PDA

View Full Version : Vikings - You ask and I try to answer



singersp
05-31-2008, 10:00 AM
You ask and I try to answer (http://ww3.startribune.com/vikingsblog/?p=1621)

May 30th, 2008 – 11:35 AM

by Judd Zulgad
startribune.com


As promised here is a Friday edition of the Access Vikings Q&A. We’ll start trying to do this on a more frequent basis. First up, Akvikesfan.

gregair13
05-31-2008, 10:24 AM
Q. Will the state legislators and governor let the Vikings slip out of Minnesota or will the stadium issue get resolved next spring? - Matthew Svendsen

A. Wish I had an answer on this one.


i bet so does everyone else in minnesota

marstc09
05-31-2008, 11:59 AM
Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?

NodakPaul
06-02-2008, 04:25 PM
I know Sidney Rice had a solid rookie season and led the Vikings with four touchdown catches, but I think he also could be in for a very good year. Rice has added about 8 pounds to his 6-4 frame. The thing about Rice is he’s the anti-Troy Williamson. Williamson just never looked comfortable attempting to catch the ball. Rice, on the other hand, often makes catching passes look easy. The Vikings decision to take Rice in the second round of the 2007 draft over USC’s Dwayne Jarrett should continue to look very good this season.

Soooo happy to read that!

kevoncox
06-02-2008, 06:16 PM
"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!

VikingsTw
06-02-2008, 08:54 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.

VikingMike
06-02-2008, 09:02 PM
Q. Would the Vikings sign punter Todd Sauerbrun? He could be great in a dome. - John Lauritsen


Some people evidently don't think before speaking (or writing)...as Marr would say, what a yutz. :)

Jereamiah
06-02-2008, 09:04 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!
Could be that the FO sees some good things in the teams young tight ends. Good hands in that group.

I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.
Could be that the fo sees good things out of the young te's. Good hands in that group.

kevoncox
06-03-2008, 11:05 AM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

jmcdon00
06-03-2008, 11:14 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"VikingsTw" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).

snowinapril
06-03-2008, 11:34 AM
I say we cut Shanc...... but I am not a coach.
He seems to be the TW of TEs.

He is earning too much money, anything over a league min is too much.
The guy hasn't earned what he is making yet.
Cut the loss off where it sits and be done with it.

Marrdro
06-03-2008, 12:08 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!

Time will tell on who is right on this.
I am of the opinion I will be talking shit to you this year over my boy Shanc.
;D ;D ;D ;D

midgensa
06-03-2008, 12:17 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:



I know Sidney Rice had a solid rookie season and led the Vikings with four touchdown catches, but I think he also could be in for a very good year. Rice has added about 8 pounds to his 6-4 frame. The thing about Rice is he’s the anti-Troy Williamson. Williamson just never looked comfortable attempting to catch the ball. Rice, on the other hand, often makes catching passes look easy. The Vikings decision to take Rice in the second round of the 2007 draft over USC’s Dwayne Jarrett should continue to look very good this season.

Soooo happy to read that!


Yeah ... I remember right after the season that about 50 people around here were saying how we HAD to take Jarrett at No. 7 ... just one of those things you remember for a while because it reminds you why we aren't all scouts or GMs
;D

marstc09
06-03-2008, 12:37 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"VikingsTw" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html

marstc09
06-03-2008, 12:41 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"VikingsTw" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:





Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232

marstc09
06-03-2008, 12:59 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"VikingsTw" wrote:







Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php

marstc09
06-03-2008, 01:12 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:









Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php


Found it!

Shiancoe 2 drops vs Williamson 4 drops

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/visanthe-shiancoe/6427

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/troy-williamson/7183?selectedTab=snapshot

BloodyHorns82
06-03-2008, 01:15 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:









Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php



Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.

Bkfldviking
06-03-2008, 01:42 PM
"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:











Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php



Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.


I'm old so the memory is a little hazy, but didn't Kliensauser have a couple TDs and a couple 1st downs WITHOUT dropping the ball.
Granted, not much for YAC but catching the ball at the right place makes up for it. ;D

C Mac D
06-03-2008, 02:05 PM
Yeah... great point. Why isn't Kliensauser on the field more for our offense? He can block and catch... not to mention he's a truck and can run people over. Pull Shank and get Jimmy K back out there.

Purple Floyd
06-03-2008, 02:13 PM
"Bkfldviking" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:













Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php



Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.


I'm old so the memory is a little hazy, but didn't Kliensauser have a couple TDs and a couple 1st downs WITHOUT dropping the ball.
Granted, not much for YAC but catching the ball at the right place makes up for it. ;D


Sasser had some key drops and fumbles back when he was the main TE too.

jmcdon00
06-03-2008, 02:25 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Bkfldviking" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:















Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php



Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.


I'm old so the memory is a little hazy, but didn't Kliensauser have a couple TDs and a couple 1st downs WITHOUT dropping the ball.
Granted, not much for YAC but catching the ball at the right place makes up for it. ;D


Sasser had some key drops and fumbles back when he was the main TE too.

Wiggins never dropped a ball.

VikingsTw
06-03-2008, 02:27 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:











Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php


Found it!

Shiancoe 2 drops vs Williamson 4 drops

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/visanthe-shiancoe/6427

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/troy-williamson/7183?selectedTab=snapshot


2 whole drops wow. I bet one of those drops was the TD pass he caught from Mewelde that the refs ruled a drop! So if Shancoe caught 27 balls and dropped 2 he's catching 93% of his passes while dropping 7%. IMO he's doin alright, he had one bad game against the Washington Redskins to go along with the rest of team and we still kept it close.

If Shancoe can come down with 35 to 45 catches this season that will be plenty, he's a key part to a solid running game, he is paid well because he is the most versatle TE we have.

marstc09
06-03-2008, 03:10 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:













Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php


Found it!

Shiancoe 2 drops vs Williamson 4 drops

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/visanthe-shiancoe/6427

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/troy-williamson/7183?selectedTab=snapshot


2 whole drops wow. I bet one of those drops was the TD pass he caught from Mewelde that the refs ruled a drop! So if Shancoe caught 27 balls and dropped 2 he's catching 93% of his passes while dropping 7%. IMO he's doin alright, he had one bad game against the Washington Redskins to go along with the rest of team and we still kept it close.

If Shancoe can come down with 35 to 45 catches this season that will be plenty, he's a key part to a solid running game, he is paid well because he is the most versatle TE we have.


I think that is what Marrdro is trying to stress. Also I have defended Shank as well. The guy will be on the team and deserves a shot to be that guy. We just need to use him more in the passing gme.

WildViking3030
06-03-2008, 03:12 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:



I know Sidney Rice had a solid rookie season and led the Vikings with four touchdown catches, but I think he also could be in for a very good year. Rice has added about 8 pounds to his 6-4 frame. The thing about Rice is he’s the anti-Troy Williamson. Williamson just never looked comfortable attempting to catch the ball. Rice, on the other hand, often makes catching passes look easy. The Vikings decision to take Rice in the second round of the 2007 draft over USC’s Dwayne Jarrett should continue to look very good this season.

Soooo happy to read that!



Yeah ... I remember right after the season that about 50 people around here were saying how we HAD to take Jarrett at No. 7 ... just one of those things you remember for a while because it reminds you why we aren't all scouts or GMs
;D


Yeah I will admit that I thought Jarrett would've been a good pick at the time, but that was only because most the analysts had us picking Ginn.
Which even now that would've been waaay better than Jarrett.
BTW this was all assuming that AD would never fall in our laps and going off the rumor that we were going WR in the first.

kevoncox
06-03-2008, 03:53 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:













Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php


Found it!

Shiancoe 2 drops vs Williamson 4 drops

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/visanthe-shiancoe/6427

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/troy-williamson/7183?selectedTab=snapshot


2 whole drops wow. I bet one of those drops was the TD pass he caught from Mewelde that the refs ruled a drop! So if Shancoe caught 27 balls and dropped 2 he's catching 93% of his passes while dropping 7%. IMO he's doin alright, he had one bad game against the Washington Redskins to go along with the rest of team and we still kept it close.

If Shancoe can come down with 35 to 45 catches this season that will be plenty, he's a key part to a solid running game, he is paid well because he is the most versatle TE we have.


LOl..that seals it...Heck since he is the best we have, he must be fine
::)
I wonder why we went after BB. heck Wade was the best we had and he's fine. Why did we draft a young saftey? Heck Sharper was the best we had. My point if it's not clear is, who you have on the roster means nothing. We are talking about are they good enoug to be considered a starter? The answer is obvious.

We have conflicting information. 1 site says something else. However, you can choose to listen to AOl sports if you like. The same site that doesn't have his career stats lol....
::) ::)

marstc09
06-03-2008, 03:59 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"VikingsTw" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:















Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php


Found it!

Shiancoe 2 drops vs Williamson 4 drops

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/visanthe-shiancoe/6427

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/troy-williamson/7183?selectedTab=snapshot


2 whole drops wow. I bet one of those drops was the TD pass he caught from Mewelde that the refs ruled a drop! So if Shancoe caught 27 balls and dropped 2 he's catching 93% of his passes while dropping 7%. IMO he's doin alright, he had one bad game against the Washington Redskins to go along with the rest of team and we still kept it close.

If Shancoe can come down with 35 to 45 catches this season that will be plenty, he's a key part to a solid running game, he is paid well because he is the most versatle TE we have.


LOl..that seals it...Heck since he is the best we have, he must be fine
::)
I wonder why we went after BB. heck Wade was the best we had and he's fine. Why did we draft a young saftey? Heck Sharper was the best we had. My point if it's not clear is, who you have on the roster means nothing. We are talking about are they good enoug to be considered a starter? The answer is obvious.

We have conflicting information. 1 site says something else. However, you can choose to listen to AOl sports if you like. The same site that doesn't have his career stats lol....
::) ::)




Conflicting info????? One site does not even list Shank with the group that has 6 drops. He obviously had less than 6. The other says he has 2 drops. What the hell are you talking about? There was nothing wrong with his play last year. It is not his fault he wasn't used.

BloodyHorns82
06-03-2008, 04:13 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Bkfldviking" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:

















Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php



Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.


I'm old so the memory is a little hazy, but didn't Kliensauser have a couple TDs and a couple 1st downs WITHOUT dropping the ball.
Granted, not much for YAC but catching the ball at the right place makes up for it. ;D


Sasser had some key drops and fumbles back when he was the main TE too.

Wiggins never dropped a ball.


Sure he didn't...
::)
Not our man love tight end who is so good he doesn't even play in the NFL anymore.

He did have good hands though.

Didn't he drop a game winner during a 2004 game against Seattle?

Chazz
06-03-2008, 04:23 PM
"C" wrote:


Yeah... great point. Why isn't Kliensauser on the field more for our offense? He can block and catch... not to mention he's a truck and can run people over. Pull Shank and get Jimmy K back out there.



Yeah...Idk why we don't use him as a reciever in the red zone more often. :'(

ItalianStallion
06-03-2008, 04:59 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"C" wrote:


Yeah... great point. Why isn't Kliensauser on the field more for our offense? He can block and catch... not to mention he's a truck and can run people over. Pull Shank and get Jimmy K back out there.



Yeah...Idk why we don't use him as a reciever in the red zone more often. :'(


Because Tarvaris is better at running for TDs than passing for them.

jmcdon00
06-03-2008, 05:08 PM
"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Bkfldviking" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:



















Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php



Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.


