PDA

View Full Version : Starting QB job up for grabs next season - Childress noncommittal on Jackson



singersp
12-23-2007, 09:28 AM
Charley Walters: Minnesota Vikings starting QB job still up for grabs for next season (http://www.twincities.com/walters/ci_7789902?nclick_check=1)

Pioneer Press

Article Last Updated: 12/22/2007 10:07:02 PM CST

SUNDAY SUPER SHOOTER CHARLEY WALTERS


Vikings second-year quarterback Tarvaris Jackson has an 8-2 record this season heading into tonight's game against the Washington Redskins, but coach Brad Childress isn't ready to say he has settled on his quarterback for 2008...

Marrdro
12-23-2007, 09:57 AM
Well that title was missleading.
Only 3 short paragraphs on TJ.

Where the hell do they find these guys they call reporters.

marstc09
12-23-2007, 10:01 AM
If we make the playoffs, TJ is our QB next year.

Marrdro
12-23-2007, 10:07 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


If we make the playoffs, TJ is our QB next year.

I think he is even if we don't make the playoffs.
Hate to say it but I think the following justifies it.

a.
He has played above expectations.
b.
He will get better (not sure to what degree) over the offseason.
c.
His supporting cast will continue to improve.
d.
There isn't a glut of NFL ready QB's out there that are much better than him this year.
e.
A collegiate candidate would be behind TJ with regard to time in the system and would set this team back.

I still find comments like this from the Chiller confusing though.
I am not 100% convinced that he is completely sold on TJ as well.
(I have seen him make a comment like that at least 5 different times)


"I'm not going to say he's not; I'm not going to say he is," Childress said. "I just want to look at these (last) seven games and see what kind of growth he's had. He's shown some things. We've said there's going to be blips. But he's still going to be a work in progress as we go through next year."



Guess that gives some of us doubters some room for hope that he will force the front office staff to at least explore the possiblities of getting a better supporting cast of candidates as backups next year.

I for one would still like to see us go after Sorgi and draft a kid as well.

mountainviking
12-23-2007, 12:14 PM
I think proper competition can be a great motivator.
Doesn't look like Bollinger or Holcomb are really challenging TJack's status at the top, and then theres all those injuries forcing starts from the bench.
I would definitely like to see something done here, though I'm no longer sure how much more we need to invest...vet and/or rookie?
At one point I was all about a first round pick and a vet...now that TJack is improving, I'd lean toward WR, DE, or S with that pick.
But, specially if the FA vets aren't looking so good (talent upgrade vs. cost), we need to consider an earlier pick in a BPA scenario.


Sorgi might be a good fit...hopefully we'll get to see him in action a bit the next two weeks.


[edit]Back to Bollinger...he managed to get the job done on Mon.
Again, seems he's better off the bench, than when he knows he is going to be the starter...perhaps?
He could be the backup/tutor for TJack and another young guy.
"he knows the system"
Once again, this being IF it is another thin FA QB class...which seems likely given all the injuries at the position, and how many teams struggled with their depth there.
Supply is down/Demand is up...D'oh!!

ciacbw
12-23-2007, 05:54 PM
And the skins are supposed to be scared of a QB who isnt even guaranteed the starting job? lmao

singersp
12-25-2007, 07:47 AM
Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 08:04 AM
"singersp" wrote:


Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.
:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.
Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but damn fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

Damn, this is a gonna be a great off year.
;D

Purple Floyd
12-25-2007, 09:11 AM
"singersp" wrote:


Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....







why are we bringing back clips from this past preseason? We already know what happened with the QB position in 2007.

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 09:15 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....







why are we bringing back clips from this past preseason? We already know what happened with the QB position in 2007.



I tend to ignore typos like that from the local sports hacks and kindof chalk it up as a prime example of thier reporting (or lack thereof most times) skills.
;D

Purple Floyd
12-25-2007, 09:20 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.
:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.
Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but damn fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

Damn, this is a gonna be a great off year.
;D


That can be spun 2 ways.

You could say that Childress has to lobby Spielman to do what he wants or it could be that Spielman is asking Childress what he needs to win and does what the coach wants.

The spin you take is up to you but isn't necessarily right or wrong.

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 09:24 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.

:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.

Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but gol 'darnit fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

gol 'darnit, this is a gonna be a great off year.

;D


That can be spun 2 ways.

You could say that Childress has to lobby Spielman to do what he wants or it could be that Spielman is asking Childress what he needs to win and does what the coach wants.

The spin you take is up to you but isn't necessarily right or wrong.

I agree it could go either way, however, in most cases Spielman is the one who is calling player personnel shots with buying from the Owner, Coach and of course Bryzcheapski.

Remember the famous quote I was using with regard to the Tuna and how he of all coaches didn't get to make player personnel decisions.
Guess what, we saw that in Dallas (TO) and now it is being touted again that since he took the Miami gig, finally has that authority.


Very funny how most people don't understand how organizations work.
With that said, I think my spin is pretty accurate.

Purple Floyd
12-25-2007, 09:32 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.
:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.
Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but gol 'darnit fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

gol 'darnit, this is a gonna be a great off year.
;D


That can be spun 2 ways.

You could say that Childress has to lobby Spielman to do what he wants or it could be that Spielman is asking Childress what he needs to win and does what the coach wants.

The spin you take is up to you but isn't necessarily right or wrong.

I agree it could go either way, however, in most cases Spielman is the one who is calling player personnel shots with buying from the Owner, Coach and of course Bryzcheapski.

Remember the famous quote I was using with regard to the Tuna and how he of all coaches didn't get to make player personnel decisions.
Guess what, we saw that in Dallas (TO) and now it is being touted again that since he took the Miami gig, finally has that authority.


Very funny how most people don't understand how organizations work.
With that said, I think my spin is pretty accurate.


I thought we were talking about the Vikings and not the cowboys? What they do has no bearing on what we do and even that organization has gone through changes. Jimmy Johnson was very involved and instrumental in choosing the talent when Jones first took over.

Back to the Vikings,though.
I have yet to see a blueprint that was approved by the club as authentic that shows Childress is just a puppet and that Brzynski is his Geppetto. If Wilf has the confidence he says he does in Childress, I am sure that Brad has input on who to bring in.

COJOMAY
12-25-2007, 09:35 AM
This has been heavily talked about on other threads...but I think Zygi made the promise to Minnesota fans that he would keep the team in Minnesota. He hates to go back on that promise but he also realizes that nothing will happen on the new stadium front unless the Vikings are a winner RIGHT NOW! He needs this team to come up big next year to get the fans excited about Viking football again.
He knows the time is short from both personnel standpoint (like Birk and others) and from the timeline
they need to get a new stadium in place.
As much as I think both the coach and the owner would like to build from the draft, time isn't going to offer that luxeury. That's why I see the Vikings loosening their purse strings and spending most of their cap money and bringing in what they need almost despite the cause. It's a "do or die" situation for the Vikings next year in terms of the stadium deal.

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 09:41 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.

:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.

Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but gol 'darnit fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

gol 'darnit, this is a gonna be a great off year.

;D


That can be spun 2 ways.

You could say that Childress has to lobby Spielman to do what he wants or it could be that Spielman is asking Childress what he needs to win and does what the coach wants.

The spin you take is up to you but isn't necessarily right or wrong.

I agree it could go either way, however, in most cases Spielman is the one who is calling player personnel shots with buying from the Owner, Coach and of course Bryzcheapski.

Remember the famous quote I was using with regard to the Tuna and how he of all coaches didn't get to make player personnel decisions.
Guess what, we saw that in Dallas (TO) and now it is being touted again that since he took the Miami gig, finally has that authority.


Very funny how most people don't understand how organizations work.
With that said, I think my spin is pretty accurate.


I thought we were talking about the Vikings and not the cowboys? What they do has no bearing on what we do and even that organization has gone through changes. Jimmy Johnson was very involved and instrumental in choosing the talent when Jones first took over.

Back to the Vikings,though.

I have yet to see a blueprint that was approved by the club as authentic that shows Childress is just a puppet and that Brzynski is his Geppetto. If Wilf has the confidence he says he does in Childress, I am sure that Brad has input on who to bring in.

Ahhh now your just trying to get me riled up.

The Cowboys are just one example of how that blueprint is infact utilized by other teams.
Discount it away if you want but that is the way things run.

As to the Vikes, if the Chiller had all the power, why would the Wilfs use a term like Triangle of Authorit?
Why didn't Wilf fire the Chiller last year after the way the draft was run and poor player personnel decisions were made during that draft?

Comeon my friend.
Ignore the facts and my assumptions all you want but the Chiller just doesn't have the power that most believe. I for one think that is a good thing.
Case in point.
Look at the only team you can really call a dynasty in this present day era.......The Pats.......

They have a GM and a Player Personnel staff.
The Head Coach does just that. Coach and of course provide input on player decisions.


Look, I am not saying that the Coaching staff doesn't have a say in who is brought in but all the research/scouting is done by that department and not the Head Coach my friend.

jargomcfargo
12-25-2007, 10:52 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:




Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.

:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.

Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but gol 'darnit fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

gol 'darnit, this is a gonna be a great off year.

;D


That can be spun 2 ways.

You could say that Childress has to lobby Spielman to do what he wants or it could be that Spielman is asking Childress what he needs to win and does what the coach wants.

The spin you take is up to you but isn't necessarily right or wrong.

I agree it could go either way, however, in most cases Spielman is the one who is calling player personnel shots with buying from the Owner, Coach and of course Bryzcheapski.

Remember the famous quote I was using with regard to the Tuna and how he of all coaches didn't get to make player personnel decisions.
Guess what, we saw that in Dallas (TO) and now it is being touted again that since he took the Miami gig, finally has that authority.


Very funny how most people don't understand how organizations work.
With that said, I think my spin is pretty accurate.


I thought we were talking about the Vikings and not the cowboys? What they do has no bearing on what we do and even that organization has gone through changes. Jimmy Johnson was very involved and instrumental in choosing the talent when Jones first took over.

Back to the Vikings,though.

I have yet to see a blueprint that was approved by the club as authentic that shows Childress is just a puppet and that Brzynski is his Geppetto. If Wilf has the confidence he says he does in Childress, I am sure that Brad has input on who to bring in.

Ahhh now your just trying to get me riled up.

The Cowboys are just one example of how that blueprint is infact utilized by other teams.
Discount it away if you want but that is the way things run.

As to the Vikes, if the Chiller had all the power, why would the Wilfs use a term like Triangle of Authorit?
Why didn't Wilf fire the Chiller last year after the way the draft was run and poor player personnel decisions were made during that draft?

