couple of years.
Fate stepped in, and he is starting sooner than anyone expected.
But that doesn't mean that JTO was ever a viable option for us at QB last year.


You are that creepy Uncle... aren't you?

Your indepth knowledge of football overwhelms me.

;D

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 06:05 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:




Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.

I guess its time for me to go home.
You are now letting others voice your opinions or are you put in your place now my friend.

;D

Marrdro, do your eyes ever get sore from looking through the purple glasses all the time? It is not unreasonable that some people are going to be unhappy with Chilli, his first season he went 6-10.


No, it isn't unreasonable for people to be unhappy with a 6-10 season.
I was unhappy with a 6-10 season.
But it is unreasonable, or at the very least short sighted, to base all judgments on Childress based on his rookie season as a head coach (Or according to some resemblance to a family uncle, as another astute poster chose to do).

Picking and choosing just the negatives to base a judgment on someone is as bad a picking and choosing just the positives.
It presents a very skewed outlook, and causes people to come in here and make assertions like Childress can't evaluate QB talent because he cut JTO last year.
What does JTO's performance against NFLE and third stringers have to do with any bearing on Childress ability to judge talent.
Last year, JTO was easily the worst of our four QBs.
Bj was the veteran starter, BB was the stop gate back up, and TJack was the QB of the future who was supposed to be able to sit and learn for a couple of years.
Fate stepped in, and he is starting sooner than anyone expected.
But that doesn't mean that JTO was ever a viable option for us at QB last year.

Very nice.
Great post my friend.

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 06:06 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Should I go on or do you want to add a few here?
::)


You could also probably include:

Took a 9-7 team coached by Tice (who is a meathead) to a remarkable 6-10 record by directing an offense that had record lows in points and first downs.

To judge his drafts now as great is beyond ridiculous, and keep in mind most of the defensive players were already here when he took over save for Leber (who has been solid, if unspectacular) and Dwight Smith, of whom Foley and TOmlin are likely more responsible than Childress.
Of course the jury is still out on Griffin and Greenway.

It's not like I don't respect his knowledge, but I hold coaches to a different level of criticism than I would your average joe.
Hopefully he turns it around this year, but I don't exactly apologize if he hasn't convinced me yet.


I agree with every word of this. Seems like there is a lot of badmouthing of Tice on this site. At least the guy had a personality and a winning record.


No no no no no no no no NO!

Tice did NOT have a winning record.
I hate it when people try and say that.
Tice was not a winning coach.
He was a .500 coach, and only managed that by implementing the exact same schemes that Green was using.
He had a personality, I will give you that.
He was a genuinely likable guy.

Childress took a team and installed new offensive and defensive schemes.
And yes, he was involved in the defensive schemes.
He is the head coach after all.
New schemes tend to equate to an adjustment period.
Especially when the schemes were so radically different from what we had seen before.
If you want to compare Tice to Childress, then compare their first years.
Tice went 5-11.
Childress went 6-10.
Let's take a look at Childress's overall record in four years like Tice had.


Tice went 6-10 in his first season, not 5-11, and the team he inherited went 5-11 in the previous season, not 9-7.

But that neither here nor there.
Childress is not the only problem we had last year, he just hasn't really done anything so far to put our team in a better position to win than we were before he got here.
I mean he may have gotten rid of problem players, which needed to be done.
As a coach you ahve the options of a) Putting the system ahead of the talent, attempting to find players that fit the system or b) Adjusting the system to the talents of your players, putting a priority on "pure talent" rather than "system talent".
Clearly Childress went with option a) last year, and it didn't work out.
Whether or not it was because of his coaching of the system or that the players didn't fit is debateable.
We'll see this year (After having two offseasons to pick up the players he wants) if the offense will be successful.
I hope it is, but I also have doubts with his system, and if there is one thing that distinguishes great coaches and bad coaches it's how flexible they are, how well the adjust and gameplan in order to win games.
To be honest, I didn't see much adjustment throughout the season on Childress' part.

Another good input.
Nice post.

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 06:48 PM
http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL

LuckyVike
08-28-2007, 07:11 PM
"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

V-Unit
08-28-2007, 07:19 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.

Comeon V, you know that Childress isn't the only one that makes the decisions for this staff. It isn't like he is a little Hitler running around up there making all the decisions.

Secondly, Do you really think that this staff will never make a mistake when it comes to personnel moves.
Some guys work out, some won't.
As far as I'm concerned, a heck of alot more have made it for this STAFF (not Childress) than haven't.


My post had nothing to do with Chili. Fact is someone was getting slammed for comparing Bollinger to JTO, saying we should have kept the latter. Well, from the looks of it now, maybe we should have kept the latter. I don't however blame that on anybody, let alone Childress. It was impossible to know things would turn out this way.

IMO, the staff didn't even make a mistake. Can you imagine if we had kept JTO instead of Bollinger last year? Mayhem! Like I said before I merely wish Bollinger had played competently.

cajunvike
08-28-2007, 07:34 PM
"V" wrote:


Let's face it people, If Bollinger was having the type of preseason that JTO had:

1. There would be no need to get Holcomb.
2. People who said, "we have no backup in case TJ struggles or goes down," would be comforted by Bollinger's play and much more sure of Childress' contingency plans.
3. People who said, "Bollinger should start the season at QB," would have an amazing argument for that case right now.

It's not so much that I want JTO back, but everyone would have been a lot happier if Bollinger had proved himself to be competent. Instead we had to go pickup another backup, and Thigpen gets the boot, which is real unfortunate. However, Bollinger's pathetic play left us with no choice.

BTW, Dallas radio is saying Holcomb might be starting by week 5. Morons.


You got that right!!!
::)

Marrdro
08-28-2007, 07:47 PM
"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL

YUP, that means alot to me my friend.
Some hack is regurging what the ESPN talking heads are saying.
Seems to me that you have a bit of hate for the Chiller.
Not sure why, but it seems to be centered around JT.

If in fact your whole beef with the Chiller is over JT then you are seriously troubled and are looking at the grand scheme with JT glasses on.

Seriously, if you think a coaching staff is gonna get every player personnel decision right then you are in for a let down when following a team.

By the way, how long have you been following this team?
Since JT was on it?
Gonna go back and search the intro threads to see what you said.
Might be a bit enlightening.
;D

Comeon dude.

seaniemck7
08-28-2007, 08:11 PM
"LuckyVike" wrote:


"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D

marstc09
08-28-2007, 08:47 PM
http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story?id=09000d5d801e621e&template=with-video&confirm=true

Thought this was interesting

NodakPaul
08-28-2007, 09:06 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:


"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


LMAO.
Nice response seaniemck7.
I doubt I could put it any better, so I won't even try. ;D

Purple Floyd
08-28-2007, 09:33 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Tice went 6-10 in his first season, not 5-11, and the team he inherited went 5-11 in the previous season, not 9-7.

I stand corrected on his first season record.
I have a hard time agreeing with the notion that the team that Childress inherited (no QB, WRs in shambles) was more talented than the one that Tice inherited (Culpepper, Moss, etc).

"ItalianStallion" wrote:


But that neither here nor there.
Childress is not the only problem we had last year, he just hasn't really done anything so far to put our team in a better position to win than we were before he got here.
I mean he may have gotten rid of problem players, which needed to be done.
As a coach you ahve the options of a) Putting the system ahead of the talent, attempting to find players that fit the system or b) Adjusting the system to the talents of your players, putting a priority on "pure talent" rather than "system talent".
Clearly Childress went with option a) last year, and it didn't work out.
Whether or not it was because of his coaching of the system or that the players didn't fit is debateable.
We'll see this year (After having two offseasons to pick up the players he wants) if the offense will be successful.
I hope it is, but I also have doubts with his system, and if there is one thing that distinguishes great coaches and bad coaches it's how flexible they are, how well the adjust and gameplan in order to win games.
To be honest, I didn't see much adjustment throughout the season on Childress' part.


I do agree with you that Childress went with option a.
I also believe that it was the correct choice.
Our existing system was a proven failure.
Or at best, it was a proven level of mediocrity.
I was and still am willing to risk mediocrity for a chance at greatness.
Does that mean that we may fail? Of course.
But with out invoking some kind of change, we were never going to get anywhere.
Childress came in and brought a his idea for O and D schemes with him.
The players he inherited did not fit very well, and we have seen some massive turn over.
You are correct in saying that this year is much more indicative of Childress's coaching abilities than last, and I too hope he does better.
If we have another losing season, then I can concede.
But if we have a winning season, I expect the same from all the Childress haters (although I won't hold my breath ;)).

