PDA

View Full Version : Quarterback Not Only Offseason Concern



Marrdro
01-21-2008, 10:56 AM
Quarterback Not Only Offseason Concern

By Scout.com

Posted Jan 19, 2008



Tarvaris Jackson’s uneven season may have been the story of 2007, but the Vikings have other positions they need to look at upgrading in the offseason.

http://min.scout.com/a.z?s=63&p=2&c=721381

MaxVike
01-21-2008, 11:04 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Quarterback Not Only Offseason Concern

By Scout.com

Posted Jan 19, 2008



Tarvaris Jackson’s uneven season may have been the story of 2007, but the Vikings have other positions they need to look at upgrading in the offseason.

http://min.scout.com/a.z?s=63&p=2&c=721381


Thanks for the article.
It's quite obvious that the Scout.com writers read PP.O
;D

cogitans
01-21-2008, 01:13 PM
It should read, QB is not even close to being the no. 1 offseason concern.

When will the hacks learn

VikingMike
01-21-2008, 01:17 PM
I was very surprised by this one:


The 2007 Vikings became the first team in history to ever have a running back rush for three touchdowns in a single game more than once in a season. Minnesota did it three times, with Chester Taylor also going for three on Nov. 18 against

Did I read that correctly...the first team in (NFL) history...or Vikings history? The writer is not very clear on this point.
???

I liked this quote too:


QUOTE TO NOTE: “I am disappointed that I wasn’t able to take this team to the playoffs. All of us can go back and see the could-have, should-have, and would-have, but I guess I prefer to look at the assets and going forward the assets that we’ll end (up) adding and that will certainly be our goal as we start in to 2008.” — Coach Brad Childress, when asked if the Vikings should be expected to be a playoff team next season

Marrdro
01-21-2008, 02:28 PM
"VikingMike" wrote:


I was very surprised by this one:


The 2007 Vikings became the first team in history to ever have a running back rush for three touchdowns in a single game more than once in a season. Minnesota did it three times, with Chester Taylor also going for three on Nov. 18 against

Did I read that correctly...the first team in (NFL) history...or Vikings history? The writer is not very clear on this point.
???

I liked this quote too:


QUOTE TO NOTE: “I am disappointed that I wasn’t able to take this team to the playoffs. All of us can go back and see the could-have, should-have, and would-have, but I guess I prefer to look at the assets and going forward the assets that we’ll end (up) adding and that will certainly be our goal as we start in to 2008.” — Coach Brad Childress, when asked if the Vikings should be expected to be a playoff team next season

The rub is that he can want to add all the assets he wants, but if Spielmen and crew don't agree then it won't happen.

Its really gonna come down to who is available, do they fit the scheme and does it make sense, fiscally to add that player.

I for one am going to watch with interest the press coverage of the Chiller if a quality Vet WR, S and DE aren't added during the offseason.
Maybe, just maybe we might see him break from party lines a bit if that doesn't happen.

mountainviking
01-21-2008, 03:25 PM
Sounds to me like the plan is to add some assets!!
;D
Hopefully, we can get it done.
Having AP on the team might help sway a guy like Kevin Curtis from last year...

I think Jared Allen, Justin Smith, and probably Suggs too, will be franchised.
Maybe the Ravens go into full on rebuilding mode, and let some guys go...?
We can only hope.
Maybe we will be looking for that RDE in the draft.

vikesfargo
01-21-2008, 06:29 PM
Williamson is probably in the top 10 in terms of athletes on the Vikings. We need athletes! Keep Williamson. His first year was with Tice, so he really has had only two years in the NFL so far.

MaxVike
01-21-2008, 06:51 PM
"vikesfargo" wrote:


Williamson is probably in the top 10 in terms of athletes on the Vikings. We need athletes! Keep Williamson. His first year was with Tice, so he really has had only two years in the NFL so far.


Yes, we do need "athletes."
However, the last time I checked, the first qualification to being a Wide Receiver is the ability to catch the ball.
We do not need a great "athlete" playing WR who can't catch the football.
He is the weakest link, got to go.

ThorSPL
01-21-2008, 06:53 PM
"MaxVike" wrote:


"vikesfargo" wrote:


Williamson is probably in the top 10 in terms of athletes on the Vikings. We need athletes! Keep Williamson. His first year was with Tice, so he really has had only two years in the NFL so far.