Comeon my friend.
Ignore the facts and my assumptions all you want but the Chiller just doesn't have the power that most believe. I for one think that is a good thing.
Case in point.
Look at the only team you can really call a dynasty in this present day era.......The Pats.......

They have a GM and a Player Personnel staff.
The Head Coach does just that. Coach and of course provide input on player decisions.


Look, I am not saying that the Coaching staff doesn't have a say in who is brought in but all the research/scouting is done by that department and not the Head Coach my friend.


Here is how it worked with the Pats. A little history from Wiki gives some insight.


In 1992, Pioli was hired as a pro personnel assistant by now-Patriots coach Bill Belichick, then the head coach of the Cleveland Browns. Even without prior NFL scouting experience, Belichick put Pioli in charge of evaluating college players and handling some player contracts.

When Belichick was fired following the Browns' move to Baltimore in 1996, Pioli stayed with the Ravens and was promoted to director of pro personnel.

A year later, in 1997, Pioli rejoined Belichick, who had followed Bill Parcells as an assistant coach to the New York Jets. Again the director of pro personnel, Pioli's moves helped the Jets to a franchise-high 12 wins and their first AFC East title in 20 years.

When Belichick accepted the Patriots' head coaching position in 2000, Pioli again followed Belichick as the Patriots' assistant director of player personnel.

In their seven seasons with the Patriots, Pioli and Belichick have led the team to three Super Bowl championships and five division titles. In his tenure with the Patriots, Pioli has earned promotions to Director of Player Personnel and Vice President of Player Personnel in 2000 and 2002, respectively, as well as a contract extension in 2005.

purplepowered
12-25-2007, 11:01 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:
[quote]
If we make the playoffs, TJ is our QB next year.

I think he is even if we don't make the playoffs.
Hate to say it but I think the following justifies it.

a.
He has played above expectations.
b.
He will get better (not sure to what degree) over the offseason.
c.
His supporting cast will continue to improve.
d.
There isn't a glut of NFL ready QB's out there that are much better than him this year.
e.
A collegiate candidate would be behind TJ with regard to time in the system and would set this team back.

I still find comments like this from the Chiller confusing though.
I am not 100% convinced that he is completely sold on TJ as well.
(I have seen him make a comment like that at least 5 different times)


"I'm not going to say he's not; I'm not going to say he is," Childress said. "I just want to look at these (last) seven games and see what kind of growth he's had. He's shown some things. We've said there's going to be blips. But he's still going to be a work in progress as we go through next year."



Guess that gives some of us doubters some room for hope that he will force the front office staff to at least explore the possiblities of getting a better supporting cast of candidates as backups next year.

I for one would still like to see us go after Sorgi and draft a kid as well.
I am with you totaly Chilly is alot of cunfusing. I am not ever sold on this guy getting us past the first round of playoffs
much less to a sb. He cant call plays on the run, he makes bad timing on stupid ideas when it comes to challening plays that are obvious. I know that it all isnt on Chilly when it comes to the challenging but I do say that the challenging the redskin play was great....i was impressed on the reversal. But still If TJack isnt our QB next year after all he has come thru...he is stupider than he looks with the clown outfit on in pp.o.

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 11:07 AM
"purplepowered" wrote:



My friend, I've given you at least 3 responses that show that the Chiller (although he approves the gameplan) doesn't call the plays during the game.

Gotta let that one go and ping on him for other things of importance like:

a.
Poor Scheme.
b.
Team not ready both mentally and physically.
c.
Poor coaching decision (i.e. Kick or not, on side kick or not, go for it on 4th and 1 or not).

Those are the types of things that come into play here, not whether or not he called a pass play or a running play.
Again, the O-coord is relaying them down to the QB coach who then calls them in.

Proud2BPurple
12-25-2007, 12:16 PM
I think stick with TJ behind our running game ( if we keep CT) and load him up with weapons. Few of the free agents mentioned like Crayton and Dallas Clark would be good or if any top drawer wideouts come availble. Vikings would have a much easier job finding quality receivers than an NFL ready or indeed proven QB!

Frostbite
12-25-2007, 06:32 PM
Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!

marstc09
12-25-2007, 06:34 PM
"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

Frostbite
12-25-2007, 06:37 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.



I tend to agree with that, although Childress might get a pass into 09 from Ziggy regardless of where we finish in 08.

Cheers!

Mr-holland
12-25-2007, 06:37 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 06:41 PM
"Mr-holland" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

The Chiller isn't going anywhere and he isn't tied to TJ in anyway other than on message boards such as this and my newpaper hacks who like to stir things up.

The owner ship group was well aware of what they faced going into this season with the talent that was provided to the coaching staff.

I for one believe this staff did a good job of getting this team ready to play (well almost every week) given the circumstances.

A good draft will happen again, a few FA will be brought in and things will continue to improve as they did this year.

Isn't that the bar everyone set at the beginning of the year?
Get better and improve?

Frostbite
12-25-2007, 06:47 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mr-holland" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

The Chiller isn't going anywhere and he isn't tied to TJ in anyway other than on message boards such as this and my newpaper hacks who like to stir things up.

The owner ship group was well aware of what they faced going into this season with the talent that was provided to the coaching staff.

I for one believe this staff did a good job of getting this team ready to play (well almost every week) given the circumstances.

A good draft will happen again, a few FA will be brought in and things will continue to improve as they did this year.

Isn't that the bar everyone set at the beginning of the year?
Get better and improve?




I was speaking of 08 being T.Jacks bubble season. I agree Childress will be here for awhile and I think he and Ziggy have a good understanding currently about the team as a whole, with regard to future growth etc.

I think the potential for having a great 08 with T.Jack playing his best football is possible, but he's certainly going to be watched closely in TC and in the pre-season by the coaches. He has a lot of work to do in the off-season to get it done.

Cheers!

Purple Floyd
12-25-2007, 06:50 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:




Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.
:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.
Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but gol 'darnit fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

gol 'darnit, this is a gonna be a great off year.
;D


That can be spun 2 ways.

You could say that Childress has to lobby Spielman to do what he wants or it could be that Spielman is asking Childress what he needs to win and does what the coach wants.

The spin you take is up to you but isn't necessarily right or wrong.

I agree it could go either way, however, in most cases Spielman is the one who is calling player personnel shots with buying from the Owner, Coach and of course Bryzcheapski.

Remember the famous quote I was using with regard to the Tuna and how he of all coaches didn't get to make player personnel decisions.
Guess what, we saw that in Dallas (TO) and now it is being touted again that since he took the Miami gig, finally has that authority.


Very funny how most people don't understand how organizations work.
With that said, I think my spin is pretty accurate.


I thought we were talking about the Vikings and not the cowboys? What they do has no bearing on what we do and even that organization has gone through changes. Jimmy Johnson was very involved and instrumental in choosing the talent when Jones first took over.

Back to the Vikings,though.
I have yet to see a blueprint that was approved by the club as authentic that shows Childress is just a puppet and that Brzynski is his Geppetto. If Wilf has the confidence he says he does in Childress, I am sure that Brad has input on who to bring in.

Ahhh now your just trying to get me riled up.

The Cowboys are just one example of how that blueprint is infact utilized by other teams.
Discount it away if you want but that is the way things run.

As to the Vikes, if the Chiller had all the power, why would the Wilfs use a term like Triangle of Authorit?
Why didn't Wilf fire the Chiller last year after the way the draft was run and poor player personnel decisions were made during that draft?

Comeon my friend.
Ignore the facts and my assumptions all you want but the Chiller just doesn't have the power that most believe. I for one think that is a good thing.
Case in point.
Look at the only team you can really call a dynasty in this present day era.......The Pats.......

They have a GM and a Player Personnel staff.
The Head Coach does just that. Coach and of course provide input on player decisions.


Look, I am not saying that the Coaching staff doesn't have a say in who is brought in but all the research/scouting is done by that department and not the Head Coach my friend.


Then try this:


Merry Christmas ;D

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 06:52 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:






Childress noncommittal over quarterback's long-term future (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12806557.html)

The Vikings coach won't say Tarvaris Jackson will be the starter in 2007, explaining that he wants to evaluate the total body of work.

By Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune

Last update: December 24, 2007 - 9:19 PM


That's it. They've seen it. Barring a run into the 2007 postseason, the Vikings have collected the vast majority of raw data they're going to have for making the most critical decision of their offseason....



THERE IT IS.......THERE IT IS.

:o
:o


"I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I'm not looking at [Denver] as our last game," Childress said. "But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you're always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance."

Is this a re-occuring theme or what.

Comeon, someone prove me wrong or convince me otherwise that the Chiller isn't really the author of or the decision maker behined this whole Jackson experiment.

He has been toeing the line cause it is a front office mandate to "Develop" this team and see were they stand, but gol 'darnit fella's, how many times do we have to see quotes like this before we finally figure this out and quite saying that he is like some little Hitler up there forcing this issue.

I am happy know.
The Chiller has the ammo (TJ's performances) as ammo to really get someone in here to run this offense.

gol 'darnit, this is a gonna be a great off year.

;D


That can be spun 2 ways.

You could say that Childress has to lobby Spielman to do what he wants or it could be that Spielman is asking Childress what he needs to win and does what the coach wants.

The spin you take is up to you but isn't necessarily right or wrong.

I agree it could go either way, however, in most cases Spielman is the one who is calling player personnel shots with buying from the Owner, Coach and of course Bryzcheapski.

Remember the famous quote I was using with regard to the Tuna and how he of all coaches didn't get to make player personnel decisions.
Guess what, we saw that in Dallas (TO) and now it is being touted again that since he took the Miami gig, finally has that authority.


Very funny how most people don't understand how organizations work.
With that said, I think my spin is pretty accurate.


I thought we were talking about the Vikings and not the cowboys? What they do has no bearing on what we do and even that organization has gone through changes. Jimmy Johnson was very involved and instrumental in choosing the talent when Jones first took over.

Back to the Vikings,though.

I have yet to see a blueprint that was approved by the club as authentic that shows Childress is just a puppet and that Brzynski is his Geppetto. If Wilf has the confidence he says he does in Childress, I am sure that Brad has input on who to bring in.

Ahhh now your just trying to get me riled up.

The Cowboys are just one example of how that blueprint is infact utilized by other teams.
Discount it away if you want but that is the way things run.

As to the Vikes, if the Chiller had all the power, why would the Wilfs use a term like Triangle of Authorit?
Why didn't Wilf fire the Chiller last year after the way the draft was run and poor player personnel decisions were made during that draft?

Comeon my friend.
Ignore the facts and my assumptions all you want but the Chiller just doesn't have the power that most believe. I for one think that is a good thing.
Case in point.
Look at the only team you can really call a dynasty in this present day era.......The Pats.......

