PDA

View Full Version : We should trade for Deangelo Hall



kevoncox
10-01-2007, 05:55 PM
Such a combo of Winfield and hall would be awesome and sure to sure up our pass defense.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-halltraderequest093007&prov=yhoo&type=lgns


What would you give up for him...

I would go as high as a 3rd and griffen for him.

marstc09
10-01-2007, 06:01 PM
We should get him now and solve our problem opposite Winfield. Griffin and McCauley are not ready. Missed tackles and poor coverage. Hall would be a huge upgrade and solve our pass defense woes. I am all for giving them a 3 maybe a 2 pick.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 06:02 PM
I've always thought DeAngelo was a cocky idiot, but he is talented. I'd give up a 2nd rounder for him. Winfield + DeAngelo = TRY THROWING THE BALL 40+ PLAY ON US NOW MOTHER F*CKERS!

cajunvike
10-01-2007, 06:05 PM
NOT if he is gonna side with Vick...c'mon...lose the colorblind glasses first!

BUT he WOULD solve two problems for us...the need for a solid #2 CB AND our kick return situation...freeing up AP for full-time RB duty and not risking getting him hurt on special teams.

kevoncox
10-01-2007, 06:06 PM
he problem is we never pull the trigger on deals that make sense....
After all we gave up 3 ist round picks for....
Never mind.
>:(

kevoncox
10-01-2007, 06:09 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:


NOT if he is gonna side with Vick...c'mon...lose the colorblind glasses first!

BUT he WOULD solve two problems for us...the need for a solid #2 CB AND our kick return situation...freeing up AP for full-time RB duty and not risking getting him hurt on special teams.


I think he sides with Vick because of how Vick took him under his wing. As much as we hate to admit it, these guys are humans. There has to be atleast one person in your life that has done something wrong but has always treated you right!
These guys are more than teammates. I played football and I know all of my teammates are like brothers to me. These guys played together in college and pros...that Builds unity.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 06:14 PM
True Kevoncox. And I don't think he's saying Michael Vick is right, just that how the organization is handling the situation is wrong.

ThorSPL
10-01-2007, 06:17 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


he problem is we never pull the trigger on deals that make sense....
After all we gave up 3 ist round picks for....
Never mind.
>:(


That post should land you in hell for a day or two....

cajunvike
10-01-2007, 06:19 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


NOT if he is gonna side with Vick...c'mon...lose the colorblind glasses first!

BUT he WOULD solve two problems for us...the need for a solid #2 CB AND our kick return situation...freeing up AP for full-time RB duty and not risking getting him hurt on special teams.


I think he sides with Vick because of how Vick took him under his wing. As much as we hate to admit it, these guys are humans. There has to be atleast one person in your life that has done something wrong but has always treated you right!
These guys are more than teammates. I played football and I know all of my teammates are like brothers to me. These guys played together in college and pros...that Builds unity.


He should be mad at Vick for putting himself in the position that he did.
It was irresponsible and ended up hurting his teammates.
Don't get mad at the messenger!

V-Unit
10-01-2007, 06:24 PM
This would be a horrible idea.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 06:30 PM
"V" wrote:


This would be a horrible idea.


Vhy vould it be V?

MaxVike
10-01-2007, 06:32 PM
"V" wrote:


This would be a horrible idea.


Agreed.


Look at this year's draft, four eventual starters and major contributors in year one.
Why would we give up at least one day one pick (more than likely two), especially how high we are going to be picking.
Also, McCauley and Griffin can play, they certainly are not Hall...however, they can play; they are young.
For all of the, "give TJack time" sentiment, this makes absolutley no sense.

kevoncox
10-01-2007, 06:37 PM
"MaxVike" wrote:


"V" wrote:


This would be a horrible idea.


Agreed.


Look at this year's draft, four eventual starters and major contributors in year one.
Why would we give up at least one day one pick (more than likely two), especially how high we are going to be picking.
Also, McCauley and Griffin can play, they certainly are not Hall...however, they can play; they are young.
For all of the, "give TJack time" sentiment, this makes absolutley no sense.


Hall is 23 or 24?
Winfield is 30+
Hall an winfield will be great for 2 more years.
After that transition hall and the better of the 2 CBs...

There is plenty of time to learn since teams love to go 4 wide on us and dink and dunk. Imagine if we had to face cincinnati this year.... :(

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 06:37 PM
"MaxVike" wrote:


"V" wrote:


This would be a horrible idea.


Agreed.


Look at this year's draft, four eventual starters and major contributors in year one.
Why would we give up at least one day one pick (more than likely two), especially how high we are going to be picking.
Also, McCauley and Griffin can play, they certainly are not Hall...however, they can play; they are young.
For all of the, "give TJack time" sentiment, this makes absolutley no sense.


I get what you're saying but Hall is a special talent. Speaking of young, he's only what...23? McCauley can still take over as the starter in 3 years when Winfield is gone. As for Griffin, lets start of by making him shed all the fat he gained in the offseason and see where to go from there.

Overlord
10-01-2007, 06:39 PM
Hall would certainly be an upgrade in terms of talent, but I don't think it would be worth it for us.
First, we're primarily a zone team.
I doubt he'd be happy in that role.
That brings us to number two, that he has problems with his ego/mouth/brain.
I don't know that he fits with the team attitude we're trying to develop.
Third, he's got two years left on his rookie contract.
Even if we could get him here, as soon as he became a free agent he would go somewhere else for a ton of money.