Yes, we do need "athletes."
However, the last time I checked, the first qualification to being a Wide Receiver is the ability to catch the ball.
We do not need a great "athlete" playing WR who can't catch the football.
He is the weakest link, got to go.


No way man, I knew this guy in high school.
Kicker... he was an athlete!
man... you wouldn't believe it.
I mean, he couldn't kick or anything, but he was an athlete!!!

Wait... yeah, WR needs to be able to catch. I'm done with him...

nikoli
01-21-2008, 08:12 PM
Wow, can't believe they didn't even mention the OL... crazy!
:P

Maybe, just maybe the OL is actually pretty good.

davike
01-21-2008, 08:33 PM
Minnesota again led the NFL against the run, giving up an average of 74.1 yards per game, but was last versus the pass. The defense surrendered 264.1 yards per game through the air. In 2006, the Vikings gave up an average of 238.6 passing yards to tie Cincinnati for worst in the league.


The key there is not how many yards we gave up in a game. We are 16th in YPA, which still isn't good, but if a team gets passed on that much your going to give up some bigger pass plays eventually. We had 646 pass attempts on us. That is like some where around 50 more then the next team. Besides how many times were we ahead by a bunch and our guys were playing deep, anyone and any team could pass on us then. We had guys getting almost a couple hundred yards on us in the second half of a game where we were up by a bunch. Of course we were going to give up a bunch of yards, But you have to look at points per a game. We are rated 12th in that area. Thats not so bad.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying there is not room for improvement, we certainly need to improve our pass D, but just look at some of the other stats besides yards given up and we aren't quite as bad as people make us out to be.

Marrdro
01-22-2008, 09:02 AM
"nikoli" wrote:


Wow, can't believe they didn't even mention the OL... crazy!
:P

Maybe, just maybe the OL is actually pretty good.

After all that crap in the other thread and you still don't understand what we are trying to tell you.....

No one said we don't have a good line.
We have a very talented line.
They just struggled a bit last year in the pass protection because of blitz pickup/recognition especially when they audibled out of a run play (Zone Blocking Scheme) to a pass play (Man Blocking Scheme).

We get the point that you don't agree and nothing we say will change your mind.
Guess what, you won't change our minds either so why not just give it a rest.

bleedpurple
01-22-2008, 10:15 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"nikoli" wrote:


Wow, can't believe they didn't even mention the OL... crazy!
:P

Maybe, just maybe the OL is actually pretty good.

After all that crap in the other thread and you still don't understand what we are trying to tell you.....

No one said we don't have a good line.
We have a very talented line.
They just struggled a bit last year in the pass protection because of blitz pickup/recognition especially when they audibled out of a run play (Zone Blocking Scheme) to a pass play (Man Blocking Scheme).

We get the point that you don't agree and nothing we say will change your mind.
Guess what, you won't change our minds either so why not just give it a rest.


damn Marrdro.. tell him how you really feel??...

I havent been on here lately, so
i'm not sure whether he was being sarcastic or not.. but it sounds like he was finally conceding the point and jumping on the bandwagon...

I thought you were being good marrdro...
:o

Marrdro
01-22-2008, 10:18 AM
"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"nikoli" wrote:


Wow, can't believe they didn't even mention the OL... crazy!
:P

Maybe, just maybe the OL is actually pretty good.

After all that crap in the other thread and you still don't understand what we are trying to tell you.....

No one said we don't have a good line.
We have a very talented line.
They just struggled a bit last year in the pass protection because of blitz pickup/recognition especially when they audibled out of a run play (Zone Blocking Scheme) to a pass play (Man Blocking Scheme).

We get the point that you don't agree and nothing we say will change your mind.
Guess what, you won't change our minds either so why not just give it a rest.


gol 'darnit Marrdro.. tell him how you really feel??...

I havent been on here lately, so
i'm not sure whether he was being sarcastic or not.. but it sounds like he was finally conceding the point and jumping on the bandwagon...

I thought you were being good marrdro...
:o

He seems to be a good guy, just doesn't see things as I (and the rest of the football world) do.