They have a GM and a Player Personnel staff.
The Head Coach does just that. Coach and of course provide input on player decisions.


Look, I am not saying that the Coaching staff doesn't have a say in who is brought in but all the research/scouting is done by that department and not the Head Coach my friend.


Then try this:


Merry Christmas ;D


Well played my friend.
Well played indeed.
Same to you and yours.

;D

marstc09
12-25-2007, 06:53 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mr-holland" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

The Chiller isn't going anywhere and he isn't tied to TJ in anyway other than on message boards such as this and my newpaper hacks who like to stir things up.

The owner ship group was well aware of what they faced going into this season with the talent that was provided to the coaching staff.

I for one believe this staff did a good job of getting this team ready to play (well almost every week) given the circumstances.

A good draft will happen again, a few FA will be brought in and things will continue to improve as they did this year.

Isn't that the bar everyone set at the beginning of the year?
Get better and improve?


What?! If we do not make the playoffs next year, he is gone.

marstc09
12-25-2007, 06:56 PM
"Mr-holland" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes


How does not making the playoffs next year showing progression?

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 07:10 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mr-holland" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

The Chiller isn't going anywhere and he isn't tied to TJ in anyway other than on message boards such as this and my newpaper hacks who like to stir things up.

The owner ship group was well aware of what they faced going into this season with the talent that was provided to the coaching staff.

I for one believe this staff did a good job of getting this team ready to play (well almost every week) given the circumstances.

A good draft will happen again, a few FA will be brought in and things will continue to improve as they did this year.

Isn't that the bar everyone set at the beginning of the year?
Get better and improve?


What?! If we do not make the playoffs next year, he is gone.

Are you telling me that if (for instance) we go 10-6 and don't win our division, the other wild cards are 11-5 or 10-6 and beat us in tie breakers you would fire him?

We have a very good chance of going 9-7, we were in almost every game (2 I am very unhappy with) and were (still are to a degree) in the playoff race right up to the end of the year with a:

a. New D-coord.
b. Not the best D against the pass (that got better as the year went on)
c. Still trying to implement a very complicated blocking scheme (that continues to get better)
d. A very unspectactular recieving corp
e. And most importantly probably one of the shackiest selection of QB's in the NFC.
f.
Barring the GB PUKERS (by one year less than us) were the youngest team in the league.

Comeon my friend, you have to admit that this coaching staff earned thier stripes and did very well with this team.
Is there room for them to improve as a coaching staff.
Yes, but damn I think they did a good job.

This team (with a few select players) got better every game.
The experience those kids got will pay huge dividends next year if they are still starters or if they provide depth behind a few added FA's.

No place to go but up, as we did this year my friend.

marstc09
12-25-2007, 07:16 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mr-holland" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:




Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

The Chiller isn't going anywhere and he isn't tied to TJ in anyway other than on message boards such as this and my newpaper hacks who like to stir things up.

The owner ship group was well aware of what they faced going into this season with the talent that was provided to the coaching staff.

I for one believe this staff did a good job of getting this team ready to play (well almost every week) given the circumstances.

A good draft will happen again, a few FA will be brought in and things will continue to improve as they did this year.

Isn't that the bar everyone set at the beginning of the year?
Get better and improve?


What?! If we do not make the playoffs next year, he is gone.

Are you telling me that if (for instance) we go 10-6 and don't win our division, the other wild cards are 11-5 or 10-6 and beat us in tie breakers you would fire him?

We have a very good chance of going 9-7, we were in almost every game (2 I am very unhappy with) and were (still are to a degree) in the playoff race right up to the end of the year with a:

a. New D-coord.
b. Not the best D against the pass (that got better as the year went on)
c. Still trying to implement a very complicated blocking scheme (that continues to get better)
d. A very unspectactular recieving corp
e. And most importantly probably one of the shackiest selection of QB's in the NFC.
f.
Barring the GB PUKERS (by one year less than us) were the youngest team in the league.

Comeon my friend, you have to admit that this coaching staff earned thier stripes and did very well with this team.
Is there room for them to improve as a coaching staff.
Yes, but damn I think they did a good job.

This team (with a few select players) got better every game.
The experience those kids got will pay huge dividends next year if they are still starters or if they provide depth behind a few added FA's.

No place to go but up, as we did this year my friend.


So your telling me if we go 9-7 this year and we go 10-6 next year and do not make the playoffs both seasons that is progressing. Come on Marrdro you know that is not acceptable. I like the job we did this year but I can't agree with you on next year keeping Childress and company if we miss the playoffs.

Marrdro
12-25-2007, 07:23 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mr-holland" wrote:






Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

The Chiller isn't going anywhere and he isn't tied to TJ in anyway other than on message boards such as this and my newpaper hacks who like to stir things up.

The owner ship group was well aware of what they faced going into this season with the talent that was provided to the coaching staff.

I for one believe this staff did a good job of getting this team ready to play (well almost every week) given the circumstances.

A good draft will happen again, a few FA will be brought in and things will continue to improve as they did this year.

Isn't that the bar everyone set at the beginning of the year?
Get better and improve?


What?! If we do not make the playoffs next year, he is gone.

Are you telling me that if (for instance) we go 10-6 and don't win our division, the other wild cards are 11-5 or 10-6 and beat us in tie breakers you would fire him?

We have a very good chance of going 9-7, we were in almost every game (2 I am very unhappy with) and were (still are to a degree) in the playoff race right up to the end of the year with a:

a. New D-coord.
b. Not the best D against the pass (that got better as the year went on)
c. Still trying to implement a very complicated blocking scheme (that continues to get better)
d. A very unspectactular recieving corp
e. And most importantly probably one of the shackiest selection of QB's in the NFC.
f.
Barring the GB PUKERS (by one year less than us) were the youngest team in the league.

Comeon my friend, you have to admit that this coaching staff earned thier stripes and did very well with this team.
Is there room for them to improve as a coaching staff.
Yes, but gol 'darnit I think they did a good job.

This team (with a few select players) got better every game.
The experience those kids got will pay huge dividends next year if they are still starters or if they provide depth behind a few added FA's.

No place to go but up, as we did this year my friend.


So your telling me if we go 9-7 this year and we go 10-6 next year and do not make the playoffs both seasons that is progressing. Come on Marrdro you know that is not acceptable. I like the job we did this year but I can't agree with you on next year keeping Childress and company if we miss the playoffs.

Its hard to make the playoffs.
Take a look at the AFC this year.
Depending on how the last week plays out a double digit win team might not get in the playoffs. Heck, SD pulled it out, however, it looked liked they were gonna get in with single digit wins.

Again, as I measure progress, playoffs aren't the only indicator that we are improving my friend. Wins and losses, players progress/play and overall team play are better indicators to me.

Of course, getting in the playoffs is the start to the primary goal of winning it all, but only one team does that a year.

I bet if we get to the playoffs next year, the Chillers mandate will be to win the SB in his 4th year or he is gone right?
;D
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings

marstc09
12-25-2007, 07:32 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:








Every Job will be open to production/performance during TC. It will be up to T.Jack to win it by showing he's doing what is expected by the C. Staff. This will be true even if a proven Vet like McNab comes here.

I think next year is the bubble season for T.Jack. Even if he wins the starting job out of camp he's going to be closely watched for signs of improvement in decision maiking, and performance in critical game situations. He will either have gotten over the stupid mistakes and be playing his best football....or he will be moving on or benched by the end of 08. I think the kid deserves the chance to work hard in the off-season, come in ready, and knock the socks off everyone's expectations of him. He's got a lot of work to do.

Cheers!


It is the bubble season for TJ and Chilly. If we do not make the playoffs next year, they both should be gone.

I'm not sure about Childress though, if we improve and show progress i think that he gets another year to run the team and why not? if you keep progressing there's no reason to get fired IMO. if next season doesn't shows any of that than it could be a critical year yes

The Chiller isn't going anywhere and he isn't tied to TJ in anyway other than on message boards such as this and my newpaper hacks who like to stir things up.

The owner ship group was well aware of what they faced going into this season with the talent that was provided to the coaching staff.

I for one believe this staff did a good job of getting this team ready to play (well almost every week) given the circumstances.

A good draft will happen again, a few FA will be brought in and things will continue to improve as they did this year.

Isn't that the bar everyone set at the beginning of the year?
Get better and improve?


What?! If we do not make the playoffs next year, he is gone.

Are you telling me that if (for instance) we go 10-6 and don't win our division, the other wild cards are 11-5 or 10-6 and beat us in tie breakers you would fire him?

We have a very good chance of going 9-7, we were in almost every game (2 I am very unhappy with) and were (still are to a degree) in the playoff race right up to the end of the year with a:

a. New D-coord.
b. Not the best D against the pass (that got better as the year went on)
c. Still trying to implement a very complicated blocking scheme (that continues to get better)
d. A very unspectactular recieving corp
e. And most importantly probably one of the shackiest selection of QB's in the NFC.
f.
Barring the GB PUKERS (by one year less than us) were the youngest team in the league.

Comeon my friend, you have to admit that this coaching staff earned thier stripes and did very well with this team.
Is there room for them to improve as a coaching staff.
Yes, but gol 'darnit I think they did a good job.

This team (with a few select players) got better every game.
The experience those kids got will pay huge dividends next year if they are still starters or if they provide depth behind a few added FA's.

No place to go but up, as we did this year my friend.


So your telling me if we go 9-7 this year and we go 10-6 next year and do not make the playoffs both seasons that is progressing. Come on Marrdro you know that is not acceptable. I like the job we did this year but I can't agree with you on next year keeping Childress and company if we miss the playoffs.

Its hard to make the playoffs.
Take a look at the AFC this year.

Depending on how the last week plays out a double digit win team might not get in the playoffs. Heck, SD pulled it out, however, it looked liked they were gonna get in with single digit wins.

Again, as I measure progress, playoffs aren't the only indicator that we are improving my friend. Wins and losses, players progress/play and overall team play are better indicators to me.

Of course, getting in the playoffs is the start to the primary goal of winning it all, but only one team does that a year.

I bet if we get to the playoffs next year, the Chillers mandate will be to win the SB in his 4th year or he is gone right?

;D
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings


But we are not in the AFC.
If you measure it in wins and losses, which is fine, does one more win after a draft, FA, and another year of offseason prep really satisfy you? Not me!
8) If we make the playoffs next year and win a one that is progress to me. In his fourth year I will only demand a NFC Championship. After that then I will demand a Super Bowl ring.
;D

CCthebest
12-25-2007, 07:49 PM
Marrdo, good coaching and good coaching staffs show progress. The games in Dec. We have sucked in every possible way. From our play calling, to not figuring out what to do when the box is stacked. Mainly because we dont have a QB anyone trusts to throw it.

