PDA

View Full Version : Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends



Mr-holland
05-12-2008, 09:10 AM
Positional Analysis: Tight Ends
http://min.scout.com/2/754176.html

By John Holler

Posted May 12, 2008


The Vikings have a decent amount of money tied up in the tight end position, which didn’t produce numbers typical of players at the position in a West Coast Offense.

Of all the positions that were deficient for the Vikings in 2007, perhaps the only one that got no attention in the offseason was tight end. While the Vikings made moves – major or minor – to upgrade at defensive end, wide receiver, safety and quarterback, no moves were made at tight end. This came as a surprise to some, since the underachievement at tight end was about as pronounced as any on the team.

Marrdro
05-12-2008, 10:04 AM
Many of the other teams in the NFL that run the WCO have invested high draft picks or serious free-agent money to bring in a pass-catching tight end that can stretch the defense down the middle seam and open up big-play possibilities for both themselves and others. The Vikings have clearly not been one of those teams.

I'm not so sure people can see the writing on the wall sometimes.

Maybe, just maybe, we are watching a different form of the WCO with respect to the old way of thinking....
Pass to setup the run.

As I've said repeatedly, we put a heck of alot more emphasis on running than we do blocking.
Heck even our WR's seem to be better blockers than pass catchers at times.
Throw in other indicators like the implementation of a blocking scheme designed to support the run, two stud RB's, extra roster spots used on blocking TE's and FB's and you would think that eventually people (and sportswriters) would get a clue on this.

Even though we are labled as a WCO, the variant that is based on the premise that we will "Run to set up the Pass" relying on play action fakes, short dinks and dunks etc to control ball, eat up the clock all the while keeping our Defense off the field.


Kleinsasser, who was designated as the Vikings’ franchise player just a few years ago under a different offensive scheme, has been reduced to almost a complete non-factor in the Vikings pass offense

That kindof says it all for me.

::)

aaeyers
05-12-2008, 10:11 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Even though we are labled as a WCO, the variant that is based on the premise that we will "Run to set up the Pass" relying on play action fakes, short dinks and dunks etc to control ball, eat up the clock all the while keeping our Defense off the field.


Thats what I've been saying for a while now; we might use a WCO-style playbook, routes, schemes, etc. but our game plan is always exactly opposite of the traditional WCO. We are much more of a 'smashmouth' style offense that just happens to use a WCO playbook.

I think between our amazing ground game, Jackson's maturation and our top-notch defense, I think our main goal every game is going to be to dominate in time of possession so the other team doesn't even get a chance to score.

kevoncox
05-12-2008, 11:00 AM
I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

C Mac D
05-12-2008, 11:20 AM
Pretty sure that Chilly has long term plans for Garrett Mills... call me crazy.

marstc09
05-12-2008, 11:30 AM
"C" wrote:


Pretty sure that Chilly has long term plans for Garrett Mills... call me crazy.


I agree. We still have not seen him on the field yet except for the last game but I am sure we will this year.

Marrdro
05-12-2008, 02:25 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.

Marrdro
05-12-2008, 02:28 PM
"C" wrote:


Pretty sure that Chilly has long term plans for Garrett Mills... call me crazy.

I agree.........

He is gonna be a hell of a H-back as he is to small to be an everydown TE.
;D

Seriously though.
When he comes into the game as a TE it will be an instant tip off that we are passing because of his size.
I look to see him used more of a H-back with him lining up in the FB position and then splitting out or catching balls in the flat if he doesn't have to block a LB coming up the middle in a blitz package.

But I dont' see him lining up on the line and helping out a T very much.

Marrdro
05-12-2008, 02:30 PM
"aaeyers" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Even though we are labled as a WCO, the variant that is based on the premise that we will "Run to set up the Pass" relying on play action fakes, short dinks and dunks etc to control ball, eat up the clock all the while keeping our Defense off the field.


Thats what I've been saying for a while now; we might use a WCO-style playbook, routes, schemes, etc. but our game plan is always exactly opposite of the traditional WCO. We are much more of a 'smashmouth' style offense that just happens to use a WCO playbook.

I think between our amazing ground game, Jackson's maturation and our top-notch defense, I think our main goal every game is going to be to dominate in time of possession so the other team doesn't even get a chance to score.

I almost disagree'd with you in another thread (about the Bears Defense).
Glad I let it go know.
;D

tastywaves
05-12-2008, 02:56 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.

mountainviking
05-12-2008, 03:28 PM
All those checkdowns to Wiggins didn't seem to help Brad Johnson much.
Most were short of the first down.

I'm not sure why everyone thinks Shank's contract is so big.
18.2 million over 5 years ($3.64/year) is nothing compared to what we give Berrian or Williams, much less Allen.
I'll bet that in comparison with the rest of the league, its pretty close to average and quite a bit below what TonyG and AntonioG are making.
With the way the player salaries keep going up, it likely won't be long before its considered a deal.


With the exception of a 79-yard completion to Shiancoe on one play, of the remaining 963 offensive plays run by the Vikings in 2007, only 37 of them (3.8 percent) went to tight ends. Those 37 receptions accounted for just 344 yards of offense – 6.5 percent of the Vikings’ total yards gained. That is one of the lowest totals in terms of tight end production in the league and was not intended to be so.

That is play calling, not TE talent or production.
Jimmy can catch just fine, and is one hell of a blocker...so what if he doesn't run a 4.4 forty.
Although he dropped some (as all players do) Shank caught some nice ones too.
His last year with the Gmen, I watched a late season game of theirs where the backups were getting most of the action.
He made several nice catches on good routes that reminded me of how smooth Jerry Rice was on the field.
IMHO there is plenty of potential at TE on our roster.
But before we can see it, we'll need better blocking from the OL and better decisions from the QB...and maybe, more TE freindly play calling too.

tastywaves
05-12-2008, 03:48 PM
"mountainviking" wrote:


All those checkdowns to Wiggins didn't seem to help Brad Johnson much.
Most were short of the first down.

I'm not sure why everyone thinks Shank's contract is so big.
18.2 million over 5 years ($3.64/year) is nothing compared to what we give Berrian or Williams, much less Allen.
I'll bet that in comparison with the rest of the league, its pretty close to average and quite a bit below what TonyG and AntonioG are making.
With the way the player salaries keep going up, it likely won't be long before its considered a deal.


With the exception of a 79-yard completion to Shiancoe on one play, of the remaining 963 offensive plays run by the Vikings in 2007, only 37 of them (3.8 percent) went to tight ends. Those 37 receptions accounted for just 344 yards of offense – 6.5 percent of the Vikings’ total yards gained. That is one of the lowest totals in terms of tight end production in the league and was not intended to be so.

That is play calling, not TE talent or production.
Jimmy can catch just fine, and is one hell of a blocker...so what if he doesn't run a 4.4 forty.
Although he dropped some (as all players do) Shank caught some nice ones too.
His last year with the Gmen, I watched a late season game of theirs where the backups were getting most of the action.
He made several nice catches on good routes that reminded me of how smooth Jerry Rice was on the field.
IMHO there is plenty of potential at TE on our roster.
But before we can see it, we'll need better blocking from the OL and better decisions from the QB...and maybe, more TE freindly play calling too.


According to the always reliable Wikipedia, the average TE salary in 2007, when Shank got his deal with the vikes was around $2M.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_salary_of_an_NFL_tight_end

In 2007, the median salary for a tight end was $2 million. In terms of salary cap numbers, which (this is a simplification) average out the bonuses over the length of the contract and add it to that year's base salary, the highest paid tight ends in 2007 were the Ravens's Todd Heap and the Falcons's Alge Crumpler, both at a little under $5 million. The Chiefs's Tony Gonzales officially had the highest salary of 2007 among tight ends, at $11 million, because it was the first year of his new contract and he collected his $10 million signing bonus in addition to his $1 million salary. The salary cap value of his contract was $4.5 million, placing him third in the league.

There is no question we overpaid for Shancoe for what we he has contributed to this point.
Whether its his fault or a fault of our offense, I'm not sure.
But either way, his signing has not paid the dividends that should be expected.
This year may change all that, but in the 5 years that he has been in the league he still hasn't shown that he is a top TE in the league even though his salary would indicate that he should be.
You can argue he hasn't been given the opportunity, but nonetheless he hasn't shown he deserves his salary at this point.