Your final point is right on.
Great coaches can gameplan and adjust during the game, and this is one of the areas that Childress was woeful in last year.
I am hoping that he has learned from his rookie mistakes.


Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't we run this same system through most of the late 80's and right up to the time that Denny Green took over? We had the strong Defense/Weaker, ball control offense that got us nothing but mediocre performances and one trip to the NFC Championship game where Darrin Nelson couldn't catch the ball.

When Green Came in he tweaked it a bit, adding some 2 tight end formations like the Redskins used and relying on more passing when they got Warren Moon because that is where his strength was. But most of the passing game even then was the intermediate to short passes, screen passes, maybe a few post patterns by CC, but mostly a possession type of offense. Look at the QB's we had: Gannon, Wilson, Johnson
Mcmahon. They were WCO QB's.

Then we drafted moss and we brought in Cunningham and George, who were gun slingers who could hit the deep pass and that to me is when we changed to the deep play offense.

I just don't see the logic in saying that our lack of success was the fault of the system. Every system out there has won super bowls and every system has been used by the worst team in the league. If your staff can get your players to execute the system you choose to run better than your opponents can defend it, then you can win a championship. So far in our 46 or so year existence that is the one thing we have yet to figure out. And when we do, it won't make a bit of difference what system we are running at the time.

CCthebest
08-28-2007, 09:42 PM
My biggest problem with childress (and I have alot of them) is his supposed knowledge of QBs. And the QBs MN has had since he came in suck ass. Except TJ. We all hope hes the future of the vikes and maybe childress did know what he was doing. But he doesnt know a backup if it bit him in the ass. How is Holcome any better then Boll? They both suck. Why keep both? Doesnt make any sense whatsoever. Choose one of the rejects and let Tyler be 3rd string.

V4L
08-28-2007, 09:45 PM
Obviously T-jack is on a way higher level then both Bollinger and Holcombe.. So im glad we got him

Holcombe should be better then Bollinger.. I have not seen a worse QB then him.. Throwin multiple picks against back up D's.. Its ridiculous

carta4eva
08-28-2007, 09:45 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


My biggest problem with childress (and I have alot of them) is his supposed knowledge of QBs. And the QBs MN has had since he came in suck jiggly butt. Except TJ. We all hope hes the future of the vikes and maybe childress did know what he was doing. But he doesnt know a backup if it bit him in the jiggly butt. How is Holcome any better then Boll? They both suck. Why keep both? Doesnt make any sense whatsoever. Choose one of the rejects and let Tyler be 3rd string.


hey any qb that quarterbacks the new version of the Cleveland Browns in a playoff game is good enough to back up TJ ;)

cajunvike
08-28-2007, 09:47 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Obviously T-jack is on a way higher level then both Bollinger and Holcombe.. So im glad we got him

Holcombe should be better then Bollinger.. I have not seen a worse QB then him.. Throwin multiple picks against back up D's.. Its ridiculous


True dat!

Where y'at, 85?

singersp
08-28-2007, 10:44 PM
Meet the press (http://www.startribune.com/blogs/vikings/?p=912)

August 28th, 2007 – 3:43 PM by Judd Zulgad
startribune.com

That’s what Vikings coach Brad Childress and new quarterback Kelly Holcomb did earlier today. A couple notes
and quotes:.....

SharperImage
08-28-2007, 10:49 PM
i was just gonna post that.Singer when ya gonna retire an let the young guns take over the site.

Ltrey33
08-28-2007, 10:50 PM
I like the Holcomb move a lot.

IMO, he IS what Brad was SUPPOSED to be last year. Smart guy, experienced, makes quick reads....I think he could help Tarvaris a lot and give us a good insurance plan.

sleepagent
08-28-2007, 11:07 PM
"SharperImage" wrote:


i was just gonna post that.Singer when ya gonna retire an let the young guns take over the site.


He'll never catch Cajun if that happens!
;D ;D ;D

singersp
08-28-2007, 11:10 PM
"SharperImage" wrote:


i was just gonna post that.Singer when ya gonna retire an let the young guns take over the site.


Retire? I haven't even been here 2 years yet.

ajjanssen
08-28-2007, 11:20 PM
Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 11:30 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:


"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.

Braddock
08-28-2007, 11:34 PM
"C" wrote:




How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


What the hell does that have to do with anything you guys were talking about? That is the WORST argument I've seen on this board in a while......


EDIT: I bet it's a dude too.... doesn't specify...

bigbadragz
08-28-2007, 11:36 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.

singersp
08-28-2007, 11:36 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)



Tic.....Tic......Tic......

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/smilies/time20bomb.gif

Braddock
08-28-2007, 11:40 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)


Yes. b/c Wilf has shown to be nothing more than Miser with his money, if you ignore Hutch's, McK's new contracts, offering millions of his own for the stadium, and the money into new uniforms and the loss of the old merchandise and such.... yeah, real cheap skate.


...dumbass

C Mac D
08-28-2007, 11:41 PM
"Braddock" wrote:


"C" wrote:




How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


What the hell does that have to do with anything you guys were talking about? That is the WORST argument I've seen on this board in a while......


EDIT: I bet it's a dude too.... doesn't specify...


Hahahahahaha, funny. You going to bed alone, eh? Trust me, it's a hotter girl you will ever be get.

And also, this discussion was going on all day, so don't sign on at 10pm and act like anyone cares.

ajjanssen
08-28-2007, 11:41 PM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

ajjanssen
08-28-2007, 11:42 PM
"Braddock" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)


Yes. b/c Wilf has shown to be nothing more than Miser with his money, if you ignore Hutch's, McK's new contracts, offering millions of his own for the stadium, and the money into new uniforms and the loss of the old merchandise and such.... yeah, real cheap skate.


...dumbass


How much is left in salary cap this year?
I will not resort to name calling but I will not be selling hope either.
Look at the reality of the situation.

ajjanssen
08-28-2007, 11:44 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.


What data shows he's a step up from Bollinger?

tb04512
08-28-2007, 11:44 PM
"C" wrote:


"Braddock" wrote:


"C" wrote:




How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


What the hell does that have to do with anything you guys were talking about? That is the WORST argument I've seen on this board in a while......


EDIT: I bet it's a dude too.... doesn't specify...


Hahahahahaha, funny. You going to bed alone, eh? Trust me, it's a hotter girl you will ever be get.

And also, this discussion was going on all day, so don't sign on at 10pm and act like anyone cares.


alright seriously who cares? no one does personal attacks on each other are retarted.. im not saying one person is wrong or right.. but its frustraiting to see a thread go to the top for me to get excited to hear what people have to say about the subject to only see ppl saying i got the hottest girl and others saying its a dude.. maybe ive had a bad last couple days and get irritated easily but can we just comment on the fucking topic at hand

Braddock
08-28-2007, 11:44 PM
"C" wrote:


"Braddock" wrote:


"C" wrote:




How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


What the hell does that have to do with anything you guys were talking about? That is the WORST argument I've seen on this board in a while......


EDIT: I bet it's a dude too.... doesn't specify...


Hahahahahaha, funny. You going to bed alone, eh? Trust me, it's a hotter girl you will ever be get.

And also, this discussion was going on all day, so don't sign on at 10pm and act like anyone cares.


And you're getting upset at the internet at 11:43 pm. Shouldn't you be in bed? or are you sleeping on the couch tonight? lol

Hands don't count as girlfriends.

bigbadragz
08-28-2007, 11:47 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

well i'll agree with you on the 2 legit qb thing, but i wouldnt call tjack a running qb.
just cuz he has the ability too doesn't mean he's mike vick, in alot ways.
but qb's get injured and holcomb's track record as a fill in has been decent, if you look around the league there are not that many teams that have 2 legit qbs, theres not many that have 1.
it's not the aquistiion of the century but it is an upgrade cuz his ability and experience is just better than bollinger.

Braddock
08-28-2007, 11:50 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:




What data shows he's a step up from Bollinger?


Their career records and experience levels. Plus Bollinger's preseason play....



That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

Like the Colts, Pats, Cowboys, Bears (they didn't use their other one....), Giants, Saints, and Ravens.... all playoff teams last year... really only needed one QB


How much is left in salary cap this year?
I will not resort to name calling but I will not be selling hope either.
Look at the reality of the situation.