By the way, you know I am chewing on the keyboard trying to refrain from turning into Bad Marrdro.
;D

mountainviking
01-22-2008, 11:59 AM
A few threads ago, somebody had a quote from mister Zone blocking himself, Shanahanagains, that it took 5 years to properly install his system.
:o
We know we have talent there...especially, from center to left tackle, I like what Herrera is doing at RG.
The only question mark is Cook, who has improved his play, but as I recall, had several penalties against the Broncos last game of the year!
Signing a guy like Starks from PIT sounds great, BUT, you have to wonder if the scheme and its learning curve might make us better off sticking with the guy who has been in it for two years now...at least for the near future.
In other words, if we sign a bad ass RT, can he improve the overall line play in the first week? month?? year???
Or even longer?


As for TWill, I'm not sure he'd get much of a chance anywhere but here.
His struggles are very well documented.
I for one am not opposed to giving him one more shot in preseason to see if he can earn a roster spot...depending, somewhat, on what he is scheduled to earn/cost us, and possibly taking a pay cut with reception incentives
;)

audioghost
01-22-2008, 12:33 PM
"vikesfargo" wrote:


Williamson is probably in the top 10 in terms of athletes on the Vikings. We need athletes! Keep Williamson. His first year was with Tice, so he really has had only two years in the NFL so far.


Shoot, thats the problem with the game today. There's too many bums in the league that get by on their athletic ability. Too many receivers who can't catch...too many db's who are fast but can't cover...I look for the most fundamental thing a WR can do: can he catch the ball? We've seen it with Cris Carter, you don't need world class athletes at WR, you need a smart WR who can get seperation and who can catch the ball...EVERY TIME. If he gets his hands on it he comes down with it 9 out of 10 times. Williamson drops 50% of the balls thrown at him, he's horrible. Whats the use of having a good athlete if he can't catch the ball? He can't use his athletic ability unless the ball's in his hands...

And COME ON! People talk smack about Jackson all day every day, but he made more progress in 1 yr than Troy boy did in 3! Williamson had his shot...he had 3 yrs and he sucked all 3 of them. I'm a big Jackson fan, but if he still looks like he did this year after starting in 2008 and 2009, I will be with the rest of you trying to ship him out of town. I think 3 yrs is a good enough measuring stick to figure out if a guy is a player or a bust. Williamson will have a hard time finding a squad to play on in '08, and I seriously doubt he will ever start again in the NFL. Yeah, he was the #3 guy this year on the team with the worst receiving corps in the NFL...and he blew it. He's done...maybe some team will be real desperate for a KR or something, but otherwise this dude won't get a shot. (See: Charles Rogers)

Prophet
01-22-2008, 12:36 PM
"audioghost" wrote:


"vikesfargo" wrote:


Williamson is probably in the top 10 in terms of athletes on the Vikings. We need athletes! Keep Williamson. His first year was with Tice, so he really has had only two years in the NFL so far.


Shoot, thats the problem with the game today. There's too many bums in the league that get by on their athletic ability. Too many receivers who can't catch...too many db's who are fast but can't cover...I look for the most fundamental thing a WR can do: can he catch the ball? We've seen it with Cris Carter, you don't need world class athletes at WR, you need a smart WR who can get seperation and who can catch the ball...EVERY TIME. If he gets his hands on it he comes down with it 9 out of 10 times. Williamson drops 50% of the balls thrown at him, he's horrible. Whats the use of having a good athlete if he can't catch the ball? He can't use his athletic ability unless the ball's in his hands...

And COME ON! People talk smack about Jackson all day every day, but he made more progress in 1 yr than Troy boy did in 3! Williamson had his shot...he had 3 yrs and he sucked all 3 of them. I'm a big Jackson fan, but if he still looks like he did this year after starting in 2008 and 2009, I will be with the rest of you trying to ship him out of town. I think 3 yrs is a good enough measuring stick to figure out if a guy is a player or a bust. Williamson will have a hard time finding a squad to play on in '08, and I seriously doubt he will ever start again in the NFL. Yeah, he was the #3 guy this year on the team with the worst receiving corps in the NFL...and he blew it. He's done...maybe some team will be real desperate for a KR or something, but otherwise this dude won't get a shot. (See: Charles Rogers)


A lot more people support your opinion than you think.

Marrdro
01-22-2008, 12:38 PM
"audioghost" wrote:


"vikesfargo" wrote:


Williamson is probably in the top 10 in terms of athletes on the Vikings. We need athletes! Keep Williamson. His first year was with Tice, so he really has had only two years in the NFL so far.