With talented players you're always willing to take some risks.
But the cost here would almost certainly be too much for what we'd get.

Also, unless they're just posturing, the Falcons have said that they will NOT trade him this year.
With only a few weeks to get anything done, I don't think anyone is going to offer anything to change their minds.

kevoncox
10-01-2007, 06:42 PM
"Overlord" wrote:


Hall would certainly be an upgrade in terms of talent, but I don't think it would be worth it for us.
First, we're primarily a zone team.
I doubt he'd be happy in that role.
That brings us to number two, that he has problems with his ego/mouth/brain.
I don't know that he fits with the team attitude we're trying to develop.
Third, he's got two years left on his rookie contract.
Even if we could get him here, as soon as he became a free agent he would go somewhere else for a ton of money.

With talented players you're always willing to take some risks.
But the cost here would almost certainly be too much for what we'd get.

Also, unless they're just posturing, the Falcons have said that they will NOT trade him this year.
With only a few weeks to get anything done, I don't think anyone is going to offer anything to change their minds.


What makes you think he will leave. We off the right money and or franchise tag him... Other teams use it, why not us.

jkjuggalo
10-01-2007, 06:44 PM
NO!!
HORRIBLE IDEA!

If we are going to trade for anyone it should be a Olineman and a WR.


The trade I would rather see is Chester Taylor and Dwight Smith plus a second day pick (maybe the extra one we got from Denver) for Levi Jones and TJ Houshmazolli.

This trade would make us instantly better on offense and we would have Doss or Tank step in and play safety for us, which is not too much of a loss of talent.
Housh would also bring some passion to the offense, something that the Vikes really need.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 06:44 PM
"Overlord" wrote:


Hall would certainly be an upgrade in terms of talent, but I don't think it would be worth it for us.
First, we're primarily a zone team.
I doubt he'd be happy in that role.
That brings us to number two, that he has problems with his ego/mouth/brain.
I don't know that he fits with the team attitude we're trying to develop.
Third, he's got two years left on his rookie contract.
Even if we could get him here, as soon as he became a free agent he would go somewhere else for a ton of money.

With talented players you're always willing to take some risks.
But the cost here would almost certainly be too much for what we'd get.

Also, unless they're just posturing, the Falcons have said that they will NOT trade him this year.
With only a few weeks to get anything done, I don't think anyone is going to offer anything to change their minds.


Other then the attitude, I don't see why not. Vikings most certianly would sign him to a new contract as soon as they traded for him (in other words, call him up and see if he'd mind MN).

PackSux!
10-01-2007, 06:47 PM
I honestly liked Dovonte Edwards myself.

The Dropper
10-01-2007, 06:48 PM
I still don't buy that our CB's are a problem or even a weakness. Sure, the younger ones will make mistakes from time to time, but when the opponent's QB has all freakin' day to throw on nearly every down, someone is bound to get open. The rush did pretty well against the Falcons, but seems to be regressing ever since.


We just aren't getting enough pressure on QB's, plain and simple. Even if every one of our DB's were probowlers it wouldn't prevent completions from a decent QB that feels no pressure.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 06:50 PM
"The" wrote:


I still don't buy that our CB's are a problem or even a weakness. Sure, the younger ones will make mistakes from time to time, but when the opponent's QB has all freakin' day to throw on nearly every down, someone is bound to get open. The rush did pretty well against the Falcons, but seems to be regressing ever since.


We just aren't getting enough pressure on QB's, plain and simple. Even if every one of our DB's were probowlers it wouldn't prevent completions from a decent QB that feels no pressure.


Maybe. Seeing as how Winfield did an excellent job on Driver only makes me wonder if we had a cloning machine...

Overlord
10-01-2007, 07:14 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Overlord" wrote:


Hall would certainly be an upgrade in terms of talent, but I don't think it would be worth it for us.
First, we're primarily a zone team.
I doubt he'd be happy in that role.
That brings us to number two, that he has problems with his ego/mouth/brain.
I don't know that he fits with the team attitude we're trying to develop.
Third, he's got two years left on his rookie contract.
Even if we could get him here, as soon as he became a free agent he would go somewhere else for a ton of money.

With talented players you're always willing to take some risks.
But the cost here would almost certainly be too much for what we'd get.

Also, unless they're just posturing, the Falcons have said that they will NOT trade him this year.
With only a few weeks to get anything done, I don't think anyone is going to offer anything to change their minds.


What makes you think he will leave. We off the right money and or franchise tag him... Other teams use it, why not us.



Three reasons:

1) My impression, based on random news clippings I remember or don't to varying degrees, is that Hall seems to be a prima donna/party/club type guy.
I don't see Minneapolis being attractive to him in that regard.
I also don't think he would fit with most of the guys on our team, who tend to be blue-collar type guys.
Compare Winfield to Hall.
Greenway to Hall.
Sharper to Hall.
Birk to Hall.
Tarvaris to Hall.
On down the line, I feel like we have guys that are players first, and everything else is secondary.
Hall seems like a showtime guy to me.
He's about the fame and the perks, and happens to be really good.


2) We're not going to offer him as much money as he'd be able to get elsewhere.
We saw Indy let their two starting CBs go this last offseason.
Why?
Because they're not as valuable in the cover 2 system.
That money is better spent elsewhere for the Vikes.
There aren't many man-to-man shutdown corners in the league, but there are plenty of guys that can do an adequate job playing zone.

3) The system doesn't fit his skills.
I think he's kind of like Smoot, a guy that is a man-to-man guy and would get frustrated in the system.
I'm not sure it'd be terrible, but for a guy that likes to mouth off, any bit could be frustrating.