Chazz
05-12-2008, 03:52 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.



I thought I was the only one who seen it that way. There were a couple of games last year that I think he tipped his hand to wanting to be a pass first offense. The game at Detroit really sticks out to me...Its just that T-Jack has not been up for the task...yet.

V-Unit
05-12-2008, 04:36 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.



I thought I was the only one who seen it that way. There were a couple of games last year that I think he tipped his hand to wanting to be a pass first offense. The game at Detroit really sticks out to me...Its just that T-Jack has not been up for the task...yet.


Sigh...there have been several games over the last two years that Childress has tried to implement typical WCO strategy, passing to set up the run, and it has never worked. The Detroit game is the best example.

Sure, we may see some more passing as TJ improves, but it is a strategy I don't agree with. We are suited to run the ball, so run the damn ball. No matter how good TJ gets, handing the ball to AD on 3rd and 4 will always be the better option.

Now, to stay on topic, I don't see anything that a TE can do in the passing game that Bobby Wade can't. We don't have a TE, but we have many other weapons. The truth is that Shank blocked a lot, and that he didn't see that many balls come his way. That is because of the offense, not because of him. Before Shank there was Wiggins, a pass-catching TE who turned in a few great years for us. Then Childress came to town; Wiggins saw far less balls and was asked to block more. Being the 3rd/4th option on passing plays, and a horrible blocker, Wiggins was useless in our offensive system.

The bottomline is we don't need a flashy pass-catching TE. To get one would be a waste of money. Shank already is a waste of money if you ask me. He has good hands, but he can't stretch the field. He has size, but isn't that fast, or a great jumper. The key here,, is that he can block. That makes him better than Kellen Winslow in our offense. He is overpaid, but he is a great fit.

kevoncox
05-12-2008, 04:54 PM
"V" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.



I thought I was the only one who seen it that way. There were a couple of games last year that I think he tipped his hand to wanting to be a pass first offense. The game at Detroit really sticks out to me...Its just that T-Jack has not been up for the task...yet.


Sigh...there have been several games over the last two years that Childress has tried to implement typical WCO strategy, passing to set up the run, and it has never worked. The Detroit game is the best example.

Sure, we may see some more passing as TJ improves, but it is a strategy I don't agree with. We are suited to run the ball, so run the gol 'darnit ball. No matter how good TJ gets, handing the ball to AD on 3rd and 4 will always be the better option.

Now, to stay on topic, I don't see anything that a TE can do in the passing game that Bobby Wade can't. We don't have a TE, but we have many other weapons. The truth is that Shank blocked a lot, and that he didn't see that many balls come his way. That is because of the offense, not because of him. Before Shank there was Wiggins, a pass-catching TE who turned in a few great years for us. Then Childress came to town; Wiggins saw far less balls and was asked to block more. Being the 3rd/4th option on passing plays, and a horrible blocker, Wiggins was useless in our offensive system.

The bottomline is we don't need a flashy pass-catching TE. To get one would be a waste of money. Shank already is a waste of money if you ask me. He has good hands, but he can't stretch the field. He has size, but isn't that fast, or a great jumper. The key here,, is that he can block. That makes him better than Kellen Winslow in our offense. He is overpaid, but he is a great fit.


Winslow is a better blocker. Additionally, if you have a weapon they have to be accounted for. Adding winslow and motioning him will force the defense to send 1 less man. However, we have forgotten was a weapon in the passing game can do for you sine Moss got traded.

V-Unit
05-12-2008, 05:48 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:




I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.



I thought I was the only one who seen it that way. There were a couple of games last year that I think he tipped his hand to wanting to be a pass first offense. The game at Detroit really sticks out to me...Its just that T-Jack has not been up for the task...yet.


Sigh...there have been several games over the last two years that Childress has tried to implement typical WCO strategy, passing to set up the run, and it has never worked. The Detroit game is the best example.

Sure, we may see some more passing as TJ improves, but it is a strategy I don't agree with. We are suited to run the ball, so run the gol 'darnit ball. No matter how good TJ gets, handing the ball to AD on 3rd and 4 will always be the better option.

Now, to stay on topic, I don't see anything that a TE can do in the passing game that Bobby Wade can't. We don't have a TE, but we have many other weapons. The truth is that Shank blocked a lot, and that he didn't see that many balls come his way. That is because of the offense, not because of him. Before Shank there was Wiggins, a pass-catching TE who turned in a few great years for us. Then Childress came to town; Wiggins saw far less balls and was asked to block more. Being the 3rd/4th option on passing plays, and a horrible blocker, Wiggins was useless in our offensive system.

The bottomline is we don't need a flashy pass-catching TE. To get one would be a waste of money. Shank already is a waste of money if you ask me. He has good hands, but he can't stretch the field. He has size, but isn't that fast, or a great jumper. The key here,, is that he can block. That makes him better than Kellen Winslow in our offense. He is overpaid, but he is a great fit.


Winslow is a better blocker. Additionally, if you have a weapon they have to be accounted for. Adding winslow and motioning him will force the defense to send 1 less man. However, we have forgotten was a weapon in the passing game can do for you sine Moss got traded.


Winslow is not a better blocker. Our offense is not designed to send our TE out wide, so adding Winslow would be a waste of his talents and our money. I would rather have an offense that was full of capable players rather than that deceiving, one weapon offense like we had in 2004. However, you have made it clear this offseason that you reply to reasonable arguments with heavily biased opinions, which will not change, so I don't know why I'm wasting my time.

vikings4life33
05-12-2008, 08:41 PM
i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block

Chazz
05-12-2008, 09:39 PM
"vikings4life33" wrote:


i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

kevoncox
05-12-2008, 11:23 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"vikings4life33" wrote:


i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.

V-Unit
05-13-2008, 07:29 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"vikings4life33" wrote:


i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.

Purple Floyd
05-13-2008, 07:42 AM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.


Exactly

mountainviking
05-13-2008, 02:14 PM
Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.

kevoncox
05-13-2008, 03:44 PM
"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"vikings4life33" wrote:


i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?

V-Unit
05-13-2008, 04:24 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"vikings4life33" wrote:


i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. Bullshit. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, bullshit we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.

Chazz
05-13-2008, 10:53 PM
"mountainviking" wrote:


Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.



You need to go back and take a good look at our game in Detroit. Childress wants to pass first, run second. He just hasn't had the talent to do it.

Purple Floyd
05-13-2008, 11:01 PM
"mountainviking" wrote:


Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.


I don't really agree with that. Westbrook and Buckhalter have been the backbone of their offense. The addition of TO put them almost over the top one year and having Stallworth helped but they sent those guys down the road. Who are their best 3 WR's?

I would think if anything after having a limited talent pool to work with at Philly sans TO, that Chilly would go hard after WR;s to bolster the team. He doesn't have DM to put the team on his shoulders here.

Yet

kevoncox
05-13-2008, 11:36 PM
"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:




i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Marrdro
05-14-2008, 06:57 AM
"mountainviking" wrote:


Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.

You are a wise man for a mountain dweller.
;D

Marrdro
05-14-2008, 07:00 AM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.
That is a very good point Tasty, however, I actually think we are more run oriented right now because in the NFL it is easier to fix the run than the pass, especially when you have a young QB, poor WR's and are installing a new blocking scheme with alot of new OL getting to know each other.

Long story short, we will be a better passing team but we will run the ball first, second and third in most cases.

Hell, I am even sure you pass happy lovers will get all pissed when you see 3 and 4 WR sets and we still run the ball out of them.
;D

Marrdro
05-14-2008, 07:03 AM
"mountainviking" wrote:


All those checkdowns to Wiggins didn't seem to help Brad Johnson much.
Most were short of the first down.

I'm not sure why everyone thinks Shank's contract is so big.
18.2 million over 5 years ($3.64/year) is nothing compared to what we give Berrian or Williams, much less Allen.
I'll bet that in comparison with the rest of the league, its pretty close to average and quite a bit below what TonyG and AntonioG are making.
With the way the player salaries keep going up, it likely won't be long before its considered a deal.


With the exception of a 79-yard completion to Shiancoe on one play, of the remaining 963 offensive plays run by the Vikings in 2007, only 37 of them (3.8 percent) went to tight ends. Those 37 receptions accounted for just 344 yards of offense – 6.5 percent of the Vikings’ total yards gained. That is one of the lowest totals in terms of tight end production in the league and was not intended to be so.

