PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Cook, Just flat out not cutting it



Pages : [1] 2

PurpleMafia
10-12-2008, 08:38 PM
Ryan Cook (who was selected with the pick we got for Daunte Culpepper) may be the worst starter on this football team. Week after week, he is made to look foolish by multiple pass rushers. If he doesn't let them fly by him to sack Gus (who was saced 4 times in the first quarter today), he just holds and/or tackles them and penalizes our offense 10 yards. Please tell me this guy isn't in this for the long haul, we need to draft someone from his position this year, or trade for someone that won't get our quarterback killed. If we had stability on the right side of the line, not only would Gus be safe, but Adrian would be that much better with the ability to run on both sides (not just the left like he does now). Sorry for the rant, but this guy is going to give me a heart attack. It just seems to me like he can't do anything right. The best you can hope from him is to not hold anyone, and for Gus to not get killed.

Webby
10-12-2008, 08:50 PM
He has had some decent games.
But he is certainly taking longer to learn tackle than he should.

He was a center before, you know.

Vikingbob69
10-12-2008, 08:51 PM
Ya Ryan Cook is awful, but he's a "Childress" guy so he isnt going away anytime soon.

VikingsTw
10-12-2008, 09:04 PM
I agree with Webby he has some good games, but the inconsistency is growing old. I was saying the same thing about Cedric Griffin and he's rung off two pretty good games in a row, including a cold knock out blow on a TE.

ThExRenegadE
10-12-2008, 09:08 PM
Ryan Cook isn't a RT he was originally and drafted as a C maybe that has something to do with it. He might possibly have a hard time containing faster moving defenders and that's why he was a C.

kspurplepride
10-12-2008, 09:08 PM
He's a joke... Ryan Cook has done nothing for this team, and we should be making moves to replace him either pre trade deadline, or in free agency or the draft in the off season

Sajid28
10-12-2008, 09:11 PM
can you blame him? hes part of the fran foley/chilli era. along with tjoke. we got rid of one of them already. lets hope by the end of the year we can get rid of the other.

cower or shotty for vikings coach 09!!!

skum
10-12-2008, 09:18 PM
Try Hicks over at RT, should atleast be considered.

baumy300
10-12-2008, 09:29 PM
The biggest knock I have on Cook is drafting him when we did.

There was no reason to waste such an early pick on this guy. He was supposed to be a 5th rounder and he is playing like it.

It is not his fault some idiotic coach drafted him in a round that implies he is better than he really is and then swapped his position on top of it all.

Webby
10-12-2008, 09:31 PM
"ThExRenegadE" wrote:


Ryan Cook isn't a RT he was originally and drafted as a C maybe that has something to do with it. He might possibly have a hard time containing faster moving defenders and that's why he was a C.


The theory was he was more built like a prototype tackle.
::) ::)
Tackle and C are far different animals when playing though.

Just more poor coaching decisions, I think.
Not going to blame Cook completely for being told to learn a difficult spot real time in the NFL.
That he does improve in bursts is more due to him than instruction.

Purple Floyd
10-12-2008, 11:09 PM
Ryan Cook will never be a good Tackle in the NFL. He is too fucking slow for the position. I do believe he could be a serviceable interior lineman but he will never cut it at Tackle. I knew the experiment was a failure last year and with ever game it becomes more apparent. That is the easy part.

The hard part is that our line play has done a complete 180. Last year the line did an outstanding job run blocking for the better part of the year until teams learned they could crowd the line and stop the run and that we couldn't pass against any defense.

This year I really believed that a better passing game would open up the running game but today against an abysmal run defense we did not look very good and we were running into only 7 defenders. I really thought we would do better. Of course AP did get 111 yards so it wasn't a complete failure but we may not face a defense this bad the rest of the season and we scored 10 offensive points.

slinkey
10-12-2008, 11:12 PM
agreed. This guy blows.
He is a third stringer at best.
Put my Grand ma in!

V4L
10-12-2008, 11:14 PM
He had a horrible game

But he has also had good ones

Ill give him more time.. If not in a couple games try Hicks

VikesFan4Life
10-12-2008, 11:16 PM
Agreed, he's been solid for the most part, considering where is natural position is.
Today was his worst game as a pro - but at least he tries, I wish I could say the same about his counterpart on the opposite side of the line...

Purple Floyd
10-12-2008, 11:36 PM
He could probably play R. Guard and do it effectively because he would be working in a tighter space. He is just 1.5 steps too slow to be an effective Tackle.

Big C
10-12-2008, 11:46 PM
Just another example of Childress trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. This is his 3rd year as a starter right? Well I think it's enough. Todays game wants me to see Hicks or Johnson start at RT. Hell, I would like to see Hicks start at LT and help get the running game going. McKinnie was lame in run blocking today.

Purple Floyd
10-13-2008, 07:49 AM
I agree that Hicks could be a better solution at this point. He filled in nicely for Mac in the first 4 games. Much like Gus at QB he might not be the long term solution to the problem but he just might improve the play enough to help us get an extra win and we need all we can get.

ejmat
10-13-2008, 08:28 AM
COok has had his difficulties.
As people have said, he's had his good games and not so good games.
IMO they should definately look into Hicks starting over him at this point.
At least play Hicks more to see how he does.
Cook is having his problems.

Suick
10-13-2008, 08:41 AM
Herrera didn't look much better. The O-line was a disgrace the entire game.

Marrdro
10-13-2008, 08:59 AM
Couple of things.....

a.
Baumy, do you still believe that the HC drafts the players?
Comeon my friend.
You know better. The draft is run by our VP of Player personnel and is based on players that appear to be the best fit (as scouted by the scouts under Studwell) for the scheme the coaches want to execute.

b.
I can't believe I am saying this, maybe Hicks would be ok over there, however, I am not so sure I would make the switch after one bad game this year.

c.
Cook, as with alot of the players on this team, are very inconsistent.
It isn't because they aren't talented, rather, they are still a bit on the green side.
As they get more and more reps they will get better an better.
Problem with Cook is that he is in a bad position (yes position) in that he plays RT, arguably one of the most visible position (as are all of the OL positions) for casual yutz fans to see, well at least the bad plays.
Good play is usually un-noticed as with Cooks play when he plays well.

There was a couple of very nice posts on here during the offseason about Cooks actual performance and his percieved performance.
Again, he had some bad stuff in there but he had some good as well.

Long story short, cut the kid some slack.

vike_mike
10-13-2008, 11:10 AM
He's a center.
He's not a RT.
I almost wish we had picked up Willie Anderson.
That should be our target in the upcoming draft.

V-Unit
10-13-2008, 11:25 AM
Wow. This is a bit ridiculous. He had one bad game folks.

vike_mike
10-13-2008, 11:27 AM
I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.

V-Unit
10-13-2008, 11:31 AM
"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.

Purple Floyd
10-13-2008, 11:35 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Couple of things.....

a.
Baumy, do you still believe that the HC drafts the players?
Comeon my friend.
You know better. The draft is run by our VP of Player personnel and is based on players that appear to be the best fit (as scouted by the scouts under Studwell) for the scheme the coaches want to execute.

b.
I can't believe I am saying this, maybe Hicks would be ok over there, however, I am not so sure I would make the switch after one bad game this year.

c.
Cook, as with alot of the players on this team, are very inconsistent.
It isn't because they aren't talented, rather, they are still a bit on the green side.
As they get more and more reps they will get better an better.

Problem with Cook is that he is in a bad position (yes position) in that he plays RT, arguably one of the most visible position (as are all of the OL positions) for casual yutz fans to see, well at least the bad plays.

Good play is usually un-noticed as with Cooks play when he plays well.

There was a couple of very nice posts on here during the offseason about Cooks actual performance and his percieved performance.
Again, he had some bad stuff in there but he had some good as well.

Long story short, cut the kid some slack.


And week after week we play against teams that put in rookies or players with no starting experience and they do fine against our vaunted defensive line.
Cook has had plenty of time to learn his role and do it effectively. His problem is not experience, it is that he is too fucking slow to block a speed rush. How many times do we need to go over this point? How in the hell do you think time is going to make his feet move faster or his reaction time improve? he is too slow for the position and that is not going to change. Like I said, make him a guard and he may be very good, but at Tackle he is the wrong fit.

Purple Floyd
10-13-2008, 11:37 AM
"V" wrote:


"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.

Bkfldviking
10-13-2008, 11:43 AM
Man, coming on here after an ugly WIN is like dealing with the Queen of Hearts in Alice through the Looking Glass.
One mistake and it's "Off with his head".
Put it in perspective people, one sack out of five, one holding call out of How many offensive snaps?
As I recall Herrea had a holding call also. Shall we throw him out also?
How many games has Birk gotten flagged for holding?

Ryan Cook was a center in college, he switched postions upon coming to the Vikings, and considering his background he has proven to be athletic enough to handle the assignment.
As JA told the fans "Just chill out."
It was a WIN!!!

Marrdro
10-13-2008, 11:46 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Couple of things.....

a.
Baumy, do you still believe that the HC drafts the players?
Comeon my friend.
You know better. The draft is run by our VP of Player personnel and is based on players that appear to be the best fit (as scouted by the scouts under Studwell) for the scheme the coaches want to execute.

b.
I can't believe I am saying this, maybe Hicks would be ok over there, however, I am not so sure I would make the switch after one bad game this year.

c.
Cook, as with alot of the players on this team, are very inconsistent.
It isn't because they aren't talented, rather, they are still a bit on the green side.
As they get more and more reps they will get better an better.

Problem with Cook is that he is in a bad position (yes position) in that he plays RT, arguably one of the most visible position (as are all of the OL positions) for casual yutz fans to see, well at least the bad plays.

Good play is usually un-noticed as with Cooks play when he plays well.

There was a couple of very nice posts on here during the offseason about Cooks actual performance and his percieved performance.
Again, he had some bad stuff in there but he had some good as well.