So that's kind of my thinking.
Obviously, he's a good player and I'd love to have that talent on the team.
But I don't think the benefit is better than the cost would be.
Especially since it would probably cost us at least our first round pick if we wanted to get him.

V-Unit
10-01-2007, 07:19 PM
I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 07:23 PM
"V" wrote:


I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.

grpape
10-01-2007, 07:27 PM
I would rather have a (QB, OL, "stud" DE), if we're gonna trade away picks. Like others have stated, better pass rush and more experiece will help the pass D two fold.

V-Unit
10-01-2007, 07:37 PM
"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 07:43 PM
"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.


For one, he gained significant weight in the offseason that has made him slower. I like Griffin too, don't get me wrong. But he does seem to have lazy habbits that I'm afraid will effect his career down the road. Not moving his hips, lazy tackling, to name a few. I do hope he comes around because like I said, I really like Griffin. And teams know Griffin is the guy to pick on. For the love of God, Lavarr Martin or whatever his name is, beat Griffin twice deep.

I think what I want is for Griffin to play more motivated. More hungry, like he did last year when he was trying to earn that starting spot.

Overlord
10-01-2007, 07:50 PM
"V" wrote:


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.


I haven't been happy with Griffin this year, but you're right that we don't need another shutdown corner.


Griffin has missed a few tackles (I'm thinking 3rd and long in Kansas City) and has done a poor job playing up on receivers.
He needs to concentrate more on the former and practice to get better at the latter.
These are not deadly sins.
He just hasn't played perfect football.

The touchdowns he's given up are tough to pin on the guy.
He's just not as big, strong, or fast as those rookie recievers.
In jump ball situations, he will lose that almost everytime.


Would Winfield do better though?
He's giving up even more height and size.
We don't have anybody to match up with those types of players.
Hall isn't a guy that can do that either.
He's another short (5'10") guy.
If we need to go after another corner, we need to find someone that's 6'4" and can run.
I think those guys all play WR though.

"V" wrote:


By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.


Thanks for that info.
I was wondering what happened.
I never saw the safety or where he was supposed to be.
Apparently the other team draws up plays to attack our defense and get people out of position.
Who knew?

V-Unit
10-01-2007, 08:00 PM
"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.


For one, he gained significant weight in the offseason that has made him slower. I like Griffin too, don't get me wrong. But he does seem to have lazy habbits that I'm afraid will effect his career down the road. Not moving his hips, lazy tackling, to name a few. I do hope he comes around because like I said, I really like Griffin. And teams know Griffin is the guy to pick on. For the love of God, Lavarr Martin or whatever his name is, beat Griffin twice deep.

I think what I want is for Griffin to play more motivated. More hungry, like he did last year when he was trying to earn that starting spot.


See, you have come so far from wanting to trade for Hall. If you really like Griffin, and really do hope that he comes around. Then you need to give him a chance. We gave Fred Smoot 3 years for goodness sakes. I think Griffin deserves more then 4 games.

As far as Ruvell Martin goes. I can only recall one catch for 36 yards. A couple things about that play.
1. We tried a jailhouse blitz, but it was the worst blitz I have ever seen. It was timed horribly.
2. Given that it was a blitz. Griffin has got to bump him at the line, knowing that he has one on one coverage. IMO that is coaching. If you tell a guy to get his hands on the receivers 100 times. He will do it eventually, especially after he gets beat like that.
3. Even though he was beat right off the line. Griffin never gave up on that play. He needs to look back for the ball though. At least he made the tackle.

In the end, he got beat badly. There is room for improvement, but don't give up on this guy.

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 08:04 PM
"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.


For one, he gained significant weight in the offseason that has made him slower. I like Griffin too, don't get me wrong. But he does seem to have lazy habbits that I'm afraid will effect his career down the road. Not moving his hips, lazy tackling, to name a few. I do hope he comes around because like I said, I really like Griffin. And teams know Griffin is the guy to pick on. For the love of God, Lavarr Martin or whatever his name is, beat Griffin twice deep.

I think what I want is for Griffin to play more motivated. More hungry, like he did last year when he was trying to earn that starting spot.


See, you have come so far from wanting to trade for Hall. If you really like Griffin, and really do hope that he comes around. Then you need to give him a chance. We gave Fred Smoot 3 years for goodness sakes. I think Griffin deserves more then 4 games.

As far as Ruvell Martin goes. I can only recall one catch for 36 yards. A couple things about that play.
1. We tried a jailhouse blitz, but it was the worst blitz I have ever seen. It was timed horribly.
2. Given that it was a blitz. Griffin has got to bump him at the line, knowing that he has one on one coverage. IMO that is coaching. If you tell a guy to get his hands on the receivers 100 times. He will do it eventually, especially after he gets beat like that.
3. Even though he was beat right off the line. Griffin never gave up on that play. He needs to look back for the ball though. At least he made the tackle.

In the end, he got beat badly. There is room for improvement, but don't give up on this guy.


Why do I want Hall? In terms of talent, they don't come even close. I'd trade for Hall anyday....but I'd be okay if we stuck with Griffin too, ya know what I mean?

MetalMike-LoudVike
10-01-2007, 08:10 PM
Now is this really what we need? A guy who is known for his temper. Defensive Playmaker you bet the chair your sitting on. I would say oh no to D-Hall. Besides Griffin and McCauley are gonna kick anus for this franchise.