We have cap room, is that a bad thing? What would you have wanted to use it on anyway? We pay bigger contracts necessary to Shank and Wade to bring them in, but at the end of the day, if a player doens't want to come here, they won't, i.e. Trent Green or any higher tier WR so far.... soooooooo, not following that argument either


EDIT: I know the Romo was the backup in D, up the starter did not/was not good, so that qualifies as one QB to me.

ajjanssen
08-28-2007, 11:52 PM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

well i'll agree with you on the 2 legit qb thing, but i wouldnt call tjack a running qb.
just cuz he has the ability too doesn't mean he's mike vick, in alot ways.
but qb's get injured and holcomb's track record as a fill in has been decent, if you look around the league there are not that many teams that have 2 legit qbs, theres not many that have 1.
it's not the aquistiion of the century but it is an upgrade cuz his ability and experience is just better than bollinger.



Kelly
SPLIT CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2005 155 230 1509 67.4 6.56 65 10 8 17 85.6
Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9

BB
Stat Overview Passing
SPLIT CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2006 13 18 146 72.2 8.11 50 0 1 6 72.9
Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


frightning how close the numbers are isn't it
how can you say he's better?
He's different, I'll give you that

Braddock
08-28-2007, 11:55 PM
Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

ajjanssen
08-28-2007, 11:57 PM
"Braddock" wrote:


Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?


Preseason is not season.
It just isn't.
They have identical TD to INT ratio.
What else do you need?
It is fair to say BB is a younger Holcolm.
On the upside maybe he isn't as washed up.
I just don't know where you draw this hope from when clearly the numbers illustrate the fact that they are virtually the same player

bigbadragz
08-29-2007, 12:02 AM
"Braddock" wrote:


Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 12:05 AM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


"Braddock" wrote:


Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.


Didn't the staff put the same faith in BB in the first place.
Neither are legit backups, look at the #'s again, turn them upside down and look at them again, they don't lie, you don't have evidence that shows that young crap is worst than old crap.

bigbadragz
08-29-2007, 12:09 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"Braddock" wrote:


Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.


Didn't the staff put the same faith in BB in the first place.
Neither are legit backups, look at the #'s again, turn them upside down and look at them again, they don't lie, you don't have evidence that shows that young crap is worst than old crap.

i think the fact that you hang around long enough to be old crap is my point.
there's a reason why the ryan leaf's and akili smith's go by the weyside.
even as a backup you have to do enough to last 10+ years.
at this point bollinger doesn't have a chance of that.
plus i've seen holcomb play many a times and he's a solid player.
no dan marino, but he can get the job done.
bollinger, not so much

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 12:13 AM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"Braddock" wrote:


Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.


Didn't the staff put the same faith in BB in the first place.
Neither are legit backups, look at the #'s again, turn them upside down and look at them again, they don't lie, you don't have evidence that shows that young crap is worst than old crap.

i think the fact that you hang around long enough to be old crap is my point.
there's a reason why the ryan leaf's and akili smith's go by the weyside.
even as a backup you have to do enough to last 10+ years.
at this point bollinger doesn't have a chance of that.
plus i've seen holcomb play many a times and he's a solid player.
no dan marino, but he can get the job done.
bollinger, not so much


The few times you have seen him play doesn't hide his hideous numbers.
The idea that he is a legit #2 QB in this league is laughable.
He couldn't even cut it as #3 on the Eagles squad.
I'm not crushing hope, I am simply analyzing it by the numbers.
Not by individual snipets that may have been seen on ESPN.
The career numbers is what tells the tale and they are the same as BB.

V4L
08-29-2007, 12:16 AM
Fact is.. Both are horrible

And Holcombe isnt our number 2 quite yet.. They are battling for the spot.. Whoever performs better gets it.. It's competition and we are lookin for a solid number 2..

Maybe he is that guy maybe he isnt... Time will tell

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 12:18 AM
"V4L" wrote:


Fact is.. Both are horrible

And Holcombe isnt our number 2 quite yet.. They are battling for the spot.. Whoever performs better gets it.. It's competition and we are lookin for a solid number 2..

Maybe he is that guy maybe he isnt... Time will tell


Your right.
In a way it isn't worth analyzing either of them because they are both bad.
We need to honestly pursue a legit #2

V4L
08-29-2007, 12:20 AM
I dont think we get anyone else so we have to deal with what we got

Personally based on preseason and seein how bad Brooks has been, Holcombe will be our number 2

bigbadragz
08-29-2007, 12:21 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"Braddock" wrote:


Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.


Didn't the staff put the same faith in BB in the first place.
Neither are legit backups, look at the #'s again, turn them upside down and look at them again, they don't lie, you don't have evidence that shows that young crap is worst than old crap.

i think the fact that you hang around long enough to be old crap is my point.
there's a reason why the ryan leaf's and akili smith's go by the weyside.
even as a backup you have to do enough to last 10+ years.
at this point bollinger doesn't have a chance of that.
plus i've seen holcomb play many a times and he's a solid player.
no dan marino, but he can get the job done.
bollinger, not so much


The few times you have seen him play doesn't hide his hideous numbers.
The idea that he is a legit #2 QB in this league is laughable.
He couldn't even cut it as #3 on the Eagles squad.
I'm not crushing hope, I am simply analyzing it by the numbers.
Not by individual snipets that may have been seen on ESPN.
The career numbers is what tells the tale and they are the same as BB.

yah but you are missing the numbers in the sense of years.
damon huard, gus ferrote, brian griese, and so on are all guys who i'm sure don't have fantastic numbers but you feel they can keep you alive until your starter gets back.
plus, it's not exactly easy to put up numbers when you are a fill in.
that is why i'm saying longevity is the best way to analyze it.
you dont last that long if you are just horrific.
an experienced backup is a guy you hope steps in and don't cost you games.
bollinger looks like he will, holcomb you hope has the experience not to do so.
as v4l said, time will tell

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 12:26 AM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:




Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.


Didn't the staff put the same faith in BB in the first place.
Neither are legit backups, look at the #'s again, turn them upside down and look at them again, they don't lie, you don't have evidence that shows that young crap is worst than old crap.

i think the fact that you hang around long enough to be old crap is my point.
there's a reason why the ryan leaf's and akili smith's go by the weyside.
even as a backup you have to do enough to last 10+ years.
at this point bollinger doesn't have a chance of that.
plus i've seen holcomb play many a times and he's a solid player.
no dan marino, but he can get the job done.
bollinger, not so much


The few times you have seen him play doesn't hide his hideous numbers.
The idea that he is a legit #2 QB in this league is laughable.
He couldn't even cut it as #3 on the Eagles squad.
I'm not crushing hope, I am simply analyzing it by the numbers.
Not by individual snipets that may have been seen on ESPN.
The career numbers is what tells the tale and they are the same as BB.

yah but you are missing the numbers in the sense of years.
damon huard, gus ferrote, brian griese, and so on are all guys who i'm sure don't have fantastic numbers but you feel they can keep you alive until your starter gets back.
plus, it's not exactly easy to put up numbers when you are a fill in.
that is why i'm saying longevity is the best way to analyze it.
you dont last that long if you are just horrific.
an experienced backup is a guy you hope steps in and don't cost you games.
bollinger looks like he will, holcomb you hope has the experience not to do so.
as v4l said, time will tell


Its not like bollinger is a rookie, he's floated like holcomb (granted not for as many years) and you are certainly right that ones numbers will be bad if they don't have the reps.
It just seems silly that you are seriously putting hope in a guy that was going to be released by the Eagles becasue they believe they have 3 other QBs that are better.
I don't want our 2nd best to be another teams fourth best (with crappier numbers than most backup QB's)

bigbadragz
08-29-2007, 12:31 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:






Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.