Long story short, cut the kid some slack.


And week after week we play against teams that put in rookies or players with no starting experience and they do fine against our vaunted defensive line.
Cook has had plenty of time to learn his role and do it effectively. His problem is not experience, it is that he is too fricken slow to block a speed rush. How many times do we need to go over this point? How in the hell do you think time is going to make his feet move faster or his reaction time improve? he is too slow for the position and that is not going to change. Like I said, make him a guard and he may be very good, but at Tackle he is the wrong fit.

Like our team doesn't have rookies or youngster performing my friend.
I've been subjected to nothing but a steady stream of that crap for almost 3 years, however, at some point even the biggest of Chiller haters would have to say that there has been some successes in that regard with STJ (Saftey TJ) being the most recent addition to that crowd.

Back to Cook, yes he struggles with speed rushers, so does Big Mac and every other damn T in the league.
Not a good arguement.


Take another tact like why wasn't he helped by the TE or something like that if you want to ping on the coaches, don't ping on Cook for playing like every other RT.


By the way, lest we forget, it appears to me that he did a good enough job a couple of times (Sauce's catch) were the TE could actually get out in space and make a catch.

Again, he had a bad game, I won't dispute that, however, he doesn't have a bad game every game.
Even the lamest of yutz fans could/should be able to admit that.

Marrdro
10-13-2008, 11:48 AM
"Bkfldviking" wrote:


Man, coming on here after an ugly WIN is like dealing with the Queen of Hearts in Alice through the Looking Glass.
One mistake and it's "Off with his head".
Put it in perspective people, one sack out of five, one holding call out of How many offensive snaps?
As I recall Herrea had a holding call also. Shall we throw him out also?
How many games has Birk gotten flagged for holding?

Ryan Cook was a center in college, he switched postions upon coming to the Vikings, and considering his background he has proven to be athletic enough to handle the assignment.
As JA told the fans "Just chill out."
It was a WIN!!!

Now there is someone who has a clue.
Excellent post my friend.


Just bumped you to the top column on the ole spreadsheet my friend.
;D

ThorSPL
10-13-2008, 12:05 PM
The sky is falling!!

Seriously... our line SUCKED, not just Cook.


Now, all of you who want him cut... who replaces him?

........Exactly

C Mac D
10-13-2008, 12:07 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


The sky is falling!!

Seriously... our line SUCKED, not just Cook.


Now, all of you who want him cut... who replaces him?

........Exactly


Move Hicks over... That was easy.

I don't even want Cook out of there, but if you're gonna lob one up like that...

Purple Floyd
10-13-2008, 12:08 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Couple of things.....

a.
Baumy, do you still believe that the HC drafts the players?
Comeon my friend.
You know better. The draft is run by our VP of Player personnel and is based on players that appear to be the best fit (as scouted by the scouts under Studwell) for the scheme the coaches want to execute.

b.
I can't believe I am saying this, maybe Hicks would be ok over there, however, I am not so sure I would make the switch after one bad game this year.

c.
Cook, as with alot of the players on this team, are very inconsistent.
It isn't because they aren't talented, rather, they are still a bit on the green side.
As they get more and more reps they will get better an better.

Problem with Cook is that he is in a bad position (yes position) in that he plays RT, arguably one of the most visible position (as are all of the OL positions) for casual yutz fans to see, well at least the bad plays.

Good play is usually un-noticed as with Cooks play when he plays well.

There was a couple of very nice posts on here during the offseason about Cooks actual performance and his percieved performance.
Again, he had some bad stuff in there but he had some good as well.

Long story short, cut the kid some slack.


And week after week we play against teams that put in rookies or players with no starting experience and they do fine against our vaunted defensive line.
Cook has had plenty of time to learn his role and do it effectively. His problem is not experience, it is that he is too fricken slow to block a speed rush. How many times do we need to go over this point? How in the hell do you think time is going to make his feet move faster or his reaction time improve? he is too slow for the position and that is not going to change. Like I said, make him a guard and he may be very good, but at Tackle he is the wrong fit.

Like our team doesn't have rookies or youngster performing my friend.
I've been subjected to nothing but a steady stream of that crap for almost 3 years, however, at some point even the biggest of Chiller haters would have to say that there has been some successes in that regard with STJ (Saftey TJ) being the most recent addition to that crowd.

Back to Cook, yes he struggles with speed rushers, so does Big Mac and every other damn T in the league.
Not a good arguement.


Take another tact like why wasn't he helped by the TE or something like that if you want to ping on the coaches, don't ping on Cook for playing like every other RT.


By the way, lest we forget, it appears to me that he did a good enough job a couple of times (Sauce's catch) were the TE could actually get out in space and make a catch.

Again, he had a bad game, I won't dispute that, however, he doesn't have a bad game every game.
Even the lamest of yutz fans could/should be able to admit that.


I guess it all comes down to expectations for the team. If you are content hovering around the .500 mark year after year then you will be happy with the play we get from the OL. If you want to go to the playoffs and go deep then you will be disappointed in what you are getting from him. Does he have good plays? Of course he does. I think he could be a solid starter in the NFL, but not at Tackle. At least not on a team that want to compete for a title.

And it isn't just cook. The whole line played like crap in the game and as a unit they are no where near playoff caliber. I think they were closer to playoff winning caliber with Hicks at LT and they might be even closer with him at RT.

ThorSPL
10-13-2008, 12:15 PM
"C" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


The sky is falling!!

Seriously... our line SUCKED, not just Cook.


Now, all of you who want him cut... who replaces him?

........Exactly


Move Hicks over... That was easy.

I don't even want Cook out of there, but if you're gonna lob one up like that...


A little slow pitch softball goes a long way!!!

I'm trying to remember what side Hicks played when he was in Philly.... anybody know?

And based on how he played for BM, he did earn a shot...

Purple Floyd
10-13-2008, 12:16 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


The sky is falling!!

Seriously... our line SUCKED, not just Cook.


Now, all of you who want him cut... who replaces him?

........Exactly


Move Hicks over... That was easy.

I don't even want Cook out of there, but if you're gonna lob one up like that...


A little slow pitch softball goes a long way!!!

I'm trying to remember what side Hicks played when he was in Philly.... anybody know?

And based on how he played for BM, he did earn a shot...


he played left guard in Philly

C Mac D
10-13-2008, 12:22 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


The sky is falling!!

Seriously... our line SUCKED, not just Cook.


Now, all of you who want him cut... who replaces him?

........Exactly


Move Hicks over... That was easy.

I don't even want Cook out of there, but if you're gonna lob one up like that...


A little slow pitch softball goes a long way!!!

I'm trying to remember what side Hicks played when he was in Philly.... anybody know?

And based on how he played for BM, he did earn a shot...


Pretty sure it was left... but I'm not totally giving up on Cook here, I just think maybe some rotation could be a good thing.

I think we could have one of the best O-Lines in the league... but they just can't seem to get it going in this offense. It's frustrating to watch (or follow on ESPN.com).

MinnesotaFury
10-13-2008, 12:22 PM
Cook had a bad game.
Adrian has had bad games.
Jared has had bad games.
Even Randy Moss had bad games.
Lets at least wait until the bye week before making any drastic moves.

V4L
10-13-2008, 12:30 PM
I like Cook and think he can be good.. I dont thnk he will be a stud but I feel he will be more consistant

Hicks.. Idk if he can play RT.. It's a big adjustment moving sides.. People won't agree but it is

V-Unit
10-13-2008, 12:45 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


A great RT is going to prevent sacks or hurries and avoid penalties about 80 to 90 percent of the time. That obviously depends on the caliber of DL that they are facing. Criticizing our run blocking is laughable unless you expect each lineman to block two defenders when we run. Cook has done fine, except for this game, where I do agree he was bad. At the same time, are we really expecting Cook to turn into an all prop blocker?

If you want to point out his bad play vs the Lions that is fine, but to see one bad game then all of a sudden say he has been horrible all year (there have been minimal complaints about the OL until this last game, and that is because they have played well.) is over the top. He's not getting benched, and hopefully he'll work his ass off and bounce back from a tough game. That is exactly whats going to happen and we all know it.

Marrdro
10-13-2008, 12:47 PM
"MinnesotaFury" wrote:


Cook had a bad game.
Adrian has had bad games.
Jared has had bad games.
Even Randy Moss had bad games.
Lets at least wait until the bye week before making any drastic moves.

That post right there got you moved up two columns
on the ole spreadsheet my friend.
Well done. ;D

ThorSPL
10-13-2008, 12:54 PM
I think enough people on this site are wise enough to recognize the difference in switching sides....

Purple Floyd
10-13-2008, 01:21 PM
"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


A great RT is going to prevent sacks or hurries and avoid penalties about 80 to 90 percent of the time. That obviously depends on the caliber of DL that they are facing. Criticizing our run blocking is laughable unless you expect each lineman to block two defenders when we run. Cook has done fine, except for this game, where I do agree he was bad. At the same time, are we really expecting Cook to turn into an all prop blocker?

If you want to point out his bad play vs the Lions that is fine, but to see one bad game then all of a sudden say he has been horrible all year (there have been minimal complaints about the OL until this last game, and that is because they have played well.) is over the top. He's not getting benched, and hopefully he'll work his ass off and bounce back from a tough game. That is exactly whats going to happen and we all know it.


What are you talking about? I have been saying he sucks for as long as he has been playing. this is no sudden revelation that happened yesterday at 3:16 PM.

He has been playing bad since he was put in as a starter but will have one good game every so often that people will use to justify his existence.

V-Unit
10-13-2008, 01:54 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


A great RT is going to prevent sacks or hurries and avoid penalties about 80 to 90 percent of the time. That obviously depends on the caliber of DL that they are facing. Criticizing our run blocking is laughable unless you expect each lineman to block two defenders when we run. Cook has done fine, except for this game, where I do agree he was bad. At the same time, are we really expecting Cook to turn into an all prop blocker?