That is play calling, not TE talent or production.
Jimmy can catch just fine, and is one hell of a blocker...so what if he doesn't run a 4.4 forty.
Although he dropped some (as all players do) Shank caught some nice ones too.
His last year with the Gmen, I watched a late season game of theirs where the backups were getting most of the action.
He made several nice catches on good routes that reminded me of how smooth Jerry Rice was on the field.
IMHO there is plenty of potential at TE on our roster.
But before we can see it, we'll need better blocking from the OL and better decisions from the QB...and maybe, more TE freindly play calling too.

I think I need to add another column "Above Top Shelf" for you my friend.
This is the second solid post by you in this thread.

Ohhhhhh Mountain Man.....Speaker of the Truth.
;D

Marrdro
05-14-2008, 07:07 AM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"mountainviking" wrote:


All those checkdowns to Wiggins didn't seem to help Brad Johnson much.
Most were short of the first down.

I'm not sure why everyone thinks Shank's contract is so big.
18.2 million over 5 years ($3.64/year) is nothing compared to what we give Berrian or Williams, much less Allen.
I'll bet that in comparison with the rest of the league, its pretty close to average and quite a bit below what TonyG and AntonioG are making.
With the way the player salaries keep going up, it likely won't be long before its considered a deal.


With the exception of a 79-yard completion to Shiancoe on one play, of the remaining 963 offensive plays run by the Vikings in 2007, only 37 of them (3.8 percent) went to tight ends. Those 37 receptions accounted for just 344 yards of offense – 6.5 percent of the Vikings’ total yards gained. That is one of the lowest totals in terms of tight end production in the league and was not intended to be so.

That is play calling, not TE talent or production.
Jimmy can catch just fine, and is one hell of a blocker...so what if he doesn't run a 4.4 forty.
Although he dropped some (as all players do) Shank caught some nice ones too.
His last year with the Gmen, I watched a late season game of theirs where the backups were getting most of the action.
He made several nice catches on good routes that reminded me of how smooth Jerry Rice was on the field.
IMHO there is plenty of potential at TE on our roster.
But before we can see it, we'll need better blocking from the OL and better decisions from the QB...and maybe, more TE freindly play calling too.


According to the always reliable Wikipedia, the average TE salary in 2007, when Shank got his deal with the vikes was around $2M.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_salary_of_an_NFL_tight_end

In 2007, the median salary for a tight end was $2 million. In terms of salary cap numbers, which (this is a simplification) average out the bonuses over the length of the contract and add it to that year's base salary, the highest paid tight ends in 2007 were the Ravens's Todd Heap and the Falcons's Alge Crumpler, both at a little under $5 million. The Chiefs's Tony Gonzales officially had the highest salary of 2007 among tight ends, at $11 million, because it was the first year of his new contract and he collected his $10 million signing bonus in addition to his $1 million salary. The salary cap value of his contract was $4.5 million, placing him third in the league.

There is no question we overpaid for Shancoe for what we he has contributed to this point.
Whether its his fault or a fault of our offense, I'm not sure.
But either way, his signing has not paid the dividends that should be expected.
This year may change all that, but in the 5 years that he has been in the league he still hasn't shown that he is a top TE in the league even though his salary would indicate that he should be.
You can argue he hasn't been given the opportunity, but nonetheless he hasn't shown he deserves his salary at this point.



Very nice stuff Tasty.

I suspect though that alot of Shancs production or lack there of was because he played second fiddle to Dick Head over there in the Meadowlands and because we had issues with our pass protection last year.

I really believe that we will see that he is worth every penny we signed him for and more this year.

By the way, you and Mountain Man have made this a really good thread.
;D

Marrdro
05-14-2008, 07:12 AM
"V" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.



I thought I was the only one who seen it that way. There were a couple of games last year that I think he tipped his hand to wanting to be a pass first offense. The game at Detroit really sticks out to me...Its just that T-Jack has not been up for the task...yet.


Sigh...there have been several games over the last two years that Childress has tried to implement typical WCO strategy, passing to set up the run, and it has never worked. The Detroit game is the best example.

Sure, we may see some more passing as TJ improves, but it is a strategy I don't agree with. We are suited to run the ball, so run the gol 'darnit ball. No matter how good TJ gets, handing the ball to AD on 3rd and 4 will always be the better option.

Now, to stay on topic, I don't see anything that a TE can do in the passing game that Bobby Wade can't. We don't have a TE, but we have many other weapons. The truth is that Shank blocked a lot, and that he didn't see that many balls come his way. That is because of the offense, not because of him. Before Shank there was Wiggins, a pass-catching TE who turned in a few great years for us. Then Childress came to town; Wiggins saw far less balls and was asked to block more. Being the 3rd/4th option on passing plays, and a horrible blocker, Wiggins was useless in our offensive system.

The bottomline is we don't need a flashy pass-catching TE. To get one would be a waste of money. Shank already is a waste of money if you ask me. He has good hands, but he can't stretch the field. He has size, but isn't that fast, or a great jumper. The key here,, is that he can block. That makes him better than Kellen Winslow in our offense. He is overpaid, but he is a great fit.

Some more great input.

I wonder though if we will really believe that Shanc is overpaid in another year or two?
Again, I believe he is the perfect TE for our scheme as he is a damn good blocker and can catch the ball if necessary.

Barring a couple of drops last year I think he was starting to find his little niche in the scheme and as the rest of the offense matures (to include the OL/QB, WR, RB's) our TE's will start to come to the forefront as solid blockers and decent targets in routes.

By the way, did anyone catch Dugan and Klieny leading AD in on his second (I think) TD in the SD game.
Dugan was basically outrunning AD as he pushed the CB ass out the endzone.
;D

Marrdro
05-14-2008, 07:15 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"vikings4life33" wrote:


i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.

And yet we saw 6 in the box for AD's first TD in the SD game as we had a 3 WR set.

Comeon my friend.
You know that vikings4life33 is right.
Depending on what the Defense is dictating to us (as they did it alot last year) we will send in the package that works the best.
In most cases last year that was extra blockers to keep the backers asses off the turf.

tastywaves
05-14-2008, 07:18 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.

But that is wrong to think that way.
Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.


Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?


Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.


Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.
That is a very good point Tasty, however, I actually think we are more run oriented right now because in the NFL it is easier to fix the run than the pass, especially when you have a young QB, poor WR's and are installing a new blocking scheme with alot of new OL getting to know each other.

Long story short, we will be a better passing team but we will run the ball first, second and third in most cases.

Hell, I am even sure you pass happy lovers will get all pissed when you see 3 and 4 WR sets and we still run the ball out of them.
;D



I completely agree that the running game is easier to fix and it made sense to focus on this aspect considering the circumstances that Childress walked into.
The main point I was trying to get across is that I don't believe Childress came into MN thinking he was going to create a powerhouse running attack and damned the passing game.
There were a lot of dynamics that happened around the time of his hire that put the passing game back a few notches.
It made sense that he tried to solidify the running game first while putting more of a long term plan in place for the passing game. Especially in light of a rookie QB.
I was the biggest fan of the AD pick for that very reason.
Fixing the passing game takes a lot more pieces and takes time.
Hell, we may never get to a point where we are a prolific passing team, but I got to believe that Childress is trying to build it, just doesn't have the absolute urgency with the strength of the defense and running game.
If TJ doesn't turn out to be a great NFL QB, by having an overstrength in running it doesn't leave us completely out in the cold.

I do agree with all of the pass happy posters, that it should be a primary area of focus going forward and I believe we have seen some attention given lately (BB, Booty).
The TE is an area that should be considered for an upgrade, unless Shank has a breakout year and proves he can be both a blocking and pass catching TE.
A pass catching TE that can block would help this offense (any offense for that matter, regardless of all the great breakdowns being posted right and left of how it is useless in our system).
If we would have kept our 9 picks, I believe we would have targeted a TE in the draft.

mountainviking
05-14-2008, 12:23 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"mountainviking" wrote:


Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.



You need to go back and take a good look at our game in Detroit. Childress wants to pass first, run second. He just hasn't had the talent to do it.


That ONE game he was trying to exploit DET's weakness, not define his KAO.
Name any other game in two years where we were pass first!
One egg does not make a dozen!!!