I'm old so the memory is a little hazy, but didn't Kliensauser have a couple TDs and a couple 1st downs WITHOUT dropping the ball.
Granted, not much for YAC but catching the ball at the right place makes up for it. ;D


Sasser had some key drops and fumbles back when he was the main TE too.

Wiggins never dropped a ball.


Sure he didn't...

::)
Not our man love tight end who is so good he doesn't even play in the NFL anymore.

He did have good hands though.

Didn't he drop a game winner during a 2004 game against Seattle?

Wiggy Wiggy Wiggy can't you see, sometimes your moves just hypnotize me!
Never dropped a ball, ever. ;D

Jimmymeboy
06-03-2008, 05:43 PM
lot's of good questions and answers!
I do hope Shank dog will live up to his price tag this season.
And I agree that Edwards should just let his actions on the field do the talking.

kevoncox
06-03-2008, 06:52 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Bkfldviking" wrote:





















Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php



Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.


I'm old so the memory is a little hazy, but didn't Kliensauser have a couple TDs and a couple 1st downs WITHOUT dropping the ball.
Granted, not much for YAC but catching the ball at the right place makes up for it. ;D


Sasser had some key drops and fumbles back when he was the main TE too.

Wiggins never dropped a ball.


Sure he didn't...

::)
Not our man love tight end who is so good he doesn't even play in the NFL anymore.

He did have good hands though.

Didn't he drop a game winner during a 2004 game against Seattle?

Wiggy Wiggy Wiggy can't you see, sometimes your moves just hypnotize me!
Never dropped a ball, ever. ;D


BIG is rolling in his grave.

cajunvike
06-03-2008, 07:07 PM
"Jimmymeboy" wrote:


lot's of good questions and answers!

I do hope Shank dog will live up to his price tag this season.
And I agree that Edwards should just let his actions on the field do the talking.


Not worried about Edwards....what are they gonna do?
Double him?
HA HA HA

Let them stop him...the other three DLs will destroy the rest of the OL one-on-one.

singersp
06-04-2008, 05:51 AM
"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.

kevoncox
06-04-2008, 08:08 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.

V-Unit
06-04-2008, 08:25 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


TWill deserves every droplet of hate he gets on this board. As for Rice, we're desperate for another star WR. The board was the same way for Burleson, Robinson, and Twill before they all blew it.

vikingivan
06-04-2008, 08:48 AM
"snowinapril" wrote:


I say we cut Shanc...... but I am not a coach.
He seems to be the TW of TEs.

He is earning too much money, anything over a league min is too much.
The guy hasn't earned what he is making yet.
Cut the loss off where it sits and be done with it.


I still cannot understand how the Vikngs signed him to a huge contract.
What is his Childress connection?
Did he play for the Badgers?
Did he try out for the Eagles?
Did he grow up in the same town as Childress?
Is he married to a relative of Childress?
If he is still on the team Sept 1st there has to be a connection that we don't know of.

marstc09
06-04-2008, 09:27 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


He made 1 big time play. That is what bloody is trying to get at. I guarantee you Bernard will make more than that. AD made a lot more than 13 big time plays.

marstc09
06-04-2008, 09:38 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


There will always be more hate for someone who was picked #7 overall compared to a 2nd rounder. You point does not make much sense. Williamson had 3 years to get his shit together. Sidney was a rookie last year and had better production than Williamson had in his rookie year. Another difference is that we barely saw Rice on the field last year. Williamson and Rice are not even comparable yet.

Chazz
06-04-2008, 04:36 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"C" wrote:


Yeah... great point. Why isn't Kliensauser on the field more for our offense? He can block and catch... not to mention he's a truck and can run people over. Pull Shank and get Jimmy K back out there.



Yeah...Idk why we don't use him as a reciever in the red zone more often. :'(


Because Tarvaris is better at running for TDs than passing for them.



;D...Ahhh...IC...thanks for the clarification. :)

VikingsTw
06-04-2008, 07:27 PM
"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


TWill deserves every droplet of hate he gets on this board. As for Rice, we're desperate for another star WR. The board was the same way for Burleson, Robinson, and Twill before they all blew it.


Yes Sir I agree on that, I was one willing to give Troy time to prove he could catch the football, and he did make some very nice grabs while playing in a Viking uniform but the drops and inconsistency was too much to bare for a guy we needed to rely on. IMO if Troy wants to turn the corner we will have to transform his thought process and confidence.

We do need a star WR but its no reason to make outrages claims. IMO Rice will be a star, he showed enough last year in his limited time to prove he has what it takes. Couple that with a great work ethic, a 6' 4 frame with great ball skills. He's a bit thin now but he already added 8 pounds through the workout program and he's only 21 years old. IMO its inevitable he is becoming a star, just ask Berrian. Sidney will soon become our #1 WR or our top option. He's very dangerous in the redzone, as Tarvaris would say "All day every day". I also believe he would have been very highly rated coming out of college in 08 had he stayed, he averaged more than 10 TD's a year, with great yardage protduction. If was to keep that pace he would have been a 1st round draft pick.

By the way Burleson never blew it and is a solid WR but his potential is not that of S. Rice. Although after watching Burleson on TV I could understand why Childress decided to part ways unless he just had first time jittters.

jessejames09
06-04-2008, 07:34 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


TWill deserves every droplet of hate he gets on this board. As for Rice, we're desperate for another star WR. The board was the same way for Burleson, Robinson, and Twill before they all blew it.


Yes Sir I agree on that, I was one willing to give Troy time to prove he could catch the football, and he did make some very nice grabs while playing in a Viking uniform but the drops and inconsistency was too much to bare for a guy we needed to rely on. IMO if Troy wants to turn the corner we will have to transform his thought process and confidence.

We do need a star WR but its no reason to make outrages claims. IMO Rice will be a star, he showed enough last year in his limited time to prove he has what it takes. Couple that with a great work ethic, a 6' 4 frame with great ball skills. He's a bit thin now but he already added 8 pounds through the workout program and he's only 21 years old. IMO its inevitable he is becoming a star, just ask Berrian. Sidney will soon become our #1 WR or our top option. He's very dangerous in the redzone, as Tarvaris would say "All day every day". I also believe he would have been very highly rated coming out of college in 08 had he stayed, he averaged more than 10 TD's a year, with great yardage protduction. If was to keep that pace he would have been a 1st round draft pick.

By the way Burleson never blew it and is a solid WR but his potential is not that of S. Rice. Although after watching Burleson on TV I could understand why Childress decided to part ways unless he just had first time jittters.


Burleson left because we couldn't keep him. Unless we wanted to give him $49 million dollars guaranteed.
Remember he was the Seahawks 'revenge' (HAHAHA) for the Hutch poison pill fiasco.

Marrdro
06-04-2008, 08:04 PM
"C" wrote:


Yeah... great point. Why isn't Kliensauser on the field more for our offense? He can block and catch... not to mention he's a truck and can run people over. Pull Shank and get Jimmy K back out there.

Klieny was on the field alot last year my friend.
In fact, he and Shanc were on the field helping out the T's so much they should get some of thier pay as they were pretty damn busy helping keep our QBs upright instead of running routes.
;D

singersp
06-04-2008, 08:31 PM
"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


TWill deserves every droplet of hate he gets on this board. As for Rice, we're desperate for another star WR. The board was the same way for Burleson, Robinson, and Twill before they all blew it.


Hate is one thing, but to falsify facts to make him look worse than what he was is pure bullshit.

He only made 1 play last year my ass.........

When he did catch the ball he averaged 13.5 yards per catch.

V-Unit
06-05-2008, 11:49 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


TWill deserves every droplet of hate he gets on this board. As for Rice, we're desperate for another star WR. The board was the same way for Burleson, Robinson, and Twill before they all blew it.


Hate is one thing, but to falsify facts to make him look worse than what he was is pure bullshit.

He only made 1 play last year my ass.........

When he did catch the ball he averaged 13.5 yards per catch.


Yeah, I know where you'rs coming from. His definition of play is really off. I would say he made 5 memorable plays, and 4 of them were bad drops.

singersp
06-05-2008, 11:50 PM
"V" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:






Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


TWill deserves every droplet of hate he gets on this board. As for Rice, we're desperate for another star WR. The board was the same way for Burleson, Robinson, and Twill before they all blew it.


Hate is one thing, but to falsify facts to make him look worse than what he was is pure bullshit.

He only made 1 play last year my ass.........

When he did catch the ball he averaged 13.5 yards per catch.


Yeah, I know where you'rs coming from. His definition of play is really off. I would say he made 5 memorable plays, and 4 of them were bad drops.


It's called "selective" memory. I see a lot of it here.

jargomcfargo
06-08-2008, 09:32 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:




Williamson only made one play for us last year.
Shank made a few circus grabs.
While neither player did anything special, Shanko does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Williamson.



Only 1? He caught 18 passes last year, many of which were for 1st downs, which moved the sticks, plus the one TD.

Granted he was nothing special, but don't try to sell us that he made only 1 play.

If you are going to claim he only made one play for us because that play is the only one that resulted in a TD, then you'd have to also say AD only made 13 plays for us last year & C-Tay 7.


TWILL hate is strong here. They praise rice who had 300 yards and bash TWill. I guess most of them wished we had taken Mike Williams.


TWill deserves every droplet of hate he gets on this board. As for Rice, we're desperate for another star WR. The board was the same way for Burleson, Robinson, and Twill before they all blew it.


Hate is one thing, but to falsify facts to make him look worse than what he was is pure kaka del rio.

He only made 1 play last year my jiggly butt.........

When he did catch the ball he averaged 13.5 yards per catch.


2007 240 yds. 1 TD
let's not forget the meaningful facts. Lack of production did him in. Not drops or lack of effort or desire.
Ommision of facts and falsification of facts sometimes are strangely similar.

marstc09
06-09-2008, 10:41 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:













Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php


Found it!

Shiancoe 2 drops vs Williamson 4 drops

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/visanthe-shiancoe/6427

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/troy-williamson/7183?selectedTab=snapshot


2 whole drops wow. I bet one of those drops was the TD pass he caught from Mewelde that the refs ruled a drop! So if Shancoe caught 27 balls and dropped 2 he's catching 93% of his passes while dropping 7%. IMO he's doin alright, he had one bad game against the Washington Redskins to go along with the rest of team and we still kept it close.

If Shancoe can come down with 35 to 45 catches this season that will be plenty, he's a key part to a solid running game, he is paid well because he is the most versatle TE we have.


Your right it was one of them. I remember that bullshit call. IMO he only had 1 drop.

marstc09
06-09-2008, 10:48 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Actually his only fumble came in week 16 vs. the Broncos. The dropped TD was in Week 3 vs. the Chiefs. Your right though people need to get off his ass.

marstc09
06-09-2008, 10:52 PM
"snowinapril" wrote:


I say we cut Shanc...... but I am not a coach.
He seems to be the TW of TEs.

He is earning too much money, anything over a league min is too much.
The guy hasn't earned what he is making yet.
Cut the loss off where it sits and be done with it.


I don't think we should cut him yet. I want to see what he does this year. He did not have a bad year. Childress already stated that they will target him more this year which was half the problem. The other half was due to not getting open. Hopefully the weight cut will help.

marstc09
06-09-2008, 10:59 PM
"VikingsTw" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:













Visanthe Shiancoe, who had a disappointing first season with the Vikings after being signed as a free agent, made some nice catches over the middle but struggled to hold onto the ball at times after running shorter patterns. On Wednesday, I had him with three drops.

Not good. What are the chances of landing Travis Beckum next year?