If you want to point out his bad play vs the Lions that is fine, but to see one bad game then all of a sudden say he has been horrible all year (there have been minimal complaints about the OL until this last game, and that is because they have played well.) is over the top. He's not getting benched, and hopefully he'll work his ass off and bounce back from a tough game. That is exactly whats going to happen and we all know it.


What are you talking about? I have been saying he sucks for as long as he has been playing. this is no sudden revelation that happened yesterday at 3:16 PM.

He has been playing bad since he was put in as a starter but will have one good game every so often that people will use to justify his existence.


Fact remains, he's had one bad game this year.

Del Rio
10-13-2008, 02:01 PM
He was also a center in college, a very capable one. Taking a guy who is used to playing inside and moving him on an island is going to take some getting used to.

I cant accept the penalties, they are unforgivable. Getting beat now and then it happens.

ejmat
10-13-2008, 02:09 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


Agreed.
His penalties show lack of focus.
He has made some decent blocks but he has also been beaten too many times IMO which will also show lack of focus or just poor blocking skills.

AngloVike
10-13-2008, 03:15 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


Agreed.
His penalties show lack of focus.
He has made some decent blocks but he has also been beaten too many times IMO which will also show lack of focus or just poor blocking skills.


and you'd also expect the coaching staff to see this when they review the game film. So as well putting some of this on Cook then how about some words about the OL coaching or lack thereof. He was originally a center so its going to take him time to make the adjustment, especially if he's having to sefl-teach. I'm not saying that he will ever be pro-bowl material but he could still be a solid player. However getting left on his own won't help his development or the team.

ejmat
10-13-2008, 04:12 PM
"AngloVike" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"vike_mike" wrote:


I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


Agreed.
His penalties show lack of focus.
He has made some decent blocks but he has also been beaten too many times IMO which will also show lack of focus or just poor blocking skills.


and you'd also expect the coaching staff to see this when they review the game film. So as well putting some of this on Cook then how about some words about the OL coaching or lack thereof. He was originally a center so its going to take him time to make the adjustment, especially if he's having to sefl-teach. I'm not saying that he will ever be pro-bowl material but he could still be a solid player. However getting left on his own won't help his development or the team.


I don't believe I ever said coaching had nothing to do with this.
But to respond to your post I think you are correct.
This is a guy playing out of the position he played in college.
Regardless of his position, my main issue with Cook is his penalties (false starts and holding).
Coaches can only coach so much.
The player has to execute on the field.
That also leads me to after 2 years of starting in the NFL he is not doing a consistent job on the front line.
Yes, some of that may be coaching as well.
The point here is whether or not he is cutting it at RT.
I would say he isn't.

Purple Floyd
10-13-2008, 04:17 PM
"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:




I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


A great RT is going to prevent sacks or hurries and avoid penalties about 80 to 90 percent of the time. That obviously depends on the caliber of DL that they are facing. Criticizing our run blocking is laughable unless you expect each lineman to block two defenders when we run. Cook has done fine, except for this game, where I do agree he was bad. At the same time, are we really expecting Cook to turn into an all prop blocker?

If you want to point out his bad play vs the Lions that is fine, but to see one bad game then all of a sudden say he has been horrible all year (there have been minimal complaints about the OL until this last game, and that is because they have played well.) is over the top. He's not getting benched, and hopefully he'll work his ass off and bounce back from a tough game. That is exactly whats going to happen and we all know it.


What are you talking about? I have been saying he sucks for as long as he has been playing. this is no sudden revelation that happened yesterday at 3:16 PM.

He has been playing bad since he was put in as a starter but will have one good game every so often that people will use to justify his existence.


Fact remains, he's had one bad game this year.


The whole line has been bad since childress took over.
It isn't just Cook but he is the main offender of a group of underachievers IMO.Let it be known that I am not blaming Cook for not being successful at that spot. I don't think he is to blame for being put in a spot where he is not physically capable of excelling.That is on the coaching staff for putting him there. Listen to what this guy and others said 2 years ago before Cook was even on the field. :

http://www.purplepride.org/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=479738;topic=27941.20;sesc=2fe16238da0040dd04885ad7991483b9

"V" wrote:


Everyone says give the line time..Honestly, how much time do you want to give them? 8 games? The whole year?

The sad part is if you look at individual plays it isn't lack of communication, usually it is either Mckinnie (who is supposed to have a break out year) or Birk (the multi-pro-bowler) getting beat by bullrushers or speed on the edge. I expect those mistakes from Johnson, but there was one play last week where we were running left. Mckinnie and Hutchinson got their blocks, but Birk's guy straight up beat the all-pro one-on-one and made the tackle. Plays like that just confuse me.


"Del" wrote:


The thing I ask myself is why is that right side of the line commiting crucial game changing penalties? From Matt Birk on you have guys that are not able to run the ball, and who are commiting these red zone altering huge penalties. The only thing I can think of is they are getting man handled over there and it is taking it's toll on them.

I guess it would be a question of does the right side of the line have the talent to improve?


"whackthepack" wrote:


I am not panicking yet as we all knew that it would take some time for the O-line to jell (contrary to what Birk thinks) and it has only been 4 games if this is still an issue after week 6 then I will be more concerned.
Every single person on the O-line has somebody new to the side of them, the best O-lines have people that have played together for 3 or 4 years.
It takes awhile to get that consistent play when you have new people and only McKinney and Johnson played on the 2005 Viking team!

I know that everybody wants it to happen overnight but you build an O-line and that is what we are doing!
The only person on the line that I don't think has the potential to be a stud on the line for us is Hicks, I think he would be a good backup and insurance for injuries but I don't think that he is a future starter for the Vikes and I hope in the offseason that they address this situation either by moving Cook into the right guard spot or going out and getting a good guard.

Marcus Johnson is only a second year player and he got schooled by Peppers but I don't think he has been the 1st and I don't think he will be the last that Peppers teaches a lesson too.
But Marcus has the potential to be a very good lineman and I am not giving up on him and I think the coaching staff feels the same way.


I hope I don't eat a plate full of crow on this but I think by game 6 or 7 we have forgotten about the poor play of the line early in the season!

Last year we started out 1 - 4, and then went to 2 - 5 and went on to 9 - 7 and barely missed the playoffs and I am much more confident in this line than I was with that line!

ejmat
10-13-2008, 07:53 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:






I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


A great RT is going to prevent sacks or hurries and avoid penalties about 80 to 90 percent of the time. That obviously depends on the caliber of DL that they are facing. Criticizing our run blocking is laughable unless you expect each lineman to block two defenders when we run. Cook has done fine, except for this game, where I do agree he was bad. At the same time, are we really expecting Cook to turn into an all prop blocker?

If you want to point out his bad play vs the Lions that is fine, but to see one bad game then all of a sudden say he has been horrible all year (there have been minimal complaints about the OL until this last game, and that is because they have played well.) is over the top. He's not getting benched, and hopefully he'll work his ass off and bounce back from a tough game. That is exactly whats going to happen and we all know it.


What are you talking about? I have been saying he sucks for as long as he has been playing. this is no sudden revelation that happened yesterday at 3:16 PM.

He has been playing bad since he was put in as a starter but will have one good game every so often that people will use to justify his existence.


Fact remains, he's had one bad game this year.


The whole line has been bad since childress took over.
It isn't just Cook but he is the main offender of a group of underachievers IMO.Let it be known that I am not blaming Cook for not being successful at that spot. I don't think he is to blame for being put in a spot where he is not physically capable of excelling.That is on the coaching staff for putting him there. Listen to what this guy and others said 2 years ago before Cook was even on the field. :

http://www.purplepride.org/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=479738;topic=27941.20;sesc=2fe16238da0040dd04885ad7991483b9

"V" wrote:


Everyone says give the line time..Honestly, how much time do you want to give them? 8 games? The whole year?

The sad part is if you look at individual plays it isn't lack of communication, usually it is either Mckinnie (who is supposed to have a break out year) or Birk (the multi-pro-bowler) getting beat by bullrushers or speed on the edge. I expect those mistakes from Johnson, but there was one play last week where we were running left. Mckinnie and Hutchinson got their blocks, but Birk's guy straight up beat the all-pro one-on-one and made the tackle. Plays like that just confuse me.


"Del" wrote:


The thing I ask myself is why is that right side of the line commiting crucial game changing penalties? From Matt Birk on you have guys that are not able to run the ball, and who are commiting these red zone altering huge penalties. The only thing I can think of is they are getting man handled over there and it is taking it's toll on them.

I guess it would be a question of does the right side of the line have the talent to improve?


"whackthepack" wrote:


I am not panicking yet as we all knew that it would take some time for the O-line to jell (contrary to what Birk thinks) and it has only been 4 games if this is still an issue after week 6 then I will be more concerned.
Every single person on the O-line has somebody new to the side of them, the best O-lines have people that have played together for 3 or 4 years.
It takes awhile to get that consistent play when you have new people and only McKinney and Johnson played on the 2005 Viking team!

I know that everybody wants it to happen overnight but you build an O-line and that is what we are doing!
The only person on the line that I don't think has the potential to be a stud on the line for us is Hicks, I think he would be a good backup and insurance for injuries but I don't think that he is a future starter for the Vikes and I hope in the offseason that they address this situation either by moving Cook into the right guard spot or going out and getting a good guard.

Marcus Johnson is only a second year player and he got schooled by Peppers but I don't think he has been the 1st and I don't think he will be the last that Peppers teaches a lesson too.
But Marcus has the potential to be a very good lineman and I am not giving up on him and I think the coaching staff feels the same way.


I hope I don't eat a plate full of crow on this but I think by game 6 or 7 we have forgotten about the poor play of the line early in the season!

Last year we started out 1 - 4, and then went to 2 - 5 and went on to 9 - 7 and barely missed the playoffs and I am much more confident in this line than I was with that line!