V-Unit
10-01-2007, 08:14 PM
"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:




I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.


For one, he gained significant weight in the offseason that has made him slower. I like Griffin too, don't get me wrong. But he does seem to have lazy habbits that I'm afraid will effect his career down the road. Not moving his hips, lazy tackling, to name a few. I do hope he comes around because like I said, I really like Griffin. And teams know Griffin is the guy to pick on. For the love of God, Lavarr Martin or whatever his name is, beat Griffin twice deep.

I think what I want is for Griffin to play more motivated. More hungry, like he did last year when he was trying to earn that starting spot.


See, you have come so far from wanting to trade for Hall. If you really like Griffin, and really do hope that he comes around. Then you need to give him a chance. We gave Fred Smoot 3 years for goodness sakes. I think Griffin deserves more then 4 games.

As far as Ruvell Martin goes. I can only recall one catch for 36 yards. A couple things about that play.
1. We tried a jailhouse blitz, but it was the worst blitz I have ever seen. It was timed horribly.
2. Given that it was a blitz. Griffin has got to bump him at the line, knowing that he has one on one coverage. IMO that is coaching. If you tell a guy to get his hands on the receivers 100 times. He will do it eventually, especially after he gets beat like that.
3. Even though he was beat right off the line. Griffin never gave up on that play. He needs to look back for the ball though. At least he made the tackle.

In the end, he got beat badly. There is room for improvement, but don't give up on this guy.


Why do I want Hall? In terms of talent, they don't come even close. I'd trade for Hall anyday....but I'd be okay if we stuck with Griffin too, ya know what I mean?


Well, in that case I'm going to go start a thread called "We should trade for Tom Brady"

PackSux!
10-01-2007, 08:34 PM
Hall is no different then smoot.
Sure when they make a interception it looks good but when they miss a tackle man does it look bad.

Now that makes me wonder why Hall gets so many interceptions?
Is it because he sucks and will give up big plays?
Or is it because he is so good that he will intercept everything thrown his way?


My choice would be because he sucks and gives up big plays.
That is why quarterbacks throw his way.

ItalianStallion
10-01-2007, 08:39 PM
I don't think the Falcons would trade one of their best defensive players (and one of the top CBs in the NFC) for anything less than a 1st rounder, which would be too much to give IMO.
It's not like we don't need him, and if we could get him for less, I'd say pull the trigger, it might stop these teams from throwing on us 45-50 times a week.

PurpleHornsOfDestruction
10-01-2007, 08:40 PM
Our pass defense problems has nothing to do with the DBs. Sharper, Winfeild and Griffin are acceptional. We do however need to coach Griffin better. Better coaching will make this guy better. He plays every play like he doesnt want to get burned. Which opens up the slant route and the go. Develop Griffin and we are beastly DBs. McCauly can hold his own. Maybe not a ball hawk or a star to day but not recognized for the good or the bad. Hold his own. I personally like Hall and think hes a pretty domient DB but is uneeded with ourpass rush improving drastically

Purplemania
10-01-2007, 09:20 PM
"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:






I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.


For one, he gained significant weight in the offseason that has made him slower. I like Griffin too, don't get me wrong. But he does seem to have lazy habbits that I'm afraid will effect his career down the road. Not moving his hips, lazy tackling, to name a few. I do hope he comes around because like I said, I really like Griffin. And teams know Griffin is the guy to pick on. For the love of God, Lavarr Martin or whatever his name is, beat Griffin twice deep.

I think what I want is for Griffin to play more motivated. More hungry, like he did last year when he was trying to earn that starting spot.


See, you have come so far from wanting to trade for Hall. If you really like Griffin, and really do hope that he comes around. Then you need to give him a chance. We gave Fred Smoot 3 years for goodness sakes. I think Griffin deserves more then 4 games.

As far as Ruvell Martin goes. I can only recall one catch for 36 yards. A couple things about that play.
1. We tried a jailhouse blitz, but it was the worst blitz I have ever seen. It was timed horribly.
2. Given that it was a blitz. Griffin has got to bump him at the line, knowing that he has one on one coverage. IMO that is coaching. If you tell a guy to get his hands on the receivers 100 times. He will do it eventually, especially after he gets beat like that.
3. Even though he was beat right off the line. Griffin never gave up on that play. He needs to look back for the ball though. At least he made the tackle.

In the end, he got beat badly. There is room for improvement, but don't give up on this guy.


Why do I want Hall? In terms of talent, they don't come even close. I'd trade for Hall anyday....but I'd be okay if we stuck with Griffin too, ya know what I mean?


Well, in that case I'm going to go start a thread called "We should trade for Tom Brady"



If Tom was on the block, absolutely no question we should trade for him! What is your point?

skum
10-02-2007, 01:10 AM
No thanks, guys temper is way over the top and he plays like day and night.

DustinDupont
10-02-2007, 01:51 AM
i would trade for ocho cinco

cajunvike
10-02-2007, 02:17 AM
End result...we don't need Hall...yes, he would be an upgrade...BUT if we can just get our QB on the same page as our WRs...and get the OL to do their jobs on passing plays, we will win some games!

But more than anything...more touches for AP...and more passes thrown to Sidney Rice!!!

Pud
10-02-2007, 02:20 AM
Before we start worrying about upgrading our DB's...we should concentrate on improving our pass rush. If we can get any sort of consistant pass rush our current DB's will be just fine.

digital420
10-02-2007, 07:11 AM
The pass rush is Key #1.

if we can't get that going.. we're stuck no matter what..