As to Philly's offense...In 2007, out of 1047 plays for 5729.6 yards, 577 plays were passing plays for 3755 yards.
That comes out to 55.1% pass plays and 65.53% pass yards.
Westbrook has 3207 career recieving yards and 4785 career rushing yards...ridiculously close.
He will probably retire with more receptions than any other RB in history!
Westbrook is pretty much their entire offense (36.7% of all yards in 07)
So, while he is obviously a good runner, he is also, an extension of the passing game!
I looked for more Philly history to show this trend isn't a one year thing, but didn't see anything off hand...but believe me, they like to throw the ball.
Probably even more when they have a TO or Stallworth on board!!

Chazz
05-14-2008, 03:31 PM
Stats Comparison
WAS MIN
Score 32 21
1st Downs 19 23

3rd down efficiency 6 - 14 4 - 10

4th down efficiency 0 - 2 0 - 1
Total Yards 367 299
Passing 261 212

Comp-Att 23 - 30 25 - 41

Yards per pass 8.7 5.2
Rushing 106 87

Rushing Attempts 32 25

Yards per rush 3.3 3.5
Penalties 7 - 52 6 - 40
Turnovers 0 3

Fumbles Lost 0 1

Interceptions Thrown 0 2
Time of Possession 30:44 29:16




Stats Comparison
MIN DEN
Score 19 22
1st Downs 16 21

3rd down efficiency 7 - 14 3 - 12

4th down efficiency 1 - 1 1 - 3
Total Yards 332 362
Passing 160 234

Comp-Att 16 - 31 26 - 37

Yards per pass 5.2 6.3
Rushing 172 128

Rushing Attempts 27 27

Yards per rush 6.4 4.7
Penalties 4 - 30 5 - 40
Turnovers 3 0

Fumbles Lost 3 0

Interceptions Thrown 0 0
Time of Possession 27:28 33:24




Stats Comparison
MIN GB
Score 0 34
1st Downs 11 29

3rd down efficiency 0 - 8 11 - 17

4th down efficiency 0 - 3 2 - 2
Total Yards 247 488
Passing 161 368

Comp-Att 16 - 26 35 - 48

Yards per pass 6.2 7.7
Rushing 86 120

Rushing Attempts 15 32

Yards per rush 5.7 3.8
Penalties 5 - 51 4 - 35
Turnovers 1 0

Fumbles Lost 0 0

Interceptions Thrown 1 0
Time of Possession 19:20 40:40



There is 3 more in just last year. Brad Johnson had even said that this was the most aggressive offense he had ever played in.

mountainviking
05-14-2008, 04:46 PM
Nice compiliation!
Good work!!

WAS 41 pass attempts to 25 rushes...OK, got me there.
But weren't we forced to throw by being down 2+ TDs early off turnovers?

DEN 31 pass Attempts to 27 rushes...pretty close, but once again, down 19-3, we were forced to pass more.

GB ouch!
D'oh!!
Only 16 of 26 attempts, and only 15 rushes.
Not much chance on offense when you're getting pummeled 34-zip.
They had the ball more than double our time of possesion.
Ouch!
Our offense couldn't stay on the field and our defense couldn't stop pooh that particular day.


I see your point, but I think there were extenuating circumstances involved in those games, all defeats we were down big early in.
I stand by my earlier assertion that our FA moves and draft picks seem to point at the defense being No.1 priority, the running game (to help out your defense) is No.2, and the passing game is pretty low on the totem pole.
Hell, we've even signed/drafted more Special Teamers than WRs or TEs and QBs...most of the WRs we did draft double as KR or PR.

Chazz
05-14-2008, 09:54 PM
2006


CHI MIN
FIRST DOWNS 19 11
Rushing 3 3
Passing 14 7
Penalty 2 1
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 5-15 5-15
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 1-1 0-1
TOTAL NET YARDS 325 286
Total Plays 63 56
Average Gain 5.2 5.1
NET YARDS RUSHING 51 97
Rushes 21 24
Average per Rush 2.4 4.0
NET YARDS PASSING 274 189
Completed - Attempted 23-41 21-31
Yards per Pass 6.5 5.9
Sacked - Yards Lost 1-4 1-5
Had Intercepted 2 0
PUNTS-AVERAGE 3-50.7 4-39.8
RETURN YARDAGE 141 172
Punt Returns - Yards 3-12 2-16
Kickoff Returns - Yards 5-129 6-119
Int. Returns - Yards 0-0 2-37
PENALTIES-YARDS 10-82 8-83
FUMBLES-LOST 0-0 2-2
TIME OF POSSESSION 28:21 31:39





MIN BUF
FIRST DOWNS 14 19
Rushing 2 7
Passing 11 10
Penalty 1 2
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 2-13 5-14
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 2-2 0-0
TOTAL NET YARDS 330 296
Total Plays 60 68
Average Gain 5.5 4.4
NET YARDS RUSHING 63 95
Rushes 16 33
Average per Rush 3.9 2.9
NET YARDS PASSING 267 201
Completed - Attempted 25-44 23-32
Yards per Pass 6.1 5.7
Sacked - Yards Lost 0-0 3-21
Had Intercepted 2 0
PUNTS-AVERAGE 6-32.5 7-37.7
RETURN YARDAGE 53 49
Punt Returns - Yards 1-16 1-0
Kickoff Returns - Yards 2-37 3-37
Int. Returns - Yards 0-0 2-12
PENALTIES-YARDS 12-78 15-104
FUMBLES-LOST 2-0 1-0
TIME OF POSSESSION 24:03 35:57





DET MIN
FIRST DOWNS 13 18
Rushing 2 5
Passing 11 11
Penalty 0 2
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 3-12 5-13
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 1-2 0-0
TOTAL NET YARDS 217 336
Total Plays 58 64
Average Gain 3.7 5.3
NET YARDS RUSHING 16 135
Rushes 11 30
Average per Rush 1.5 4.5
NET YARDS PASSING 201 201
Completed - Attempted 23-42 26-34
Yards per Pass 4.3 5.9
Sacked - Yards Lost 5-24 0-0
Had Intercepted 3 1
PUNTS-AVERAGE 6-49.3 4-42.0
RETURN YARDAGE 172 129
Punt Returns - Yards 2-41 3-19
Kickoff Returns - Yards 5-102 3-63
Int. Returns - Yards 1-29 3-47
PENALTIES-YARDS 7-50 5-40
FUMBLES-LOST 1-1 3-2
TIME OF POSSESSION 23:21 36:39





NE MIN
FIRST DOWNS 25 17
Rushing 4 2
Passing 18 14
Penalty 3 1
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 4-11 5-14
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 0-1 0-2
TOTAL NET YARDS 430 284
Total Plays 61 61
Average Gain 7.0 4.7
NET YARDS RUSHING 85 45
Rushes 15 15
Average per Rush 5.7 3.0
NET YARDS PASSING 345 239
Completed - Attempted 29-43 26-42
Yards per Pass 7.5 5.2
Sacked - Yards Lost 3-27 4-22
Had Intercepted 1 4
PUNTS-AVERAGE 4-46.8 5-49.8
RETURN YARDAGE 209 163
Punt Returns - Yards 3-44 2-81
Kickoff Returns - Yards 2-91 5-82
Int. Returns - Yards 4-74 1-0
PENALTIES-YARDS 9-85 6-39
FUMBLES-LOST 3-1 1-0
TIME OF POSSESSION 29:45 30:15





GB MIN
FIRST DOWNS 16 14
Rushing 2 4
Passing 13 9
Penalty 1 1
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 9-19 6-15
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 0-0 1-1
TOTAL NET YARDS 394 312
Total Plays 68 57
Average Gain 5.8 5.5
NET YARDS RUSHING 47 90
Rushes 26 23
Average per Rush 1.8 3.9
NET YARDS PASSING 347 222
Completed - Attempted 24-42 18-30
Yards per Pass 8.3 6.5
Sacked - Yards Lost 0-0 4-35
Had Intercepted 0 1
PUNTS-AVERAGE 7-51.3 7-48.0
RETURN YARDAGE 107 138
Punt Returns - Yards 6-43 2-14
Kickoff Returns - Yards 3-64 5-124
Int. Returns - Yards 1-0 0-0
PENALTIES-YARDS 5-34 7-49
FUMBLES-LOST 0-0 3-1
TIME OF POSSESSION 33:39 26:21