The line was bad before Childress took over.
The 2005 season will prove that.

packerbasher
10-13-2008, 08:16 PM
One thing you can count on cook for is a false start penelty or two per game and usally a hold or 2 as well,he's the Todd Stussie of this team.

slinkey
10-13-2008, 08:39 PM
Stussie had some really good years before he fell apart though....Cook has always blown.

V-Unit
10-13-2008, 09:57 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:






I'ts ridiculous that you believe he's only had one bad game.
There are several games you can count this year and last that he isn't cutting it.
Same thing with Marcus Johnson.
We need to cut loose already.


Honestly, how do you quantify good RT play?

Tackles are hardly ever highlighted for good plays, but they always are for bad ones. I would ask you which other games this year he has undeperformed in, but your view is so skewed that I don't expect a reasonable response.


If he is getting called for penalties, getting beat in pass protection and failing to open up lanes in the running game I would say that is bad play.

Define for us what you have seen that demonstrate that he has played well.


A great RT is going to prevent sacks or hurries and avoid penalties about 80 to 90 percent of the time. That obviously depends on the caliber of DL that they are facing. Criticizing our run blocking is laughable unless you expect each lineman to block two defenders when we run. Cook has done fine, except for this game, where I do agree he was bad. At the same time, are we really expecting Cook to turn into an all prop blocker?

If you want to point out his bad play vs the Lions that is fine, but to see one bad game then all of a sudden say he has been horrible all year (there have been minimal complaints about the OL until this last game, and that is because they have played well.) is over the top. He's not getting benched, and hopefully he'll work his ass off and bounce back from a tough game. That is exactly whats going to happen and we all know it.


What are you talking about? I have been saying he sucks for as long as he has been playing. this is no sudden revelation that happened yesterday at 3:16 PM.

He has been playing bad since he was put in as a starter but will have one good game every so often that people will use to justify his existence.


Fact remains, he's had one bad game this year.


The whole line has been bad since childress took over.
It isn't just Cook but he is the main offender of a group of underachievers IMO.Let it be known that I am not blaming Cook for not being successful at that spot. I don't think he is to blame for being put in a spot where he is not physically capable of excelling.That is on the coaching staff for putting him there. Listen to what this guy and others said 2 years ago before Cook was even on the field. :

http://www.purplepride.org/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=479738;topic=27941.20;sesc=2fe16238da0040dd04885ad7991483b9

"V" wrote:


Everyone says give the line time..Honestly, how much time do you want to give them? 8 games? The whole year?

The sad part is if you look at individual plays it isn't lack of communication, usually it is either Mckinnie (who is supposed to have a break out year) or Birk (the multi-pro-bowler) getting beat by bullrushers or speed on the edge. I expect those mistakes from Johnson, but there was one play last week where we were running left. Mckinnie and Hutchinson got their blocks, but Birk's guy straight up beat the all-pro one-on-one and made the tackle. Plays like that just confuse me.


"Del" wrote:


The thing I ask myself is why is that right side of the line commiting crucial game changing penalties? From Matt Birk on you have guys that are not able to run the ball, and who are commiting these red zone altering huge penalties. The only thing I can think of is they are getting man handled over there and it is taking it's toll on them.

I guess it would be a question of does the right side of the line have the talent to improve?


"whackthepack" wrote:


I am not panicking yet as we all knew that it would take some time for the O-line to jell (contrary to what Birk thinks) and it has only been 4 games if this is still an issue after week 6 then I will be more concerned.
Every single person on the O-line has somebody new to the side of them, the best O-lines have people that have played together for 3 or 4 years.
It takes awhile to get that consistent play when you have new people and only McKinney and Johnson played on the 2005 Viking team!

I know that everybody wants it to happen overnight but you build an O-line and that is what we are doing!
The only person on the line that I don't think has the potential to be a stud on the line for us is Hicks, I think he would be a good backup and insurance for injuries but I don't think that he is a future starter for the Vikes and I hope in the offseason that they address this situation either by moving Cook into the right guard spot or going out and getting a good guard.

Marcus Johnson is only a second year player and he got schooled by Peppers but I don't think he has been the 1st and I don't think he will be the last that Peppers teaches a lesson too.
But Marcus has the potential to be a very good lineman and I am not giving up on him and I think the coaching staff feels the same way.


I hope I don't eat a plate full of crow on this but I think by game 6 or 7 we have forgotten about the poor play of the line early in the season!

Last year we started out 1 - 4, and then went to 2 - 5 and went on to 9 - 7 and barely missed the playoffs and I am much more confident in this line than I was with that line!



How do quotes from 2 years ago matter? I am talking about THIS year.

V-Unit
10-21-2008, 05:51 PM
Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.

Purple Floyd
10-21-2008, 10:50 PM
"V" wrote:


Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.


Ryan Cook still sucks.

Happy now?

Marrdro
10-22-2008, 06:16 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.


Ryan Cook still sucks.

Happy now?

I haven't quit on Birk either.
;D

singersp
10-22-2008, 06:20 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.


Ryan Cook still sucks.

Happy now?

I haven't quit on Birk either.

;D


Really? WOW! You fooled an entire gated community of 8,000+

Do you refer to Cook as future tackle boy?

Marrdro
10-22-2008, 06:23 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.


Ryan Cook still sucks.

Happy now?

I haven't quit on Birk either.
;D


Really? WOW! You fooled an entire gated community of 8,000+

Do you refer to Cook as future tackle boy?

Morning.
I needed a chuckle thats for sure.


What came to mind was a picture of your puter with some sort of alert function that scans for me critiquing guys like Birk, Memo, Smoot etc.
As soon as the alert went off you came to their defense.


You deserve a new title, "Defender of the Players"......;D
;D
;D

singersp
10-22-2008, 06:28 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.


Ryan Cook still sucks.

Happy now?

I haven't quit on Birk either.

;D


Really? WOW! You fooled an entire gated community of 8,000+

Do you refer to Cook as future tackle boy?

Morning.
I needed a chuckle thats for sure.


What came to mind was a picture of your puter with some sort of alert function that scans for me critiquing guys like Birk, Memo, Smoot etc.
As soon as the alert went off you came to their defense.



You deserve a new title, "Defender of the Players"......;D
;D
;D


Only when I feel they are unjustly cast under the bus.

Prophet
10-22-2008, 10:40 AM
"V" wrote:


Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.


Isn't that how it is supposed to work on pp.o?

V-Unit
10-22-2008, 12:20 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


"V" wrote:


Well, well, well. Look what we have here. The OL has a good game and all the haters go mum.

Don't fear, if Cook has another bad game, they'll be saying he's been bad all season.


Isn't that how it is supposed to work on pp.o?


Maybe so.

When I first joined the board, the realists were called pessimists. Now the realists are called optimists.

Crazy shit huh?

singersp
12-22-2008, 08:39 AM
http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg

Purple Floyd
12-22-2008, 08:42 AM
"singersp" wrote:


http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

Marrdro
12-22-2008, 09:52 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.

singersp
12-22-2008, 09:56 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Ryan "Hoover" Cook is the biggest vortex on the OL line.

Suick
12-22-2008, 10:27 AM
Do we go QB or OT in April's draft? ???

jessejames09
12-22-2008, 10:28 AM
"Suick" wrote:


Do we go QB or OT in April's draft? ???


Hopefully OT first seeing as a QB will sit for a year or 2 anyways.

Freakout
12-22-2008, 10:38 AM
"Suick" wrote:


Do we go QB or OT in April's draft? ???


OT especially with it shaping up to look like a lot of the top qb's are staying in college.

OT, DT, and Safety the 3 targets in the first round IMO.

Sharper is done, possible suspensions for Williams Bro's next season, and of course we get killed at RT.

Purple Floyd
12-22-2008, 11:35 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.

NordicNed
12-22-2008, 11:44 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.



I think they should put Cook back to what he really is, a Center, maybe even a guard.
But he surely is no Tackle.......

Marrdro
12-22-2008, 11:58 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.

He has picked it up, however, did you see his gaffs?
Hell on one of them he got owned so bad the defender caused him to bump AD which of course resulted in one of many fumbles.

Again, one more time for possible penetration, Cook had issues yesterday, but I saw everyone of our OL (except maybe Herrera) have problems yesterday.
Heck, i even have 2 game notes on the great Hutch screwed the pooch yesterday.

No reason in hell our OL got schooled by that DL my friends.
It all goes back to the Coach on this one.

singersp
12-22-2008, 11:59 AM
"NordicNed" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.



I think they should put Cook back to what he really is, a Center, maybe even a guard.
But he surely is no Tackle.......


They'd probably have better luck replacing Cook with this. Plus no false starts.

http://www.robbinssports.com/sporting-goods-store/images/STTACKBL_l.jpg

Marrdro
12-22-2008, 12:02 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:




http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.



I think they should put Cook back to what he really is, a Center, maybe even a guard.
But he surely is no Tackle.......


They'd probably have better luck replacing Cook with this. Plus no false starts.

http://www.robbinssports.com/sporting-goods-store/images/STTACKBL_l.jpg

It'll be better next year when we shit can Birk and get a new OL coach.
;D
;D
;D

singersp
12-22-2008, 12:03 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:






http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.



I think they should put Cook back to what he really is, a Center, maybe even a guard.
But he surely is no Tackle.......


They'd probably have better luck replacing Cook with this. Plus no false starts.

http://www.robbinssports.com/sporting-goods-store/images/STTACKBL_l.jpg

It'll be better next year when we shit can Birk and get a new OL coach.

;D
;D
;D


Yeah, because a new center will make Cook block better.
::)

Birk > Cook

Mr-holland
12-22-2008, 12:05 PM
Wow did this guy suck :o

Marrdro
12-22-2008, 12:06 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:








http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.



I think they should put Cook back to what he really is, a Center, maybe even a guard.
But he surely is no Tackle.......