Didn't the staff put the same faith in BB in the first place.
Neither are legit backups, look at the #'s again, turn them upside down and look at them again, they don't lie, you don't have evidence that shows that young crap is worst than old crap.

i think the fact that you hang around long enough to be old crap is my point.
there's a reason why the ryan leaf's and akili smith's go by the weyside.
even as a backup you have to do enough to last 10+ years.
at this point bollinger doesn't have a chance of that.
plus i've seen holcomb play many a times and he's a solid player.
no dan marino, but he can get the job done.
bollinger, not so much


The few times you have seen him play doesn't hide his hideous numbers.
The idea that he is a legit #2 QB in this league is laughable.
He couldn't even cut it as #3 on the Eagles squad.
I'm not crushing hope, I am simply analyzing it by the numbers.
Not by individual snipets that may have been seen on ESPN.
The career numbers is what tells the tale and they are the same as BB.

yah but you are missing the numbers in the sense of years.
damon huard, gus ferrote, brian griese, and so on are all guys who i'm sure don't have fantastic numbers but you feel they can keep you alive until your starter gets back.
plus, it's not exactly easy to put up numbers when you are a fill in.
that is why i'm saying longevity is the best way to analyze it.
you dont last that long if you are just horrific.
an experienced backup is a guy you hope steps in and don't cost you games.
bollinger looks like he will, holcomb you hope has the experience not to do so.
as v4l said, time will tell


Its not like bollinger is a rookie, he's floated like holcomb (granted not for as many years) and you are certainly right that ones numbers will be bad if they don't have the reps.
It just seems silly that you are seriously putting hope in a guy that was going to be released by the Eagles becasue they believe they have 3 other QBs that are better.
I don't want our 2nd best to be another teams fourth best (with crappier numbers than most backup QB's)

well i mentioned this earlier in this thread but it wasn't a matter of him being 4th on the depth chart but that they didn't really have him in their plans.
and i beg to differ on the crappier numbers than most thing.
he is probably the average.
i can't think of any backups who have 20 more td's than interceptions and a qb rating of 100, that's just the life of a backup.
and i'm not putting my faith in him, if tjack goes down it will suck cuz it will set us back progression wise and we are not good enough to have a mediocre qb leading us for a long stretch.
but if he has to come in for 2-3 games i believe he can get it done

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 12:36 AM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:








Career 523 810 5401 64.6 6.67 68 37 37 59 79.9


Career 168 293 1764 57.3 6.02 60 7 7 39 73.0


yeah identical.... 7 TD vs 37

523 comp vs 168

sure the ratings are close, but i believe that's b/c BB hasn't had a chance to drop his very much. Have you seen the preseason?

aj, what are you talking about.
for one obviously the coaching staff thinks holcomb is an upgrade.

2. holcomb has been in the league how many years?
you don't last in the league as a part time starter, perrenial backup by accident.
bollinger might not even be in the league this year if we cut him loose.

3.sample size does matter.
holcomb has seen more, has beaten out competitors to be a starter before and has actually played in a playoff game.
bollinger has basically latched on cuz childress is familiar with him.
the jets made 3 moves that automatically put him 4 on the depth chart in ny, pretty much what's about to happen to him here.

come on bro.


Didn't the staff put the same faith in BB in the first place.
Neither are legit backups, look at the #'s again, turn them upside down and look at them again, they don't lie, you don't have evidence that shows that young crap is worst than old crap.

i think the fact that you hang around long enough to be old crap is my point.
there's a reason why the ryan leaf's and akili smith's go by the weyside.
even as a backup you have to do enough to last 10+ years.
at this point bollinger doesn't have a chance of that.
plus i've seen holcomb play many a times and he's a solid player.
no dan marino, but he can get the job done.
bollinger, not so much


The few times you have seen him play doesn't hide his hideous numbers.
The idea that he is a legit #2 QB in this league is laughable.
He couldn't even cut it as #3 on the Eagles squad.
I'm not crushing hope, I am simply analyzing it by the numbers.
Not by individual snipets that may have been seen on ESPN.
The career numbers is what tells the tale and they are the same as BB.

yah but you are missing the numbers in the sense of years.
damon huard, gus ferrote, brian griese, and so on are all guys who i'm sure don't have fantastic numbers but you feel they can keep you alive until your starter gets back.
plus, it's not exactly easy to put up numbers when you are a fill in.
that is why i'm saying longevity is the best way to analyze it.
you dont last that long if you are just horrific.
an experienced backup is a guy you hope steps in and don't cost you games.
bollinger looks like he will, holcomb you hope has the experience not to do so.
as v4l said, time will tell


Its not like bollinger is a rookie, he's floated like holcomb (granted not for as many years) and you are certainly right that ones numbers will be bad if they don't have the reps.
It just seems silly that you are seriously putting hope in a guy that was going to be released by the Eagles becasue they believe they have 3 other QBs that are better.
I don't want our 2nd best to be another teams fourth best (with crappier numbers than most backup QB's)

well i mentioned this earlier in this thread but it wasn't a matter of him being 4th on the depth chart but that they didn't really have him in their plans.
and i beg to differ on the crappier numbers than most thing.
he is probably the average.
i can't think of any backups who have 20 more td's than interceptions and a qb rating of 100, that's just the life of a backup.
and i'm not putting my faith in him, if tjack goes down it will suck cuz it will set us back progression wise and we are not good enough to have a mediocre qb leading us for a long stretch.
but if he has to come in for 2-3 games i believe he can get it done


And I can live with a difference in opinion.
It is just too hard to put faith in what I percieve as junk.

NDVikingFan66
08-29-2007, 12:39 AM
I met Brooks Bollinger this summer, and know his dad.

He is a nice guy, but he will be a career backup in this league.
Situation is everything, and being in the right situation will definitely help him out.
Our team really is a good situation for him, when you look at what he can do, but for whatever reason he struggles.
We are a running team, and use the short passing game.
Unfortunately in a short passing game, a pick will kill you, as it has the distinct possibility of going the other way for 6.

gregair13
08-29-2007, 01:15 AM
being a nice guy does not convert to touchdown passes

singersp
08-29-2007, 06:27 AM
"C" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:


"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


There is no call for that kind of remark. I think that comment merits more time in hell at the very least.

I'll reserve my judgement & remain mum on my impression of you as a member here........







After a few seconds thinking about it, no I won't. You're an asshat (to be polite) and I'm willing to bet the majority of the posters here would agree based on your latest comment.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/smilies/asshat.jpg

singersp
08-29-2007, 06:48 AM
Holcomb comes to Vikings willing to teach, but anxious to play (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/2007-08-28-3069591122_x.htm)

Posted 11h 3m ago


By Jon Krawczynski, AP Sports Writer
usatoday.com


EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. — Kelly Holcomb knows why the Minnesota Vikings brought him here.....

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:05 AM
"singersp" wrote:


Holcomb comes to Vikings willing to teach, but anxious to play (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/2007-08-28-3069591122_x.htm)

Posted 11h 3m ago


By Jon Krawczynski, AP Sports Writer
usatoday.com


EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. — Kelly Holcomb knows why the Minnesota Vikings brought him here.....



He was brought here to compete with a younger him, Brooks Bollinger

singersp
08-29-2007, 07:27 AM
"C" wrote:



How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


This must be her..............

http://www.addictlab.com/labfiles/creatives/Objet_2_variante.jpg

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 07:52 AM
"C" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:


"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.

Again with the need to compete. You really appear to be pretty desparate for vindication from you weak ass posting.
You must have been up all night searching the internet for that little nugget (a fantasy page) vice having sex with a hot 22 year old.

I want pictures.
I don't believe you, mostly cause you stated in another thread that you had a "Life Partner". ;D

Which is it?
Your credibility is at risk here.

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 07:58 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:


"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


There is no call for that kind of remark. I think that comment merits more time in hell at the very least.

I'll reserve my judgement & remain mum on my impression of you as a member here........







After a few seconds thinking about it, no I won't. You're an asshat (to be polite) and I'm willing to bet the majority of the posters here would agree based on your latest comment.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/smilies/asshat.jpg


No worries my friend.
Just shows how childish he really is.
He called me out trying to make this a competition instead of an intelligent discsussion on football, I then proceeded to prove his knowledge was lacking other than the ability to say the team sucks.


The only thing he has left now is to resort to name calling.
Sad day indeed when america's youth can't even articulate a thought.


Pretty soon he will go tell his Mommy on me for picking on him.
22 year old hot chick indeed.
;D

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 08:02 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.

NodakPaul
08-29-2007, 08:06 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:




http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


There is no call for that kind of remark. I think that comment merits more time in hell at the very least.

I'll reserve my judgement & remain mum on my impression of you as a member here........







After a few seconds thinking about it, no I won't. You're an asshat (to be polite) and I'm willing to bet the majority of the posters here would agree based on your latest comment.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/smilies/asshat.jpg


No worries my friend.
Just shows how childish he really is.
He called me out trying to make this a competition instead of an intelligent discsussion on football, I then proceeded to prove his knowledge was lacking other than the ability to say the team sucks.


The only thing he has left now is to resort to name calling.
Sad day indeed when america's youth can't even articulate a thought.