How is that any kind of improvement? Because our D won us some games? Because AD is awesome? Our passing game sucks as much A$$ now as it did on that imfamous day when childress took over. I just pray Ziggy does to childress and TJ at the end of this year as he did to tice 2 years ago.

COJOMAY
12-25-2007, 11:16 PM
Jury Out on T-Jack?
http://min.scout.com/2/714188.html


A year ago, Brad Childress was steadfast that Tarvaris Jackson would be his QB in 2007. A couple of weeks ago, T-Jack's long-term future seemed locked in place. But, two awful passing days later, Chilly isn't saying whether or not Jackson is the short-term or long-term answer for the Vikings in 2008 and beyond...

A good read!

Potus2028
12-25-2007, 11:31 PM
Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 12:36 AM
"Potus2028" wrote:


Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

I think you are going to be disappointed

SKOL
12-26-2007, 12:55 AM
"Potus2028" wrote:


Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!


The problem I see is there's no way to run against 8/9 in the box.
They put them there specifically to stop the run.
The only way to overcome it is with a respectable passing attack, which we don't have.

happy camper
12-26-2007, 01:20 AM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Potus2028" wrote:


Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

I think you are going to be disappointed


Why? I think we need to keep him. That does not necessarily mean he is going to be starting. I want him on the team next year, but as a #2 with the chance to move up to #1 under certain circumstances.

Mikecarter81
12-26-2007, 01:30 AM
I love T jack, but i'll be honest something has been nagging on me for a while.
lI would be all right with the kid if he was just fundementally sound.
I hate his footwork and ever since Ron Jaworski pointed it out, it just grates on me.
I mean when the kid plants his feet right.
He throws a great pass
Yet it seems like he reverts to his old ways when we need him the most.

Mike

Purple Floyd
12-26-2007, 08:05 AM
"SKOL" wrote:


"Potus2028" wrote:


Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!


The problem I see is there's no way to run against 8/9 in the box.
They put them there specifically to stop the run.
The only way to overcome it is with a respectable passing attack, which we don't have.


Yes you can and we have done it at times but got away from it the last few weeks.You bring in 2 TE's which gives you 7 blockers and the fullback makes 8 which means it is our 8 against theirs. If we do our job we can make yards this way. It also means that we will have WR's with single coverage that need to be able to capitalize on those opportunities all day long when they are presented. When we started to do this we started to win and the last few games when we reverted back to the sets we relied on at the start of the season we went backwards offensively.

Marrdro
12-26-2007, 09:07 AM
"CCthebest" wrote:


Marrdo, good coaching and good coaching staffs show progress. The games in Dec. We have sucked in every possible way. From our play calling, to not figuring out what to do when the box is stacked. Mainly because we dont have a QB anyone trusts to throw it.

How is that any kind of improvement? Because our D won us some games? Because AD is awesome? Our passing game sucks as much A$$ now as it did on that imfamous day when childress took over. I just pray Ziggy does to childress and TJ at the end of this year as he did to tice 2 years ago.

I feel like I am beating a dead horse to death here.


Are you gonna tell me that you are gonna completely ignore all the other areas of improvement on this team, to include Wins and Losses and only focus on one aspect of the team?
Passing.
Damn CC you usually make a better arguement than that.
Would we even be talking about our passing attack if we had a better QB on the field?
Hell no, we would be talking about how dominant this team is.
Funny how that part is ignored but guys like you continue to hate cause you aren't seeing a guy run deep and catch a deep touchdown every play.

Anyway,

Good coaching and a good coaching staff is the only reason this team has improved.
Show me another team out there with a 2nd year QB (limited starts), Rookie/2nd year CB's, no viable Pass rushing specialist at the RDE spot, rookie RT, first year starter at RG, rookie WR etc etc etc contending for a play off spot this year.

Face it, our lack of play calling has nothing to do with how smart are coaches are, but has everything to do with the quality of the QB trying to execute those plays and to a point our OL play early on in the year.

If the triangle of authority (not just the Chiller) would have put a better QB on the field this year instead of going down the "Developmental" path would our passing game be that bad?
Would teams be able to stack the box?
I say no.

Face it my friends, beeeeyyyyatttcccchhh all you want about Childress and his flaws but it all starts at the top and we were sold a bill of goods all year by this organization from the owner on down about how this was gonna be the year to develop our young talent that they were gonna put on the field via the draft.

If you can't see that obvious fact and keep trying to lay blame only on the Head Coach then there is no need to try to talk about this team, coaching staff and front office with you.

Take a honest hard look at this team and you will find that we only have a few flaws that need to be fixed after a 2 year rebuilding process orchestrated by this staff (NOT JUST THE CHILLER) and I am sure those will be fixed to include your beloved passing attack.
Heck maybe the Chiller will come out and say he is re-implementing the "Randy Ratio" and is gonna call it the "Rice Ration"... :o


Brother
::)

Marrdro
12-26-2007, 09:15 AM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Potus2028" wrote:


Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

I think you are going to be disappointed

I am not on the side of dumping "Futureboy" either as I believe this years experience will pay dividends down the road, heck he might eventually develop into something other than a very good/servicable backup but I am on the side of bringing in someone that can at least make passes on a consistent basis.

Why is everyone so afraid to go ahead and bring a real QB in to compete for the job?

The staff now knows the holes that need to be fixed, (RDE, WR, CB/S, and yes QB).
Now all that has to be done is to get Spielman and staff to find the right guys, Bryzcheapski and staff to pay the price and most of all convince the owner to spend the money.

Jettison some dead weight.....

BB, KH, Erasmus, Fergy/Twill, Tank to make holes on the roster for those vets.........

Draft wisely for depth, future replacements for aging vets and you will have a damn good team next year.

But of course, some will contend that we aren't getting any better.......

Damn.
Like talking to a wall sometimes.
;D
;D
;D
;D
;D

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 09:22 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Potus2028" wrote:


Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

I think you are going to be disappointed

I am not on the side of dumping "Futureboy" either as I believe this years experience will pay dividends down the road, heck he might eventually develop into something other than a very good/servicable backup but I am on the side of bringing in someone that can at least make passes on a consistent basis.

Why is everyone so afraid to go ahead and bring a real QB in to compete for the job?

The staff now knows the holes that need to be fixed, (RDE, WR, CB/S, and yes QB).
Now all that has to be done is to get Spielman and staff to find the right guys, Bryzcheapski and staff to pay the price and most of all convince the owner to spend the money.

Jettison some dead weight.....

BB, KH, Erasmus, Fergy/Twill, Tank to make holes on the roster for those vets.........

Draft wisely for depth, future replacements for aging vets and you will have a gol 'darnit good team next year.

But of course, some will contend that we aren't getting any better.......

gol 'darnit.
Like talking to a wall sometimes.
;D
;D
;D
;D
;D

I have never said I was in favor of getting rid of TJ entirely. In fact, if you read some of my past posts, I have always said he has an upside. The trouble is , it's just taking him a lot longer to learn than anyone thought it would. And with our others players now at their "peak performance" we need a QB who can lead us NOW, not a year or two or three in the future. TJ can learn under that QB which is what everyone seemed to want at the beginning of the year. So what's changed?

Marrdro
12-26-2007, 09:29 AM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Potus2028" wrote:


Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

I think you are going to be disappointed

I am not on the side of dumping "Futureboy" either as I believe this years experience will pay dividends down the road, heck he might eventually develop into something other than a very good/servicable backup but I am on the side of bringing in someone that can at least make passes on a consistent basis.

Why is everyone so afraid to go ahead and bring a real QB in to compete for the job?

The staff now knows the holes that need to be fixed, (RDE, WR, CB/S, and yes QB).
Now all that has to be done is to get Spielman and staff to find the right guys, Bryzcheapski and staff to pay the price and most of all convince the owner to spend the money.

Jettison some dead weight.....

BB, KH, Erasmus, Fergy/Twill, Tank to make holes on the roster for those vets.........

Draft wisely for depth, future replacements for aging vets and you will have a gol 'darnit good team next year.

But of course, some will contend that we aren't getting any better.......

gol 'darnit.
Like talking to a wall sometimes.

;D
;D
;D
;D
;D

I have never said I was in favor of getting rid of TJ entirely. In fact, if you read some of my past posts, I have always said he has an upside. The trouble is , it's just taking him a lot longer to learn than anyone thought it would. And with our others players now at their "peak performance" we need a QB who can lead us NOW, not a year or two or three in the future. TJ can learn under that QB which is what everyone seemed to want at the beginning of the year. So what's changed?

I know how smart you are my friend, I just tagged along on your point and was addressing the highlighted point my friend.

Sorry.
I never doubt the COJO man.
;D

As to what has changed.......They put a few games together, got our hopes up and then screwed the pooch.
Now the "Fire the Coach" cause he isn't as loveable as Meathead are back.
:o
;D

marcosMN
12-26-2007, 10:03 AM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Potus2028" wrote:


Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

I think you are going to be disappointed

I am not on the side of dumping "Futureboy" either as I believe this years experience will pay dividends down the road, heck he might eventually develop into something other than a very good/servicable backup but I am on the side of bringing in someone that can at least make passes on a consistent basis.

Why is everyone so afraid to go ahead and bring a real QB in to compete for the job?

The staff now knows the holes that need to be fixed, (RDE, WR, CB/S, and yes QB).
Now all that has to be done is to get Spielman and staff to find the right guys, Bryzcheapski and staff to pay the price and most of all convince the owner to spend the money.

Jettison some dead weight.....

BB, KH, Erasmus, Fergy/Twill, Tank to make holes on the roster for those vets.........

Draft wisely for depth, future replacements for aging vets and you will have a gol 'darnit good team next year.

But of course, some will contend that we aren't getting any better.......

gol 'darnit.
Like talking to a wall sometimes.
;D
;D
;D
;D
;D

I have never said I was in favor of getting rid of TJ entirely. In fact, if you read some of my past posts, I have always said he has an upside. The trouble is , it's just taking him a lot longer to learn than anyone thought it would. And with our others players now at their "peak performance" we need a QB who can lead us NOW, not a year or two or three in the future. TJ can learn under that QB which is what everyone seemed to want at the beginning of the year. So what's changed?


I think most of us thought he was being thrust in to the starting role far too soon.

CCthebest
12-26-2007, 02:44 PM
A few things Marrdro

I disagree with just about everything you post, but I enjoy reading them and I see the points your trying to make. But we have a TERRIBLE coaching staff.