They'd probably have better luck replacing Cook with this. Plus no false starts.

http://www.robbinssports.com/sporting-goods-store/images/STTACKBL_l.jpg

It'll be better next year when we pooh can Birk and get a new OL coach.

;D
;D
;D


Yeah, because a new center will make Cook block better.
::)

Birk > Cook

A new Center making the correct line calls will make all of them better.

Ohhhhhh wait, Birk was outstanding yesterday especially with the snap (blamed on TJ) and how he stayed engaged with his defender for like 2 seconds which resulted in a sack/fumble (blamed on TJ).

Comeon my friend, you know my feelings on this one.
It isn't only on the OLmen but the coaches and our Center as well.

marstc09
12-22-2008, 12:10 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:




http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.



I think they should put Cook back to what he really is, a Center, maybe even a guard.
But he surely is no Tackle.......


They'd probably have better luck replacing Cook with this. Plus no false starts.

http://www.robbinssports.com/sporting-goods-store/images/STTACKBL_l.jpg


LMFAO!

singersp
12-22-2008, 12:13 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"NordicNed" wrote:










http://www.satansupportsmorton.com/Revolving%20Door.jpg


That is a bad comparison. That revolving door actually moves and serves a purpose.

So is that intended just for Cook or for the whole OL who looked like that yesterday?

Comeon man, I admit he has his problems but you overlook the rest of the line that sucked just as bad yesterday.


Just Cook.

Even McKiney has stepped up his play. Cook is like a lost sheep out there.



I think they should put Cook back to what he really is, a Center, maybe even a guard.
But he surely is no Tackle.......


They'd probably have better luck replacing Cook with this. Plus no false starts.

http://www.robbinssports.com/sporting-goods-store/images/STTACKBL_l.jpg

It'll be better next year when we pooh can Birk and get a new OL coach.

;D
;D
;D


Yeah, because a new center will make Cook block better.
::)

Birk > Cook

A new Center making the correct line calls will make all of them better.

Ohhhhhh wait, Birk was outstanding yesterday especially with the snap (blamed on TJ) and how he stayed engaged with his defender for like 2 seconds which resulted in a sack/fumble (blamed on TJ).

Comeon my friend, you know my feelings on this one.
It isn't only on the OLmen but the coaches and our Center as well.


Of course it isn't all on the OLine. Birk had a couple of miscues during the game where as Cook was pretty much owned the entire game.

Yet you refuse to see that & lay more blame on Birk than you do on Cook.

STCLOUDSAYSGOVIKES
12-22-2008, 12:27 PM
Cook did have a fumble recovery. That's grasping at straws, but he did prevent another lost fumble. :P

Marrdro
12-22-2008, 12:30 PM
"singersp" wrote:



Of course it isn't all on the OLine. Birk had a couple of miscues during the game where as Cook was pretty much owned the entire game.

Yet you refuse to see that & lay more blame on Birk than you do on Cook.

I have hope (as I have for all the other players you guys have wrongly persacuted) for Cook.


Lets not forget that I also blame the QB in this area, but as with Cook, he has a future.
Birks is just passed.

Matt, although he has been a good player for us either doesn't fit the scheme or can't play anymore at the level we need.
I believe it is a little of both.
He continually goofs on his pre-snap reads and line call assignments suck because of it.

Again, that doesn't in anyway take away from what he has done for us, just time to move on IMHO.

(PS, Same goes for Sharp and Longwell).
::)

ejmat
12-22-2008, 05:33 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:



Of course it isn't all on the OLine. Birk had a couple of miscues during the game where as Cook was pretty much owned the entire game.

Yet you refuse to see that & lay more blame on Birk than you do on Cook.

I have hope (as I have for all the other players you guys have wrongly persacuted) for Cook.


Lets not forget that I also blame the QB in this area, but as with Cook, he has a future.
Birks is just passed.

Matt, although he has been a good player for us either doesn't fit the scheme or can't play anymore at the level we need.
I believe it is a little of both.
He continually goofs on his pre-snap reads and line call assignments suck because of it.

Again, that doesn't in anyway take away from what he has done for us, just time to move on IMHO.

(PS, Same goes for Sharp and Longwell).

::)



Longwell?
Why Longwell?
I can understand Birk and Sharper.
Why Sharper didn't swat that fumble out of bounds yesterday I don't know.
I think he is trying to showboat too much and sometimes it causes him to do stupid things.
But Longwell is pretty consistent.
I admit he's had a few blocked FGs but for the most part he has been money.

bleedpurple
12-22-2008, 05:36 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:



Of course it isn't all on the OLine. Birk had a couple of miscues during the game where as Cook was pretty much owned the entire game.

Yet you refuse to see that & lay more blame on Birk than you do on Cook.

I have hope (as I have for all the other players you guys have wrongly persacuted) for Cook.


Lets not forget that I also blame the QB in this area, but as with Cook, he has a future.
Birks is just passed.

Matt, although he has been a good player for us either doesn't fit the scheme or can't play anymore at the level we need.
I believe it is a little of both.
He continually goofs on his pre-snap reads and line call assignments suck because of it.

Again, that doesn't in anyway take away from what he has done for us, just time to move on IMHO.

(PS, Same goes for Sharp and Longwell).

::)



Longwell?
Why Longwell?
I can understand Birk and Sharper.
Why Sharper didn't swat that fumble out of bounds yesterday I don't know.
I think he is trying to showboat too much and sometimes it causes him to do stupid things.
But Longwell is pretty consistent.
I admit he's had a few blocked FGs but for the most part he has been money.


+1

but i think he's they're just saying that bc they are ex-packers.. who i will be rooting for tonight by the way!!

marstc09
12-22-2008, 06:03 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:



Of course it isn't all on the OLine. Birk had a couple of miscues during the game where as Cook was pretty much owned the entire game.

Yet you refuse to see that & lay more blame on Birk than you do on Cook.

I have hope (as I have for all the other players you guys have wrongly persacuted) for Cook.


Lets not forget that I also blame the QB in this area, but as with Cook, he has a future.
Birks is just passed.

Matt, although he has been a good player for us either doesn't fit the scheme or can't play anymore at the level we need.
I believe it is a little of both.
He continually goofs on his pre-snap reads and line call assignments suck because of it.

Again, that doesn't in anyway take away from what he has done for us, just time to move on IMHO.

(PS, Same goes for Sharp and Longwell).

::)



Cook has no future. He will not start next year.

Can someone say Mark Tauscher?

LONGwell will be here next year. Sharper might not.

Purple Floyd
12-22-2008, 06:09 PM
"STCLOUDSAYSGOVIKES" wrote:


Cook did have a fumble recovery. That's grasping at straws, but he did prevent another lost fumble. :P


Wasn't the person who caused the fumble his blocking assignment?

singersp
12-23-2008, 10:46 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"STCLOUDSAYSGOVIKES" wrote:


Cook did have a fumble recovery. That's grasping at straws, but he did prevent another lost fumble. :P


Wasn't the person who caused the fumble his blocking assignment?


Ownage!

singersp
12-23-2008, 10:47 AM
"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

TheVike1
12-23-2008, 10:52 AM
C mon folks give our O line a break!
All of em!
2nd best rusging offense in league?
He like all of em are bustin their a**es and get no respect or shout outs!
If he isn t better than the defender lined up against him it is the coaching staff responsibility to insure he is helped and they are doubled team!
JMHO

bleedpurple
12-23-2008, 10:55 AM
"TheVike1" wrote:


C mon folks give our O line a break!
All of em!
2nd best rusging offense in league?
He like all of em are bustin their a**es and get no respect or shout outs!
If he isn t better than the defender lined up against him it is the coaching staff responsibility to insure he is helped and they are doubled team!
JMHO


i agree and overall they have been alot better at pass blocking than last year that's for sure... but noone is really harping on them in regards to run blocking.. its more pass blocking that has everyone up in arms!!

singersp
12-23-2008, 11:15 AM
"TheVike1" wrote:


C mon folks give our O line a break!
All of em!
2nd best rusging offense in league?
He like all of em are bustin their a**es and get no respect or shout outs!
If he isn t better than the defender lined up against him it is the coaching staff responsibility to insure he is helped and they are doubled team!
JMHO


Actually we are 3rd in the rushing offense category. What concerns me more is the passing game. There we are ranked 27th, but being a WCO team rather than a passing team, that has to be taken into consideration.

We also rank 23rd in % of passes completed. Take that for what it's worth. There are inacurate passes, hurries, throw aways & drops to consider.

When it comes to sacks that our O-line gives up, we are 7th overall with 41.

marstc09
12-23-2008, 11:30 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.


Good. He will be 10 times better then Cook. Cook blows!

bleedpurple
12-23-2008, 11:57 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"TheVike1" wrote:


C mon folks give our O line a break!
All of em!
2nd best rusging offense in league?
He like all of em are bustin their a**es and get no respect or shout outs!
If he isn t better than the defender lined up against him it is the coaching staff responsibility to insure he is helped and they are doubled team!
JMHO


Actually we are 3rd in the rushing offense category. What concerns me more is the passing game. There we are ranked 27th, but being a WCO team rather than a passing team, that has to be taken into consideration.

We also rank 23rd in % of passes completed. Take that for what it's worth. There are inacurate passes, hurries, throw aways & drops to consider.

When it comes to sacks that out O-line gives up, we are 7th overall with 41.


doesn't every team have that??
wouldn't that make it apples to apples?

Marrdro
12-23-2008, 02:12 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg

marstc09
12-23-2008, 02:14 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg


He is actually a really nice guy. I met him a few times. Played darts with him and Craig Nall when I went to school in Green Bay.

Marrdro
12-23-2008, 02:16 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg


He is actually a really nice guy. I met him a few times. Played darts with him and Craig Nall when I went to school in Green Bay.

I feel for him then.
He is forever gonna be a PUKER.
Hate it when that happens to nice guys.