MIN MIA
FIRST DOWNS 25 15
Rushing 8 2
Passing 15 12
Penalty 2 1
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 5-17 5-13
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 4-4 0-0
TOTAL NET YARDS 361 251
Total Plays 82 56
Average Gain 4.4 4.5
NET YARDS RUSHING 114 -3
Rushes 35 14
Average per Rush 3.3 -0.2
NET YARDS PASSING 247 254
Completed - Attempted 26-44 26-42
Yards per Pass 5.3 6.0
Sacked - Yards Lost 3-15 0-0
Had Intercepted 1 1
PUNTS-AVERAGE 6-37.7 6-42.7
RETURN YARDAGE 172 134
Punt Returns - Yards 6-68 2-20
Kickoff Returns - Yards 3-78 3-63
Int. Returns - Yards 1-26 1-51
PENALTIES-YARDS 6-49 5-40
FUMBLES-LOST 3-2 2-1
TIME OF POSSESSION 36:00 24:00





ARZ MIN
FIRST DOWNS 22 30
Rushing 1 9
Passing 19 20
Penalty 2 1
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 2-9 7-15
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 2-3 2-2
TOTAL NET YARDS 412 412
Total Plays 58 76
Average Gain 7.1 5.4
NET YARDS RUSHING 17 157
Rushes 6 33
Average per Rush 2.8 4.8
NET YARDS PASSING 395 255
Completed - Attempted 31-51 27-41
Yards per Pass 7.6 5.9
Sacked - Yards Lost 1-10 2-16
Had Intercepted 2 0
PUNTS-AVERAGE 0-0.0 5-42.8
RETURN YARDAGE 238 53
Punt Returns - Yards 3-18 0-0
Kickoff Returns - Yards 6-220 2-49
Int. Returns - Yards 0-0 2-4
PENALTIES-YARDS 8-64 8-63
FUMBLES-LOST 5-3 1-1
TIME OF POSSESSION 23:28 36:32





MIN CHI
FIRST DOWNS 21 6
Rushing 9 5
Passing 8 1
Penalty 4 0
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 4-17 2-11
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 1-1 1-1
TOTAL NET YARDS 348 107
Total Plays 77 45
Average Gain 4.5 2.4
NET YARDS RUSHING 192 83
Rushes 35 25
Average per Rush 5.5 3.3
NET YARDS PASSING 156 24
Completed - Attempted 21-39 6-19
Yards per Pass 3.7 1.2
Sacked - Yards Lost 3-22 1-10
Had Intercepted 4 3
PUNTS-AVERAGE 8-31.1 7-43.1
RETURN YARDAGE 73 222
Punt Returns - Yards 3-10 3-70
Kickoff Returns - Yards 4-62 4-85
Int. Returns - Yards 3-1 4-67
PENALTIES-YARDS 12-69 9-65
FUMBLES-LOST 2-1 2-2
TIME OF POSSESSION 39:21 20:39





NYJ MIN
FIRST DOWNS 21 15
Rushing 2 3
Passing 17 11
Penalty 2 1
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 7-14 2-13
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 0-1 1-1
TOTAL NET YARDS 391 307
Total Plays 71 58
Average Gain 5.5 5.3
NET YARDS RUSHING 68 62
Rushes 29 15
Average per Rush 2.3 4.1
NET YARDS PASSING 323 245
Completed - Attempted 29-40 24-40
Yards per Pass 7.7 5.7
Sacked - Yards Lost 2-16 3-28
Had Intercepted 1 1
PUNTS-AVERAGE 3-45.3 7-47.3
RETURN YARDAGE 99 123
Punt Returns - Yards 3-50 1-1
Kickoff Returns - Yards 3-49 6-115
Int. Returns - Yards 1-0 1-7
PENALTIES-YARDS 7-55 8-56
FUMBLES-LOST 1-1 1-0
TIME OF POSSESSION 36:26 23:34





STL MIN
FIRST DOWNS 23 17
Rushing 8 6
Passing 15 10
Penalty 0 1
3RD-DOWN EFFICIENCY 5-12 6-14
4TH-DOWN EFFICIENCY 1-1 0-0
TOTAL NET YARDS 416 293
Total Plays 67 61
Average Gain 6.2 4.8
NET YARDS RUSHING 168 82
Rushes 36 22
Average per Rush 4.7 3.7
NET YARDS PASSING 248 211
Completed - Attempted 19-31 21-35
Yards per Pass 8.0 5.4
Sacked - Yards Lost 0-0 4-14
Had Intercepted 0 2
PUNTS-AVERAGE 4-43.5 6-45.2
RETURN YARDAGE 122 242
Punt Returns - Yards 3-25 2-17
Kickoff Returns - Yards 2-50 8-225
Int. Returns - Yards 2-47 0-0
PENALTIES-YARDS 4-62 5-35
FUMBLES-LOST 0-0 3-0
TIME OF POSSESSION 31:54 28:06




Hmmmm....If my math is correct, that would be 10 of 16 games in 2006. Or if you prefer, 65.5% of our games we threw the ball more than we ran it.

A lot of close games in there. Kind of blows your whole we were down theory out of the water, doesn't it??

Marrdro
05-15-2008, 07:41 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Thier offensive line functions better silly.
;D

mountainviking
05-15-2008, 12:23 PM
I see your point, but I think there were extenuating circumstances involved in those games, all defeats we were down big early in.


Totally true to all 3 of those games.
That Ship's afloat.


And what does the fact that we lost all but 2 of those games quoted from 2006 tell you?


How about the completion % hanging right around 50?


How about that No.1 rushing team and No.28 passing team ranking?


How about despite our rankings, where our star potential at RBs acquired vs. WR/QB/TEs acquired lies?


2006, To me, was a rebuilding year.
An installation year.
A lets see what we've got year.
A these guys need to play in the system to learn it year.
2007 is a bit better judgement, IMHO, but we in essence had a rookie QB.
I think 2008 will be a much better measure of where this KAO is going.

2007 22 rush TDs 12 pass TDs
2006 12 rush TDs 11 pass TDs...but 2 of those passes were from Longwell and Mewelde.
I think trick plays kind of deserve their own category.

I can see going for a balanced offensive attack, and I believe we've heard Childress mention just that.
But I totally believe there is more evidence pointing toward a desire to run than the desire to be a pass first team.

Plus, passing yards tend to come in big chunks, while rushing yards are usually tougher to pile up.

On the other hand, a trend I've noticed is that HCs usually draft toward their weakness.
Offensive guys draft defense first, and Defensive guys usually draft offense first.
My guess is that they feel their system can make up for lack of talent on their side of the ball.
This trend is also often effected by owners tending to hire HCs who have more experience in their team's current weakness.

Like BAL hiring Billick.
Indy hiring Dungy.
CIN hiring Lewis.
KC hiring Edwards.
NYG with Coughlin.
DET and Marinelli.
The Bucs win a superbowl with Dungy's defense the year they trade for Gruden's offense...ect.


As for me personally, I tend to ask questions even when I agree...Have I earned the title, "PPO Devil's Advocate?"
Or does somebody else already hold that one?

kevoncox
05-15-2008, 02:55 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:








i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Thier offensive line functions better silly.

;D


Either that or they utilize a doubt TE set with Mamula(really long arse name) helping the LT and use gates to run routes. This is simply what I am advocating. We have a solid blocking TE in Shank, bring in an absolute athlethe at TE to help aliviate some of the pressure. You have to be able to keep the defense honset. Shank so far is more of a hinderence than an aid. Again so, far...he might come out and have a devestating 2008 campain. I however, doubt that greatly.

Chazz
05-15-2008, 04:11 PM
2006, To me, was a rebuilding year.
An installation year.
A lets see what we've got year.
A these guys need to play in the system to learn it year.
2007 is a bit better judgement, IMHO, but we in essence had a rookie QB.
I think 2008 will be a much better measure of where this KAO is going.



New players on offense in 2007. Rice, Fergy, AA, Wade, T-Jack, Cook, Herrera, AD. That is 8 different offensive players in one year. That blows your "feeling out process" out of the water. And yes I know T-Jack, Cook, and Herrera were here in 2006, but none of them got playing time until the end of the year when our season was over with anyways, so don't bother bringing that up.