Don't tell Marr this. He think Shank will suddenly get a hands transplant and turn into Gates.
The guy cannot catch!!!!


I would have to argue that, I've seen Shanc make some impressive catches since being here in Minny, he had a couple drops on National Telivision for everyone to see and people feel he's complete garbage, granted thats a bad time to drop a pass I'll give him another year, he also fumbled his only ball away in that same game. His best games were with Holcomb at QB. This tells me Tarvaris needs to get better at utilizing the TE.

I read somwhere that he had 3 drops in OTA's in a hurry, I don't like this but I also don't know how solid the source is. IMO he's a very sound blocker and he's our biggest threat at TE. We must feel somewhat comfortable with what we have, not one TE was brought in this offseason.


Just because we "feel comfortabel" doesn't make him good. He is a decnt athletic TE who is solid at blocking. He has suspect hands and i predict we will see that more this year. I've known he sucked before his time on this team. I watch Giants games : (

I believe he dropped more passes than twill last year. That's saying something.
(sorry no link).


All I could find is that none of them had more than 5, which is not that bad.

http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/league/passesdropped.html


Also found this list.

http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=&type=Receiving&range=NFC&rank=232


Interesting. Shaincoe had a 63% and Williamson had a 47%.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php


Found it!

Shiancoe 2 drops vs Williamson 4 drops

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/visanthe-shiancoe/6427

http://sports.aol.com/nfl-players/troy-williamson/7183?selectedTab=snapshot


2 whole drops wow. I bet one of those drops was the TD pass he caught from Mewelde that the refs ruled a drop! So if Shancoe caught 27 balls and dropped 2 he's catching 93% of his passes while dropping 7%. IMO he's doin alright, he had one bad game against the Washington Redskins to go along with the rest of team and we still kept it close.

If Shancoe can come down with 35 to 45 catches this season that will be plenty, he's a key part to a solid running game, he is paid well because he is the most versatle TE we have.


Actually that game he was targeted 4 times and caught them all for 20 yards.

V-Unit
06-10-2008, 09:00 AM
Why do we still expect Shank to be a premier receiving threat? He is a good blocking TE with above average receivng skills. Given that, he is overpaid, but played well last year. Someone said 35 to 45 catches. That is a good range, maybe a bit high.

Childress' offenses have never targeted the TE. Who was the TE in Philly?

Zeus
06-10-2008, 09:02 AM
"V" wrote:


Why do we still expect Shank to be a premier receiving threat? He is a good blocking TE with above average receivng skills. Given that, he is overpaid, but played well last year. Someone said 35 to 45 catches. That is a good range, maybe a bit high.

Childress' offenses have never targeted the TE. Who was the TE in Philly?


LJ Smith.
And how is that relevant?
Childress was the OC, but that is Andy Reid's offense.

=Z=

kevoncox
06-10-2008, 04:27 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Why do we still expect Shank to be a premier receiving threat? He is a good blocking TE with above average receivng skills. Given that, he is overpaid, but played well last year. Someone said 35 to 45 catches. That is a good range, maybe a bit high.

Childress' offenses have never targeted the TE. Who was the TE in Philly?


LJ Smith.
And how is that relevant?
Childress was the OC, but that is Andy Reid's offense.

=Z=


Before LJ it was Chad Lewis.
No one knows who designed the plays in Phi. Anyone telling you different is just talking about their backsides.

C Mac D
06-10-2008, 04:31 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization

El Vikingo
06-10-2008, 04:52 PM
Lately It seems a C Mac Vs Kevoncox ....


In
my rigth with purple and gold short trousers weigthining
192 pounds ,from
Buffallo New York ,He is the undisputed hell traveller of the World ....." C

Mac


D"

And in the left corner ,he is the challenger with purple and gold too,weithinging 185 pounds from Fairfax ,Kevon
"the black chef" COX


Ring Ring !!!

kevoncox
06-10-2008, 05:23 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Marrdro
06-11-2008, 12:31 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 12:38 PM
"El" wrote:


Lately It seems a C Mac Vs Kevoncox ....


In
my rigth with purple and gold short trousers weigthining

192 pounds ,from
Buffallo New York ,He is the undisputed hell traveller of the World ....." C

Mac


D"

And in the left corner ,he is the challenger with purple and gold too,weithinging 185 pounds from Fairfax ,Kevon
"the black chef" COX


Ring Ring !!!


Lets get it on. That's funny!!!!

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 12:48 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.


I think you are right. I was responding to Zeus saying that Childress had nothing to do with the creation of plays in Phil...I simply asked him to show proof?

Marrdro
06-11-2008, 12:51 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.


I think you are right. I was responding to Zeus saying that Childress had nothing to do with the creation of plays in Phil...I simply asked him to show proof?

Alright, first I am not so sure the guy posting as CmacD is really the same guy after he said something nice about the Chiller........

And now I have made 3 attempts to get into a discussion with you and you keep agreeing (almost) with me.

Your starting to scare me as well.
What the hell did you do with the real Kevon?
;D
;D
;D

V-Unit
06-11-2008, 01:04 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Why do we still expect Shank to be a premier receiving threat? He is a good blocking TE with above average receivng skills. Given that, he is overpaid, but played well last year. Someone said 35 to 45 catches. That is a good range, maybe a bit high.

Childress' offenses have never targeted the TE. Who was the TE in Philly?


LJ Smith.
And how is that relevant?
Childress was the OC, but that is Andy Reid's offense.

=Z=


It's relevant because we basically run a spin-off of Andy Reid's offense.
So If Chilly didn't call the plays, or design them, what the hell did he do?

Zeus
06-11-2008, 01:20 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.


I dunno - ask V.
He brought up the Iggles as a point referencing the value of the TE in the KAO.

=Z=

Zeus
06-11-2008, 01:21 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.


I think you are right. I was responding to Zeus saying that Childress had nothing to do with the creation of plays in Phil...I simply asked him to show proof?


I said/wrote/posted nothing of the sort.

=Z=

V-Unit
06-11-2008, 01:36 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.

Zeus
06-11-2008, 01:38 PM
"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 01:44 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:




No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!

V-Unit
06-11-2008, 01:48 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Also:

Cleveland Browns
Dallas Cowboys

marstc09
06-11-2008, 02:01 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 02:17 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:




No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.


I think you are right. I was responding to Zeus saying that Childress had nothing to do with the creation of plays in Phil...I simply asked him to show proof?


I said/wrote/posted nothing of the sort.

=Z=


You're right!
" LJ Smith.
And how is that relevant?
Childress was the OC, but that is Andy Reid's offense."

My response was that no one knows who offense it was and who was responsible for play creation.
I read it as you were implying that childress's offense is very different than Andy Reid's? We don't know if it is, we just know that their play calling is different as well as the personal.

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 02:27 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:








No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.

Marrdro
06-11-2008, 02:37 PM
"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.

I will give you the TE point, however, I totally disagree with you on with respect to the core of our offense being modeled off the Phillies.

Just cause he brought in a few players who could/would be familiar with how he did things doesn't mean he was gonna run the same style of offense.

I'm not gonna pull up the stats page and check, but last I checked he was someplace in the area of 70/60% pass/30/40% run.
Not sure how/why you think we are anything close to that.

Also if you take alook at the composition of our roster, you will find we carry more FB/TE types than they do.

cajunvike
06-11-2008, 02:46 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:










No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats












16

75 855

53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

2 1


2006 Baltimore 16

73 765

47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


That just shows that HEAP was the main target...not the TE.
IF that was truly the case, then Syp would have still gotten the looks (kind of like Kevin Boss did once Shockey went down).
Besides, ONE year of stats hardly qualifies as a barometer of future performance.
Not criticizing, just an observation.

C Mac D
06-11-2008, 02:56 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:


That just shows that HEAP was the main target...not the TE.
IF that was truly the case, then Syp would have still gotten the looks (kind of like Kevin Boss did once Shockey went down).
Besides, ONE year of stats hardly qualifies as a barometer of future performance.
Not criticizing, just an observation.


It's kevoncox... why wouldn't you criticize?

marstc09
06-11-2008, 03:37 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:










No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


You just proved your own point wrong. Basically your are saying that Heap was getting the looks because of his skill level not because he is a TE. It it was truly a system in which the TE is targeted the most then Sypniewski would of had more receptions.

marstc09
06-11-2008, 04:23 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:




No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.

I will give you the TE point, however, I totally disagree with you on with respect to the core of our offense being modeled off the Phillies.

Just cause he brought in a few players who could/would be familiar with how he did things doesn't mean he was gonna run the same style of offense.

I'm not gonna pull up the stats page and check, but last I checked he was someplace in the area of 70/60% pass/30/40% run.
Not sure how/why you think we are anything close to that.

Also if you take alook at the composition of our roster, you will find we carry more FB/TE types than they do.


Close, the Eagles were 58% Pass and 42% Run. The Vikes were 47% Pass and 53% Run.

V-Unit
06-11-2008, 04:32 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:












No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats












16

75 855

53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

2 1


2006 Baltimore 16

73 765

47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


You just proved your own point wrong. Basically your are saying that Heap was getting the looks because of his skill level not because he is a TE. It it was truly a system in which the TE is targeted the most then Sypniewski would of had more receptions.


Well, my original point was that Childress has not gone after a Heap-like TE because he doesn't use a guy like that in his offense. Yes, we signed Shank, but we should not expect him to have a Heap-like impact.

marstc09
06-11-2008, 04:37 PM
"V" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:














No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


You just proved your own point wrong. Basically your are saying that Heap was getting the looks because of his skill level not because he is a TE. It it was truly a system in which the TE is targeted the most then Sypniewski would of had more receptions.


Well, my original point was that Childress has not gone after a Heap-like TE because he doesn't use a guy like that in his offense. Yes, we signed Shank, but we should not expect him to have a Heap-like impact.


Very true. Childress did say that he wanted to get him more involved but I doubt he will have anything more than 500 yards and 3 TDs.

V-Unit
06-11-2008, 04:46 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:




No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.

I will give you the TE point, however, I totally disagree with you on with respect to the core of our offense being modeled off the Phillies.

Just cause he brought in a few players who could/would be familiar with how he did things doesn't mean he was gonna run the same style of offense.

I'm not gonna pull up the stats page and check, but last I checked he was someplace in the area of 70/60% pass/30/40% run.
Not sure how/why you think we are anything close to that.

Also if you take alook at the composition of our roster, you will find we carry more FB/TE types than they do.


If you are suggesting that Childress designed our offense completely from scratch, then wow, I guess that the guy is a genius. If I tried to design an NFL offense like that I would probably 2-30 as head coach, not 14-18.

However, seeing as we all know Chilldress is not a genius, lets be honest. He started with the Philly WCO and made adjustments to fit our personnel based off of that. We brought in former Eagles not to replicate Philly, but becase they were familiar with Chilly's offense. Thus, it is obvious that if a former Eagle knows a new coach's offense, it is because the same offense was used in Philly.

I will agree with you that the system has thoroughly evolved since Chilly left the Eagles.

C Mac D
06-11-2008, 04:53 PM
"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.

I will give you the TE point, however, I totally disagree with you on with respect to the core of our offense being modeled off the Phillies.

Just cause he brought in a few players who could/would be familiar with how he did things doesn't mean he was gonna run the same style of offense.

I'm not gonna pull up the stats page and check, but last I checked he was someplace in the area of 70/60% pass/30/40% run.
Not sure how/why you think we are anything close to that.

Also if you take alook at the composition of our roster, you will find we carry more FB/TE types than they do.