FuadFan
12-23-2008, 02:17 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg



Other reasons not to want him he is an older player at 32 and he tore his ACL back at the start of the month I think I'll pass.

marstc09
12-23-2008, 02:19 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg


He is actually a really nice guy. I met him a few times. Played darts with him and Craig Nall when I went to school in Green Bay.

I feel for him then.
He is forever gonna be a PUKER.
Hate it when that happens to nice guys.


Look at this tool.

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72985754.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB4DFDC4B8A1758D49A40A659CEC4C8CB6
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71448321.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB50EF50D43C2A68BFA40A659CEC4C8CB6

Marrdro
12-23-2008, 02:21 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:





Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg


He is actually a really nice guy. I met him a few times. Played darts with him and Craig Nall when I went to school in Green Bay.

I feel for him then.
He is forever gonna be a PUKER.
Hate it when that happens to nice guys.


Look at this tool.

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72985754.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB4DFDC4B8A1758D49A40A659CEC4C8CB6
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71448321.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB50EF50D43C2A68BFA40A659CEC4C8CB6

I actually thought you would post something like that and was suprised you posted you knew him first.
;D

marstc09
12-23-2008, 02:25 PM
"FuadFan" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg



Other reasons not to want him he is an older player at 32 and he tore his ACL back at the start of the month I think I'll pass.


There are other OT available. Point is, we need one in FA.

DeathtoDenny
12-23-2008, 02:25 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:





Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg


He is actually a really nice guy. I met him a few times. Played darts with him and Craig Nall when I went to school in Green Bay.

I feel for him then.
He is forever gonna be a PUKER.
Hate it when that happens to nice guys.


Look at this tool.

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72985754.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB4DFDC4B8A1758D49A40A659CEC4C8CB6
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71448321.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB50EF50D43C2A68BFA40A659CEC4C8CB6


He looks like a victim of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Oh, Wisconsin loves their FAS babies!

marstc09
12-23-2008, 02:27 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:







Can someone say Mark Tauscher?



If we get Tauscher, no matter how well he plays, I'll bet Marrdro will hate him from day 1.

You are wrong, I already dislike the guy........Look at him.
Big dufus.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/museum/exhibits/toys/images/tauschermark.jpg


He is actually a really nice guy. I met him a few times. Played darts with him and Craig Nall when I went to school in Green Bay.

I feel for him then.
He is forever gonna be a PUKER.
Hate it when that happens to nice guys.


Look at this tool.

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72985754.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB4DFDC4B8A1758D49A40A659CEC4C8CB6
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71448321.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB50EF50D43C2A68BFA40A659CEC4C8CB6

I actually thought you would post something like that and was suprised you posted you knew him first.

;D


Cook looks way smaller than 6-6, 328 in person.

marstc09
03-25-2009, 12:27 PM
Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5

Marrdro
03-25-2009, 12:32 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5

You really are desparate to make this happen aren't you.
:o
;D

Prophet
03-25-2009, 12:37 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.

bleedpurple
03-25-2009, 01:28 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.


i'm' glad he's gonna be a back up... he can't pass block for shit!...

ejmat
03-25-2009, 06:11 PM
"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.


i'm' glad he's gonna be a back up... he can't pass block for shit!...


Does anyone realize this article was during the 2008 season when Cook lost his job?
Yes, he lost his job to Hicks.
Hicks got hurt and Cook started again.
Cook improved toward the end of the season (not that it's saying much) but he kept the starting job even though Hicks could play.
As of now Cook is still slated as the starter. C an it change?
Yes.
I hope it does.
But he finished the season with the starting role and until we hear different he is still slated as the starter.

marshallvike
03-25-2009, 09:35 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.


i'm' glad he's gonna be a back up... he can't pass block for pooh!...


Does anyone realize this article was during the 2008 season when Cook lost his job?
Yes, he lost his job to Hicks.
Hicks got hurt and Cook started again.
Cook improved toward the end of the season (not that it's saying much) but he kept the starting job even though Hicks could play.
As of now Cook is still slated as the starter. C an it change?
Yes.
I hope it does.
But he finished the season with the starting role and until we hear different he is still slated as the starter.


Yes he did play better later in the season. It is not like learning to play tackle is an easy proposition. He is not the reason we were not as good as we should have been last season. Draw your own conclusion.

nephilimstorm
03-25-2009, 09:48 PM
I smell a trde regarding cook, just a hunch. Maybe a 5th 6th rounder LOL

marshallvike
03-25-2009, 10:19 PM
"Nephilim" wrote:


I smell a trde regarding cook, just a hunch. Maybe a 5th 6th rounder LOL


do you think maybe cook was the hangup in the cutler trade? too much to give up?

marstc09
03-25-2009, 11:21 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.


i'm' glad he's gonna be a back up... he can't pass block for shit!...


Does anyone realize this article was during the 2008 season when Cook lost his job?
Yes, he lost his job to Hicks.
Hicks got hurt and Cook started again.
Cook improved toward the end of the season (not that it's saying much) but he kept the starting job even though Hicks could play.
As of now Cook is still slated as the starter. C an it change?
Yes.
I hope it does.
But he finished the season with the starting role and until we hear different he is still slated as the starter.


No. Hicks was on the injury report the whole end of the season. In fact week 16 he was listed as doubtful.

ejmat
03-26-2009, 02:57 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.


i'm' glad he's gonna be a back up... he can't pass block for shit!...


Does anyone realize this article was during the 2008 season when Cook lost his job?
Yes, he lost his job to Hicks.
Hicks got hurt and Cook started again.
Cook improved toward the end of the season (not that it's saying much) but he kept the starting job even though Hicks could play.
As of now Cook is still slated as the starter. C an it change?
Yes.
I hope it does.
But he finished the season with the starting role and until we hear different he is still slated as the starter.


No. Hicks was on the injury report the whole end of the season. In fact week 16 he was listed as doubtful.


Is that true?
I didn't realize that.
To be honest this is so ridiculous.
Who really cares at this point who is the starter?
All I know is Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
The current depth charts show him as the starter.
That is all I can go by.
Does it mean he is the sure starter in September?
Nope.
Nor does it mean Hicks is.
It only means that Cook is slated as a starter right now according to current depth charts.
That's all.
That won't chance until later this year.

I'm not saying I am right or you are wrong here.
The fact is no one is because we are in the off season and things can happen between now and then that change.
But just going by current depth charts Cook is the starter.
That's all I can base my thought on.

marstc09
03-26-2009, 03:02 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:




Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.


i'm' glad he's gonna be a back up... he can't pass block for shit!...


Does anyone realize this article was during the 2008 season when Cook lost his job?
Yes, he lost his job to Hicks.
Hicks got hurt and Cook started again.
Cook improved toward the end of the season (not that it's saying much) but he kept the starting job even though Hicks could play.
As of now Cook is still slated as the starter. C an it change?
Yes.
I hope it does.
But he finished the season with the starting role and until we hear different he is still slated as the starter.


No. Hicks was on the injury report the whole end of the season. In fact week 16 he was listed as doubtful.


Is that true?
I didn't realize that.
To be honest this is so ridiculous.
Who really cares at this point who is the starter?
All I know is Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
The current depth charts show him as the starter.
That is all I can go by.
Does it mean he is the sure starter in September?
Nope.
Nor does it mean Hicks is.
It only means that Cook is slated as a starter right now according to current depth charts.
That's all.
That won't chance until later this year.

I'm not saying I am right or you are wrong here.
The fact is no one is because we are in the off season and things can happen between now and then that change.
But just going by current depth charts Cook is the starter.
That's all I can base my thought on.


I understand your viewpoint, I just don't agree.
;D

http://www.nfl.com/teams/injuries?team=MIN&week=16

ejmat
03-26-2009, 07:13 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:






Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5


Cook's problems last year are easily fixed.
All teams have guys on the line that fill in as needed.
I'm not down on Cook, think he will work out fine.


i'm' glad he's gonna be a back up... he can't pass block for shit!...


Does anyone realize this article was during the 2008 season when Cook lost his job?
Yes, he lost his job to Hicks.
Hicks got hurt and Cook started again.
Cook improved toward the end of the season (not that it's saying much) but he kept the starting job even though Hicks could play.
As of now Cook is still slated as the starter. C an it change?
Yes.
I hope it does.
But he finished the season with the starting role and until we hear different he is still slated as the starter.


No. Hicks was on the injury report the whole end of the season. In fact week 16 he was listed as doubtful.


Is that true?
I didn't realize that.
To be honest this is so ridiculous.
Who really cares at this point who is the starter?
All I know is Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
The current depth charts show him as the starter.
That is all I can go by.
Does it mean he is the sure starter in September?
Nope.
Nor does it mean Hicks is.
It only means that Cook is slated as a starter right now according to current depth charts.
That's all.
That won't chance until later this year.

I'm not saying I am right or you are wrong here.
The fact is no one is because we are in the off season and things can happen between now and then that change.
But just going by current depth charts Cook is the starter.
That's all I can base my thought on.


I understand your viewpoint, I just don't agree.
;D

http://www.nfl.com/teams/injuries?team=MIN&week=16


That's cool.
We don't have to agree.
This is an interesting topic.
I believed you about the injuries.
He was hampered all year but I didn't realize it was as late as that.
;D

singersp
03-27-2009, 05:42 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


Is that true?
I didn't realize that.
To be honest this is so ridiculous.
Who really cares at this point who is the starter?
All I know is Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
The current depth charts show him as the starter.
That is all I can go by.
Does it mean he is the sure starter in September?
Nope.
Nor does it mean Hicks is.
It only means that Cook is slated as a starter right now according to current depth charts.
That's all.
That won't chance until later this year.

I'm not saying I am right or you are wrong here.
The fact is no one is because we are in the off season and things can happen between now and then that change.
But just going by current depth charts Cook is the starter.
That's all I can base my thought on.


That depth chart hasn't been changed for quite awhile & as Mars noted, Hicks was out do to injury the rest of the regular season.