As for running the ball more the year we had a rookie QB. That goes right into the catagory of...."Well DUH!". That makes 2006 a better measure, since we had a veteran QB.

You are right about 2008 being a telling year though. Well....if T-Jack steps up that is.

kevoncox
05-15-2008, 05:25 PM
"Chazz" wrote:



2006, To me, was a rebuilding year.
An installation year.
A lets see what we've got year.
A these guys need to play in the system to learn it year.
2007 is a bit better judgement, IMHO, but we in essence had a rookie QB.
I think 2008 will be a much better measure of where this KAO is going.



New players on offense in 2007. Rice, Fergy, AA, Wade, T-Jack, Cook, Herrera, AD. That is 8 different offensive players in one year. That blows your "feeling out process" out of the water. And yes I know T-Jack, Cook, and Herrera were here in 2006, but none of them got playing time until the end of the year when our season was over with anyways, so don't bother bringing that up.

As for running the ball more the year we had a rookie QB. That goes right into the catagory of...."Well DUH!". That makes 2006 a better measure, since we had a veteran QB.

You are right about 2008 being a telling year though. Well....if T-Jack steps up that is.


He he doesn't there will be other excuses. Beleive me, Ive heard them all. The sun was in his eye.

Purple Floyd
05-15-2008, 07:50 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:










i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Thier offensive line functions better silly.
;D


Either that or they utilize a doubt TE set with Mamula(really long arse name) helping the LT and use gates to run routes. This is simply what I am advocating. We have a solid blocking TE in Shank, bring in an absolute athlethe at TE to help aliviate some of the pressure. You have to be able to keep the defense honset. Shank so far is more of a hinderence than an aid. Again so, far...he might come out and have a devestating 2008 campain. I however, doubt that greatly.


The Chargers looked pretty lethargic last year until they went out and got Chambers. If you look at the team stats before and after him you can see the impact he had on the team.

kevoncox
05-15-2008, 10:28 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:












i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Thier offensive line functions better silly.

;D


Either that or they utilize a doubt TE set with Mamula(really long arse name) helping the LT and use gates to run routes. This is simply what I am advocating. We have a solid blocking TE in Shank, bring in an absolute athlethe at TE to help aliviate some of the pressure. You have to be able to keep the defense honset. Shank so far is more of a hinderence than an aid. Again so, far...he might come out and have a devestating 2008 campain. I however, doubt that greatly.


The Chargers looked pretty lethargic last year until they went out and got Chambers. If you look at the team stats before and after him you can see the impact he had on the team.


We don't have a Chambers. BTW they played
CHI - Good Defense
NWE - We all know
GBay - Played amazing last year
Kan - I don't know but they beat us too ; (

They just had rough start based on schedule. The fact remains a solid TE will assist a developing Qb. The distance of the throw is shorter and less likely to lose accuracy.

V-Unit
05-16-2008, 10:52 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:














i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Thier offensive line functions better silly.

;D


Either that or they utilize a doubt TE set with Mamula(really long arse name) helping the LT and use gates to run routes. This is simply what I am advocating. We have a solid blocking TE in Shank, bring in an absolute athlethe at TE to help aliviate some of the pressure. You have to be able to keep the defense honset. Shank so far is more of a hinderence than an aid. Again so, far...he might come out and have a devestating 2008 campain. I however, doubt that greatly.


The Chargers looked pretty lethargic last year until they went out and got Chambers. If you look at the team stats before and after him you can see the impact he had on the team.


We don't have a Chambers. BTW they played
CHI - Good Defense
NWE - We all know
GBay - Played amazing last year
Kan - I don't know but they beat us too ; (

They just had rough start based on schedule. The fact remains a solid TE will assist a developing Qb. The distance of the throw is shorter and less likely to lose accuracy.



Can you not acheive the same thing in other ways?
Short Slants
Short Outs
Short Curls
Short Crosses
Swing Passes
Screens.

Besides, most of the elite TEs in this day and age are known for their ability to stretch the field.

Sure, there is San Diego, but there is also Washington. Another team with a young QB and a solid pass catching TE. Campbell was asked to throw more, but was marginally better than TJ. Of course, you can flip that aroung and say that Cooley was the difference. I would argue that Moss and Randle El trump Rice and Wade.

kevoncox
05-16-2008, 11:33 AM
"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:
















i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Thier offensive line functions better silly.

;D


Either that or they utilize a doubt TE set with Mamula(really long arse name) helping the LT and use gates to run routes. This is simply what I am advocating. We have a solid blocking TE in Shank, bring in an absolute athlethe at TE to help aliviate some of the pressure. You have to be able to keep the defense honset. Shank so far is more of a hinderence than an aid. Again so, far...he might come out and have a devestating 2008 campain. I however, doubt that greatly.


The Chargers looked pretty lethargic last year until they went out and got Chambers. If you look at the team stats before and after him you can see the impact he had on the team.


We don't have a Chambers. BTW they played
CHI - Good Defense
NWE - We all know
GBay - Played amazing last year
Kan - I don't know but they beat us too ; (

They just had rough start based on schedule. The fact remains a solid TE will assist a developing Qb. The distance of the throw is shorter and less likely to lose accuracy.



Can you not acheive the same thing in other ways?
Short Slants
Short Outs
Short Curls
Short Crosses
Swing Passes
Screens.

Besides, most of the elite TEs in this day and age are known for their ability to stretch the field.

Sure, there is San Diego, but there is also Washington. Another team with a young QB and a solid pass catching TE. Campbell was asked to throw more, but was marginally better than TJ. Of course, you can flip that aroung and say that Cooley was the difference. I would argue that Moss and Randle El trump Rice and Wade.


I live in skins country and Moss and Randle didn't do too much to aid Campbell ( injuries aside). His biggest weapon was Cooley.

As for throwing the passes you listed with a slot WR....It won't keep the defense honest. If the defense sees double tight they will read run. If they see 3 wrs they will read pass possibly run. We still wont wix the problem when we are in double tight. If we would like to run the ball like we want to, we need to add a 2nd TE who is a receiveing threat. That might be Mills, that Might be Shank with Sauce on the other side. Who ever it is, we need to get them in here. Would offering Jeremy Stevens a contract of 1 mill kill us. I don't remember why he is introuble.

V-Unit
05-16-2008, 12:08 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


















i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block


Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.

You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.


We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.


No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?


Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.


I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

Scraps of the Offense -
BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds ::). Think about that for a moment!

Thier offensive line functions better silly.

;D


Either that or they utilize a doubt TE set with Mamula(really long arse name) helping the LT and use gates to run routes. This is simply what I am advocating. We have a solid blocking TE in Shank, bring in an absolute athlethe at TE to help aliviate some of the pressure. You have to be able to keep the defense honset. Shank so far is more of a hinderence than an aid. Again so, far...he might come out and have a devestating 2008 campain. I however, doubt that greatly.


The Chargers looked pretty lethargic last year until they went out and got Chambers. If you look at the team stats before and after him you can see the impact he had on the team.


We don't have a Chambers. BTW they played
CHI - Good Defense
NWE - We all know
GBay - Played amazing last year
Kan - I don't know but they beat us too ; (

They just had rough start based on schedule. The fact remains a solid TE will assist a developing Qb. The distance of the throw is shorter and less likely to lose accuracy.



Can you not acheive the same thing in other ways?
Short Slants
Short Outs
Short Curls
Short Crosses
Swing Passes
Screens.

Besides, most of the elite TEs in this day and age are known for their ability to stretch the field.

Sure, there is San Diego, but there is also Washington. Another team with a young QB and a solid pass catching TE. Campbell was asked to throw more, but was marginally better than TJ. Of course, you can flip that aroung and say that Cooley was the difference. I would argue that Moss and Randle El trump Rice and Wade.


I live in skins country and Moss and Randle didn't do too much to aid Campbell ( injuries aside). His biggest weapon was Cooley.

As for throwing the passes you listed with a slot WR....It won't keep the defense honest. If the defense sees double tight they will read run. If they see 3 wrs they will read pass possibly run. We still wont wix the problem when we are in double tight. If we would like to run the ball like we want to, we need to add a 2nd TE who is a receiveing threat. That might be Mills, that Might be Shank with Sauce on the other side. Who ever it is, we need to get them in here. Would offering Jeremy Stevens a contract of 1 mill kill us. I don't remember why he is introuble.