A) We KNEW for weeks the Skins would stack the box. Yet we had no answer for it. Nor did we make ANY adjustments for it until it was too LATE. Thats BAD EFFING coaching. The skins KNEW TJ cant pass to save his life, esp when under pressure. They dared him to try and throw it, and TJ wasnt ready when the game started. This was a playoff game. We needed a QB in there who doesnt panic. Kinda like washed up Todd Colins. We have a few guys on our bench better then Collins.

B) Our D once again got beat by a no name QB. The D did good, but made too many mistakes with a sub par QB. The skins were better coached.

C) Our ST has been sucking and once again they sucked. How do you miss a 53 yr FG in the dome playing at home? Didnt the skins make like a 52 yrd one? ST didnt kill us in this game but it didnt help.

You keep talking about improvements. They are very SLIGHT. The Oline still has problems. TJ still has MAJOR problems and shouldnt be an NFL QB. The D cant cover anyone (2 rookies,yes griffin is still a rookie to me) as our CBs. Brain dead sharper is only good at INTs not complex coverages or picking up the slack of a LB. WE STILL HAVE NO PASS RUSH FROM OUR FRONT 4. ALL these and mant more we problems last year and havent been adressed and fixed. And dont say the players dont execute and give another pass to Dickless. Its his job to have and coach players that can execute.

Zeus
12-26-2007, 02:46 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Well that title was missleading.
Only 3 short paragraphs on TJ.

Where the hell do they find these guys they call reporters.



Charley Walters is a gossip columnist, not a reporter.

So, that should tell you how much stock to put in anything he writes.

=Z=

Zeus
12-26-2007, 02:49 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


C) Our ST has been sucking and once again they sucked. How do you miss a 53 yr FG in the dome playing at home? Didnt the skins make like a 52 yrd one? ST didnt kill us in this game but it didnt help.


I hope you're out there in the snow right now, working on your kicking.
Because if it's that easy for you, you could walk up to Winter Park and get the job right now.
Go for it, dude!


=Z=

V4L
12-26-2007, 02:51 PM
Our options...

1. T-Jack- I think he will be here still and will start

2. Rookie- Not gonna be any better

3. McNabb- Not gonna happen.. And price is too steep.. Would be awesome though

4. D. Anderson- Browns will get a deal done til Quinn is ready to roll

5. Pennington- Please no.. WEAKKKK arm.. Injury prone.. Benched to a rookie for good reason

Just stick with T-jack or try to get a deal for McNabb.. I doubt we can give them what they want but try to make it cheap as possible

mountainviking
12-26-2007, 02:52 PM
LOL!
I want my ration of Rice!

Marrdro
12-26-2007, 02:54 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Well that title was missleading.
Only 3 short paragraphs on TJ.

Where the hell do they find these guys they call reporters.



Charley Walters is a gossip columnist, not a reporter.

So, that should tell you how much stock to put in anything he writes.

=Z=

They all report/gossip drivel.
;D

V4L
12-26-2007, 02:55 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Our options...

1. T-Jack- I think he will be here still and will start

2. Rookie- Not gonna be any better

3. McNabb- Not gonna happen.. And price is too steep.. Would be awesome though

4. D. Anderson- Browns will get a deal done til Quinn is ready to roll

5. Pennington- Please no.. WEAKKKK arm.. Injury prone.. Benched to a rookie for good reason

Just stick with T-jack or try to get a deal for McNabb.. I doubt we can give them what they want but try to make it cheap as possible



As far as I know those are our best 5 options that are actually possible

If I forgot any throw them on there

But T-jack looks like our best bet

C Mac D
12-26-2007, 02:55 PM
What about Quinn, what are people's thoughts on that situation? Are the Browns gonna ditch Anderson for sure?

V4L
12-26-2007, 02:57 PM
"C" wrote:


What about Quinn, what are people's thoughts on that situation? Are the Browns gonna ditch Anderson for sure?



I personally think they will keep him around and develop Quinn

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 03:11 PM
D. Anderson is in his 3rd year as an NFL QB. It took him this long to make him decent. Now the Browns have Brady Quinn. If it takes him 3 years to grow like Anderson it shows you what "grooming" can do. I bring this up because if the Browns allow Andereson to go, they will be in the same shape the Vikings are in right now. A QB trying to grow under fire. I sincerely believe the Browns are going to keep Anderson.
Now, if the Vikings use TJ as the starter next year two things happen...
1) He will probably still suck next year but he will improve under fire.
2) He will get injured and then where we be. BB? Do you really want him as a backup? To me the thing that makes the most sense would have been for the Vikes to bring in a good, experienced FA QB last year. But we didn't do that. I think someone (maybe Childress) was too bullheaded. But let's not make this mistake again. Bring in McNabb, let him be the starter. Let TJ work with him and if McNabb gets injured, TJ can come in without a huge letdown like we would have now if TJ is injured.
I think a quality QB like McNabb is worth a 1st round draft choice next year. And maybe a 2nd or 3rd the following year. There's no way the Eagles will get two first round draft picks for him or give them a first round pick next year and possibly MeMo.
It's the only thing that makes sense to me. But then I'm old and senile.
;)

bleedpurple
12-26-2007, 03:13 PM
I for one say Keep Twill and Raz!!...
I think if and that's a big if, Raz can stay healthy, he'd be better than some of the guys we have now.. and T-will, in my opinion, had one of his best games as a viking against the skins.. no he didn't score or light it up, but he played well, caught the ball and ran pretty good routes... I actually fergie better than wade.. but that's just my opinion...

secondly, i do feel as though we need to bring in a QB.. i was all for giving T Jack a chance, and letting him play
it out.. but he clearly cost us that game against the skins.. no doubt about it.. i say sit him and let him learn under a proven vet.... and go GET MCNABB...

Additionally, although my assessment of the coaching staff hasn't always been the best, i do feel as though they're on the right track.. but in the first half.. (even Chilly admitted to sticking to the run too long), i feel like they coulda made some adjustments sooner than they did.. I.E. running out of passing formations and doing a few things differently instead of beating a dead horse and running against 8 and 9 man fronts... I agree it hadn't worked in the last two weeks, S.F. and CHI, and you knew the skins were gonna do the same thing and they didn't have a game plan for it, until the second half...

Lastly, Ryan Cook, is a decent RT.. i've seen some posts bashing him, but yall have to remember, he was a center in college... and he's doing a more than adequate job on the right side... so cut the guy some slack... if anybody, our worse offensive lineman this year or the last few games, has been a toss-up between Birk and McKinnie...

happy camper
12-26-2007, 03:14 PM
I really don't think I would give a first rounder for McNabb. And we can't trade Mewelde because he will be a FA.

C Mac D
12-26-2007, 03:16 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


D. Anderson is in his 3rd year as an NFL QB. It took him this long to make him decent. Now the Browns have Brady Quinn. If it takes him 3 years to grow like Anderson it shows you what "grooming" can do. I bring this up because if the Browns allow Andereson to go, they will be in the same shape the Vikings are in right now. A QB trying to grow under fire. I sincerely believe the Browns are going to keep Anderson.
Now, if the Vikings use TJ as the starter next year two things happen...
1) He will probably still suck next year but he will improve under fire.
2) He will get injured and then where we be. BB? Do you really want him as a backup? To me the thing that makes the most sense would have been for the Vikes to bring in a good, experienced FA QB last year. But we didn't do that. I think someone (maybe Childress) was too bullheaded. But let's not make this mistake again. Bring in McNabb, let him be the starter. Let TJ work with him and if McNabb gets injured, TJ can come in without a huge letdown like we would have now if TJ is injured.
I think a quality QB like McNabb is worth a 1st round draft choice next year. And maybe a 2nd or 3rd the following year. There's no way the Eagles will get two first round draft picks for him or give them a first round pick next year and possibly MeMo.
It's the only thing that makes sense to me. But then I'm old and senile.
;)



I actually agree with this. I think McNabb could make the plays with our WRs. I mean, name some of the WR he went to all those NFC Championships with... Pinkston? Thrash? If we got McNabb, I think we'd be an automatic contender.

marstc09
12-26-2007, 03:28 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Marrdo, good coaching and good coaching staffs show progress. The games in Dec. We have sucked in every possible way. From our play calling, to not figuring out what to do when the box is stacked. Mainly because we dont have a QB anyone trusts to throw it.

How is that any kind of improvement? Because our D won us some games? Because AD is awesome? Our passing game sucks as much A$$ now as it did on that imfamous day when childress took over. I just pray Ziggy does to childress and TJ at the end of this year as he did to tice 2 years ago.

I feel like I am beating a dead horse to death here.


Are you gonna tell me that you are gonna completely ignore all the other areas of improvement on this team, to include Wins and Losses and only focus on one aspect of the team?
Passing.
Damn CC you usually make a better arguement than that.
Would we even be talking about our passing attack if we had a better QB on the field?
Hell no, we would be talking about how dominant this team is.
Funny how that part is ignored but guys like you continue to hate cause you aren't seeing a guy run deep and catch a deep touchdown every play.

Anyway,

Good coaching and a good coaching staff is the only reason this team has improved.
Show me another team out there with a 2nd year QB (limited starts), Rookie/2nd year CB's, no viable Pass rushing specialist at the RDE spot, rookie RT, first year starter at RG, rookie WR etc etc etc contending for a play off spot this year.

Face it, our lack of play calling has nothing to do with how smart are coaches are, but has everything to do with the quality of the QB trying to execute those plays and to a point our OL play early on in the year.

If the triangle of authority (not just the Chiller) would have put a better QB on the field this year instead of going down the "Developmental" path would our passing game be that bad?
Would teams be able to stack the box?
I say no.

Face it my friends, beeeeyyyyatttcccchhh all you want about Childress and his flaws but it all starts at the top and we were sold a bill of goods all year by this organization from the owner on down about how this was gonna be the year to develop our young talent that they were gonna put on the field via the draft.

If you can't see that obvious fact and keep trying to lay blame only on the Head Coach then there is no need to try to talk about this team, coaching staff and front office with you.

Take a honest hard look at this team and you will find that we only have a few flaws that need to be fixed after a 2 year rebuilding process orchestrated by this staff (NOT JUST THE CHILLER) and I am sure those will be fixed to include your beloved passing attack.
Heck maybe the Chiller will come out and say he is re-implementing the "Randy Ratio" and is gonna call it the "Rice Ration"... :o


Brother

::)


What?!
:o I doubt that the coaching staff is the only reason this team has improved.
I think you are giving this staff too much credit.

Marrdro
12-26-2007, 03:50 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Marrdo, good coaching and good coaching staffs show progress. The games in Dec. We have sucked in every possible way. From our play calling, to not figuring out what to do when the box is stacked. Mainly because we dont have a QB anyone trusts to throw it.