Based on that depth chart, are you also going to assume that Nappo is our starting MLB, Birk our starting center & Sharper our starting SS?
:P

http://www.vikings.com/TeamDepthChart.aspx

ejmat
03-27-2009, 08:02 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


Is that true?
I didn't realize that.
To be honest this is so ridiculous.
Who really cares at this point who is the starter?
All I know is Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
The current depth charts show him as the starter.
That is all I can go by.
Does it mean he is the sure starter in September?
Nope.
Nor does it mean Hicks is.
It only means that Cook is slated as a starter right now according to current depth charts.
That's all.
That won't chance until later this year.

I'm not saying I am right or you are wrong here.
The fact is no one is because we are in the off season and things can happen between now and then that change.
But just going by current depth charts Cook is the starter.
That's all I can base my thought on.


That depth chart hasn't been changed for quite awhile & as Mars noted, Hicks was out do to injury the rest of the regular season.

Based on that depth chart, are you also going to assume that Nappo is our starting MLB, Birk our starting center & Sharper our starting SS?
:P

http://www.vikings.com/TeamDepthChart.aspx


Excellent point Singer.
We all know Napo isn't the current starter especially since he doesn't even have a contract right now.
Again, I am not trying to say I am correct here.
All I can do is go by the depth charts I see or what is stated in current news articles.
Hicks may very well be the starter.
BUt the last I checked Cook is slated in that position as the lead.
Again, can that change?
Absolutely!
But right now to me judging from what I have seen and read Cook is the starter.

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 08:10 AM
Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.
::)

ejmat
03-27-2009, 08:14 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 09:04 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)

marstc09
03-27-2009, 09:15 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

ejmat
03-27-2009, 09:18 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


I can agree there but in this discussion we were debating who was the slated starter.
There are a lot of variables we can all throw in just as any other discussions on the sites.
However it is clear these two players are still on the team.
We cannot predict who the VIkings will bring in, who they draft or who they may trade for.
So we can only go by the current situation when we speak about the current situation.
The current situation tells me it is between Hicks and Cook.
Who's better?
IMO it is Hicks.
However, if I go by what current charts or articles I am reading I would have to swing toward the side that Cook is pencilled in as the starter for now.
Is that right or wrong?
I have no clue and none of us will know unless something happens (i.e. trade, FA, preseason or regular season).
We can't even debate about the draft because we have no idea who will be drafted yet.

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 09:20 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.

marstc09
03-27-2009, 09:24 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 09:25 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:




Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.
Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D

marstc09
03-27-2009, 09:28 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:






Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 09:29 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:








Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.

ejmat
03-27-2009, 09:32 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:










Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.

C Mac D
03-27-2009, 09:33 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:












Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.


That's a pretty good point... wasn't Cook slotted as a 4th round pick?

marstc09
03-27-2009, 09:36 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:












Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.


Yes sir. Both were reaches and we probably could have drafted someone else that could be contributing in the 2nd round and still have Cook and TJ. Pisses me off.

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 09:36 AM
"C" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:














Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.


That's a pretty good point... wasn't Cook slotted as a 4th round pick?

They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.

ejmat
03-27-2009, 09:37 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:














Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.


Yes sir. Both were reaches and we probably could have drafted someone else that could be contributing in the 2nd round and still have Cook and TJ. Pisses me off.


Pisses me off too.
I'm not so sure TJ would have still been around.
But in the same sense that portion of the draft that year I never agreed with.

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 09:43 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:
















Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.


Yes sir. Both were reaches and we probably could have drafted someone else that could be contributing in the 2nd round and still have Cook and TJ. Pisses me off.


Pisses me off too.
I'm not so sure TJ would have still been around.
But in the same sense that portion of the draft that year I never agreed with.

Obviously alot of people didn't that actually work at Winter Park as the dude that orchestrated it got fired shortly after it.

;D

marstc09
03-27-2009, 09:48 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


















Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.


Yes sir. Both were reaches and we probably could have drafted someone else that could be contributing in the 2nd round and still have Cook and TJ. Pisses me off.


Pisses me off too.
I'm not so sure TJ would have still been around.
But in the same sense that portion of the draft that year I never agreed with.

Obviously alot of people didn't that actually work at Winter Park as the dude that orchestrated it got fired shortly after it.

;D


I have a feeling both of them (TJ and Cook) will be replaced this year as well.

ejmat
03-27-2009, 09:52 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:




















Most team sites put a caveat on the bottom of thier page stating that the team depth charts won't be updated until the beginning of camp.

Case you guys didn't notice.

::)


I guess that goes back to my earlier point on who really gives a frog's fat behind?
All we can go by is what is the lates news and depth charts.
That is all I see.
SO it looks like Cook was the starter at the end of the season.
As Mars pointed out Hicks was hurt and didn't play so how much if this matters.
Absolutely none of it.
We won't know until late August or early September who the starter is or even if it is either of these two players.
ALl we can do is take what we read / see for what it is worth.

Not that it really matters, however, when I scrub each teams depth chart I take into account alot of things as indicators that a shift might be coming.....

a.
What his the incumbants contract status.
b.
How often he got hurt.
c.
Did he ever get into a pissing contest with the coach.
d.
Did the staff go ahead and put some young cat in to get him reps if the season is all but a wash.
e.
Did the staff bring in any Vets during the offseason.
g.
Has the team scheduled visits with kids at that position.

Gives you a better feel than some outdated depth chart...... ::)


You forgot something....

h. Did he get benched due to performance.

d.
Kindof covers that for me.


The season was not a wash nor was Hicks put in to get reps. Cook sucked and got benched. That deserves an h.
;D

I don't think I have ever seen a fan have a deep burning hate for a cat the way you do for Cook.

Unless of course his name is Lord Dickhead.
;D


It is more of a hate for a coach who thinks he can put guys where they don't belong and get away with it.

Touche'......That has been my point about Cook for quite some time now.


Personally I've always believed it was a reach to draft Cook when they did.
I think if they really wanted TJ they could have drafted him there (not saying I personally agree with drafting hm that high) and Cook would have still been around in the 3rd round.
Then we could have kept both the 3rd rounders and had the same players.
JMO of course.
IMO both were a reach where they drafted them in the first place but since the Vikes needed a QB I can almost understand why they went after TJ when they did.
It was how they did it given they drafted Cook in the 2nd that makes me scratch my noggin.


Yes sir. Both were reaches and we probably could have drafted someone else that could be contributing in the 2nd round and still have Cook and TJ. Pisses me off.


Pisses me off too.
I'm not so sure TJ would have still been around.
But in the same sense that portion of the draft that year I never agreed with.

Obviously alot of people didn't that actually work at Winter Park as the dude that orchestrated it got fired shortly after it.

;D


I have a feeling both of them (TJ and Cook) will be replaced this year as well.


Cook - most likely.
TJ I am not so sure about just yet.
I think he and Sage will have a good battle in preseason.
If TJ can just learn to calm down some and hit the easy passes there is no reason why he can't have a better completion % like Sage does.
If Sage can limit the turnovers than he has a great chance of winning the starting spot.

Marrdro
03-27-2009, 10:30 AM
Of the cats that are left, pickings are pretty slim, I would go with Foster.

George Foster, UFA, Detroit Lions RT. Drafted by Bronco's. Familiar with ZB scheme.

Others that could be considered....

Brandon Gorin, UFA, St. Louis Rams, RT in College. Drafted 7th Round by Chargers.
SB with Pats.
Adrian Jones, UFA, Kansas City Chiefs, RT and LT. Athletic, Started as a TE in College.
Mark Tauscher, UFA, Green Bay Packers, RT.
Rehabbing knee injury.
Fricken EX PUKER even though he is Mars buddy.
Ephraim Salaam, UFA, Houston Texans, RT and LT.
Hell of a grociery store bagger.

Purple Floyd
03-27-2009, 09:51 PM
Cook may eventually be a good backup guard. That is his only hope

singersp
03-28-2009, 05:43 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P

ejmat
03-28-2009, 06:42 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P


He may have screwed the pooch this year but how did he screw the pooch during the draft?
Because he didn't trade up to get hin>
How do you know he didn't try?
This whole blame things on childress with no substantiated evidence is real old

Marrdro
03-28-2009, 07:16 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P

And yet we were the first team to call.......Sirius guys said we back out (again) cause the asking price was to high (again)........Hmmmm, something don't quite jell there does it.
Maybe some yutz reporter is spinning it his way don't ya think......

Marrdro
03-28-2009, 07:17 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P


He may have screwed the pooch this year but how did he screw the pooch during the draft?
Because he didn't trade up to get hin>
How do you know he didn't try?
This whole blame things on childress with no substantiated evidence is real old

Ignore Singer my friend.
He is still struggling with the Triad concept and how we work without a GM. ;D

ejmat
03-28-2009, 07:26 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P


He may have screwed the pooch this year but how did he screw the pooch during the draft?
Because he didn't trade up to get hin>
How do you know he didn't try?
This whole blame things on childress with no substantiated evidence is real old

Ignore Singer my friend.
He is still struggling with the Triad concept and how we work without a GM. ;D


Hey I just farted.
FIRE CHILDRESS!

Marrdro
03-28-2009, 07:29 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P


He may have screwed the pooch this year but how did he screw the pooch during the draft?
Because he didn't trade up to get hin>
How do you know he didn't try?
This whole blame things on childress with no substantiated evidence is real old

Ignore Singer My Sexy Little Pixie.
He is still struggling with the Triad concept and how we work without a GM. ;D


Hey I just farted.
FIRE CHILDRESS!

He brings that wimp assed excuse for getting this team ready for the season again and I will be farting right with you.........