Where is EJames?
we need to attack qb's not let them have more then one window per WR!!

DiGiTaL

Zeus
10-02-2007, 08:46 AM
"digital420" wrote:


Where is EJames?

we need to attack qb's not let them have more then one window per WR!!


Not yet recovered from last season's injury.

=Z=

Jeremy
10-02-2007, 08:58 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


Such a combo of Winfield and hall would be awesome and sure to sure up our pass defense.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-halltraderequest093007&prov=yhoo&type=lgns


What would you give up for him...

I would go as high as a 3rd and griffen for him.
A big time reciever would do a lot more for this team than a big time cornerback. A tackle not named Cook would certainly help too.

marstc09
10-02-2007, 10:34 AM
"jkjuggalo" wrote:


NO!!
HORRIBLE IDEA!

If we are going to trade for anyone it should be a Olineman and a WR.


The trade I would rather see is Chester Taylor and Dwight Smith plus a second day pick (maybe the extra one we got from Denver) for Levi Jones and TJ Houshmazolli.

This trade would make us instantly better on offense and we would have Doss or Tank step in and play safety for us, which is not too much of a loss of talent.
Housh would also bring some passion to the offense, something that the Vikes really need.


How is getting a WR going to make us instantly better on offense? What good is Levi Jones if the rest of our line is playing bad. Who knows if he will even mess with those guys.

marstc09
10-02-2007, 10:44 AM
"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Purplemania" wrote:


"V" wrote:






I understand the want for a better pass defense, but trading for Hall would be a total knne jerk reaction. Also consider the fact that we have had many opportunities to win teh game because of our D.They are doing a fine job. It is the offense, just as it was last year, that needs to pick it up.

Griffin and McCauley will get better with experience. Consider the fact that we played one of the best passing offenses, and I'm not worried. We held the Lions to 20 points. They are a top 5 passing team. We held the Chiefs to 13 points. Any D that turns in a 13 point day should expect a W. We held the Packers to 23 points. Another top 5 passing team. Our DBs could be so much worse its laughable.

If anything Griffin is the youngest player on a very good defense. His inexperience means some mistakes, and that is the same with McCauley. Just give them time, and they will be fine. They are showing twice as much promise as TJ is up to this point.

By the way, on the first TD, McCauley did his job on shading
the outside. He could have had tighter coverage yes, but the Safety was dragged out on that play and the inside was exposed. He got beat by a great QB.

On the second Td it was a pump fake who froze the saftey. There could have been better coverage sure, but a young guy like that can't be expected to be perfect in one-on-one situations like that. Just give them time. Besides, the D clearly is not one of our biggest problems.


Agree on the McCauley analysis. However, Cedric Griffin is another story. He's been beat repeatedly in all the games thus far. Lazy, as the commentators have said, about moving his feet and hips.


To give up on a guy this quickly is psychotic. A year ago we were praising Griffin for being the answer to Smoot. Now people want McCauley in for Griffin.. What is McCauley has some bad games next year? Are we going to be calling for his head too?

How does DB pop out as your biggest need than us? I don't give a hoot what the announcers say, I watch and form my own opinions. That being that yes, he has gotten beat. It's probably because they throw his way 20 times a game. He gets beat 3-4 times. He has gotten beat deep once? Why do people point out this, but ignore the fact that he has 27 tackles, two less than Winfield and Greenway? Why do people not admit that the coaches made a mistake by putting him on KC's best receiver?

Otherwise, it is all coachable. Getting a better bump at the line. Backpedalling until you are sure the guy is going deep. Looking back for the ball. It's just something that will come with time. I'll wait till he has a Smoot-like day before I make any serious critcisms of the kid.

We don't need another shutdown corner. We need a RT. We need a QB. We need a better OC. If we find those things, you will see too that we are fine on defense.


For one, he gained significant weight in the offseason that has made him slower. I like Griffin too, don't get me wrong. But he does seem to have lazy habbits that I'm afraid will effect his career down the road. Not moving his hips, lazy tackling, to name a few. I do hope he comes around because like I said, I really like Griffin. And teams know Griffin is the guy to pick on. For the love of God, Lavarr Martin or whatever his name is, beat Griffin twice deep.

I think what I want is for Griffin to play more motivated. More hungry, like he did last year when he was trying to earn that starting spot.


See, you have come so far from wanting to trade for Hall. If you really like Griffin, and really do hope that he comes around. Then you need to give him a chance. We gave Fred Smoot 3 years for goodness sakes. I think Griffin deserves more then 4 games.

As far as Ruvell Martin goes. I can only recall one catch for 36 yards. A couple things about that play.
1. We tried a jailhouse blitz, but it was the worst blitz I have ever seen. It was timed horribly.
2. Given that it was a blitz. Griffin has got to bump him at the line, knowing that he has one on one coverage. IMO that is coaching. If you tell a guy to get his hands on the receivers 100 times. He will do it eventually, especially after he gets beat like that.
3. Even though he was beat right off the line. Griffin never gave up on that play. He needs to look back for the ball though. At least he made the tackle.

In the end, he got beat badly. There is room for improvement, but don't give up on this guy.


Why do I want Hall? In terms of talent, they don't come even close. I'd trade for Hall anyday....but I'd be okay if we stuck with Griffin too, ya know what I mean?


Well, in that case I'm going to go start a thread called "We should trade for Tom Brady"



Brady is not unhappy with his team.

marstc09
10-02-2007, 10:47 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:


End result...we don't need Hall...yes, he would be an upgrade...BUT if we can just get our QB on the same page as our WRs...and get the OL to do their jobs on passing plays, we will win some games!