How is that any kind of improvement? Because our D won us some games? Because AD is awesome? Our passing game sucks as much A$$ now as it did on that imfamous day when childress took over. I just pray Ziggy does to childress and TJ at the end of this year as he did to tice 2 years ago.

I feel like I am beating a dead horse to death here.


Are you gonna tell me that you are gonna completely ignore all the other areas of improvement on this team, to include Wins and Losses and only focus on one aspect of the team?
Passing.
gol 'darnit CC you usually make a better arguement than that.
Would we even be talking about our passing attack if we had a better QB on the field?
Hell no, we would be talking about how dominant this team is.
Funny how that part is ignored but guys like you continue to hate cause you aren't seeing a guy run deep and catch a deep touchdown every play.

Anyway,

Good coaching and a good coaching staff is the only reason this team has improved.
Show me another team out there with a 2nd year QB (limited starts), Rookie/2nd year CB's, no viable Pass rushing specialist at the RDE spot, rookie RT, first year starter at RG, rookie WR etc etc etc contending for a play off spot this year.

Face it, our lack of play calling has nothing to do with how smart are coaches are, but has everything to do with the quality of the QB trying to execute those plays and to a point our OL play early on in the year.

If the triangle of authority (not just the Chiller) would have put a better QB on the field this year instead of going down the "Developmental" path would our passing game be that bad?
Would teams be able to stack the box?
I say no.

Face it my friends, beeeeyyyyatttcccchhh all you want about Childress and his flaws but it all starts at the top and we were sold a bill of goods all year by this organization from the owner on down about how this was gonna be the year to develop our young talent that they were gonna put on the field via the draft.

If you can't see that obvious fact and keep trying to lay blame only on the Head Coach then there is no need to try to talk about this team, coaching staff and front office with you.

Take a honest hard look at this team and you will find that we only have a few flaws that need to be fixed after a 2 year rebuilding process orchestrated by this staff (NOT JUST THE CHILLER) and I am sure those will be fixed to include your beloved passing attack.
Heck maybe the Chiller will come out and say he is re-implementing the "Randy Ratio" and is gonna call it the "Rice Ration"... :o


Brother

::)


What?!
:o I doubt that the coaching staff is the only reason this team has improved.
I think you are giving this staff too much credit.

Ohhh, your telling me that the team coached themselves.
Wait, maybe your telling me they don't need coaches.

Hey, you might be on to something, we can get rid of all the coaches, draw plays up in the astroturf and use the money we spend on the coaches to build the new stadium.

Comeon my friend, your just messing with me now.

;D
;D
;D
;D

C Mac D
12-26-2007, 03:57 PM
I hear Ryan Leaf is available

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 04:04 PM
"C" wrote:


I hear Ryan Leaf is available


LOL And he comes REAL CHEAP, too.

marstc09
12-26-2007, 04:12 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Marrdo, good coaching and good coaching staffs show progress. The games in Dec. We have sucked in every possible way. From our play calling, to not figuring out what to do when the box is stacked. Mainly because we dont have a QB anyone trusts to throw it.

How is that any kind of improvement? Because our D won us some games? Because AD is awesome? Our passing game sucks as much A$$ now as it did on that imfamous day when childress took over. I just pray Ziggy does to childress and TJ at the end of this year as he did to tice 2 years ago.

I feel like I am beating a dead horse to death here.


Are you gonna tell me that you are gonna completely ignore all the other areas of improvement on this team, to include Wins and Losses and only focus on one aspect of the team?
Passing.
gol 'darnit CC you usually make a better arguement than that.
Would we even be talking about our passing attack if we had a better QB on the field?
Hell no, we would be talking about how dominant this team is.
Funny how that part is ignored but guys like you continue to hate cause you aren't seeing a guy run deep and catch a deep touchdown every play.

Anyway,

Good coaching and a good coaching staff is the only reason this team has improved.
Show me another team out there with a 2nd year QB (limited starts), Rookie/2nd year CB's, no viable Pass rushing specialist at the RDE spot, rookie RT, first year starter at RG, rookie WR etc etc etc contending for a play off spot this year.

Face it, our lack of play calling has nothing to do with how smart are coaches are, but has everything to do with the quality of the QB trying to execute those plays and to a point our OL play early on in the year.

If the triangle of authority (not just the Chiller) would have put a better QB on the field this year instead of going down the "Developmental" path would our passing game be that bad?
Would teams be able to stack the box?
I say no.

Face it my friends, beeeeyyyyatttcccchhh all you want about Childress and his flaws but it all starts at the top and we were sold a bill of goods all year by this organization from the owner on down about how this was gonna be the year to develop our young talent that they were gonna put on the field via the draft.

If you can't see that obvious fact and keep trying to lay blame only on the Head Coach then there is no need to try to talk about this team, coaching staff and front office with you.

Take a honest hard look at this team and you will find that we only have a few flaws that need to be fixed after a 2 year rebuilding process orchestrated by this staff (NOT JUST THE CHILLER) and I am sure those will be fixed to include your beloved passing attack.
Heck maybe the Chiller will come out and say he is re-implementing the "Randy Ratio" and is gonna call it the "Rice Ration"... :o


Brother

::)


What?!
:o I doubt that the coaching staff is the only reason this team has improved.
I think you are giving this staff too much credit.

Ohhh, your telling me that the team coached themselves.
Wait, maybe your telling me they don't need coaches.

Hey, you might be on to something, we can get rid of all the coaches, draw plays up in the astroturf and use the money we spend on the coaches to build the new stadium.

Comeon my friend, your just messing with me now.

;D

;D

;D

;D


I am not saying that the coaches are worthless because I do believe in Childress and what he is doing. I just think that we are giving the coaching too much credit. You said that the coaching staff is the only reason we have improved. I do not think you meant to say this. The players were executing better when we won those 5 in a row. The last two games we went back to the same mistakes that made us lose 6 out of 9 in the begining of the season. IMO you can't teach execution only technique. Execution comes from practice. Technique comes from coaching. You are saying they are doing a good job of coaching which I will not disagree with. So what does it come down to? Is the team not focusing on the right things in practice? I do not have the answers to his because I am not an NFL coach. I guess I am just disappointed that we did not have an answer for the stacking of the box after the Bears game. Again I do not have an answer because I am just a fan. My only response is that TJ needs more development time and I would like to see a guy like McNabb come in here and finish his career and then have TJ take over. I am no coach but I think this would be a wise move. McNabb is smart enough to exploit 8 or 9 in the box. I hope my rambling makes sense.

C Mac D
12-26-2007, 04:18 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"C" wrote:


I hear Ryan Leaf is available


LOL And he comes REAL CHEAP, too.


I don't know if we could get him out of his current contract:

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0703/brazil_ethanol0306.jpg

vikesfargo
12-26-2007, 05:30 PM
I guess Jeff George is ready to go.

Purple Floyd
12-26-2007, 05:48 PM
"C" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


D. Anderson is in his 3rd year as an NFL QB. It took him this long to make him decent. Now the Browns have Brady Quinn. If it takes him 3 years to grow like Anderson it shows you what "grooming" can do. I bring this up because if the Browns allow Andereson to go, they will be in the same shape the Vikings are in right now. A QB trying to grow under fire. I sincerely believe the Browns are going to keep Anderson.
Now, if the Vikings use TJ as the starter next year two things happen...
1) He will probably still suck next year but he will improve under fire.
2) He will get injured and then where we be. BB? Do you really want him as a backup? To me the thing that makes the most sense would have been for the Vikes to bring in a good, experienced FA QB last year. But we didn't do that. I think someone (maybe Childress) was too bullheaded. But let's not make this mistake again. Bring in McNabb, let him be the starter. Let TJ work with him and if McNabb gets injured, TJ can come in without a huge letdown like we would have now if TJ is injured.
I think a quality QB like McNabb is worth a 1st round draft choice next year. And maybe a 2nd or 3rd the following year. There's no way the Eagles will get two first round draft picks for him or give them a first round pick next year and possibly MeMo.
It's the only thing that makes sense to me. But then I'm old and senile.
;)



I actually agree with this. I think McNabb could make the plays with our WRs. I mean, name some of the WR he went to all those NFC Championships with... Pinkston? Thrash? If we got McNabb, I think we'd be an automatic contender.


who is going to replace him when he is on the injured list like he has been every year since 2004? If you say TJ, then we might as well stick with him and use the draft picks on someone else that wil help us. ;D

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 05:53 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


D. Anderson is in his 3rd year as an NFL QB. It took him this long to make him decent. Now the Browns have Brady Quinn. If it takes him 3 years to grow like Anderson it shows you what "grooming" can do. I bring this up because if the Browns allow Andereson to go, they will be in the same shape the Vikings are in right now. A QB trying to grow under fire. I sincerely believe the Browns are going to keep Anderson.
Now, if the Vikings use TJ as the starter next year two things happen...
1) He will probably still suck next year but he will improve under fire.
2) He will get injured and then where we be. BB? Do you really want him as a backup? To me the thing that makes the most sense would have been for the Vikes to bring in a good, experienced FA QB last year. But we didn't do that. I think someone (maybe Childress) was too bullheaded. But let's not make this mistake again. Bring in McNabb, let him be the starter. Let TJ work with him and if McNabb gets injured, TJ can come in without a huge letdown like we would have now if TJ is injured.
I think a quality QB like McNabb is worth a 1st round draft choice next year. And maybe a 2nd or 3rd the following year. There's no way the Eagles will get two first round draft picks for him or give them a first round pick next year and possibly MeMo.
It's the only thing that makes sense to me. But then I'm old and senile.
;)



I actually agree with this. I think McNabb could make the plays with our WRs. I mean, name some of the WR he went to all those NFC Championships with... Pinkston? Thrash? If we got McNabb, I think we'd be an automatic contender.


who is going to replace him when he is on the injured list like he has been every year since 2004? If you say TJ, then we might as well stick with him and use the draft picks on someone else that wil help us. ;D


So let me get this straight...You are saying that McNabb won't help this team? And that TJ will?