Pretty soon he will go tell his Mommy on me for picking on him.
22 year old hot chick indeed.
;D


What an idiot.
How many 14 year olds can get with a 22 year old, hot or otherwise.
So let me see, his latest football related arguments are
1) Childress looks like some uncle who molested him
2) Any poster who disagrees with him must not be getting any (because apparently there is a correlation between ass and intelligence)

Yeah, he has me convinced.
Let's trade for JTO.
::)

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 08:08 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:






http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


There is no call for that kind of remark. I think that comment merits more time in hell at the very least.

I'll reserve my judgement & remain mum on my impression of you as a member here........







After a few seconds thinking about it, no I won't. You're an asshat (to be polite) and I'm willing to bet the majority of the posters here would agree based on your latest comment.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/smilies/asshat.jpg


No worries my friend.
Just shows how childish he really is.
He called me out trying to make this a competition instead of an intelligent discsussion on football, I then proceeded to prove his knowledge was lacking other than the ability to say the team sucks.


The only thing he has left now is to resort to name calling.
Sad day indeed when america's youth can't even articulate a thought.


Pretty soon he will go tell his Mommy on me for picking on him.

22 year old hot chick indeed.
;D


What an idiot.
How many 14 year olds can get with a 22 year old, hot or otherwise.
So let me see, his latest football related arguments are
1) Childress looks like some uncle who molested him
2) Any poster who disagrees with him must not be getting any (because apparently there is a correlation between jiggly butt and intelligence)

Yeah, he has me convinced.
Let's trade for JTO.
::)

I have never really paid to much attention to him until this thread, so I did a search and read some of his posts last night.


I'll give him one thing......
He is consistent.
;D

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 08:19 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup

cogitans
08-29-2007, 08:24 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 08:25 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



Agree that he moved around a bit in college but haven't seen it as much as one would think this year in pre-season.


I think by design, this offense will have him rolling out to keep the pass rush off balance a bit. If the pass isn't there when he does that then he will probably tuck it and run for whatever is available and then slide.
That equates to a mobile QB and not a Vick type runner.

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 08:28 AM
"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:




Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 08:32 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:






Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?

Can you say Tyler?

cogitans
08-29-2007, 08:32 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:






Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?


Of course the point remains. We need a legit backup. Holcomb is it. He has experience with a lot of start in the league. Perfect for our current situation.

Kolb please. Like he is a legit backup in his rookie year.

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 08:38 AM
"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:








Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?


Of course the point remains. We need a legit backup. Holcomb is it. He has experience with a lot of start in the league. Perfect for our current situation.

Kolb please. Like he is a legit backup in his rookie year.


I am not suggesting that Kolb is ready to step in right away, but you have to remember that in the last three years their backups that have sucked have come our way.
Need I remind you of the McMahon period in Viking history.
You have obviously seen Brooks Bollinger in action and are disgusted.
Why are you trying to buy hope on Holcolm their next poop dropping on our squad?
They will try to groom a legit backup in Kolb and hope he doesn't smell like those that they have so willingly passed in our direction.
Be real.

cogitans
08-29-2007, 08:42 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:










Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?


Of course the point remains. We need a legit backup. Holcomb is it. He has experience with a lot of start in the league. Perfect for our current situation.

Kolb please. Like he is a legit backup in his rookie year.


I am not suggesting that Kolb is ready to step in right away, but you have to remember that in the last three years their backups that have sucked have come our way.
Need I remind you of the McMahon period in Viking history.
You have obviously seen Brooks Bollinger in action and are disgusted.
Why are you trying to buy hope on Holcolm their next poop dropping on our squad?
They will try to groom a legit backup in Kolb and hope he doesn't smell like those that they have so willingly passed in our direction.
Be real.


All I'm saying at this point is that at least they got out and found some legit experience at the positions.

Look again Holcomb have actually started a lot of games in this league.

At this point he's just as good as anyone else they could have brought in. No controversy from him either, and he knows the system.

He might not be sexy, but as a backup he's a fit.

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 08:52 AM
"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:












Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?


Of course the point remains. We need a legit backup. Holcomb is it. He has experience with a lot of start in the league. Perfect for our current situation.

Kolb please. Like he is a legit backup in his rookie year.


I am not suggesting that Kolb is ready to step in right away, but you have to remember that in the last three years their backups that have sucked have come our way.
Need I remind you of the McMahon period in Viking history.
You have obviously seen Brooks Bollinger in action and are disgusted.
Why are you trying to buy hope on Holcolm their next poop dropping on our squad?
They will try to groom a legit backup in Kolb and hope he doesn't smell like those that they have so willingly passed in our direction.
Be real.


All I'm saying at this point is that at least they got out and found some legit experience at the positions.

Look again Holcomb have actually started a lot of games in this league.

At this point he's just as good as anyone else they could have brought in. No controversy from him either, and he knows the system.

He might not be sexy, but as a backup he's a fit.

Again his numbers are similar to Bollinger, how can I feel good about them taking him as their backup.
They have the same TD to INT ratio

Purple Floyd
08-29-2007, 09:14 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:








Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?

Can you say Tyler?


Now your talking my language ;D

C Mac D
08-29-2007, 09:15 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:


"C" wrote:


http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


There is no call for that kind of remark. I think that comment merits more time in hell at the very least.

I'll reserve my judgement & remain mum on my impression of you as a member here........







After a few seconds thinking about it, no I won't. You're an asshat (to be polite) and I'm willing to bet the majority of the posters here would agree based on your latest comment.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/smilies/asshat.jpg








I was belligerently drunk last night when I wrote this. I apologize.

And it was only a moderately attractive 22 year old.

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 09:16 AM
"C" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"LuckyVike" wrote:




http://www.nfl.com/fantasy/story?id=09000d5d801e2a34&template=without-video&confirm=true

Hey Marrdro, another article you should read. Who is that last QB listed? Wow, I must have been crazy all that stuff I was saying, but seems like some people are agreeing with me... and they work at NFL.com... Just pointing it out... ;D

LOL


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LOL

A. you pointed out NFL.com FANTASY page. Del Don works for Rotowire.
/bonk
B. The Lions played the Colts. Nice D. They certainly are not the Bears of Ravens.
C. He put up 10pts. Whooptie doo. Even the Bears put up 27 on the Colts.

:D


How many points have ANY Vikings QB put up? Zero?

And Marrdro, Don't be bitter because I have articles and CURRENT facts to back up my argument, you are just a bitter old guy who either hasn't gotten a** in awhile.

Sorry dude, wish I could argue this, but I gotta go to bed with a hot 22 year old.


There is no call for that kind of remark. I think that comment merits more time in hell at the very least.

I'll reserve my judgement & remain mum on my impression of you as a member here........







After a few seconds thinking about it, no I won't. You're an asshat (to be polite) and I'm willing to bet the majority of the posters here would agree based on your latest comment.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/smilies/asshat.jpg








I was belligerently drunk last night when I wrote this. I apologize.

And it was only a moderately attractive 22 year old.

You do crack me up my friend.
Again, no worries.

cogitans
08-29-2007, 09:23 AM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:














Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?


Of course the point remains. We need a legit backup. Holcomb is it. He has experience with a lot of start in the league. Perfect for our current situation.

Kolb please. Like he is a legit backup in his rookie year.


I am not suggesting that Kolb is ready to step in right away, but you have to remember that in the last three years their backups that have sucked have come our way.
Need I remind you of the McMahon period in Viking history.
You have obviously seen Brooks Bollinger in action and are disgusted.
Why are you trying to buy hope on Holcolm their next poop dropping on our squad?
They will try to groom a legit backup in Kolb and hope he doesn't smell like those that they have so willingly passed in our direction.
Be real.


All I'm saying at this point is that at least they got out and found some legit experience at the positions.

Look again Holcomb have actually started a lot of games in this league.

At this point he's just as good as anyone else they could have brought in. No controversy from him either, and he knows the system.

He might not be sexy, but as a backup he's a fit.

Again his numbers are similar to Bollinger, how can I feel good about them taking him as their backup.
They have the same TD to INT ratio


11 seasons, and 22 starts compared to 5 seasons and 9 starts. That's the difference and the only one that matters in this comparison.

You haven't said who it is that you expected them to bring in here instead.

V-Unit
08-29-2007, 09:26 AM
There is something wrong with your thinking if you are not more comfortable with Holcomb than Bollinger. Yes, Holcomb is a band-aid, but Bollinger proved he couldn't even be that. If you are angry at this transaction, the only one to blame is Bollinger, because he gave the Vikings no choice. We needed a better backup, and Holcomb was the guy.