If you are suggesting that Childress designed our offense completely from scratch, then wow, I guess that the guy is a genius. If I tried to design an NFL offense like that I would probably 2-30 as head coach, not 14-18.

However, seeing as we all know Chilldress is not a genius, lets be honest. He started with the Philly WCO and made adjustments to fit our personnel based off of that. We brought in former Eagles not to replicate Philly, but becase they were familiar with Chilly's offense. Thus, it is obvious that if a former Eagle knows a new coach's offense, it is because the same offense was used in Philly.

I will agree with you that the system has thoroughly evolved since Chilly left the Eagles.


Hmm... I just reread Marrdro's post... and he never once said Childress designed our offense from scratch, he simply said Chilly didn't replicate Philly's offense when he came to Minnesota and the play calling really dependent upon the personnel you have.

Maybe I'm reading a different post though....

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 05:36 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:












No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats












16

75 855

53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

2 1


2006 Baltimore 16

73 765

47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


You just proved your own point wrong. Basically your are saying that Heap was getting the looks because of his skill level not because he is a TE. It it was truly a system in which the TE is targeted the most then Sypniewski would of had more receptions.


Nooooo.... If Gonzales goes out, their back up TE won't get as many looks as Bowe gets next year. It's call adapting. When Gates went down...Manumaleuna didn't become a receiving threat. Teams adapt their systems to who they have available. So when Heap went down, Mason became the primary.

Nice try though!

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 05:46 PM
"C" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


That just shows that HEAP was the main target...not the TE.
IF that was truly the case, then Syp would have still gotten the looks (kind of like Kevin Boss did once Shockey went down).
Besides, ONE year of stats hardly qualifies as a barometer of future performance.
Not criticizing, just an observation.


It's kevoncox... why wouldn't you criticize?


Way to add to the discussion...Keep it up, the top spot on Marr's spreadsheet you want to badly is going to be yours with quality posts like these!

C Mac D
06-11-2008, 05:59 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


That just shows that HEAP was the main target...not the TE.
IF that was truly the case, then Syp would have still gotten the looks (kind of like Kevin Boss did once Shockey went down).
Besides, ONE year of stats hardly qualifies as a barometer of future performance.
Not criticizing, just an observation.


It's kevoncox... why wouldn't you criticize?


Way to add to the discussion...Keep it up, the top spot on Marr's spreadsheet you want to badly is going to be yours with quality posts like these!


I think my standing with Marr is just fine.

There's more quality in my 6-word post than all of yours put together.

Have a sense of humor... your tampon string is hanging out.

El Vikingo
06-11-2008, 06:05 PM
You two ,get a room

marstc09
06-11-2008, 06:15 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


That just shows that HEAP was the main target...not the TE.
IF that was truly the case, then Syp would have still gotten the looks (kind of like Kevin Boss did once Shockey went down).
Besides, ONE year of stats hardly qualifies as a barometer of future performance.
Not criticizing, just an observation.


It's kevoncox... why wouldn't you criticize?


Way to add to the discussion...Keep it up, the top spot on Marr's spreadsheet you want to badly is going to be yours with quality posts like these!


I think my standing with Marr is just fine.

There's more quality in my 6-word post than all of yours put together.

Have a sense of humor... your tampon string is hanging out.


LMFAO!

marstc09
06-11-2008, 06:32 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:














No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


You just proved your own point wrong. Basically your are saying that Heap was getting the looks because of his skill level not because he is a TE. It it was truly a system in which the TE is targeted the most then Sypniewski would of had more receptions.


Nooooo.... If Gonzales goes out, their back up TE won't get as many looks as Bowe gets next year. It's call adapting. When Gates went down...Manumaleuna didn't become a receiving threat. Teams adapt their systems to who they have available. So when Heap went down, Mason became the primary.

Nice try though!


Yesssss... If you have a system designed to target a TE, which is what was being said, then it should not matter who comes in at TE. The plays will still be there. Bowe was always on the field. Adapting is changing their characteristics to make themselves more suited for the environment. No major changes except for who got more looks.

Nice try though!

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 06:50 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


That just shows that HEAP was the main target...not the TE.
IF that was truly the case, then Syp would have still gotten the looks (kind of like Kevin Boss did once Shockey went down).
Besides, ONE year of stats hardly qualifies as a barometer of future performance.
Not criticizing, just an observation.


It's kevoncox... why wouldn't you criticize?


Way to add to the discussion...Keep it up, the top spot on Marr's spreadsheet you want to badly is going to be yours with quality posts like these!


I think my standing with Marr is just fine.

There's more quality in my 6-word post than all of yours put together.

Have a sense of humor... your tampon string is hanging out.


Lmao...good one
::)
If it's 1 person that has a sense of humor on this board it's me.

C Mac D
06-11-2008, 07:02 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


Nooooo.... If Gonzales goes out, their back up TE won't get as many looks as Bowe gets next year. It's call adapting. When Gates went down...Manumaleuna didn't become a receiving threat. Teams adapt their systems to who they have available. So when Heap went down, Mason became the primary.

Nice try though!


Yesssss... If you have a system designed to target a TE, which is what was being said, then it should not matter who comes in at TE. The plays will still be there. Bowe was always on the field. Adapting is changing their characteristics to make themselves more suited for the environment. No major changes except for who got more looks.

Nice try though!


Yeah... I gotta agree with mars on this one. If they don't continue to pass to their backup TE, thats not really a "system" it's simply utilizing the personnel hey have.

Throwing to the TE regularly, regardless of who is at the position... thats a system.

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 08:02 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:
















No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats












16

75 855

53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

2 1


2006 Baltimore 16

73 765

47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


You just proved your own point wrong. Basically your are saying that Heap was getting the looks because of his skill level not because he is a TE. It it was truly a system in which the TE is targeted the most then Sypniewski would of had more receptions.


Nooooo.... If Gonzales goes out, their back up TE won't get as many looks as Bowe gets next year. It's call adapting. When Gates went down...Manumaleuna didn't become a receiving threat. Teams adapt their systems to who they have available. So when Heap went down, Mason became the primary.

Nice try though!


Yesssss... If you have a system designed to target a TE, which is what was being said, then it should not matter who comes in at TE. The plays will still be there. Bowe was always on the field. Adapting is changing their characteristics to make themselves more suited for the environment. No major changes except for who got more looks.

Nice try though!


Are you telling me that if Chargers lost gates tht their back up Te is going to come in and get the same touches? LMAO. What? Teams will move the ball to the next option. On the chargers it would be to probally be distrubted between more touches for LT and V. jackson.

kevoncox
06-11-2008, 08:10 PM
"C" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


Nooooo.... If Gonzales goes out, their back up TE won't get as many looks as Bowe gets next year. It's call adapting. When Gates went down...Manumaleuna didn't become a receiving threat. Teams adapt their systems to who they have available. So when Heap went down, Mason became the primary.

Nice try though!


Yesssss... If you have a system designed to target a TE, which is what was being said, then it should not matter who comes in at TE. The plays will still be there. Bowe was always on the field. Adapting is changing their characteristics to make themselves more suited for the environment. No major changes except for who got more looks.

Nice try though!


Yeah... I gotta agree with mars on this one. If they don't continue to pass to their backup TE, thats not really a "system" it's simply utilizing the personnel hey have.

Throwing to the TE regularly, regardless of who is at the position... thats a system.



That just means you will be wrong for the first time on this board ever
::).
The utilization of your players is your system. The Eagles runn a crap load of screens and swing passes to the Rb. That is cracterized as "their system" They find backs to fit that system. However, when Westbook went doen and a Dorsey levens steped in, their offense adjusted to find another target while giving Doersey, his type of touches....

It's the same reason if Ad goes down this year our offense will shift from a power funning offense to one that incoporates slight draws, and swing patterns to utilize Chester tailors srenghts. Chest will not get the appx 20 rushing touches AD will have but may get 15 rushes 5 passes. The system hasn't changed but the playcalling has been modified. The bottom line is Heap is the Ravens go to receiver when ever he is healthy and on the field. If you think that a lessore player will come in and ut up the #s he can (Rec, yards and TDs) you're smoking that good ish! Heck, that's like saying Nate Burlson should have been putting up Randy numbers because the system was the same and hence his # of looks and touched were the same.

I see what you tried to do there
:-X

singersp
06-11-2008, 08:38 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.


I think you are right. I was responding to Zeus saying that Childress had nothing to do with the creation of plays in Phil...I simply asked him to show proof?


I said/wrote/posted nothing of the sort.

=Z=


You're right!
" LJ Smith.
And how is that relevant?
Childress was the OC, but that is Andy Reid's offense."

My response was that no one knows who offense it was and who was responsible for play creation.
I read it as you were implying that childress's offense is very different than Andy Reid's? We don't know if it is, we just know that their play calling is different as well as the personal.



It couldn't have been Childress.............He was to busy fullfilling the role of QB guru. LOL.
:P

marstc09
06-11-2008, 09:03 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


















No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.

=Z=


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


Your joking right? Mason was the main target with 103 receptions. Heap and Sypniewski combined for only 57 receptions.


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.


You just proved your own point wrong. Basically your are saying that Heap was getting the looks because of his skill level not because he is a TE. It it was truly a system in which the TE is targeted the most then Sypniewski would of had more receptions.


Nooooo.... If Gonzales goes out, their back up TE won't get as many looks as Bowe gets next year. It's call adapting. When Gates went down...Manumaleuna didn't become a receiving threat. Teams adapt their systems to who they have available. So when Heap went down, Mason became the primary.

Nice try though!


Yesssss... If you have a system designed to target a TE, which is what was being said, then it should not matter who comes in at TE. The plays will still be there. Bowe was always on the field. Adapting is changing their characteristics to make themselves more suited for the environment. No major changes except for who got more looks.

Nice try though!


Are you telling me that if Chargers lost gates tht their back up Te is going to come in and get the same touches? LMAO. What? Teams will move the ball to the next option. On the chargers it would be to probally be distrubted between more touches for LT and V. jackson.


The backup TE should come in and get the same touches if you are running a balanced offense. Plus that is not what you are arguing. Clearly that would not be a TE first system.

Can you say predictable? I am so glad you are not our offensive coordinator.
::)

marstc09
06-11-2008, 09:31 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


Nooooo.... If Gonzales goes out, their back up TE won't get as many looks as Bowe gets next year. It's call adapting. When Gates went down...Manumaleuna didn't become a receiving threat. Teams adapt their systems to who they have available. So when Heap went down, Mason became the primary.

Nice try though!


Yesssss... If you have a system designed to target a TE, which is what was being said, then itshould not matter who comes in at TE. The plays will still be there. Bowe was always on the field. Adapting is changing their characteristics to make themselves more suited for the environment. No major changes except for who got more looks.

Nice try though!


Yeah... I gotta agree with mars on this one. If they don't continue to pass to their backup TE, thats not really a "system" it's simply utilizing the personnel hey have.

Throwing to the TE regularly, regardless of who is at the position... thats a system.



That just means you will be wrong for the first time on this board ever
::).
The utilization of your players is your system. The Eagles run a crap load of screens and swing passes to the Rb. That is characterized as "their system" They find backs to fit that system. However, when Westbook went down and a Dorsey Levens stepped in, their offense adjusted to find another target while giving Dorsey, his type of touches....