Purple Floyd
12-26-2007, 06:07 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


D. Anderson is in his 3rd year as an NFL QB. It took him this long to make him decent. Now the Browns have Brady Quinn. If it takes him 3 years to grow like Anderson it shows you what "grooming" can do. I bring this up because if the Browns allow Andereson to go, they will be in the same shape the Vikings are in right now. A QB trying to grow under fire. I sincerely believe the Browns are going to keep Anderson.
Now, if the Vikings use TJ as the starter next year two things happen...
1) He will probably still suck next year but he will improve under fire.
2) He will get injured and then where we be. BB? Do you really want him as a backup? To me the thing that makes the most sense would have been for the Vikes to bring in a good, experienced FA QB last year. But we didn't do that. I think someone (maybe Childress) was too bullheaded. But let's not make this mistake again. Bring in McNabb, let him be the starter. Let TJ work with him and if McNabb gets injured, TJ can come in without a huge letdown like we would have now if TJ is injured.
I think a quality QB like McNabb is worth a 1st round draft choice next year. And maybe a 2nd or 3rd the following year. There's no way the Eagles will get two first round draft picks for him or give them a first round pick next year and possibly MeMo.
It's the only thing that makes sense to me. But then I'm old and senile.
;)



I actually agree with this. I think McNabb could make the plays with our WRs. I mean, name some of the WR he went to all those NFC Championships with... Pinkston? Thrash? If we got McNabb, I think we'd be an automatic contender.


who is going to replace him when he is on the injured list like he has been every year since 2004? If you say TJ, then we might as well stick with him and use the draft picks on someone else that wil help us. ;D


So let me get this straight...You are saying that McNabb won't help this team? And that TJ will?


I am saying that I would rather take my chances on Jackson improving than bring in a QB who is past his prime and hasn't played a full season since 2004.Yes.


How will he help the team from the injured list?

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 07:06 PM
If that's your opinion I'll go with it. I only express my opinion and I guess we have to respect each other's opinions...







BUT YOU'RE WRONG!
;D
(Please note the smiley face)

snowinapril
12-26-2007, 07:09 PM
I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 08:54 PM
"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.

CCthebest
12-26-2007, 09:30 PM
Im sure the vikings 'triangle of authority' will pass on Mcnabb and be content with T for turnover Jack.

Schutz
12-26-2007, 10:04 PM
It just hit me, whoever we have at QB next year we have a cage match to see who wants it more.
Because the cream of the crop will surface if we have a cage match, devilishly perfect.

mr.woo
12-26-2007, 11:04 PM
"Schutz" wrote:


It just hit me, whoever we have at QB next year we have a cage match to see who wants it more.
Because the cream of the crop will surface if we have a cage match, devilishly perfect.


honestly whats NOT to love about cagematches

happy camper
12-26-2007, 11:17 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.


How do you get that idea? I mean, I chose a salami sandwich over bologna today, I really hope bologna doesn't think I hate it. Because I don't, I just wanted Salami.

There would be many more variables to consider in the decision than just what he thinks of Childress. To draw the conclusion that him going elsewhere is evidence of him hating Childress would be speculative at best.

Schutz
12-26-2007, 11:37 PM
"happy" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.


How do you get that idea? I mean, I chose a salami sandwich over bologna today, I really hope bologna doesn't think I hate it. Because I don't, I just wanted Salami.

There would be many more variables to consider in the decision than just what he thinks of Childress. To draw the conclusion that him going elsewhere is evidence of him hating Childress would be speculative at best.


I don't think that would show anything at all.
There is so many organizational things that go into a trade.
Maybe Childress wanted him but the front office/Wilf said no.
It shows nothing.

COJOMAY
12-26-2007, 11:43 PM
"Schutz" wrote:


"happy" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.


How do you get that idea? I mean, I chose a salami sandwich over bologna today, I really hope bologna doesn't think I hate it. Because I don't, I just wanted Salami.

There would be many more variables to consider in the decision than just what he thinks of Childress. To draw the conclusion that him going elsewhere is evidence of him hating Childress would be speculative at best.


I don't think that would show anything at all.
There is so many organizational things that go into a trade.
Maybe Childress wanted him but the front office/Wilf said no.
It shows nothing.


We all know there's the Chilly/Eagles connection and that Reid and Chilly are best friends. From the sounds of Childress he also sounds like he's responsible for McNabb's success because he taught him all he knows. Now let's just assume for a moment that he could go to Chicago or the Vikings and all money deals were equal. Don't you think if Chilly was such a good coach and taught him all he knows that he would choose to take the deal at Chicago? Especially since the Vikings are an up and coming team and all they need is a good QB to go places.
Now granted there is the thought that Speilman or Wilf could nix the deal but I stil think if Chilly says, "Hey, I could win big with this guy" they wouldn't go along with his wishes? It's obvious Wilf has the final say and so far he's backing Childress as far as I can see.
It wouold be a slap in the face if McNabb went somewhere else if all other things were equal. To me that would be him saying "I don't want to go to the Vikings because I know Childress and he's a loser.

Purple Floyd
12-26-2007, 11:47 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


If that's your opinion I'll go with it. I only express my opinion and I guess we have to respect each other's opinions...







BUT YOU'RE WRONG!
;D
(Please note the smiley face)



I guess you are right after all. I have been wrong before. Take for example the Herschel Walker trade. I though that was a stupid trade right from the start of the trade talks and thought it was stupid to give up picks to get him but in the end he was just what we needed to get to the Super Bowl. McNabb will probably be just as good.

So all we need to do is send about 7 1st round picks and half our defense to the Eagles for him and we will be in the Super Bowl next year. ;)

Purple Floyd
12-26-2007, 11:51 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Schutz" wrote:


"happy" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.


How do you get that idea? I mean, I chose a salami sandwich over bologna today, I really hope bologna doesn't think I hate it. Because I don't, I just wanted Salami.

There would be many more variables to consider in the decision than just what he thinks of Childress. To draw the conclusion that him going elsewhere is evidence of him hating Childress would be speculative at best.


I don't think that would show anything at all.
There is so many organizational things that go into a trade.
Maybe Childress wanted him but the front office/Wilf said no.
It shows nothing.


We all know there's the Chilly/Eagles connection and that Reid and Chilly are best friends. From the sounds of Childress he also sounds like he's responsible for McNabb's success because he taught him all he knows. Now let's just assume for a moment that he could go to Chicago or the Vikings and all money deals were equal. Don't you think if Chilly was such a good coach and taught him all he knows that he would choose to take the deal at Chicago? Especially since the Vikings are an up and coming team and all they need is a good QB to go places.
Now granted there is the thought that Speilman or Wilf could nix the deal but I stil think if Chilly says, "Hey, I could win big with this guy" they wouldn't go along with his wishes? It's obvious Wilf has the final say and so far he's backing Childress as far as I can see.
It wouold be a slap in the face if McNabb went somewhere else if all other things were equal. To me that would be him saying "I don't want to go to the Vikings because I know Childress and he's a loser.


He is still under contract with the Eagles. Besides some speculation from a few hacks, what makes you think he is going to leave? The only thing behind him is a Rookie QB with zero NFL regular season snaps under his belt. If the Eagles trade him they will be in the same shape that we are in now and do you think that Reid has the job security to go through 3 years with Kolb while he develops without an experienced guy behind him?
I just don't see it.

tb04512
12-27-2007, 01:42 AM
"SnoBumMN" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Potus2028" wrote:


Good read. But I can't fathom dumping a QB after just 11 or 12 starts... That makes no sesne! New qb, new coach, new sensational RB, new WR's, new DCord....

Everything here is new. Whenever we figure out how to run and pass against 8/9 in the box, we'll be golden!

Give it time friends. Winning isn't an overnight thing. I am on the keep Tjack side.

I think you are going to be disappointed

I am not on the side of dumping "Futureboy" either as I believe this years experience will pay dividends down the road, heck he might eventually develop into something other than a very good/servicable backup but I am on the side of bringing in someone that can at least make passes on a consistent basis.

Why is everyone so afraid to go ahead and bring a real QB in to compete for the job?

The staff now knows the holes that need to be fixed, (RDE, WR, CB/S, and yes QB).
Now all that has to be done is to get Spielman and staff to find the right guys, Bryzcheapski and staff to pay the price and most of all convince the owner to spend the money.

Jettison some dead weight.....

BB, KH, Erasmus, Fergy/Twill, Tank to make holes on the roster for those vets.........

Draft wisely for depth, future replacements for aging vets and you will have a gol 'darnit good team next year.

But of course, some will contend that we aren't getting any better.......

gol 'darnit.
Like talking to a wall sometimes.
;D
;D
;D
;D
;D

I have never said I was in favor of getting rid of TJ entirely. In fact, if you read some of my past posts, I have always said he has an upside. The trouble is , it's just taking him a lot longer to learn than anyone thought it would. And with our others players now at their "peak performance" we need a QB who can lead us NOW, not a year or two or three in the future. TJ can learn under that QB which is what everyone seemed to want at the beginning of the year. So what's changed?


I think most of us thought he was being thrust in to the starting role far too soon.


not only that, but there would be bumps in the road, i think most of us thought he would be mediocre. honestly, i think hes played better than the expectations.


I think the coaches have done fairly well this year with him, except for lately i mean they are trying to run when they had 8 or 9 in the box, we ran a twin TE i form set with one receiver.
so if that receiver isnt open then what? thats jacksons fault? With our receiver corp and that formation i would run 1 on 1 coverage with a safety in the middle too, do the likes of Wade, Fergy, Williamson, Allison scare you? Rice wouldve helped but not dramatically.


I think Williamson has improved and looked to be Jacksons go to guy, i dont know about you guys but he did a good job on sunday, even caught the deep ball although it was out of bounds still caught it, i say let him stick around.

Back to Jackson, im all for bringing in a capable backup that could help with his progression, a smarter qb like pennington would be sufficiant, not a starter bc of his noodle arm but a very intelligent qb who could help.

Anyone notice that the last two games have been prime time games, i feel the added pressure didnt help and he was trying to force things trying to make big things happen.
He is developing and I like overall what he has done I think he should be the starter next year but like i said bring in a capable backup

PacNWVike
12-27-2007, 02:01 AM
How much career time do you think McNabb believes he has left?
How many injuries has he experienced in the last few seasons?
Does he have any heart left?
Someone told me he grew up in Chicago.
True?
If so, would he prefer to end his career in his hometown, or with Childress?
Jackson isn't the answer...

Marrdro
12-27-2007, 08:38 AM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.

Or that Chicago paid him more.

I for one think he is looking to win with the next team he chooses. IMHO between the two (no purple glasses) the Vikings look to be a better fit than the Bears.


Additionally, lets not forget that there are two ties to Donavan on this team, The Chiller and the QB coach. I believe that coach Rogers probably had alot more to do with the development of Donavan than the Chiller.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2288906

Purple Floyd
12-27-2007, 11:23 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.

Or that Chicago paid him more.

I for one think he is looking to win with the next team he chooses. IMHO between the two (no purple glasses) the Vikings look to be a better fit than the Bears.


Additionally, lets not forget that there are two ties to Donavan on this team, The Chiller and the QB coach. I believe that coach Rogers probably had alot more to do with the development of Donavan than the Chiller.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2288906


Who on the Eagles staff have said for a fact that they are going to jettison him in favor of a QB who has never taken an NFL snap?