CCthebest
08-29-2007, 10:33 AM
It really doesnt matter who our QB backup is, because the OLine cant pass protect. When the regular season starts, they will be blitzing every other play i bet. And our OLine cant even pass protect with just 4 D linemen rushing. Until thats fixed it wouldnt matter if we had Manning as our QB.

You would think though that an offensive guru like childress is supposed to be, a QB coach, that we could have better backups then Boll and holcomb. To me they are identical. If Holcomb didnt have ties to Eagles we wouldnt even be having this discussion.

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 01:17 PM
"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:
















Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?


Of course the point remains. We need a legit backup. Holcomb is it. He has experience with a lot of start in the league. Perfect for our current situation.

Kolb please. Like he is a legit backup in his rookie year.


I am not suggesting that Kolb is ready to step in right away, but you have to remember that in the last three years their backups that have sucked have come our way.
Need I remind you of the McMahon period in Viking history.
You have obviously seen Brooks Bollinger in action and are disgusted.
Why are you trying to buy hope on Holcolm their next poop dropping on our squad?
They will try to groom a legit backup in Kolb and hope he doesn't smell like those that they have so willingly passed in our direction.
Be real.


All I'm saying at this point is that at least they got out and found some legit experience at the positions.

Look again Holcomb have actually started a lot of games in this league.

At this point he's just as good as anyone else they could have brought in. No controversy from him either, and he knows the system.

He might not be sexy, but as a backup he's a fit.

Again his numbers are similar to Bollinger, how can I feel good about them taking him as their backup.
They have the same TD to INT ratio


11 seasons, and 22 starts compared to 5 seasons and 9 starts. That's the difference and the only one that matters in this comparison.

You haven't said who it is that you expected them to bring in here instead.


The point is we should not be content let alone excited for our front office when they bring in washed up Brooks Bollingers to replace Brooks Bollinger because by the numbers that is what you get.

NodakPaul
08-29-2007, 01:26 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


It really doesnt matter who our QB backup is, because the OLine cant pass protect. When the regular season starts, they will be blitzing every other play i bet. And our OLine cant even pass protect with just 4 D linemen rushing. Until thats fixed it wouldnt matter if we had Manning as our QB.

You would think though that an offensive guru like childress is supposed to be, a QB coach, that we could have better backups then Boll and holcomb. To me they are identical. If Holcomb didnt have ties to Eagles we wouldnt even be having this discussion.


God I hope that is the case.
If you are expecting a blitz, they are one of the easiest things (IMHO) to defeat, because there is guaranteed to be at least one (probably two) open receivers when the defense is blitzing.
The key is just to find them and get the ball off quick enough.
Or depending on where the blitz is expected, you can call a run. The point is that a team that blitzes continuously will be left exposed in other areas.

Unfortunately, and this is where I think you were going, I don't think opposing teams need to blitz to get pressure on our QBs.
While they have looked better in preseason, it is still preseason.
And once we have some fast defensive ends keying off from McKinnie or whoever lands the right side spot, our QBs are going to have to make decisions quickly.

FYI though, trying to tie Childress and Holcomb together with the Eagles connection is a little bit of a stretch, since their time in Philly didn't overlap...

NodakPaul
08-29-2007, 01:27 PM
"V" wrote:


There is something wrong with your thinking if you are not more comfortable with Holcomb than Bollinger. Yes, Holcomb is a band-aid, but Bollinger proved he couldn't even be that. If you are angry at this transaction, the only one to blame is Bollinger, because he gave the Vikings no choice. We needed a better backup, and Holcomb was the guy.


You are exactly right.
Bollinger really dropped in value from last year to this.
His play was atrocious.
Now granted, I haven't seen Holcomb play in a purple uniform yet for a valid comparison, but anything has got to better.
Now if he stinks it up on Thursday, this thread is going to get heated... :)

bigbadragz
08-29-2007, 03:15 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


It really doesnt matter who our QB backup is, because the OLine cant pass protect. When the regular season starts, they will be blitzing every other play i bet. And our OLine cant even pass protect with just 4 D linemen rushing. Until thats fixed it wouldnt matter if we had Manning as our QB.

You would think though that an offensive guru like childress is supposed to be, a QB coach, that we could have better backups then Boll and holcomb. To me they are identical. If Holcomb didnt have ties to Eagles we wouldnt even be having this discussion.

well i haven[t seen anything in the preseason so far that makes me think we can't pass protect.
i feel like our starters have done a decent job.
as for backups, thats a different story.


as for holcomb being bollinger you guys are just off base.
bollinger would and will be a 3rd string qb at the pro level for his whole career at best.
holcomb played behind peyton manning, has challened for starting jobs, and has actually won battles where all of bollingers expereince came from the jets losing the 3 qbs in front of him and ran outta options.


i dont know how young some of you are, comparing the 2, but holcomb is no bollinger.
basically cuz bollinger is just that bad.
in another words, holcomb is not gonna be jeff garcia coming off the bench, but he will be able to keep us stable until tjack comes back from an injury.
bollinger single handedly could be the reason we lose 3 straight games if tjack went down for that amount of time.

bigbadragz
08-29-2007, 03:42 PM
i found this on viking update.
maybe this will shut some of you up.

Pat Kirwan at NFL.com hits the nail on the head in this report when he says:
“The Vikings really helped themselves trading for Holcomb.
When you consider he has more career starts than all the other Vikings quarterbacks combined, the team is better for having him.
Holcomb can take the pressure off Tarvaris Jackson when need be, he can keep the team in a competitive situation should Jackson get hurt, he moves Brooks Bollinger back to the third spot where he belongs.”

“A quarterback controversy might arise, but Minnesota really got the best of both worlds,” he added.
“Jackson got the practice time he needed while Holcomb spent the summer in Philadelphia, and now the team has some position security.
Ask yourself this question:
How many teams could have used Holcomb and passed on the opportunity to get him?
The compensation (a second-day pick) wasn’t very much.”

Kirwan writes that at least 16 other teams could have also benefited from acquiring Holcomb.

cogitans
08-29-2007, 05:58 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


















Kelly Holcolm is a band-aid

The vikings gave up about the same as the Dolphins did to get Green to get a lifetime 2nd 3rd string non-factor QB.
BOO!
I am so mad at this transaction because essentially they got somebody with the same numbers as BB our other bandaid.
Poor job up front.
(Holcolm cost less then Green though so Wilf can save money like Red)

i'm assuming you were one of the people that want a qb to start for us besides tjack.
this is not going to happen since tjack is our qb.
when are some of you guys gonna give up on the idea that the vikes want another qb to lead this team?
they have been making every decision since the season ended towards tavaris being the guy.


green would never have come here anyway and if you recall it took how many months for the chiefs to finally get the pick they wanted from the only team green would play for.
holcomb is what he is, a veteran backup who can come in and hopefully win you some games if tjack goes down.
what do you expect us to do, trade for peyton manning to hold a clipboard.
he's a step up from bollinger and that in itself should make you somewhat happy.


That assumption would be wrong. This is a league where you need two legit QB's.
We as vikings fans should know that with the wear and tear a running QB takes (look no further than Culpepper) If a legit backup can't come in, it spells disaster for our favorite team.

I'm not so sure I would label him as a running QB.
Mobility means he can move around in the pocket as well (i.e. rollouts).

I think of him more along the lines of Steve Young with respect to mobility vice a Vick or a Culpepper.


Again I am just going by the numbers.
You can't deny that he runs more than a typical pocket quarterback.
He is more suceptable to injury because of his running ability.
That is all I am saying.
Young was injury prone at times too for his same ability.
I remember him getting some of the worst concussions.
The point still remains, he needs a legit backup



TJack is going to use his legs at times, both to buy time, and to make a play. But as he gets better I don't see him running a lot, like a Michael Vick.

As he learns how to work the pocket better, he'll do so. And the coaches want him to be a timing thrower inside of the pocket. Think more of how McNabb when he were at his best stood in the pocket and read the field, and then sometimes used his legs, and a great vision to make the play when the pocket collapsed. That's how I hope and expect TJack to become.


Again, McNabb, an injury prone QB you are not arguing the point.
The point still remains, the succeptability is there.
WE NEED A BETTER BACKUP! bring examples of QBs like TJack that are not injury prone.
It isn't possible, they are dynamic players and that is why we love them but we need a good backup.
(By the way, why do you think the Eagle served up some Kolb action in the draft?
THEY NEEDED A LEGIT BACKUP instead of the BB's and the Holcolms of the world)
We need to be better than depending on Bollinger and Holcolm don't you think?