It's the same reason if Ad goes down this year our offense will shift from a power funning offense to one that incorporates slight draws, and swing patterns to utilize Chester tailors strengths. Chest will not get the appx 20 rushing touches AD will have but may get 15 rushes 5 passes. The system hasn't changed but the play calling has been modified. The bottom line is Heap is the Ravens go to receiver when ever he is healthy and on the field. If you think that a lessor player will come in and put up the #s he can (Rec, yards and TDs) you're smoking that good ish! Heck, that's like saying Nate Burleson should have been putting up Randy numbers because the system was the same and hence his # of looks and touched were the same.

I see what you tried to do there
:-X


Someone needs to get off their high horse. What makes you think your OPINION is right or wrong? I fixed some of your spelling by the way.

Players play in a system. If Peterson goes down, our system does not change. In fact Peterson went down last year and Chester came in a rushed for more yards. Chester had 29 receptions for 281 yards last year and Adrian had 19 for 268. What the hell makes you think that Peterson would get less looks in the passing game? He is better in the open field than Chester. The play calling has not been modified. Those plays were always there and most likely were run if Peterson was in or if Chester was in. Point is the system does not change and the plays do not change. If a play is designed to look for a certain receiver the QB will still look no matter who is there. I do agree that the play calling might then favor someone else but that does not mean the TE jus disappears. That is called predictability. Again the argument was that the Ravens run a TE first system and they don't.

Marrdro
06-12-2008, 09:08 AM
"C" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:








No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.

I will give you the TE point, however, I totally disagree with you on with respect to the core of our offense being modeled off the Phillies.

Just cause he brought in a few players who could/would be familiar with how he did things doesn't mean he was gonna run the same style of offense.

I'm not gonna pull up the stats page and check, but last I checked he was someplace in the area of 70/60% pass/30/40% run.
Not sure how/why you think we are anything close to that.

Also if you take alook at the composition of our roster, you will find we carry more FB/TE types than they do.


If you are suggesting that Childress designed our offense completely from scratch, then wow, I guess that the guy is a genius. If I tried to design an NFL offense like that I would probably 2-30 as head coach, not 14-18.

However, seeing as we all know Chilldress is not a genius, lets be honest. He started with the Philly WCO and made adjustments to fit our personnel based off of that. We brought in former Eagles not to replicate Philly, but becase they were familiar with Chilly's offense. Thus, it is obvious that if a former Eagle knows a new coach's offense, it is because the same offense was used in Philly.

I will agree with you that the system has thoroughly evolved since Chilly left the Eagles.


Hmm... I just reread Marrdro's post... and he never once said Childress designed our offense from scratch, he simply said Chilly didn't replicate Philly's offense when he came to Minnesota and the play calling really dependent upon the personnel you have.

Maybe I'm reading a different post though....

Your reading the correct thread.
V is just talking crazy in an effort to spin me up.
;D


He is aware that the basic idea behind the scheme can be traced back further than Big Boy Andy and is trying to evade my point that Chiller doesn't employ the WCO the same way that Andy does regardless of the fact that we did bring in some Philly rejects.

I wonder if the Tuna is gonna run the same offense/defense that he did in Dallas based on the sweepups he is brining in to Miami.
;D

Zeus
06-12-2008, 09:23 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...

yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.


I think you are right. I was responding to Zeus saying that Childress had nothing to do with the creation of plays in Phil...I simply asked him to show proof?


I said/wrote/posted nothing of the sort.


You're right!
" LJ Smith.
And how is that relevant?
Childress was the OC, but that is Andy Reid's offense."

My response was that no one knows who offense it was and who was responsible for play creation.
I read it as you were implying that childress's offense is very different than Andy Reid's? We don't know if it is, we just know that their play calling is different as well as the personal.

My quote without the bit from V to which I was responding does lead you to that conclusion.
Add in V's assertion and it's a different read, IMHO.

=Z=

Zeus
06-12-2008, 09:28 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.


Name me an offense in the NFL outside of San Diego and KC where the TE *IS* a main target, rather than just another option.


NE before the added Randy?
Atl - before Vicks trial
Skins
Ravens....

You make this too easy!


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.

=Z=

V-Unit
06-12-2008, 09:39 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:










No one knows who designed the plays in Phi.


No one? Wow... what a mystery...


yet another uneducated, mass-generalization


Please inform us if you know!

Does it really matter?
Truth be told, it was probably a team (coaching staff) effort.
Ocoord, WR coach, OL Coach, RB coach with oversight, final decision by the HC.

Secondly, what the hell does it matter what Philly runs/ran?
They are predominantly a pass first offense with very little running.
Heck the primary RB is better know for his ability to catch passes than it is for his ability to punch it up off gaurd.

Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever.

I completely disagree. Childress has made an effort to model his offense of off Philly's, even going as far as to import players from the same system. Andy Reid's offense is the only offense that Chilly knows how to run. Obviously some changes have been made, but the core of our offense is the Philly WCO.

Anyways, my point was that I don't think Chilly has ever been a part of an offense where the TE was a main target.

I will give you the TE point, however, I totally disagree with you on with respect to the core of our offense being modeled off the Phillies.

Just cause he brought in a few players who could/would be familiar with how he did things doesn't mean he was gonna run the same style of offense.

I'm not gonna pull up the stats page and check, but last I checked he was someplace in the area of 70/60% pass/30/40% run.
Not sure how/why you think we are anything close to that.

Also if you take alook at the composition of our roster, you will find we carry more FB/TE types than they do.


If you are suggesting that Childress designed our offense completely from scratch, then wow, I guess that the guy is a genius. If I tried to design an NFL offense like that I would probably 2-30 as head coach, not 14-18.

However, seeing as we all know Chilldress is not a genius, lets be honest. He started with the Philly WCO and made adjustments to fit our personnel based off of that. We brought in former Eagles not to replicate Philly, but becase they were familiar with Chilly's offense. Thus, it is obvious that if a former Eagle knows a new coach's offense, it is because the same offense was used in Philly.

I will agree with you that the system has thoroughly evolved since Chilly left the Eagles.


Hmm... I just reread Marrdro's post... and he never once said Childress designed our offense from scratch, he simply said Chilly didn't replicate Philly's offense when he came to Minnesota and the play calling really dependent upon the personnel you have.

Maybe I'm reading a different post though....

Your reading the correct thread.
V is just talking crazy in an effort to spin me up.

;D


He is aware that the basic idea behind the scheme can be traced back further than Big Boy Andy and is trying to evade my point that Chiller doesn't employ the WCO the same way that Andy does regardless of the fact that we did bring in some Philly rejects.

I wonder if the Tuna is gonna run the same offense/defense that he did in Dallas based on the sweepups he is brining in to Miami.

;D


Well, if you want to give credit to Bill Walsh and not Andy Reid, that's fine with me. The fact remains that they both currently run hybrids of the WCO. Thus, saying that "Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever." Just isn't true.

I have already accepted the fact that it is not completely the same. The major difference is the personnel, and the major difference in personnel is that they have a top tier passer and we don't. Hell, if Chilly ran the Andy Reid offense I'd be pissed. Only at the roots it is the same.

Meanwhile you have evaded how the players were brought in because they knew the initial system. That is the only reason guys like McMullen, McMahon, and Hicks were here. It clearly was not because of talent.

Is the same not true of the cover 2? When Dwight Smith was brought in his cover 2 experience was an important selling point.

It's time to stop being stubborn. The Tuna isn't even calling the plays in Miami.

Marrdro
06-12-2008, 10:33 AM
"V" wrote:


Well, if you want to give credit to Bill Walsh and not Andy Reid, that's fine with me. The fact remains that they both currently run hybrids of the WCO. Thus, saying that "Our offense isn't anything like what they run in Philly, nor will it ever." Just isn't true.

I have already accepted the fact that it is not completely the same. The major difference is the personnel, and the major difference in personnel is that they have a top tier passer and we don't. Hell, if Chilly ran the Andy Reid offense I'd be pissed. Only at the roots it is the same.

Meanwhile you have evaded how the players were brought in because they knew the initial system. That is the only reason guys like McMullen, McMahon, and Hicks were here. It clearly was not because of talent.

Is the same not true of the cover 2? When Dwight Smith was brought in his cover 2 experience was an important selling point.

It's time to stop being stubborn. The Tuna isn't even calling the plays in Miami.

Alright, I accept defeat and concede the field to you.
I can't argue against those two excellent points. ;D

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 10:37 AM
Hicks was brought in mostly for his talent on special teams... not so much how he fits our "system"

Zeus
06-12-2008, 10:45 AM
"C" wrote:


Hicks was brought in mostly for his talent on special teams... not so much how he fits our "system"


ARTIS HICKS, not Maurice Hicks.


=Z=

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 11:15 AM
"marstc09" wrote:



Are you telling me that if Chargers lost gates tht their back up Te is going to come in and get the same touches? LMAO. What? Teams will move the ball to the next option. On the chargers it would be to probally be distrubted between more touches for LT and V. jackson.


The backup TE should come in and get the same touches if you are running a balanced offense. Plus that is not what you are arguing. Clearly that would not be a TE first system.

Can you say predictable? I am so glad you are not our offensive coordinator.
::)
[/quote]

So are you telling me that, When Andre Johnson goes down, the Texans don't adjust their game plan and spread the ball more?

When Vick went down, and Shaub had to come in did ATL continue to run their modifiy option offense?
I would have love to see Shaub take off down field. Teams adjust. The bottom line is Heap is the primary reciving option on the Ravens. Argue if you want but you'll be wrong. Unless you think a TE with 73 receptions in a RUN heavy offense was a matter of luck.

It's common sense. If Gates goes down, you think their run blocking TE is going to
be running all the patterns gates runs? Lol. I would love to see him motioned out and running streaks. It's not about being balanced guy. It's called getting the ball in the hands of you secondary playmakers. The guy is on the bench for a reason.

We can continue this version of the tango but i fear you guys don't know the steps to this dance.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 11:24 AM
"marstc09" wrote:



Someone needs to get off their high horse. What makes you think your OPINION is right or wrong? I fixed some of your spelling by the way.

Players play in a system. If Peterson goes down, our system does not change. In fact Peterson went down last year and Chester came in a rushed for more yards. Chester had 29 receptions for 281 yards last year and Adrian had 19 for 268. What the hell makes you think that Peterson would get less looks in the passing game? He is better in the open field than Chester. The play calling has not been modified. Those plays were always there and most likely were run if Peterson was in or if Chester was in. Point is the system does not change and the plays do not change. If a play is designed to look for a certain receiver the QB will still look no matter who is there. I do agree that the play calling might then favor someone else but that does not mean the TE jus disappears. That is called predictability. Again the argument was that the Ravens run a TE first system and they don't.


When I say the play calling is modified, it simply means the plays the coach uses are called to the strenght of what he has available. It's simple. If Reggie bush goes down. I don't think Payton is going to be calling the 15 or so Reggie specific plays he calls
a game. Unless you think Deuce is going ot be motioned out at WR to catch a screen in the flats
;D! Reggie is still the focus of the teams passing game ( some will argue Colston but please look at the bigger picture I'm painting you)
but
without him on the field, the plays Payton will call will be slightly different. The decisions the QB will make will be different. Ask youself what Boller/McNair?Smith was thinking last year? Do i go to Mason or stick lock on to the back up TE because Heap is normally the targeted play. Hell you go to Mason.

Adrian started the majority of games last year. If you are going to compare his receptions against Chester's it does make a lot of sense.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 11:48 AM
"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.

=Z=

I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

Zeus
06-12-2008, 12:07 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.