Shoot, thats the problem with the game today. There's too many bums in the league that get by on their athletic ability. Too many receivers who can't catch...too many db's who are fast but can't cover...I look for the most fundamental thing a WR can do: can he catch the ball? We've seen it with Cris Carter, you don't need world class athletes at WR, you need a smart WR who can get seperation and who can catch the ball...EVERY TIME. If he gets his hands on it he comes down with it 9 out of 10 times. Williamson drops 50% of the balls thrown at him, he's horrible. Whats the use of having a good athlete if he can't catch the ball? He can't use his athletic ability unless the ball's in his hands...

And COME ON! People talk smack about Jackson all day every day, but he made more progress in 1 yr than Troy boy did in 3! Williamson had his shot...he had 3 yrs and he sucked all 3 of them. I'm a big Jackson fan, but if he still looks like he did this year after starting in 2008 and 2009, I will be with the rest of you trying to ship him out of town. I think 3 yrs is a good enough measuring stick to figure out if a guy is a player or a bust. Williamson will have a hard time finding a squad to play on in '08, and I seriously doubt he will ever start again in the NFL. Yeah, he was the #3 guy this year on the team with the worst receiving corps in the NFL...and he blew it. He's done...maybe some team will be real desperate for a KR or something, but otherwise this dude won't get a shot. (See: Charles Rogers)

I just moved you up 3 columns my friend.
;D

Frostbite
01-22-2008, 12:57 PM
What's wrong with our O-line now Marrdro?? ;D

The Horse was beaten, died, burried, and is now turned to dust in it's grave.

It's the pass rush that we could use more help in. Opposing QBs can stand in the pocket 6-8 seconds on average before even feeling any threat. I don't care if you have the greatest defensive backs of all time....they will get burned with that much open pocket time, by any starting QB in this League.

Start to get some pressure on the QB off the ends with a 4 man rush (No Blitzes) and watch how much better our pass defense gets. When we have to call blitzes all the time to get pressure and sacks it puts the defesive backs in to many man coverage situations. Eventually that's gonna kill ya.

To me one of the weakest areas we have currently is our pass rush. JMHO.

Although another top WR wouldn't hurt either....How about both??

Cheers!

Marrdro
01-22-2008, 02:31 PM
"Frostbite" wrote:


What's wrong with our O-line now Marrdro?? ;D

The Horse was beaten, died, burried, and is now turned to dust in it's grave.

It's the pass rush that we could use more help in. Opposing QBs can stand in the pocket 6-8 seconds on average before even feeling any threat. I don't care if you have the greatest defensive backs of all time....they will get burned with that much open pocket time, by any starting QB in this League.

Start to get some pressure on the QB off the ends with a 4 man rush (No Blitzes) and watch how much better our pass defense gets. When we have to call blitzes all the time to get pressure and sacks it puts the defesive backs in to many man coverage situations. Eventually that's gonna kill ya.

To me one of the weakest areas we have currently is our pass rush. JMHO.

Although another top WR wouldn't hurt either....How about both??

Cheers!

You know me.
Always on the OL as I am on the DL.
Its what I do.
;D

Couldn't agree more.
We need a RDE that can get us 10 or 12 sacks this year.
Probably gonna need help at S as well if both Doss and Smith are allowed to leave/given thier walking papers.

MindFreak
01-22-2008, 02:44 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


What's wrong with our O-line now Marrdro?? ;D

The Horse was beaten, died, burried, and is now turned to dust in it's grave.

It's the pass rush that we could use more help in. Opposing QBs can stand in the pocket 6-8 seconds on average before even feeling any threat. I don't care if you have the greatest defensive backs of all time....they will get burned with that much open pocket time, by any starting QB in this League.

Start to get some pressure on the QB off the ends with a 4 man rush (No Blitzes) and watch how much better our pass defense gets. When we have to call blitzes all the time to get pressure and sacks it puts the defesive backs in to many man coverage situations. Eventually that's gonna kill ya.

To me one of the weakest areas we have currently is our pass rush. JMHO.

Although another top WR wouldn't hurt either....How about both??

Cheers!

You know me.
Always on the OL as I am on the DL.
Its what I do.
;D

Couldn't agree more.
We need a RDE that can get us 10 or 12 sacks this year.
Probably gonna need help at S as well if both Doss and Smith are allowed to leave/given thier walking papers.

Don't forget that Tank is a FA as well, he did tons for us in his 2 years here
:)

Marrdro
01-22-2008, 02:48 PM
"MindFreak" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


What's wrong with our O-line now Marrdro?? ;D

The Horse was beaten, died, burried, and is now turned to dust in it's grave.