But more than anything...more touches for AP...and more passes thrown to Sidney Rice!!!


Well said. I also want to see James get out there. What is taking so long? He played in the preseason.

Zeus
10-02-2007, 10:48 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


Brady is not unhappy with his team.


DeAngelo Hall is only unhappy because, after costing his team with childish antics on the field and then yelling at the coaches, they fined him.

That's the kind of team guy I really really really want on my team.
Yeah.

=Z=

marstc09
10-02-2007, 10:52 AM
"Zeus" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Brady is not unhappy with his team.


DeAngelo Hall is only unhappy because, after costing his team with childish antics on the field and then yelling at the coaches, they fined him.

That's the kind of team guy I really really really want on my team.
Yeah.

=Z=


As much as I agree with you, I bet there is more to the story.

CCthebest
10-02-2007, 11:13 AM
Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.

NodakPaul
10-02-2007, 11:15 AM
"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


So you're saying that only players with attitude can be good?
::)
Last I checked Winfield, Sharper, AP, Rice, and others all have pretty good attitudes...

marstc09
10-02-2007, 11:25 AM
"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Cheers to that. I am so sick of that angle.

Pud
10-02-2007, 11:34 AM
I wouldnt worry about Hall's attitude. Players want to win, ATL isn't doing that, plus all the Vick stuff they've had to go through..im sure its been a headache for all the players this year. One poster said he'd trade a 3rd and Griffin..if we could pull that deal i would do it by all means. Can you imagine having a 1-2 punch of Winfield and Hall?

Pud
10-02-2007, 11:36 AM
Childress said he expects James to be ready to go against Chicago. I'm not really expecting much from him this season, especially right away when he gets back..it takes time to get some of that explosiveness back after a knee injury.

NodakPaul
10-02-2007, 11:38 AM
If our glaring problem was at corner back, or even on defense, I could understand wanting to trade for him.
But unless we think Hall can play OT or QB, he doesn't interest me right now.

Pud
10-02-2007, 11:46 AM
i agree, its a nice thought and all..but definetly not a priority right now.

douginc
10-02-2007, 11:48 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Cheers to that. I am so sick of that angle.


It seems to me, Childress's worse crime is that he suffers from some sort of superiority complex and will promote players who placate to his ego.
Marcus Robinson questioned the ability and wisdom of Childress's plan, and our leading receiver was cut on Christmas Eve.
Jeff Dugan stays on the team.
Artis Hicks comes over from the Eagles and nearly immediately lands the starting job.
Then, Brooks Bollinger comes over, who has personal ties to Childress.
Last year, it was Mike McMahon who spent time with BC with the Eagles.
Then it was Drew Henson, who had personal ties to the Childress family.
You cannot run a football team with your best friends.
You simply cannot.

So, I highly doubt the Vikings will trade for Deaangelo Hall, even though the move would make a hell of a lot of sense.
He could possibly be had for a third or second round pick.
It's very doubtful you'll find that kind of talent, especially ready to play talent, in the second or third round - the odds just aren't there.
We have the cap room, a veteran and respectable mentor in Antoine who very well could keep D Hall in check (like Carter did to Moss), and we would be massively improved on pass coverage.
So, it's logical, worth the risk, but goes against Childress's policy of bringing in players who might question his authority.
He does not want anyone to expose him for the intellectual fraud he is.

jessejames09
10-02-2007, 11:56 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Cheers to that. I am so sick of that angle.


I suppose I'll raise my glass too.

But another CB is not what we need right now. And we won't get fuck all anyways because our coach is too stubborn to admit he was wrong. It took him a year and a bit to admit he can't call plays, and he still didn't admit it.

NodakPaul
10-02-2007, 12:05 PM
"douginc" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Cheers to that. I am so sick of that angle.


It seems to me, Childress's worse crime is that he suffers from some sort of superiority complex and will promote players who placate to his ego.
Marcus Robinson questioned the ability and wisdom of Childress's plan, and our leading receiver was cut on Christmas Eve.
Jeff Dugan stays on the team.
Artis Hicks comes over from the Eagles and nearly immediately lands the starting job.
Then, Brooks Bollinger comes over, who has personal ties to Childress.
Last year, it was Mike McMahon who spent time with BC with the Eagles.
Then it was Drew Henson, who had personal ties to the Childress family.
You cannot run a football team with your best friends.
You simply cannot.

So, I highly doubt the Vikings will trade for Deaangelo Hall, even though the move would make a hell of a lot of sense.
He could possibly be had for a third or second round pick.
It's very doubtful you'll find that kind of talent, especially ready to play talent, in the second or third round - the odds just aren't there.
We have the cap room, a veteran and respectable mentor in Antoine who very well could keep D Hall in check (like Carter did to Moss), and we would be massively improved on pass coverage.
So, it's logical, worth the risk, but goes against Childress's policy of bringing in players who might question his authority.
He does not want anyone to expose him for the intellectual fraud he is.


I am going to throw the bullshit flag out here on the three points bolded above.

1) What on earth does any of that have to do with a superiority complex or any kind of ego?
Marcus Robinson didn't "question the wisdom" to anything.
He skipped practices by saying he was injured, and then bitched and moaned when he couldn't play in the game as a result.
You want to see someone who truly questioned Childress's plan? Look at Winfield.
He professionally made some of his complaints known, and a lot of what he said was taken to heart by Childress.
Instead of bitching and whining about it and playing the victim, he effected change.
Robinson btw only averaged 38.1 yards per game last year.
Four games in and Wade is already doing better.