OK, so now we are talking about having the ability to pass effectively out of running formations. To do that, you definetly need a quality pass-catching TE. That is a very legit point.

We do have WRs who block very well. Maybe we resort to running out of a one back set with 3 WRs and a TE? Or maybe even and I form with a slot receiver instead of a TE.

That is what I would do to hide weaknesses and maximize strengths. Those formations could mask run or pass, but if a defense still has 8 in the box despite a 3 wide set, we would obviously struggle to run effectively. The key then is to pass well enough to threaten the defense with 3 WRs.

Like I said you have a good point, I'm just throwing ideas out there, because Stevens is a marginal upgrade at best, and I'm positive we can find a way other than getting a new TE to strengthen the passing game. Childress however, loves two TE sets.

seaniemck7
05-16-2008, 12:43 PM
Jerramy Stevens is an bona fide piece of pooh.
If he comes to Minny, I will literally cut someone in the personnel office.
Turd personified.


You can read this article on PFT.com to find out more.
Read the link inside that post.
Its long, but if you want Stevens here after reading that... well I don't know how you could.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/01/29/stevens-story-provokes-pft-planet/

Mr Anderson
05-16-2008, 01:05 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


I live in skins country and Moss and Randle didn't do too much to aid Campbell ( injuries aside). His biggest weapon was Cooley.

As for throwing the passes you listed with a slot WR....It won't keep the defense honest. If the defense sees double tight they will read run. If they see 3 wrs they will read pass possibly run. We still wont wix the problem when we are in double tight. If we would like to run the ball like we want to, we need to add a 2nd TE who is a receiveing threat. That might be Mills, that Might be Shank with Sauce on the other side. Who ever it is, we need to get them in here. Would offering Jeremy Stevens a contract of 1 mill kill us. I don't remember why he is introuble.


This is coming from the guy who didn't want to take a chance on Jared Allen because of his alcohol issues?!! Are you kidding me man?



I don't remember why he is introuble
Which time are you referring to?

When he beat the shit out of a 17 year old kid and stomped on his face? While armed with a deadly weapon.

Or the time he raped a college freshman?

Or the hit-and-run, when he crashed into a nursing home?

Or his other hit-and-run/DUI/reckless driving charge?

Or his DUI last year. I remember that one pretty well, I think in Arizona, what he did was considered "Extreme DUI"?

Or his other turd issues, positive marijuana test, complaints from his condo complex neighbors, including "vomit on their doors, used condoms on the back porch, loud parties at all hours of the night, and various noise complaints."

And I'm sure he wasn't drunk for his hit-and-run.... I'm 98% sure that would have been a DUI as well had he stayed at the scene. That makes 3 DUIs for Jerramy Stevens, and 3 DUIs for Jared Allen. They're even on DUIs, but look at the rest of Stevens' rap sheet... ridiculous.

How can you advocate us offering a deal, albeit one year, to one of the biggest scumbags in recent NFL history, who's two years older, and not much of a player. But protest signing the reigning NFL sack leader.


Seriously, what's your logic?

aaeyers
05-16-2008, 01:12 PM
Michael Vick has a better chance of ever playing in the NFL again than Jeremy Stevens does.

kevoncox
05-16-2008, 04:29 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I live in skins country and Moss and Randle didn't do too much to aid Campbell ( injuries aside). His biggest weapon was Cooley.

As for throwing the passes you listed with a slot WR....It won't keep the defense honest. If the defense sees double tight they will read run. If they see 3 wrs they will read pass possibly run. We still wont wix the problem when we are in double tight. If we would like to run the ball like we want to, we need to add a 2nd TE who is a receiveing threat. That might be Mills, that Might be Shank with Sauce on the other side. Who ever it is, we need to get them in here. Would offering Jeremy Stevens a contract of 1 mill kill us. I don't remember why he is introuble.


This is coming from the guy who didn't want to take a chance on Jared Allen because of his alcohol issues?!! Are you kidding me man?



I don't remember why he is introuble
Which time are you referring to?

When he beat the pooh out of a 17 year old kid and stomped on his face? While armed with a deadly weapon.

Or the time he raped a college freshman?

Or the hit-and-run, when he crashed into a nursing home?

Or his other hit-and-run/DUI/reckless driving charge?

Or his DUI last year. I remember that one pretty well, I think in Arizona, what he did was considered "Extreme DUI"?

Or his other turd issues, positive marijuana test, complaints from his condo complex neighbors, including "vomit on their doors, used condoms on the back porch, loud parties at all hours of the night, and various noise complaints."

And I'm sure he wasn't drunk for his hit-and-run.... I'm 98% sure that would have been a DUI as well had he stayed at the scene. That makes 3 DUIs for Jerramy Stevens, and 3 DUIs for Jared Allen. They're even on DUIs, but look at the rest of Stevens' rap sheet... ridiculous.

How can you advocate us offering a deal, albeit one year, to one of the biggest scumbags in recent NFL history, who's two years older, and not much of a player. But protest signing the reigning NFL sack leader.


Seriously, what's your logic?




What part of not remebering why the guy is in trouble don't you understand? I don't remember what he had done. Is it a crime to not be on the fore-front of Bucs and Seahawks breaking news? However since you asked....


When he beat the pooh out of a 17 year old kid and stomped on his face? While armed with a deadly weapon.
How old was he? Was it a high school fight among kids that you want to hang the guy for?

Or the time he raped a college freshman?
Wereyou there? According to this article, the prosecutor decided it would be too hard to prove. No offense but in college you wouldnt believe the amount of time I have heard the rape word thrown out and then recanted. I'm not saying she wasn't rape but it wouldnt be the first time a girl gave up some butt and then everyoen found out and she didn't know how to deal with it so she lied. Heck the Duke stripper was raped!!!

Or the hit-and-run, when he crashed into a nursing home?

Or his other hit-and-run/DUI/reckless driving charge?

Or his DUI last year. I remember that one pretty well, I think in Arizona, what he did was considered "Extreme DUI"?

Or his other turd issues, positive marijuana test, complaints from his condo complex neighbors, including "vomit on their doors, used condoms on the back porch, loud parties at all hours of the night, and various noise complaints."

And I'm sure he wasn't drunk for his hit-and-run.... I'm 98% sure that would have been a DUI as well had he stayed at the scene. That makes 3 DUIs for Jerramy Stevens, and 3 DUIs for Jared Allen. They're even on DUIs, but look at the rest of Stevens' rap sheet... ridiculous.

How can you advocate us offering a deal, albeit one year, to one of the biggest scumbags in recent NFL history, who's two years older, and not much of a player. But protest signing the reigning NFL sack leader.


Again, I had nothing against Allen. I never said I don't want him on this team. If so please show me where I said that. I did say that it's sending mixed signals with the Robinson issue and then signing Allen. I had also in the past say I prefered Peppers to Allen. I have never said I didn't want Allen. Heck I'm the biggest Mac supporter ever. I dont care what a player has done off the field within limits. As far as Stevens, again i didn't know what it was that he had been done but outside of the DUIs and fleeing the scene I din't really see anything that he really did wrong. Unless of couse you don't think the eye witness recount of a white girl and a black athlete having sex could be laced with a bit of biasesness.

Mr Anderson
05-16-2008, 04:42 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


I live in skins country and Moss and Randle didn't do too much to aid Campbell ( injuries aside). His biggest weapon was Cooley.

As for throwing the passes you listed with a slot WR....It won't keep the defense honest. If the defense sees double tight they will read run. If they see 3 wrs they will read pass possibly run. We still wont wix the problem when we are in double tight. If we would like to run the ball like we want to, we need to add a 2nd TE who is a receiveing threat. That might be Mills, that Might be Shank with Sauce on the other side. Who ever it is, we need to get them in here. Would offering Jeremy Stevens a contract of 1 mill kill us. I don't remember why he is introuble.


This is coming from the guy who didn't want to take a chance on Jared Allen because of his alcohol issues?!! Are you kidding me man?



I don't remember why he is introuble
Which time are you referring to?

When he beat the pooh out of a 17 year old kid and stomped on his face? While armed with a deadly weapon.

Or the time he raped a college freshman?

Or the hit-and-run, when he crashed into a nursing home?