I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

"Welker"

NE:
The offense does not have a main target.
It is designed, and has been for years, with multiple options and a lack of a main target, simply because they did not have "THE MAN" available to them.
With "THE MAN" (assuming that is Randy) available, they continued to spread the ball around.
You can toss out things like "that ball is tossed to him 9 times out of 10" all you want, but that is NOT how NE runs their offense and has NOT been how the run it since Tom Brady took control.
I would argue that the MAIN TARGET of the NE offense is the "hole in the defense" or the "key mismatch" rather than a particular player.

ATL:
Their offense has no main target because all of their players suck.
However, I would propose that the MAIN TARGET of the Falcons offense is Warrick Dunn, followed closely by whoever their #1 WR is.
BUT - please don't lose sight of the fact that the Falcons are going to be running their 3rd offensive system in the last 3 seasons, so distinguishing what is a MAIN TARGET is difficult.

WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.

BAL:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense (at least last season) is Willis McGahee.
Neither you nor I can say what it will be in 2008, since they have a new coaching staff in place.

You seem to be the one who is confusing the number of receptions with being the MAIN TARGET, hence the reason you put ATL (Alge Crumpler), WAS (Chris Cooley) and BAL (Todd Heap) on the list of TE-centric offenses.


Oh - and I don't give a crap whether or not you think I'm wrong or take me seriously.


=Z=

midgensa
06-12-2008, 12:13 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.


I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

"Welker"

NE:
The offense does not have a main target.
It is designed, and has been for years, with multiple options and a lack of a main target, simply because they did not have "THE MAN" available to them.
With "THE MAN" (assuming that is Randy) available, they continued to spread the ball around.
You can toss out things like "that ball is tossed to him 9 times out of 10" all you want, but that is NOT how NE runs their offense and has NOT been how the run it since Tom Brady took control.
I would argue that the MAIN TARGET of the NE offense is the "hole in the defense" or the "key mismatch" rather than a particular player.

ATL:
Their offense has no main target because all of their players suck.
However, I would propose that the MAIN TARGET of the Falcons offense is Warrick Dunn, followed closely by whoever their #1 WR is.
BUT - please don't lose sight of the fact that the Falcons are going to be running their 3rd offensive system in the last 3 seasons, so distinguishing what is a MAIN TARGET is difficult.

WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.

BAL:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense (at least last season) is Willis McGahee.
Neither you nor I can say what it will be in 2008, since they have a new coaching staff in place.

You seem to be the one who is confusing the number of receptions with being the MAIN TARGET, hence the reason you put ATL (Alge Crumpler), WAS (Chris Cooley) and BAL (Todd Heap) on the list of TE-centric offenses.


Oh - and I don't give a crap whether or not you think I'm wrong or take me seriously.


=Z=


Also of note ... the Ravens offense had a whole 80 catches by Tight Ends last season. Derrick Mason had 103 all by his lonesome. I am pretty sure that is not using the Tight End as the "main target." And hell, not even close to the "most receptions" on the team, which seems to be what you call a TE centric offense.
You can look at K.C. and S.D. and those teams are not even focused on the TE ... they are built around Larry Johnson and LaDanian Tomlinson.
There is NOT ONE offense in the NFL that is "built" around the Tight End ... and outside of maybe S.D. and K.C. there is not one where the T.E. is the "main" target.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 12:14 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.


I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

"Welker"

NE:
The offense does not have a main target.
It is designed, and has been for years, with multiple options and a lack of a main target, simply because they did not have "THE MAN" available to them.
With "THE MAN" (assuming that is Randy) available, they continued to spread the ball around.
You can toss out things like "that ball is tossed to him 9 times out of 10" all you want, but that is NOT how NE runs their offense and has NOT been how the run it since Tom Brady took control.
I would argue that the MAIN TARGET of the NE offense is the "hole in the defense" or the "key mismatch" rather than a particular player.

ATL:
Their offense has no main target because all of their players suck.
However, I would propose that the MAIN TARGET of the Falcons offense is Warrick Dunn, followed closely by whoever their #1 WR is.
BUT - please don't lose sight of the fact that the Falcons are going to be running their 3rd offensive system in the last 3 seasons, so distinguishing what is a MAIN TARGET is difficult.

WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.

BAL:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense (at least last season) is Willis McGahee.
Neither you nor I can say what it will be in 2008, since they have a new coaching staff in place.

You seem to be the one who is confusing the number of receptions with being the MAIN TARGET, hence the reason you put ATL (Alge Crumpler), WAS (Chris Cooley) and BAL (Todd Heap) on the list of TE-centric offenses.


Oh - and I don't give a crap whether or not you think I'm wrong or take me seriously.


=Z=


First of all we were talking about Receiving...
So toss out Dunn and Portis. Unless you believe that LJ adn LT are the overal keys to KC's and SD's offense(your first post)

So lets get back to talking about passing please. Now answer the questiosn again mate!

midgensa
06-12-2008, 12:21 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.


I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

"Welker"

NE:
The offense does not have a main target.
It is designed, and has been for years, with multiple options and a lack of a main target, simply because they did not have "THE MAN" available to them.
With "THE MAN" (assuming that is Randy) available, they continued to spread the ball around.
You can toss out things like "that ball is tossed to him 9 times out of 10" all you want, but that is NOT how NE runs their offense and has NOT been how the run it since Tom Brady took control.
I would argue that the MAIN TARGET of the NE offense is the "hole in the defense" or the "key mismatch" rather than a particular player.

ATL:
Their offense has no main target because all of their players suck.
However, I would propose that the MAIN TARGET of the Falcons offense is Warrick Dunn, followed closely by whoever their #1 WR is.
BUT - please don't lose sight of the fact that the Falcons are going to be running their 3rd offensive system in the last 3 seasons, so distinguishing what is a MAIN TARGET is difficult.

WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.

BAL:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense (at least last season) is Willis McGahee.
Neither you nor I can say what it will be in 2008, since they have a new coaching staff in place.

You seem to be the one who is confusing the number of receptions with being the MAIN TARGET, hence the reason you put ATL (Alge Crumpler), WAS (Chris Cooley) and BAL (Todd Heap) on the list of TE-centric offenses.


Oh - and I don't give a crap whether or not you think I'm wrong or take me seriously.


=Z=


First of all we were talking about Receiving...
So toss out Dunn and Portis. Unless you believe that LJ adn LT are the overal keys to KC's and SD's offense(your first post)

So lets get back to talking about passing please. Now answer the questiosn again mate!


The main target of the Ravens passing offense is Derrick Mason, the main target of the Falcons offense is Roddy White, the main target of the Redskins offense is actually Santana Moss (thrown to more than any other player on the team, though had 5 less reception than Cooley because he missed two games).
As stated before. The ONLY passing games in the league that are TE centric are S.D. and K.C., who both use their TEs often as slot WR and not as TEs.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 12:24 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.


I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

"Welker"

NE:
The offense does not have a main target.
It is designed, and has been for years, with multiple options and a lack of a main target, simply because they did not have "THE MAN" available to them.
With "THE MAN" (assuming that is Randy) available, they continued to spread the ball around.
You can toss out things like "that ball is tossed to him 9 times out of 10" all you want, but that is NOT how NE runs their offense and has NOT been how the run it since Tom Brady took control.
I would argue that the MAIN TARGET of the NE offense is the "hole in the defense" or the "key mismatch" rather than a particular player.

ATL:
Their offense has no main target because all of their players suck.
However, I would propose that the MAIN TARGET of the Falcons offense is Warrick Dunn, followed closely by whoever their #1 WR is.
BUT - please don't lose sight of the fact that the Falcons are going to be running their 3rd offensive system in the last 3 seasons, so distinguishing what is a MAIN TARGET is difficult.

WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.

BAL:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense (at least last season) is Willis McGahee.
Neither you nor I can say what it will be in 2008, since they have a new coaching staff in place.

You seem to be the one who is confusing the number of receptions with being the MAIN TARGET, hence the reason you put ATL (Alge Crumpler), WAS (Chris Cooley) and BAL (Todd Heap) on the list of TE-centric offenses.


Oh - and I don't give a crap whether or not you think I'm wrong or take me seriously.


=Z=


Also of note ... the Ravens offense had a whole 80 catches by Tight Ends last season. Derrick Mason had 103 all by his lonesome. I am pretty sure that is not using the Tight End as the "main target." And hell, not even close to the "most receptions" on the team, which seems to be what you call a TE centric offense.
You can look at K.C. and S.D. and those teams are not even focused on the TE ... they are built around Larry Johnson and LaDanian Tomlinson.
There is NOT ONE offense in the NFL that is "built" around the Tight End ... and outside of maybe S.D. and K.C. there is not one where the T.E. is the "main" target.


We aren't talking running game guy. We have gotten off topic but I will attempt to stictch this all up.

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 12:27 PM
kevoncox refuses to admit when he's been proven wrong. Just it go, he's not worth arguing with.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 12:33 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.


I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

"Welker"

NE:
The offense does not have a main target.
It is designed, and has been for years, with multiple options and a lack of a main target, simply because they did not have "THE MAN" available to them.
With "THE MAN" (assuming that is Randy) available, they continued to spread the ball around.
You can toss out things like "that ball is tossed to him 9 times out of 10" all you want, but that is NOT how NE runs their offense and has NOT been how the run it since Tom Brady took control.
I would argue that the MAIN TARGET of the NE offense is the "hole in the defense" or the "key mismatch" rather than a particular player.

ATL:
Their offense has no main target because all of their players suck.
However, I would propose that the MAIN TARGET of the Falcons offense is Warrick Dunn, followed closely by whoever their #1 WR is.
BUT - please don't lose sight of the fact that the Falcons are going to be running their 3rd offensive system in the last 3 seasons, so distinguishing what is a MAIN TARGET is difficult.

WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.

BAL:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense (at least last season) is Willis McGahee.
Neither you nor I can say what it will be in 2008, since they have a new coaching staff in place.

You seem to be the one who is confusing the number of receptions with being the MAIN TARGET, hence the reason you put ATL (Alge Crumpler), WAS (Chris Cooley) and BAL (Todd Heap) on the list of TE-centric offenses.


Oh - and I don't give a crap whether or not you think I'm wrong or take me seriously.


=Z=


First of all we were talking about Receiving...
So toss out Dunn and Portis. Unless you believe that LJ adn LT are the overal keys to KC's and SD's offense(your first post)

So lets get back to talking about passing please. Now answer the questiosn again mate!


The main target of the Ravens passing offense is Derrick Mason, the main target of the Falcons offense is Roddy White, the main target of the Redskins offense is actually Santana Moss (thrown to more than any other player on the team, though had 5 less reception than Cooley because he missed two games).
As stated before. The ONLY passing games in the league that are TE centric are S.D. and K.C., who both use their TEs often as slot WR and not as TEs.


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!
::)

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 12:34 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.


At the sake of sounding asinine.... Santana Moss?

I mean, this discussion is about passing games... not rushing. Moss had more receptions.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 12:37 PM
"C" wrote:


kevoncox refuses to admit when he's been proven wrong. Just it go, he's not worth arguing with.


Another award winning post. Glad you are here to talk football!

midgensa
06-12-2008, 12:38 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:




LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.


I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken serieously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!

"Welker"

NE:
The offense does not have a main target.
It is designed, and has been for years, with multiple options and a lack of a main target, simply because they did not have "THE MAN" available to them.
With "THE MAN" (assuming that is Randy) available, they continued to spread the ball around.
You can toss out things like "that ball is tossed to him 9 times out of 10" all you want, but that is NOT how NE runs their offense and has NOT been how the run it since Tom Brady took control.
I would argue that the MAIN TARGET of the NE offense is the "hole in the defense" or the "key mismatch" rather than a particular player.