Of course the point remains. We need a legit backup. Holcomb is it. He has experience with a lot of start in the league. Perfect for our current situation.

Kolb please. Like he is a legit backup in his rookie year.


I am not suggesting that Kolb is ready to step in right away, but you have to remember that in the last three years their backups that have sucked have come our way.
Need I remind you of the McMahon period in Viking history.
You have obviously seen Brooks Bollinger in action and are disgusted.
Why are you trying to buy hope on Holcolm their next poop dropping on our squad?
They will try to groom a legit backup in Kolb and hope he doesn't smell like those that they have so willingly passed in our direction.
Be real.


All I'm saying at this point is that at least they got out and found some legit experience at the positions.

Look again Holcomb have actually started a lot of games in this league.

At this point he's just as good as anyone else they could have brought in. No controversy from him either, and he knows the system.

He might not be sexy, but as a backup he's a fit.

Again his numbers are similar to Bollinger, how can I feel good about them taking him as their backup.
They have the same TD to INT ratio


11 seasons, and 22 starts compared to 5 seasons and 9 starts. That's the difference and the only one that matters in this comparison.

You haven't said who it is that you expected them to bring in here instead.


The point is we should not be content let alone excited for our front office when they bring in washed up Brooks Bollingers to replace Brooks Bollinger because by the numbers that is what you get.

No one were yelling this is the pick up that takes us to the superbowl.

Your jumping around from one debate to the next here.

You were saying that TJack needed a back up that were not Bollinger. Hence, as I said, here is Holcomb. He's not sexy, and he hasn't had a big winning percentage, but he has 11 years experience, and he's a fit in the system.

That's about as good as you get in this situation. We're not putting the stock of the franchise on his shoulders, but of the QBs currently on the market, that's as good as you can do. And he is still an upgrade over Brooks.

NordicNed
08-29-2007, 06:05 PM
The more I think about it, the more I think this was a really good move on our part.



And I'll sleep alot better, knowing that BB isn't going to be the back up to TJ and that Holcomb is.....

Marrdro
08-29-2007, 06:43 PM
I can't believe we are still on this topic.....
A backup for chrimmeny sakes.
:o

What teams actually used thier backups last year due to injury?

KC
TB
Eagles
Seahawks

Who did I miss.
I mean comeon.
23 pages on a backup.

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 06:50 PM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


i found this on viking update.
maybe this will shut some of you up.

Pat Kirwan at NFL.com hits the nail on the head in this report when he says:
“The Vikings really helped themselves trading for Holcomb.
When you consider he has more career starts than all the other Vikings quarterbacks combined, the team is better for having him.
Holcomb can take the pressure off Tarvaris Jackson when need be, he can keep the team in a competitive situation should Jackson get hurt, he moves Brooks Bollinger back to the third spot where he belongs.”

“A quarterback controversy might arise, but Minnesota really got the best of both worlds,” he added.
“Jackson got the practice time he needed while Holcomb spent the summer in Philadelphia, and now the team has some position security.
Ask yourself this question:
How many teams could have used Holcomb and passed on the opportunity to get him?
The compensation (a second-day pick) wasn’t very much.”

Kirwan writes that at least 16 other teams could have also benefited from acquiring Holcomb.


That is buying hope when hope isn't there.
It is the NFL networks job to sell hope so people will buy tickets.
Don't buy it man, I was there once and I am sick of being dissapointed, we need a better squad then this in order to get excited

vike_mike
08-29-2007, 06:51 PM
I am glad we picked up Holcomb.
Now we need to get a real offensive scheme.
YAC can work if you have the players for it.
As we have shown, we don't have the players for it.
change it up, or we will be losing 13 to ?
80% of the points will be scored by the defense.

Purple Floyd
08-29-2007, 06:56 PM
"bigbadragz" wrote:


i found this on viking update.
maybe this will shut some of you up.

Pat Kirwan at NFL.com hits the nail on the head in this report when he says:
“The Vikings really helped themselves trading for Holcomb.
When you consider he has more career starts than all the other Vikings quarterbacks combined, the team is better for having him. Holcomb can take the pressure off Tarvaris Jackson when need be, he can keep the team in a competitive situation should Jackson get hurt, he moves Brooks Bollinger back to the third spot where he belongs.”

“A quarterback controversy might arise, but Minnesota really got the best of both worlds,” he added.
“Jackson got the practice time he needed while Holcomb spent the summer in Philadelphia, and now the team has some position security.
Ask yourself this question:
How many teams could have used Holcomb and passed on the opportunity to get him?
The compensation (a second-day pick) wasn’t very much.”

Kirwan writes that at least 16 other teams could have also benefited from acquiring Holcomb.


Brad Johnson had several times more experience than anything we have on the team this year and you can see where that got us.

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 06:57 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"bigbadragz" wrote:


i found this on viking update.
maybe this will shut some of you up.

Pat Kirwan at NFL.com hits the nail on the head in this report when he says:
“The Vikings really helped themselves trading for Holcomb.
When you consider he has more career starts than all the other Vikings quarterbacks combined, the team is better for having him. Holcomb can take the pressure off Tarvaris Jackson when need be, he can keep the team in a competitive situation should Jackson get hurt, he moves Brooks Bollinger back to the third spot where he belongs.”

“A quarterback controversy might arise, but Minnesota really got the best of both worlds,” he added.
“Jackson got the practice time he needed while Holcomb spent the summer in Philadelphia, and now the team has some position security.
Ask yourself this question:
How many teams could have used Holcomb and passed on the opportunity to get him?
The compensation (a second-day pick) wasn’t very much.”

Kirwan writes that at least 16 other teams could have also benefited from acquiring Holcomb.


Brad Johnson had several times more experience than anything we have on the team this year and you can see where that got us.


I never even considered that point but I wish I could have seen the excitement about Brad Johnson on this message board before last season.
IT is misplaced hope!

olson_10
08-29-2007, 06:59 PM
holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:00 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:03 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:05 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

cajunvike
08-29-2007, 07:07 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it


When Trent Green goes down with his next concussion, you might not be so sure in your assessment.

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:08 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

we needed to get somebody that wanted to be in that position and understood the situation..we didnt need to trade a 4th round pick for an injury prone old guy that would bitch and moan all year long

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:09 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:13 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:




holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a bitch

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:15 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:






holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:18 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:








holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:19 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:










holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

you mean like cunningham in 1998 right?
Or are you too young to remember?

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:22 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:












holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

you mean like cunningham in 1998 right?
Or are you too young to remember?

dude, you are just lost on this one, so just give it up already..tell me who our randy moss is? how bout john randle? where are those guys? wheres a top flight coaching staff stacked at every position? wheres the great depth at every spot? who is our new randy moss, cris carter, and jake reid?

the comment you just made shows us all that you really think this team aside from the QB position is just as good as the 1998 team..im sorry, but dude, theres no way you could honestly say that without laughing hysterically

get over it, we are a rebuilding team, and we built this team for jackson to call the signals..we werent looking for a vet to start, because we didnt want that..our time is in a couple years, NOT now

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:24 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:














holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

you mean like cunningham in 1998 right?
Or are you too young to remember?

dude, you are just lost on this one, so just give it up already..tell me who our randy moss is? how bout john randle? where are those guys? wheres a top flight coaching staff stacked at every position? wheres the great depth at every spot? who is our new randy moss, cris carter, and jake reid?

the comment you just made shows us all that you really think this team aside from the QB position is just as good as the 1998 team..im sorry, but dude, theres no way you could honestly say that without laughing hysterically

How could we be when our front office is content with picking up the bobby wade's, robert ferguson's and Kelly Holcolms of the world.
You have clearly stated my point of all of this in your rant.
WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAYERS ON THIS TEAM BECAUSE WE PICK UP CRAP PLAYERS LIKE HOLCOLM

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:29 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:
















holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

you mean like cunningham in 1998 right?
Or are you too young to remember?

dude, you are just lost on this one, so just give it up already..tell me who our randy moss is? how bout john randle? where are those guys? wheres a top flight coaching staff stacked at every position? wheres the great depth at every spot? who is our new randy moss, cris carter, and jake reid?

the comment you just made shows us all that you really think this team aside from the QB position is just as good as the 1998 team..im sorry, but dude, theres no way you could honestly say that without laughing hysterically