2) Why would this move make sense?
CB is not our weak spot.
QB and OT are.


3) Hall was a first round draft pick in 2004, and he has lived up to the pick in terms of ability.
Why in the hell do you think the Falcons would trade him for a "third or second round pick".
We would have to give up a lot more than that to bring him.
And even if it was just a second round pick, we have been pretty damn good with our second round picks lately.
Especially when you consider the fact that with or without Hall we will likely be a high draft pick in 2008.

douginc
10-02-2007, 12:16 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"douginc" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Cheers to that. I am so sick of that angle.


It seems to me, Childress's worse crime is that he suffers from some sort of superiority complex and will promote players who placate to his ego.
Marcus Robinson questioned the ability and wisdom of Childress's plan, and our leading receiver was cut on Christmas Eve.
Jeff Dugan stays on the team.
Artis Hicks comes over from the Eagles and nearly immediately lands the starting job.
Then, Brooks Bollinger comes over, who has personal ties to Childress.
Last year, it was Mike McMahon who spent time with BC with the Eagles.
Then it was Drew Henson, who had personal ties to the Childress family.
You cannot run a football team with your best friends.
You simply cannot.

So, I highly doubt the Vikings will trade for Deaangelo Hall, even though the move would make a hell of a lot of sense.
He could possibly be had for a third or second round pick.
It's very doubtful you'll find that kind of talent, especially ready to play talent, in the second or third round - the odds just aren't there.
We have the cap room, a veteran and respectable mentor in Antoine who very well could keep D Hall in check (like Carter did to Moss), and we would be massively improved on pass coverage.
So, it's logical, worth the risk, but goes against Childress's policy of bringing in players who might question his authority.
He does not want anyone to expose him for the intellectual fraud he is.


I am going to throw the kaka del rio flag out here on the three points bolded above.

1) What on earth does any of that have to do with a superiority complex or any kind of ego?
Marcus Robinson didn't "question the wisdom" to anything.
He skipped practices by saying he was injured, and then bitched and moaned when he couldn't play in the game as a result.
You want to see someone who truly questioned Childress's plan? Look at Winfield.
He professionally made some of his complaints known, and a lot of what he said was taken to heart by Childress.
Instead of bitching and whining about it and playing the victim, he effected change.
Robinson btw only averaged 38.1 yards per game last year.
Four games in and Wade is already doing better.


2) Why would this move make sense?
CB is not our weak spot.
QB and OT are.


3) Hall was a first round draft pick in 2004, and he has lived up to the pick in terms of ability.
Why in the hell do you think the Falcons would trade him for a "third or second round pick".
We would have to give up a lot more than that to bring him.
And even if it was just a second round pick, we have been pretty gol 'darnit good with our second round picks lately.
Especially when you consider the fact that with or without Hall we will likely be a high draft pick in 2008.


Robinson seemed to be the only player catching touchdowns.
Sure, I agree, Marcus had a bad attitude, perhaps he didn't even deserve a spot on the team, but he was at least worthy of a roster spot until the end of the year.
Corner is still a weak spot.
Whether or not you think Griffin is a highly talented corner, the depth and improvement would still be extremely helpful.
Should Griffin or McCaulley be injured at any time, then a lot of people would be very worried about our CB positions.
No one is going to trade a talented QB or O-lineman, but true, those are much weaker spots, and I would love to obtain either over CB.
However, here is an opportunity to have two amazing corners next to one another.
It'd be the Pat/Kevin Williams duo of the backfield.

The reason D Hall might be given up for cheap is other teams may be worried about his attitude.
Plus, according to the reports from ProFootballTalk, D Hall was physically attacked in the locker room by his fellow teammates.
If that were true, there's no way he would be willing to give his all to his team.
There would be a trememdous rift in the lockerroom.

And, in my opinion, B Childress does suffer from a complex and does want to surround himself with his supporters.

Zeus
10-02-2007, 12:17 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Randy's attitude was so good in Oakland that they ended up with the #1 pick.
Do you think that Randy would be playing at a high level if he were struggling along with this offense?

=Z=

NodakPaul
10-02-2007, 12:21 PM
"douginc" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"douginc" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Cheers to that. I am so sick of that angle.


It seems to me, Childress's worse crime is that he suffers from some sort of superiority complex and will promote players who placate to his ego.
Marcus Robinson questioned the ability and wisdom of Childress's plan, and our leading receiver was cut on Christmas Eve.
Jeff Dugan stays on the team.
Artis Hicks comes over from the Eagles and nearly immediately lands the starting job.
Then, Brooks Bollinger comes over, who has personal ties to Childress.
Last year, it was Mike McMahon who spent time with BC with the Eagles.
Then it was Drew Henson, who had personal ties to the Childress family.
You cannot run a football team with your best friends.
You simply cannot.

So, I highly doubt the Vikings will trade for Deaangelo Hall, even though the move would make a hell of a lot of sense.
He could possibly be had for a third or second round pick.
It's very doubtful you'll find that kind of talent, especially ready to play talent, in the second or third round - the odds just aren't there.
We have the cap room, a veteran and respectable mentor in Antoine who very well could keep D Hall in check (like Carter did to Moss), and we would be massively improved on pass coverage.
So, it's logical, worth the risk, but goes against Childress's policy of bringing in players who might question his authority.
He does not want anyone to expose him for the intellectual fraud he is.