ATL:
Their offense has no main target because all of their players suck.
However, I would propose that the MAIN TARGET of the Falcons offense is Warrick Dunn, followed closely by whoever their #1 WR is.
BUT - please don't lose sight of the fact that the Falcons are going to be running their 3rd offensive system in the last 3 seasons, so distinguishing what is a MAIN TARGET is difficult.

WAS:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense is Clinton Portis.
Saying anything else is asinine.

BAL:
The MAIN TARGET of that offense (at least last season) is Willis McGahee.
Neither you nor I can say what it will be in 2008, since they have a new coaching staff in place.

You seem to be the one who is confusing the number of receptions with being the MAIN TARGET, hence the reason you put ATL (Alge Crumpler), WAS (Chris Cooley) and BAL (Todd Heap) on the list of TE-centric offenses.


Oh - and I don't give a crap whether or not you think I'm wrong or take me seriously.


=Z=


First of all we were talking about Receiving...
So toss out Dunn and Portis. Unless you believe that LJ adn LT are the overal keys to KC's and SD's offense(your first post)

So lets get back to talking about passing please. Now answer the questiosn again mate!


The main target of the Ravens passing offense is Derrick Mason, the main target of the Falcons offense is Roddy White, the main target of the Redskins offense is actually Santana Moss (thrown to more than any other player on the team, though had 5 less reception than Cooley because he missed two games).
As stated before. The ONLY passing games in the league that are TE centric are S.D. and K.C., who both use their TEs often as slot WR and not as TEs.


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!

::)


Look ... dick ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making shit up to try and prove your idiotic argument.

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 12:38 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!
::)


Haha, a simple glance back at a couple pages... you use the same argument to help prove your point.... Give it up man, no one is impressed by your stubbornness or your lack of football knowledge.


"kevoncox" wrote:


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.



EDIT: How's that for an award winning post?

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 12:40 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


Look ... dick ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making shit up to try and prove your idiotic argument.


That's a bit advanced for him... kevoncox just pissed his pants and forgot his name.

Marrdro
06-12-2008, 12:40 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!

::)


Haha, a simple glance back at a couple pages... you use the same argument to help prove your point.... Give it up man, no one is impressed by your stubbornness or your lack of football knowledge.


"kevoncox" wrote:


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats












16

75 855

53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

2 1


2006 Baltimore 16

73 765

47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.



I kindof like stubborn people.
Not sure why as I don't have a stubborn bone in my body.
;D

midgensa
06-12-2008, 12:42 PM
"C" wrote:


kevoncox refuses to admit when he's been proven wrong. Just it go, he's not worth arguing with.


I know ... we all know better.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 12:46 PM
"midgensa" wrote:



Look ... slick willy ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making pooh up to try and prove your idiotic argument.


We are comparing the yards he was there vs. the years Derrick was there. Why would I compare it to the years Mason was on Ten. Again, logic escapes you so Mr. Brick Wall, you win
;D.

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 12:47 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:



Look ... slick willy ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making pooh up to try and prove your idiotic argument.


We are comparing the yards he was there vs. the years Derrick was there. Why would I compare it to the years Mason was on Ten. Again, logic escapes you!



Have you ever heard the term, "Painted into a corner" before? Probably not...

midgensa
06-12-2008, 12:51 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:



Look ... slick willy ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making pooh up to try and prove your idiotic argument.


We are comparing the yards he was there vs. the years Derrick was there. Why would I compare it to the years Mason was on Ten. Again, logic escapes you!



Still only 620 yards. Simple math really.
And he DEFINITELY was not the primary LAST season (even when healthy) which would be the best one to base it on since it is the most recent.
I concede he was once their main target when they could do nothing else on offense, but Billick has NEVER ran an offense where the TE was supposed to be the main target ... and last two seasons he finally had the tools to move away from it and did.

cajunvike
06-12-2008, 12:54 PM
IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.

midgensa
06-12-2008, 12:56 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


Yeah ... that is what people have been trying to say about ALL of these offenses for about six pages now I think.
But that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 12:57 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:



Look ... slick willy ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making pooh up to try and prove your idiotic argument.


We are comparing the yards he was there vs. the years Derrick was there. Why would I compare it to the years Mason was on Ten. Again, logic escapes you!



Have you ever heard the term, "Painted into a corner" before? Probably not...


No it's logically. I'm not in a corner. I am simply allowing the so call football know it alls of this site to prove what they really know. Squat.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 12:59 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:



Look ... slick willy ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making pooh up to try and prove your idiotic argument.


We are comparing the yards he was there vs. the years Derrick was there. Why would I compare it to the years Mason was on Ten. Again, logic escapes you!



Still only 620 yards. Simple math really.
And he DEFINITELY was not the primary LAST season (even when healthy) which would be the best one to base it on since it is the most recent.
I concede he was once their main target when they could do nothing else on offense, but Billick has NEVER ran an offense where the TE was supposed to be the main target ... and last two seasons he finally had the tools to move away from it and did.


He suffered from a pulled hamstring all thru the season. When was he healthy? Again Squat!

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 01:02 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!
::)


Haha, a simple glance back at a couple pages... you use the same argument to help prove your point.... Give it up man, no one is impressed by your stubbornness or your lack of football knowledge.


"kevoncox" wrote:


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.



EDIT: How's that for an award winning post?


You never responded to this post (oddly), kevoncox? I'd love to hear your explanation....

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 01:09 PM
"C" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!

::)


Haha, a simple glance back at a couple pages... you use the same argument to help prove your point.... Give it up man, no one is impressed by your stubbornness or your lack of football knowledge.


"kevoncox" wrote:


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats












16

75 855

53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

2 1


2006 Baltimore 16

73 765

47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1

0 0 0.0 0.0 0

0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.



EDIT: How's that for an award winning post?


You never responded to this post (oddly), kevoncox? I'd love to hear your explanation....


I don't see a post? If you are talking about me using his stats. I used that to show his prior production to last season. It was response to a someone talking about the combined reception of Heap and his backup. I tried to show that that was not his usually production. It was not a reception based argument. Jesus!

Yes your football knowledge is amazing. Please tell me what's the difference between a trap, power, blast and dive?
What's the difference between slide and a swing pattern?

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 01:10 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


What has changed about their QB situation? Lol....You guys make it too easy.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 01:12 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


Yeah ... that is what people have been trying to say about ALL of these offenses for about six pages now I think.
But that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Lol..way to cosign on a bad loan!

josdin00
06-12-2008, 01:31 PM
Just to bring this discussion back around, and since I haven't gone back in the thread far enough to figure this out on my own...

Could someone please explain why we're discussing Todd Heaps relative place in the baltimore offense of a couple years ago and how that's relevant to the upcoming Viking's season? I'm a bit lost.

kevoncox
06-12-2008, 01:52 PM
"josdin00" wrote:


Just to bring this discussion back around, and since I haven't gone back in the thread far enough to figure this out on my own...

Could someone please explain why we're discussing Todd Heaps relative place in the baltimore offense of a couple years ago and how that's relevant to the upcoming Viking's season? I'm a bit lost.


Simply We were discussing how the TEs will be used in Childress' offense. A point was made that it will be similary to the the Eagles offense. Someone made a statment and said that a TE is never the main option of an offense and wished to be proved wrong. I gave several teams in the league where a TE is the main option and rather than saying wow I'm wrong. It turned into a discussion on the Ravens offense.

marstc09
06-12-2008, 02:09 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Are you telling me that if Chargers lost gates tht their back up Te is going to come in and get the same touches? LMAO. What? Teams will move the ball to the next option. On the chargers it would be to probally be distrubted between more touches for LT and V. jackson.


The backup TE should come in and get the same touches if you are running a balanced offense. Plus that is not what you are arguing. Clearly that would not be a TE first system.

Can you say predictable? I am so glad you are not our offensive coordinator.
::)


So are you telling me that, When Andre Johnson goes down, the Texans don't adjust their game plan and spread the ball more?

When Vick went down, and Shaub had to come in did ATL continue to run their modifiy option offense?
I would have love to see Shaub take off down field. Teams adjust. The bottom line is Heap is the primary receiving option on the Ravens. Argue if you want but you'll be wrong. Unless you think a TE with 73 receptions in a RUN heavy offense was a matter of luck.

It's common sense. If Gates goes down, you think their run blocking TE is going to
be running all the patterns gates runs? Lol. I would love to see him motioned out and running streaks. It's not about being balanced guy. It's called getting the ball in the hands of you secondary playmakers. The guy is on the bench for a reason.

We can continue this version of the tango but i fear you guys don't know the steps to this dance.
[/quote]

If Andre went down and they gave the looks to the next best receivier how would that be spreading the ball around?

Say what you want bu Heap is not the primary WR in the Ravens offense. Just because he has the most receptions does not make him the primary or a TE first system. All teams have a backup to catch. We have Mills. If Shank goes down, Mills get the work. That is COMMON SENSE! The guy is in the NFL for a reason.

We can continue this version of the tango but I fear you have a big head and your opinion is just that, an opinion. I just showed your opinion to a worker here who coaches. He LOL!

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 02:11 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


Yeah ... that is what people have been trying to say about ALL of these offenses for about six pages now I think.
But that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Lol..way to cosign on a bad loan!


Seriously... there must be some disconnect with you and reality.

Because, either EVERYONE on this board is wrong... or you are wrong. Sorry kevoncox... but you're making it worse one yourself.

marstc09
06-12-2008, 02:12 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Someone needs to get off their high horse. What makes you think your OPINION is right or wrong? I fixed some of your spelling by the way.

Players play in a system. If Peterson goes down, our system does not change. In fact Peterson went down last year and Chester came in a rushed for more yards. Chester had 29 receptions for 281 yards last year and Adrian had 19 for 268. What the hell makes you think that Peterson would get less looks in the passing game? He is better in the open field than Chester. The play calling has not been modified. Those plays were always there and most likely were run if Peterson was in or if Chester was in. Point is the system does not change and the plays do not change. If a play is designed to look for a certain receiver the QB will still look no matter who is there. I do agree that the play calling might then favor someone else but that does not mean the TE jus disappears. That is called predictability. Again the argument was that the Ravens run a TE first system and they don't.


When I say the play calling is modified, it simply means the plays the coach uses are called to the strenght of what he has available. It's simple. If Reggie bush goes down. I don't think Payton is going to be calling the 15 or so Reggie specific plays he calls
a game. Unless you think Deuce is going ot be motioned out at WR to catch a screen in the flats
;D! Reggie is still the focus of the teams passing game ( some will argue Colston but please look at the bigger picture I'm painting you)
but
without him on the field, the plays Payton will call will be slightly different. The decisions the QB will make will be different. Ask youself what Boller/McNair?Smith was thinking last year? Do i go to Mason or stick lock on to the back up TE because Heap is normally the targeted play. Hell you go to Mason.

Adrian started the majority of games last year. If you are going to compare his receptions against Chester's it does make a lot of sense.


Those plays were always in that system. They are not changing the system. The Ravens don't use a TE first system.

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 02:14 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!
::)


Haha, a simple glance back at a couple pages... you use the same argument to help prove your point.... Give it up man, no one is impressed by your stubbornness or your lack of football knowledge.


"kevoncox" wrote:


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.