How could we be when our front office is content with picking up the bobby wade's, robert ferguson's and Kelly Holcolms of the world.
You have clearly stated my point of all of this in your rant.
WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAYERS ON THIS TEAM BECAUSE WE PICK UP CRAP PLAYERS LIKE HOLCOLM

yes, we are a bad team because we made a trade to acquire a good backup qb because we want tarvaris to be our starter..you make tons of sense
::)

we are picking up young players, and good veteran leaders..we didnt need joe horn or any of the closing in on the end of their career wash ups that were out there in FA this season..again, when we have a team full of very good 26-28 year olds, we will be a top FA destination..how do you think SF got so many great FA signings this offseason? by building a young team that could show it could compete, which attracted big name FAs..i dont know what star FA would want to play with the vikings this season when they could play for teams that are alot closer to winning than us..you cant be such a homer all the time in assuming every player on the market wants to play for the vikings

we made a good trade and got a good veteran backup QB..leave it at that

ajjanssen
08-29-2007, 07:30 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


















holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

you mean like cunningham in 1998 right?
Or are you too young to remember?

dude, you are just lost on this one, so just give it up already..tell me who our randy moss is? how bout john randle? where are those guys? wheres a top flight coaching staff stacked at every position? wheres the great depth at every spot? who is our new randy moss, cris carter, and jake reid?

the comment you just made shows us all that you really think this team aside from the QB position is just as good as the 1998 team..im sorry, but dude, theres no way you could honestly say that without laughing hysterically

How could we be when our front office is content with picking up the bobby wade's, robert ferguson's and Kelly Holcolms of the world.
You have clearly stated my point of all of this in your rant.
WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAYERS ON THIS TEAM BECAUSE WE PICK UP CRAP PLAYERS LIKE HOLCOLM

yes, we are a bad team because we made a trade to acquire a good backup qb because we want tarvaris to be our starter..you make tons of sense
::)

we are picking up young players, and good veteran leaders..we didnt need joe horn or any of the closing in on the end of their career wash ups that were out there in FA this season..again, when we have a team full of very good 26-28 year olds, we will be a top FA destination..how do you think SF got so many great FA signings this offseason? by building a young team that could show it could compete, which attracted big name FAs..i dont know what star FA would want to play with the vikings this season when they could play for teams that are alot closer to winning than us..you can be such a homer all the time in assuming every player on the market wants to play for the vikings

we made a good trade and got a good veteran backup QB..leave it at that

He is not good!

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:35 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:




















holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

you mean like cunningham in 1998 right?
Or are you too young to remember?

dude, you are just lost on this one, so just give it up already..tell me who our randy moss is? how bout john randle? where are those guys? wheres a top flight coaching staff stacked at every position? wheres the great depth at every spot? who is our new randy moss, cris carter, and jake reid?

the comment you just made shows us all that you really think this team aside from the QB position is just as good as the 1998 team..im sorry, but dude, theres no way you could honestly say that without laughing hysterically

How could we be when our front office is content with picking up the bobby wade's, robert ferguson's and Kelly Holcolms of the world.
You have clearly stated my point of all of this in your rant.
WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAYERS ON THIS TEAM BECAUSE WE PICK UP CRAP PLAYERS LIKE HOLCOLM

yes, we are a bad team because we made a trade to acquire a good backup qb because we want tarvaris to be our starter..you make tons of sense
::)

we are picking up young players, and good veteran leaders..we didnt need joe horn or any of the closing in on the end of their career wash ups that were out there in FA this season..again, when we have a team full of very good 26-28 year olds, we will be a top FA destination..how do you think SF got so many great FA signings this offseason? by building a young team that could show it could compete, which attracted big name FAs..i dont know what star FA would want to play with the vikings this season when they could play for teams that are alot closer to winning than us..you can be such a homer all the time in assuming every player on the market wants to play for the vikings

we made a good trade and got a good veteran backup QB..leave it at that

He is not good!

he is a good backup qb that wants to be in that position..how can you not be good and have the 3rd best playoff performance for a QB in nfl history??..we are building this team the right way, and everyone will see that when the star FAs start signing here in a year or two

olson_10
08-29-2007, 07:37 PM
ajjanssen look at it this way..we couldve overpaid for crap this offseason, or we can overpay for real talent next offseason..which one would you prefer?..really, the guys out there were too old, and had no interest to play here anyways..next offseason, the better FAs will be younger and willing to come to an on the rise team like the vikings will be

Del Rio
08-29-2007, 08:06 PM
He has played in more games in his career then our entire QB core together. So he is worth having on the team. If our QB gets hurt he is a guy that can possibly gimp us into the playoffs.

He wasnt signed to be the starter, he wasnt signed to be the next Tarkenton. He was signed for a reasonable price to do a job that most people who sit and watch ESPN highlights all day and think that football is only about starters and big plays wouldnt understand.

The term we are only as strong as our weakest link? Worn out?...yes it is....True?Absolutely.

We will be competitive this season we are one of the top teams with cap space next season, our rookie QB who will either succeed or bring our coach down with him now has a vet who is capable of winning games, and to be honest with our defense all we may need is a guy that can survive and not suicide us.

Hell if Rex Grossman can make the SB then Holcomb isnt a bad option for a 2nd string qb on a team with a tenacious defense and a young athletic QB.

Purple Floyd
08-29-2007, 08:19 PM
"olson_10" wrote:


ajjanssen look at it this way..we couldve overpaid for crap this offseason, or we can overpay for real talent next offseason..which one would you prefer?..really, the guys out there were too old, and had no interest to play here anyways..next offseason, the better FAs will be younger and willing to come to an on the rise team like the vikings will be


There was talent out there this year. New England loaded up on talented people like Thomas, Stallworth and Wes Welker,all of whom would be the #1 guy at their position on our team and none of which have peaked physically. That was just one team.

Del Rio
08-29-2007, 08:23 PM
We went after some talent. Its a two way street.

Kevin Curtis said no thanks we threw everything we had at him. It isnt wal-mart. You cant just go in get what you want and leave. They actually have to WANT to play here and honestly until we start winning it probably wont happen.

Using the pats as an example is kind of jaded. I mean thats like saying well the fatest kids in the world chose to go play for the chocolate factory.

Who wouldnt want to play for the pats if you were a free agent. Randy Moss? No ring.... why would he pass on a chance to play for the Patriots.....

Hell, I wouldnt be surprised if some PLAYERS PAID THEM to let them on their roster....I kid, but seriously they have buying power we dont have. Just because we didnt get them doesnt mean we didnt try. It takes success and time.

cajunvike
08-29-2007, 08:32 PM
"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:


"olson_10" wrote:


"ajjanssen" wrote:












holcomb was an excellent pickup, and he only cost us a late pick..why anybody would be fussing over us getting a reasonably good backup QB is beyond reason

the guy completes alot of his passes, and can put up huge numbers at times..its a great pickup because of the situation we were in

What about his clearly high interception rate?

the same number of touchdowns..what did you want them to do? have bollinger serve as the backup? lets get real, we got the best backup qb option there was out there..the guy got starts for some absolutely pathetic football teams, so of course hes gonna throw some interceptions..when the vikes werent very good, daunte threw a ton of picks too


How much did it cost the dolphins to get trent green? a fourth or fifth round pick, and we got holcolm, I'm sorry but don't be ridiculous that we got the best end of it

im sorry, but dont be ridiculous in thinking that trent green wanted to come here and be a backup

Why would he have needed to be a backup in the first year, isn't the leadership and experience of holcolm what has gotten you all excited

no..his ability and willingness to accept a backup role are the most important things..he wants to help jackson become a better qb..if we picked up green, hed be here starting, with jackson sitting around throwing to backups on the sideline all year..if you took green out of the starting lineup, hed be sitting there demanding a trade and whining like a beeyatch

Don't you think trent green would deserve to train jackson while starting games for a year to give confidence to fans that we have a seasoned, PROVEN leader behind center

because it makes absolutely no sense at all to have an old, about to retire qb playing on a team thats trying to develop youth all around..if ur gonna be developing young rb's and receivers, then you need to let them grow with a young, developing quarterback

heres the deal..when the miami dolphins end up with a top 5 pick in next years draft, the discussion will be put to rest..green wont win even 8 games this season

you mean like cunningham in 1998 right?
Or are you too young to remember?


Randall wasn't developing any young WRs or RBs...Cris Carter helped develop Randy Moss...and Robert Smith was just hitting his stride.
No offense to Randall, because I liked him here, but his timing in landing in Minny was like catching lightning in a bottle.
Yes, he still had the arm...but without Billick to call the shots, he soon became lost and confused.