If they are looking to unload him, can we send them TJ, Bollinger and Holcolm?

PacNWVike
12-27-2007, 11:28 AM
Hell, send them TJ and Holcomb.
Keep Bollinger.
Those Dakota boys (Leber, Kleinsasser) can develop into tough players...
;)

Purple Floyd
12-27-2007, 11:39 AM
I was checking out an Eagles forum to see what they thought of all of the Mcnabb talk and it is pretty evident that the majority of their fans aren't as impressed with him as many on here are.

http://igglephans.com/

Marrdro
12-27-2007, 11:57 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.

Or that Chicago paid him more.

I for one think he is looking to win with the next team he chooses. IMHO between the two (no purple glasses) the Vikings look to be a better fit than the Bears.


Additionally, lets not forget that there are two ties to Donavan on this team, The Chiller and the QB coach. I believe that coach Rogers probably had alot more to do with the development of Donavan than the Chiller.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2288906


Who on the Eagles staff have said for a fact that they are going to jettison him in favor of a QB who has never taken an NFL snap?

If they are looking to unload him, can we send them TJ, Bollinger and Holcolm?

No one to date.
Like most things on here, just speculation.
Going back to the QB thread I started, not alot out there when it comes to VET QB's.

jargomcfargo
12-27-2007, 12:11 PM
We will wait until the very end of preseason. Then we will cut Holcumb and Bollinger and bring in Henson and some other third rate cast off for the third year in a row!

Well I hope not.

My guess is a trade will be made for a qb. I don't think it will be McNabb.

Purple Floyd
12-27-2007, 12:13 PM
"jargomcfargo" wrote:


We will wait until the very end of preseason. Then we will cut Holcumb and Bollinger and bring in Henson and some other third rate cast off for the third year in a row!

Well I hope not.

My guess is a trade will be made for a qb. I don't think it will be McNabb.


Good post, you know the team well lol

mountainviking
12-27-2007, 01:17 PM
On a side note involving QBs...CLE just resigned their third QB, Dorsey, to a three year extension.
Wonder what that means to their other two QBs...?
PFT says Quinn lobbied for him:
http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm


So what does the move to keep Dorsey through 2010 mean?
On one hand, it could be viewed as a sign that the Browns will look to move restricted free agent Derek Anderson in the offseason, since the deal puts Dorsey in position to be the long-term mentor for Quinn.
On the other hand, the decision could be a precursor to a long-term contract with Anderson.

Why, you ask?
Because even though the sock puppets have been presuming that the Browns could painlessly keep Anderson and Quinn for the next several years because Quinn has a manageable contract, Quinn's contract is based on the presumption that he'll be playing -- and thus earning those big-money incentives.

So if the Browns plan to squat on Quinn for the next four years, they'll need to otherwise keep him happy.
And one way to do it is to have his pal Ken under contract.

I still think they'll try to keep them all for one more year...unless, putting the tag on Anderson would be too ridiculous cost wise...wouldn't it be the average of the top 5 paid QBs to put the highest tender on him?
That might be a lot of dough (and salary cap)

Marrdro
12-27-2007, 01:23 PM
"mountainviking" wrote:


On a side note involving QBs...CLE just resigned their third QB, Dorsey, to a three year extension.
Wonder what that means to their other two QBs...?
PFT says Quinn lobbied for him:
http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm


So what does the move to keep Dorsey through 2010 mean?
On one hand, it could be viewed as a sign that the Browns will look to move restricted free agent Derek Anderson in the offseason, since the deal puts Dorsey in position to be the long-term mentor for Quinn.
On the other hand, the decision could be a precursor to a long-term contract with Anderson.

Why, you ask?
Because even though the sock puppets have been presuming that the Browns could painlessly keep Anderson and Quinn for the next several years because Quinn has a manageable contract, Quinn's contract is based on the presumption that he'll be playing -- and thus earning those big-money incentives.

So if the Browns plan to squat on Quinn for the next four years, they'll need to otherwise keep him happy.
And one way to do it is to have his pal Ken under contract.

I still think they'll try to keep them all for one more year...unless, putting the tag on Anderson would be too ridiculous cost wise...wouldn't it be the average of the top 5 paid QBs to put the highest tender on him?
That might be a lot of dough (and salary cap)

That is a very interesting twist my Purple Mountain Friend.

Couple of things......

a.
There is gonna be another $7 mil added to the CAP this year.
I am sure that most teams will be able to keep someone they probably couldn't have had the $$ for.
b.
If they put the tag on Anderson he would in essence be playing for 1 year contract with no gauranteed long term future.
I wouldn't think he would stand in the pocket and take to many shots.
Not sure if a coaching staff would want a guy out there worried about what next year might not bring.

Long story short, I wouldn't want to be the Browns GM at this point in the game.
It will be fun to watch this one play out.
;D

Thanks for the read.

josdin00
12-27-2007, 02:10 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Schutz" wrote:


"happy" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.


How do you get that idea? I mean, I chose a salami sandwich over bologna today, I really hope bologna doesn't think I hate it. Because I don't, I just wanted Salami.

There would be many more variables to consider in the decision than just what he thinks of Childress. To draw the conclusion that him going elsewhere is evidence of him hating Childress would be speculative at best.


I don't think that would show anything at all.
There is so many organizational things that go into a trade.
Maybe Childress wanted him but the front office/Wilf said no.
It shows nothing.


We all know there's the Chilly/Eagles connection and that Reid and Chilly are best friends. From the sounds of Childress he also sounds like he's responsible for McNabb's success because he taught him all he knows. Now let's just assume for a moment that he could go to Chicago or the Vikings and all money deals were equal. Don't you think if Chilly was such a good coach and taught him all he knows that he would choose to take the deal at Chicago? Especially since the Vikings are an up and coming team and all they need is a good QB to go places.
Now granted there is the thought that Speilman or Wilf could nix the deal but I stil think if Chilly says, "Hey, I could win big with this guy" they wouldn't go along with his wishes? It's obvious Wilf has the final say and so far he's backing Childress as far as I can see.
It wouold be a slap in the face if McNabb went somewhere else if all other things were equal. To me that would be him saying "I don't want to go to the Vikings because I know Childress and he's a loser.


See, but all things will never be equal if Chicago is in the mix. McNabb went to Mt. Carmel high school. If he's deciding between Chicago and Minneapolis, guess which one is closer?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/large%20pics/MtCarmel-1.jpg

Marrdro
12-27-2007, 02:34 PM
"josdin00" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


"Schutz" wrote:


"happy" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:




I will put money down that McNabb, if not in Philly next year, will be in Chicago.

You are right SIA, that is a real possibility. I wrote some time ago it will be interesting to see if he has a choice where he goes will he go to Chicago or Minnesota. For all the talk about Childress teaching him all he knows and their past association, if he goes to Chicago it will show me he hates Childress and doesn't think much of him as a coach.


How do you get that idea? I mean, I chose a salami sandwich over bologna today, I really hope bologna doesn't think I hate it. Because I don't, I just wanted Salami.

There would be many more variables to consider in the decision than just what he thinks of Childress. To draw the conclusion that him going elsewhere is evidence of him hating Childress would be speculative at best.


I don't think that would show anything at all.
There is so many organizational things that go into a trade.
Maybe Childress wanted him but the front office/Wilf said no.
It shows nothing.

We all know there's the Chilly/Eagles connection and that Reid and Chilly are best friends. From the sounds of Childress he also sounds like he's responsible for McNabb's success because he taught him all he knows. Now let's just assume for a moment that he could go to Chicago or the Vikings and all money deals were equal. Don't you think if Chilly was such a good coach and taught him all he knows that he would choose to take the deal at Chicago? Especially since the Vikings are an up and coming team and all they need is a good QB to go places.
Now granted there is the thought that Speilman or Wilf could nix the deal but I stil think if Chilly says, "Hey, I could win big with this guy" they wouldn't go along with his wishes? It's obvious Wilf has the final say and so far he's backing Childress as far as I can see.
It wouold be a slap in the face if McNabb went somewhere else if all other things were equal. To me that would be him saying "I don't want to go to the Vikings because I know Childress and he's a loser.


See, but all things will never be equal if Chicago is in the mix. McNabb went to Mt. Carmel high school. If he's deciding between Chicago and Minneapolis, guess which one is closer?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/large%20pics/MtCarmel-1.jpg



I gotta agree with Jos on this one.

I know alot of you really believe that I am some sort of Childress worshiper or something but I not really.
I only point these types of things out to make sure that you all understand that the HC just doesn't have the power that most of you believe and it really isn't up to him on what players are put on the field.

As to Donavan, the Chiller might want him but he has got to get Bryzcheapski, Spielmen and the ownership to buy into a decision like that. Granted he will get a vote in it, however.......

Take a look at the articles below.
It might help you see why I believe I am right in this regard.


http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/10/28/vikings-already-looking-pat-tarvaris-jackson-toward-2008-nfl-dr/

Sid Hartman of the Star-Tribune quotes Rick Spielman, the Vikings' vice president of player personnel, on the quarterbacks he's looking at:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2463358


The hire turned out to be a disaster, with Foley being fired on May 3 after inaccuracies on his resume, clashes with other Vikings management and a draft that was widely panned.



Though effusive in his praise of Wilf and Childress, Spielman was reluctant to talk about the actual power structure and who would be making the final decisions. He said he would work with Childress, vice president of football operations Rob Brzezinski and director of college scouting Scott Studwell.

"Sure, we're going to have disagreements, just like everybody else does," Spielman said. "But, it's not what's best for me, it's not what's best for coach Childress, it's not what's best for Scott Studwell, it's what's best for the Minnesota Vikings. And that's what we're going to do."



http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S72173.shtml?cat=1


This weekend, he will be presiding over his first draft as the Minnesota Vikings vice president of player personnel.




Tales of shouting matches involving the head-strong Foley circulated through the Vikings' Winter Park headquarters, and one of Spielman's main tasks was to unite the coaches, scouts and personnel department.



http://min.scout.com/2/640628.html

Mr-holland
12-27-2007, 02:43 PM
It's a young mans dream to play for the team that you have supported since you were a little boy, than there could be 10 coaches that have taught him everything he knows on the Vikings team he still would choose for the bears at least i would.. It remains to be seen what happends IF he doesn't stays with the Eagles.

mountainviking
12-27-2007, 02:56 PM
"Mr-holland" wrote:


It's a young mans dream to play for the team that you have supported since you were a little boy, than there could be 10 coaches that have taught him everything he knows on the Vikings team he still would choose for the bears at least i would.. It remains to be seen what happends IF he doesn't stays with the Eagles.


Yup.
I can't really imagine anybody making me want to play for a team more than I would the Vikings!!