EDIT: How's that for an award winning post?


You never responded to this post (oddly), kevoncox? I'd love to hear your explanation....


I don't see a post? If you are talking about me using his stats. I used that to show his prior production to last season. It was response to a someone talking about the combined reception of Heap and his backup. I tried to show that that was not his usually production. It was not a reception based argument. Jesus!

Yes your football knowledge is amazing. Please tell me what's the difference between a trap, power, blast and dive?
What's the difference between slide and a swing pattern?


Here... let me help your comprehension skills a bit...

You insulted someone who posted stats (most receptions) by saying, "our ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute."

Yet... two pages earlier you used receptions stat to try and prove your (weak and already pointless) point.

Does that help at all?

cajunvike
06-12-2008, 02:16 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


What has changed about their QB situation? Lol....You guys make it too easy.


Hardly, buddy.
The fact is that they are not throwing to the TE out of design, but out of desperation.
A situation that I hope the Vikings NEVER are in.
If you would rather that be the case that the Vikings are playing in a system that is so desperate that they have to use the TE as their passing game focus, then prepare yourself to continue to see mediocre play on the field.
As for me, give me the WR centric offenses that are responsible for winning Super Bowls....many of them.
As for encyclopedic knowledge of football, it is my experience that common sense trumps it everytime.
And common sense says that focusing on WRs gets you more YPC, since the TE is usually running underneath patterns while the WRs are usually further down the field.
Furthermore, both Gonzales and Gates are anomolies in the passing game, as they are split out much more than an average TE.
Also, I would rather see the ball going to a speedier WR than a usually much slower TE.
In your zeal to try and prove your point, common sense has gone out of the window.
One thing is for sure, though...the current makeup of the Vikings receiving corps dicatates that the WRs will be the ones getting the majority of the looks in the passing game...and rightfully so.

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 02:23 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


What has changed about their QB situation? Lol....You guys make it too easy.


Hardly, buddy.
The fact is that they are not throwing to the TE out of design, but out of desperation.
A situation that I hope the Vikings NEVER are in.
If you would rather that be the case that the Vikings are playing in a system that is so desperate that they have to use the TE as their passing game focus, then prepare yourself to continue to see mediocre play on the field.
As for me, give me the WR centric offenses that are responsible for winning Super Bowls....many of them.
As for encyclopedic knowledge of football, it is my experience that common sense trumps it everytime.
And common sense says that focusing on WRs gets you more YPC, since the TE is usually running underneath patterns while the WRs are usually further down the field.
Furthermore, both Gonzales and Gates are anomolies in the passing game, as they are split out much more than an average TE.
Also, I would rather see the ball going to a speedier WR than a usually much slower TE.
In your zeal to try and prove your point, common sense has gone out of the window.
One thing is for sure, though...the current makeup of the Vikings receiving corps dicatates that the WRs will be the ones getting the majority of the looks in the passing game...and rightfully so.


He doesn't understand... the simple fact that he said, "What has changed about the (ravens') QB situation?"... I mean... are you serious? They don't even know who is gonna start this year... let alone they only brought McNair in for 2 years... and he only started 6 games last season.

Are you serious? What has changed about the Ravens' QB situation?

You make this too easy.

marstc09
06-12-2008, 02:29 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


LOL.
Just because the TE is USED in the offense does not mean the TE is the "main target".

Hell - RANDY wasn't even the main target in NE last year - Wes Welker is.


NE - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
And in 2006, it wasn't either.
ATL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
WAS - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.
If you actually paid attention (and seeing as how you live in Reston, I don't know how you could avoid it) to the Skins, you'd know that Cooley is an H-Back, not a TE.
We're talking offenses and schemes.
Joe Gibbs calls him an H-Back, so I will, too.
BAL - no, the TE is not the main target of that offense.

Lordy, you confuse easily, don't you?
Being an OPTION does not make you a MAIN TARGET.

=Z=

I really thought higher of your football knowledge. You seem to have fallen into the trap of belive that who leads a team in receptions makes that person the main target of a given play. To say that WES Walker is the primary target of the Pats offense is laughable. If Randy has Man on Man coverage that ball is thrown to him 9 out of 10 times. The reason Wes had half of the receptions he had this season was due to the army of defenders used to contain Moss. Heck you're a Vikings fan, you should know that nate Burlson looked like great thanks to the drags and out patterns he ran while lined up along side Moss. Receptions does not equal primary.


As for the teams listed, why don't you tell me who are the primary option on the team. Again not the person that gets the most recptions but the primary option.

I'll end this once and for all. We all agree that Gonzalez is the primary option for KC. What happens if he is injured? Will his back up step in and get the 100+ receptions 1000 yards and 10 tds he is typically responsible for? Your answer to this will end this argument as either you're wrong or you're not to be taken seriously? Please think about
it, i rather take you seriously!



First of all I doubt Zeus cares what you think of his football knowledge. I man who dedicates himself to every game speaks for itself. But that is besides that point. You are the one that thinks a person with the most receptions is the main focus of the offense. That is false. The QB has look look to a certain target first. If he is covered than the secondary is targeted. The to the last option. The Ravens go from WR to TE to RB.

Your the last person on earth that I care if I am taken seriously by. If Gonzalez goes down then the backup should come in and get the looks in a TE system. It is up to that guy to get the same production. The Chiefs are probably not a TE system. In fact I doubt any are. It just so happens that he is good enough to get open. The QB sees that option open after he scans all of the receiving options in a passing play. I doubt any team is a TE offense. It is either Passing or Rushing. Now that should end this once and for all.

V-Unit
06-12-2008, 02:32 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


Yeah ... that is what people have been trying to say about ALL of these offenses for about six pages now I think.
But that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Lol..way to cosign on a bad loan!


Seriously... there must be some disconnect with you and reality.

Because, either EVERYONE on this board is wrong... or you are wrong. Sorry kevoncox... but you're making it worse one yourself.


Wow, the majority is always right. What a great argument!

Even if he is wrong about the Ravens he's still right about the other teams mentioned.

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 02:34 PM
"V" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


"cajunvike" wrote:


IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


Yeah ... that is what people have been trying to say about ALL of these offenses for about six pages now I think.
But that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Lol..way to cosign on a bad loan!


Seriously... there must be some disconnect with you and reality.

Because, either EVERYONE on this board is wrong... or you are wrong. Sorry kevoncox... but you're making it worse one yourself.


Wow, the majority is always right. What a great argument!

Even if he is wrong about the Ravens he's still right about the other teams mentioned.


No... I've read all his arguments and he either contradicts himself every other post or just lashes out at people with differing opinions.

Don't agree with him V. Are they letting anyone just walk out of Vanderbilt with a degree these days?

marstc09
06-12-2008, 02:38 PM
"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


You know what you're right. You win! Derick Mason is the main passing threat they just have a TE that averages about 800 yards a season. Your ability to look at who has the most receptions and determine that player to be the primary forcus of the teams offensive game plan is astute. I concede!
::)


Haha, a simple glance back at a couple pages... you use the same argument to help prove your point.... Give it up man, no one is impressed by your stubbornness or your lack of football knowledge.


"kevoncox" wrote:


Are yo talking about the Same Heap that played in 6 games( all while hurt) Are those the stats you want to justify Mason as the primary.

Heap stats











16
75 855
53.4 11.4 48 3.5 43 7
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
2 1

2006 Baltimore 16
73 765
47.8 10.5 30 3.7 40 6
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0

2007 Baltimore
6

23
239

39.8 10.4 37 3.4 14 1
0 0 0.0 0.0 0
0 0


Any time your TE gets target this # of times...he's the primary.



EDIT: How's that for an award winning post?


Bingo! C Mac D gets a A for today.
;) I am glad you are here to talk football. Don't listen to Mr. I Sit on the High Horse.

Marrdro
06-12-2008, 02:39 PM
Won't be long now.
;D

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 02:41 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Won't be long now.
;D


Locked or green dots? Because I'm going for a green dot.

V-Unit
06-12-2008, 02:52 PM
We are being a bit critical here. When you have a special talent, you are going to build your offense around that talent. In the case of KC, SD, CLE, BAL, DAL etc. they have a talent at TE. Hence, there are many plays for that TE, his talent warrants this. If the guy gets injured obviously things will change. Why? Because a good coach plays to his team's strengths.

So, if it is really the words "main target" that bug you. Would "frequently use" be better?

I cannot recall a Childress offense that frequently uses TE. This whole argument began because WCOs usually use TEs a lot, and offenses with young QBs usually use TEs a lot, but our system doesn't, which is IMO because Childress does not design his offense that way.

marstc09
06-12-2008, 02:53 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:



Look ... slick willy ... this all started with you saying the MAIN FOCUS ... and he is not the MAIN FOCUS of the offense. The WR's are. Also, dipshit ... learn basic math ... Heap averages 557 yards per season. It is really simple ... you divide the total yards by number of seasons played.
Quit making pooh up to try and prove your idiotic argument.


We are comparing the yards he was there vs. the years Derrick was there. Why would I compare it to the years Mason was on Ten. Again, logic escapes you!



Have you ever heard the term, "Painted into a corner" before? Probably not...


No it's logically. I'm not in a corner. I am simply allowing the so call football know it alls of this site to prove what they really know. Squat.


ROTFLMFAO! Nobody to me seems to be a know it all here. Why don't you step down and state your case instead of saying you are a know it all, I thought you had more football knowledge, I am going to end this once and for all, or the best yet, you are wrong!

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 02:56 PM
PPO died the day kevoncox opened his account.

V-Unit
06-12-2008, 02:57 PM
"C" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:




IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


Yeah ... that is what people have been trying to say about ALL of these offenses for about six pages now I think.
But that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Lol..way to cosign on a bad loan!


Seriously... there must be some disconnect with you and reality.

Because, either EVERYONE on this board is wrong... or you are wrong. Sorry kevoncox... but you're making it worse one yourself.


Wow, the majority is always right. What a great argument!

Even if he is wrong about the Ravens he's still right about the other teams mentioned.


No... I've read all his arguments and he either contradicts himself every other post or just lashes out at people with differing opinions.

Don't agree with him V. Are they letting anyone just walk out of Vanderbilt with a degree these days?


You just criticized him for lashing out at people with differing opinions. Then, two sentences later, you made a totally unrelated insult because I have a differing opinion. That is a contradicition, which you also criticized him for.

C Mac D
06-12-2008, 02:59 PM
"V" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:






IF Todd Heap was the main option in Baltimore (and ONE single season doesn't make that a proven fact), then it was much more due to the shaky situation at QB than any predetermined push to make him the focus of the offense.


Yeah ... that is what people have been trying to say about ALL of these offenses for about six pages now I think.
But that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Lol..way to cosign on a bad loan!


Seriously... there must be some disconnect with you and reality.

Because, either EVERYONE on this board is wrong... or you are wrong. Sorry kevoncox... but you're making it worse one yourself.


Wow, the majority is always right. What a great argument!

Even if he is wrong about the Ravens he's still right about the other teams mentioned.


No... I've read all his arguments and he either contradicts himself every other post or just lashes out at people with differing opinions.

Don't agree with him V. Are they letting anyone just walk out of Vanderbilt with a degree these days?


You just criticized him for lashing out at people with differing opinions. Then, two sentences later, you made a totally unrelated insult because I have a differing opinion. That is a contradicition, which you also criticized him for.


I'll Fed-Ex you some kleenex to cry about it.

josdin00
06-12-2008, 03:00 PM
I think it's time for this thread to go buh-bye.