Or his other hit-and-run/DUI/reckless driving charge?

Or his DUI last year. I remember that one pretty well, I think in Arizona, what he did was considered "Extreme DUI"?

Or his other turd issues, positive marijuana test, complaints from his condo complex neighbors, including "vomit on their doors, used condoms on the back porch, loud parties at all hours of the night, and various noise complaints."

And I'm sure he wasn't drunk for his hit-and-run.... I'm 98% sure that would have been a DUI as well had he stayed at the scene. That makes 3 DUIs for Jerramy Stevens, and 3 DUIs for Jared Allen. They're even on DUIs, but look at the rest of Stevens' rap sheet... ridiculous.

How can you advocate us offering a deal, albeit one year, to one of the biggest scumbags in recent NFL history, who's two years older, and not much of a player. But protest signing the reigning NFL sack leader.


Seriously, what's your logic?




What part of not remebering why the guy is in trouble don't you understand? I don't remember what he had done. Is it a crime to not be on the fore-front of Bucs and Seahawks breaking news? However since you asked....


When he beat the pooh out of a 17 year old kid and stomped on his face? While armed with a deadly weapon.
How old was he? Was it a high school fight among kids that you want to hang the guy for?

Or the time he raped a college freshman?
Wereyou there? According to this article, the prosecutor decided it would be too hard to prove. No offense but in college you wouldnt believe the amount of time I have heard the rape word thrown out and then recanted. I'm not saying she wasn't rape but it wouldnt be the first time a girl gave up some butt and then everyoen found out and she didn't know how to deal with it so she lied. Heck the Duke stripper was raped!!!

Or the hit-and-run, when he crashed into a nursing home?

Or his other hit-and-run/DUI/reckless driving charge?

Or his DUI last year. I remember that one pretty well, I think in Arizona, what he did was considered "Extreme DUI"?

Or his other turd issues, positive marijuana test, complaints from his condo complex neighbors, including "vomit on their doors, used condoms on the back porch, loud parties at all hours of the night, and various noise complaints."

And I'm sure he wasn't drunk for his hit-and-run.... I'm 98% sure that would have been a DUI as well had he stayed at the scene. That makes 3 DUIs for Jerramy Stevens, and 3 DUIs for Jared Allen. They're even on DUIs, but look at the rest of Stevens' rap sheet... ridiculous.

How can you advocate us offering a deal, albeit one year, to one of the biggest scumbags in recent NFL history, who's two years older, and not much of a player. But protest signing the reigning NFL sack leader.


Again, I had nothing against Allen. I never said I don't want him on this team. If so please show me where I said that. I did say that it's sending mixed signals with the Robinson issue and then signing Allen. I had also in the past say I prefered Peppers to Allen. I have never said I didn't want Allen. Heck I'm the biggest Mac supporter ever. I dont care what a player has done off the field within limits. As far as Stevens, again i didn't know what it was that he had been done but outside of the DUIs and fleeing the scene I din't really see anything that he really did wrong. Unless of couse you don't think the eye witness recount of a white girl and a black athlete having sex could be laced with a bit of biasesness.





Wait... what?

Armed with a deadly weapon, who cares how old he was?

Two hit-and-runs.

A possible rape.

Trashing his condo complex.


The guy's an asshole. I don't care if he's black or white, or who he's raping.

kevoncox
05-16-2008, 05:07 PM
"Mr" wrote:


Wait... what?

Armed with a deadly weapon, who cares how old he was?

Two hit-and-runs.

A possible rape trial.

Trashing his condo complex.


The guy's an donkey butt. I don't care if he's black or white, or who he's raping.


1) he wasn't aremed wit a deadly weapon. He and his friend hit some guy with a baseball bat and he kicked him in the mouth. It was a prearranged fight. Which means the other guy was talking sh*t and the agreed to fight. Howmany of the guys friengs were there? We don't know but it doesn't sound like a 1 on 1 fight. Heck i would hate for you to lose a job because of a fight you got into in High School.

2) The Hit and runs I cannot excuse it sucks. I have been a victim while in college and wanted to kill the other guy.

3) Again the rape or possibility is idiotic. Duke taught us that the innocent can be accused. Lets drop it. I find it funny it turned into rape once everyone on campus found out about it. I.e Virgin turned wh*re routine.

4) The condo incident I missed and don't know much about..but that makes him a bad neighboor not a felony criminal( unless the damaged cost is of felony level amounts)

Again, i thought he would be a nice fit before all of this was brought to light. I thought it may have been a DUI and a Weed posession. I didn't know the extent of his legal issues. YOu are ignoring the fact that I said before hand...that I couldnt remember why he wasn't resigned.

Mr Anderson
05-16-2008, 05:33 PM
Some more on the Stevens rape case, how this one got thrown out I don't know.

There's no comparison to Duke Lacrosse or Kobe Bryant here.


A UW student who walked by and witnessed them having sex called 911 to report it as a possible rape, noting that the woman appeared to be drugged; he described her as "half passed out ... eyes glazed ... no one home." Stevens's semen was found in the victim, who was penetrated vaginally and anally, and numerous witnesses testified that she acted as if drugged at the party. Police suspected a date rape drug was given to the woman at the party, but blood samples were taken too late for testing.

Despite these suspicions, the King County prosecutor declined to file rape charges against Stevens due to "confusing and conflicting statements".

A civil suit, which resulted in a settlement, was later filed by the victim. The civil settlement was not publicly disclosed, but according to published reports included a $300,000 payment by Stevens to the plaintiff. The investigation and aftermath of this incident and the subsequent decision to not charge Stevens were reported by the Seattle Times.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004147460_rbstevens270.html

The article is very long and detailed, if you have time read through it, you'll wonder how he wasn't locked up for the rape, or anything else.

gagarr
05-16-2008, 06:29 PM
Boy... this thread sure did go down hill fast!

As for the topic...

Is it important for the Vikes to have a pass catching TE?
Hell YES
Is VS the man?
Not by last year's performance.
Should they throw to Klienny more?
I think so... when he does go out, he's usually wide open.
But his blocking is stellar, so until the OT's can handle things, he needs to block.
Why do the TE's block on passing downs?
Because they had too.
TJ needed time, Cook and McKinnie needed help.
Do the Vikes run a WCO?


In 2007? No... Did they want to? Yes.... Why didn't they? TJ, TE, WR's, can't WCO without a efficient passing game.

In 2008? Let's hope they have the pieces to do it proper
Is Shank overpaid?
YES!
The problem I have is the $8Mill signing bonus.
He was an average backup with the Giants.
How he deserved that signing bonus is beyond me.

kevoncox
05-16-2008, 06:51 PM
"Mr" wrote:


Some more on the Stevens rape case, how this one got thrown out I don't know.

There's no comparison to Duke Lacrosse or Kobe Bryant here.


A UW student who walked by and witnessed them having sex called 911 to report it as a possible rape, noting that the woman appeared to be drugged; he described her as "half passed out ... eyes glazed ... no one home." Stevens's semen was found in the victim, who was penetrated vaginally and anally, and numerous witnesses testified that she acted as if drugged at the party. Police suspected a date rape drug was given to the woman at the party, but blood samples were taken too late for testing.

Despite these suspicions, the King County prosecutor declined to file rape charges against Stevens due to "confusing and conflicting statements".

A civil suit, which resulted in a settlement, was later filed by the victim. The civil settlement was not publicly disclosed, but according to published reports included a $300,000 payment by Stevens to the plaintiff. The investigation and aftermath of this incident and the subsequent decision to not charge Stevens were reported by the Seattle Times.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004147460_rbstevens270.html

The article is very long and detailed, if you have time read through it, you'll wonder how he wasn't locked up for the rape, or anything else.



Lol.. i got raped and I am a victim...Let me file a civil suit to replace the virginity you took. I'm not saying that she wasnt rape but the mor eI read the less i trust this victim. She looked half passed out ... eyes glazed ... no one home at a party she had been drinking...Sounds like she was drunk? That's while she was at the party. What happened after the party? Does anyone know. The only think anyone knows is she was seen having sex with this guy and she was standing...Not exactly the diffenition of half passed out.

I wasn't there and that is between them and God. All i can say is that i have seen tons of broads throw out the rape word and recant later( not at me because I'm a gentleman
::) ?