It's the pass rush that we could use more help in. Opposing QBs can stand in the pocket 6-8 seconds on average before even feeling any threat. I don't care if you have the greatest defensive backs of all time....they will get burned with that much open pocket time, by any starting QB in this League.

Start to get some pressure on the QB off the ends with a 4 man rush (No Blitzes) and watch how much better our pass defense gets. When we have to call blitzes all the time to get pressure and sacks it puts the defesive backs in to many man coverage situations. Eventually that's gonna kill ya.

To me one of the weakest areas we have currently is our pass rush. JMHO.

Although another top WR wouldn't hurt either....How about both??

Cheers!

You know me.
Always on the OL as I am on the DL.
Its what I do.
;D

Couldn't agree more.
We need a RDE that can get us 10 or 12 sacks this year.
Probably gonna need help at S as well if both Doss and Smith are allowed to leave/given thier walking papers.

Don't forget that Tank is a FA as well, he did tons for us in his 2 years here
:)

Is he really?
I didn't know that.
Problem is even bigger than I thought.

21 Michael Doss S 26 5-10 207 5 Ohio State FA

37 Eric Frampton S 23 5-11 205 R Washington State

42 Darren Sharper S 32 6-2 210 11 William & Mary

24 Dwight Smith S 29 5-10 201 7 Akron Status still unsure.
Could at least be
suspended for part of season.

25 Tank Williams S 27 6-3 223 6 Stanford FA

ThorSPL
01-22-2008, 04:13 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"MindFreak" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Frostbite" wrote:


What's wrong with our O-line now Marrdro?? ;D

The Horse was beaten, died, burried, and is now turned to dust in it's grave.

It's the pass rush that we could use more help in. Opposing QBs can stand in the pocket 6-8 seconds on average before even feeling any threat. I don't care if you have the greatest defensive backs of all time....they will get burned with that much open pocket time, by any starting QB in this League.

Start to get some pressure on the QB off the ends with a 4 man rush (No Blitzes) and watch how much better our pass defense gets. When we have to call blitzes all the time to get pressure and sacks it puts the defesive backs in to many man coverage situations. Eventually that's gonna kill ya.

To me one of the weakest areas we have currently is our pass rush. JMHO.

Although another top WR wouldn't hurt either....How about both??

Cheers!

You know me.
Always on the OL as I am on the DL.
Its what I do.
;D

Couldn't agree more.
We need a RDE that can get us 10 or 12 sacks this year.
Probably gonna need help at S as well if both Doss and Smith are allowed to leave/given thier walking papers.

Don't forget that Tank is a FA as well, he did tons for us in his 2 years here
:)

Is he really?
I didn't know that.
Problem is even bigger than I thought.

21 Michael Doss S 26 5-10 207 5 Ohio State FA

37 Eric Frampton S 23 5-11 205 R Washington State

42 Darren Sharper S 32 6-2 210 11 William & Mary

24 Dwight Smith S 29 5-10 201 7 Akron Status still unsure.
Could at least be
suspended for part of season.

25 Tank Williams S 27 6-3 223 6 Stanford FA


Makes you gasp a little bit.
I'm pretty sure Smith is gonna be suspended for at least 4 games next year.... don't know how you could get out of that.

Doss and Tank really didn't do a hell of a lot while hear; but that being said if a roster spot opened up they could fill in decently.
It's obvious we are going to need to pick up a safety in the draft.... I think FA will dictate whether we pick up somebody to step in soon versus somebody to groom a few years.
OR the other way around... who knows.

ballhog27
01-22-2008, 04:22 PM
I am sick and tired of hearing about how Jackson is the reason the Vikings are bad. I hear it all the time. I don't understand how any QB can be good without good wide receivers. If we are ever going to know if he is a good QB we must give him some wideouts to throw to, not Bobby Wade's.

bleedpurple
01-22-2008, 04:47 PM
"ballhog27" wrote:


I am sick and tired of hearing about how Jackson is the reason the Vikings are bad. I hear it all the time. I don't understand how any QB can be good without good wide receivers. If we are ever going to know if he is a good QB we must give him some wideouts to throw to, not Bobby Wade's.


i agree... but FYI... Donovan Mcnabb and Favre... did it.... and Favre has a tendancy to make average receivers look like pro bowlers... i.e. antoino freeman...