I am going to throw the kaka del rio flag out here on the three points bolded above.

1) What on earth does any of that have to do with a superiority complex or any kind of ego?
Marcus Robinson didn't "question the wisdom" to anything.
He skipped practices by saying he was injured, and then bitched and moaned when he couldn't play in the game as a result.
You want to see someone who truly questioned Childress's plan? Look at Winfield.
He professionally made some of his complaints known, and a lot of what he said was taken to heart by Childress.
Instead of bitching and whining about it and playing the victim, he effected change.
Robinson btw only averaged 38.1 yards per game last year.
Four games in and Wade is already doing better.


2) Why would this move make sense?
CB is not our weak spot.
QB and OT are.


3) Hall was a first round draft pick in 2004, and he has lived up to the pick in terms of ability.
Why in the hell do you think the Falcons would trade him for a "third or second round pick".
We would have to give up a lot more than that to bring him.
And even if it was just a second round pick, we have been pretty gol 'darnit good with our second round picks lately.
Especially when you consider the fact that with or without Hall we will likely be a high draft pick in 2008.


Robinson seemed to be the only player catching touchdowns.
Sure, I agree, Marcus had a bad attitude, perhaps he didn't even deserve a spot on the team, but he was at least worthy of a roster spot until the end of the year.
Corner is still a weak spot.
Whether or not you think Griffin is a highly talented corner, the depth and improvement would still be extremely helpful.
Should Griffin or McCaulley be injured at any time, then a lot of people would be very worried about our CB positions.
No one is going to trade a talented QB or O-lineman, but true, those are much weaker spots, and I would love to obtain either over CB.
However, here is an opportunity to have two amazing corners next to one another.
It'd be the Pat/Kevin Williams duo of the backfield.

The reason D Hall might be given up for cheap is other teams may be worried about his attitude.
Plus, according to the reports from ProFootballTalk, D Hall was physically attacked in the locker room by his fellow teammates.
If that were true, there's no way he would be willing to give his all to his team.
There would be a trememdous rift in the lockerroom.

And, in my opinion, B Childress does suffer from a complex and does want to surround himself with his supporters.


OK, I am with you on your first two points.
I didn't like the timing of the Robinson cut either, and you are right in that Atlanta might be willing to unload him for cheap given the circumstances.

You still lose me on the ego point.
I just don't see Childress doing anything different than any other coach.
Coaches will always bring in people that they are familiar with, it has nothing to do with ego.
You can question his evaluation of talent at certain positions, but I just really don't see any evidence that it is done because of some kind of superiority complex.

douginc
10-02-2007, 12:25 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Randy's attitude was so good in Oakland that they ended up with the #1 pick.
Do you think that Randy would be playing at a high level if he were struggling along with this offense?

=Z=


I'm not a Moss apologist.
I'm really not.
I'm a bad coach apologist.
I apologize to players who have to deal with terrible coaching.

My condolenses to Moss of the last two years, and especially to Ladanian Tomlinson of this year.
Norv Turner destroyed both offenses, Oakland and now San Diego.
The year before, it was Art Shell.
I don't think He-Man and Superman could have success in their systems.
I don't think anyone is going to say LT is a bad character person, or all of a sudden is terrible this year.
It's clearly the Norv that's destroyed that offense, the same one that couldn't score with 2 terrific WR in Moss and Porter in Oakland.
Before that, it was Art Shell, who looks like he wandered out of an old person's home in bunny slippers looking for his lost dog.

But, I agree, is Moss were struggling, he very well might not overcome it, but rather complain.
But you could see why.
If you were terrific at your job and your boss had absolutely no clue what he's doing, you'd be extremely frustrated as well.
But, true character is shutting your mouth and doing what you can (see Cris Carter).

NodakPaul
10-02-2007, 12:29 PM
"douginc" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yeah, god forbid we get a talented player with a little 'attitude'. Moss and his 'attitude' are going to help the patsies to a 16-0 season and SB win. I prefer the lackluster, sub par,
non talented players childress is so fond of.


Randy's attitude was so good in Oakland that they ended up with the #1 pick.
Do you think that Randy would be playing at a high level if he were struggling along with this offense?

=Z=


I'm not a Moss apologist.
I'm really not.
I'm a bad coach apologist.
I apologize to players who have to deal with terrible coaching.

My condolenses to Moss of the last two years, and especially to Ladanian Tomlinson of this year.
Norv Turner destroyed both offenses, Oakland and now San Diego.
The year before, it was Art Shell.
I don't think He-Man and Superman could have success in their systems.
I don't think anyone is going to say LT is a bad character person, or all of a sudden is terrible this year.
It's clearly the Norv that's destroyed that offense, the same one that could score with 2 terrific WR in Moss and Porter in Oakland.
Before that, it was Art Shell, who looks like he wandered out of an old person's home in bunny slippers looking for his lost dog.

But, I agree, is Moss were struggling, he very well might not overcome it, but rather complain.
But you could see why.
If you were terrific at your job and your boss had absolutely no clue what he's doing, you'd be extremely frustrated as well.


Everyone who is good at what they do thinks their boss has no clue at some point, regardless of how much truth is in it.
What separates good employees or players
fro the bad ones isn't just their ability, but also how they deal with situations like that.
I refer back to my earlier post about Winfield for an example of a good player addressing the situation.
Moss would not have addressed it that way.

marstc09
10-07-2007, 01:57 PM
Fumble return for a TD. Wouldn't mind him being opposite Winfield. He will be expensive when he hits free agency.