OOOOHHHHH OHHHHHHH, I don't want anyone to get hurt, OOOOOHHHHHH OOOHHHHHHH.
Yutz.
>:(

ejmat
03-28-2009, 07:33 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:




They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P


He may have screwed the pooch this year but how did he screw the pooch during the draft?
Because he didn't trade up to get hin>
How do you know he didn't try?
This whole blame things on childress with no substantiated evidence is real old

Ignore Singer My Sexy Little Pixie.
He is still struggling with the Triad concept and how we work without a GM. ;D


Hey I just farted.
FIRE CHILDRESS!

He brings that wimp assed excuse for getting this team ready for the season again and I will be farting right with you.........

OOOOHHHHH OHHHHHHH, I don't want anyone to get hurt, OOOOOHHHHHH OOOHHHHHHH.
Yutz.

>:(


LOL.
He may not have that option soon enough if they go to the 18 game season.
At least he is showing he cares about his players
;D

Hey TJH signed somewhere else.
Childress is an idiot.
Fire him!
It really amazes me the things he gets blamed for without knowing the entire story.
Maybe he did screw the pooch.
Who knows?
But there is no substantial evidence he was the one that didn't try to trade up and beat Denver to the punch.

Marrdro
03-28-2009, 07:36 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:






They could have used thier first, and both seconds to get Cutler and still got Cook and Griff later.
Still mystifies me why they didn't.

My guess is they probably felt that was to much and Clemens would be available.
After he was gone they had to move up to get TJ as he was the only WCO QB left.


Because Childress "screwed the pooch" on draft day & didn't want Cutler then, just as he "screwed the pooch"
:P on the trade deal last month because he still didn't want him.


:P


He may have screwed the pooch this year but how did he screw the pooch during the draft?
Because he didn't trade up to get hin>
How do you know he didn't try?
This whole blame things on childress with no substantiated evidence is real old

Ignore Singer My Sexy Little Pixie.
He is still struggling with the Triad concept and how we work without a GM. ;D


Hey I just farted.
FIRE CHILDRESS!

He brings that wimp assed excuse for getting this team ready for the season again and I will be farting right with you.........

OOOOHHHHH OHHHHHHH, I don't want anyone to get hurt, OOOOOHHHHHH OOOHHHHHHH.
Yutz.

>:(


LOL.
He may not have that option soon enough if they go to the 18 game season.
At least he is showing he cares about his players
;D

Hey TJH signed somewhere else.
Childress is an idiot.
Fire him!
It really amazes me the things he gets blamed for without knowing the entire story.
Maybe he did screw the pooch.
Who knows?
But there is no substantial evidence he was the one that didn't try to trade up and beat Denver to the punch.

I think I've given enough evidence in the way of articles and such that there is a structure called the triad and in that structure, the VP of Player Personnel actually runs the draft..... ::)

marstc09
03-30-2009, 05:14 PM
Lets also not forget that Drew Radovich will be competing for a spot. He can play RT. He was selected for the Pacific-10 Conference honorable mention team with USC. This kid has potential. He spent the last part of the season on IR.

ejmat
03-30-2009, 05:54 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


Lets also not forget that Drew Radovich will be competing for a spot. He can play RT. He was selected for the Pacific-10 Conference honorable mention team with USC. This kid has potential. He spent the last part of the season on IR.


Good point.
I believe Radovich has potential.
I liked what I saw the minimal time I watched him play.

Vikes_King
03-30-2009, 06:15 PM
i forgot all about Radovich :P

Purple Floyd
03-30-2009, 07:24 PM
What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.

V4L
03-30-2009, 07:37 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D

ejmat
03-30-2009, 07:41 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?

marstc09
03-30-2009, 07:46 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes

Purple Floyd
03-30-2009, 09:01 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

Purple Floyd
03-30-2009, 09:05 PM
Good news, it looks like he is available:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Mozes


Mozes is considered to be one of the greatest lineman to play for West Virginia. He and running back Steve Slaton (whom he blocked for) were the first pair of consensus All-Americans in school history. He won the Rimington Trophy his senior season.

Lets get this guy back on the team.

V-Unit
03-30-2009, 09:57 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


Lets also not forget that Drew Radovich will be competing for a spot. He can play RT. He was selected for the Pacific-10 Conference honorable mention team with USC. This kid has potential. He spent the last part of the season on IR.


You mean we actually have depth at Tackle even if someone gets injured? Whodathunkit?

Marrdro
03-31-2009, 07:37 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.
::)

V-Unit
03-31-2009, 08:23 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:




What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.

::)


Matt Birk was a vet.

Marrdro
03-31-2009, 08:42 AM
"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:






What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.

::)


Matt Birk was a vet.

Sorry, should've said "A Vet that can pull and read a defense".
;D

i_bleed_purple
03-31-2009, 08:44 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:








What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.

::)


Matt Birk was a vet.

Sorry, should've said "A Vet that can pull and read a defense".

;D


Please... so you think the best pulling center in the league somehow forgot how to pull?

Mark_The_Viking
03-31-2009, 08:52 AM
I think it's fair to say that Birk had lost a step or two last season and was beginning to be exploited by some of the faster guys.

That said I think Matt had been a huge servant of the Vikings and I was hoping he would see his career out here and maybe move into a coaching role. He has a lot to bring with experience and leadership.

Marrdro
03-31-2009, 08:55 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:










What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.

::)


Matt Birk was a vet.

Sorry, should've said "A Vet that can pull and read a defense".

;D


Please... so you think the best pulling center in the league somehow forgot how to pull?

How in the hell can he forget?
Maybe he just can't do it anymore, ya think?
WOW.

Marrdro
03-31-2009, 08:57 AM
"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


I think it's fair to say that Birk had lost a step or two last season and was beginning to be exploited by some of the faster guys.

That said I think Matt had been a huge servant of the Vikings and I was hoping he would see his career out here and maybe move into a coaching role. He has a lot to bring with experience and leadership.

Exactly.

I also think Matt struggled with the ZB scheme and the line call responsibilities.
Not a knock on him, just an observation.

Problem for Matt, it appears the Ravens are toying with the idea of moving to that very same scheme.
::)

V-Unit
03-31-2009, 09:32 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:








What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.

::)


Matt Birk was a vet.

Sorry, should've said "A Vet that can pull and read a defense".

;D


Matt Birk can pull and read a defense.

marstc09
03-31-2009, 09:40 AM
"V" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Lets also not forget that Drew Radovich will be competing for a spot. He can play RT. He was selected for the Pacific-10 Conference honorable mention team with USC. This kid has potential. He spent the last part of the season on IR.


You mean we actually have depth at Tackle even if someone gets injured? Whodathunkit?


How come you never mentioned Drew?

Prophet
03-31-2009, 09:42 AM
"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:










What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.

::)


Matt Birk was a vet.

Sorry, should've said "A Vet that can pull and read a defense".

;D


Matt Birk can pull and read a defense.


Marrdro is just sore because he used some fishing trip money to buy a Birk jersey and now he walked.

V-Unit
03-31-2009, 12:14 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Lets also not forget that Drew Radovich will be competing for a spot. He can play RT. He was selected for the Pacific-10 Conference honorable mention team with USC. This kid has potential. He spent the last part of the season on IR.


You mean we actually have depth at Tackle even if someone gets injured? Whodathunkit?


How come you never mentioned Drew?


Honestly, I forgot he existed.

bleedpurple
03-31-2009, 12:23 PM
"V" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Lets also not forget that Drew Radovich will be competing for a spot. He can play RT. He was selected for the Pacific-10 Conference honorable mention team with USC. This kid has potential. He spent the last part of the season on IR.


You mean we actually have depth at Tackle even if someone gets injured? Whodathunkit?


How come you never mentioned Drew?


Honestly, I forgot he existed.


yeah, he's on the team and showed he can be decent.. he might be able to step in.. as he showed promise in the pre-season, but if he were ready to play i don't think they would have put him on IR.. they would have atleast put him on the p.squad.. imo!..

what was it a minor shoulder injury that kept him out?...

i_bleed_purple
03-31-2009, 12:45 PM
"bleedpurple" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Lets also not forget that Drew Radovich will be competing for a spot. He can play RT. He was selected for the Pacific-10 Conference honorable mention team with USC. This kid has potential. He spent the last part of the season on IR.


You mean we actually have depth at Tackle even if someone gets injured? Whodathunkit?


How come you never mentioned Drew?


Honestly, I forgot he existed.


yeah, he's on the team and showed he can be decent.. he might be able to step in.. as he showed promise in the pre-season, but if he were ready to play i don't think they would have put him on IR.. they would have atleast put him on the p.squad.. imo!..

what was it a minor shoulder injury that kept him out?...


IR ensures we keep him, Psquad he's up for grabs by any team.

V4L
03-31-2009, 05:34 PM
I got high hopes for Radovich

I feel he and Erin Henderson were our best free agent rookie pick ups last year

Purple Floyd
04-02-2009, 09:58 PM
He could be a decent backup guard.

Marrdro
04-03-2009, 07:56 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


He could be a decent backup guard.

I'll agree with you he can play gaurd, but the times I saw him at LT, he didn't look so back either. Course my opinion might be a bit skewed by the game were he tried to keep playing with a dislocated shoulder and still beat his man down..... ::)

Love cats who play hurt.
;D

Purple Floyd
04-03-2009, 07:59 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


He could be a decent backup guard.

I'll agree with you he can play gaurd, but the times I saw him at LT, he didn't look so back either. Course my opinion might be a bit skewed by the game were he tried to keep playing with a dislocated shoulder and still beat his man down..... ::)

Love cats who play hurt.
;D


I was actually talking about the subject of the thread- Cook. ;)
The chances of him looking good at LT are slim to none.

Marrdro
04-03-2009, 08:03 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


He could be a decent backup guard.

I'll agree with you he can play gaurd, but the times I saw him at LT, he didn't look so back either. Course my opinion might be a bit skewed by the game were he tried to keep playing with a dislocated shoulder and still beat his man down..... ::)

Love cats who play hurt.

;D


I was actually talking about the subject of the thread- Cook. ;)

The chances of him looking good at LT are slim to none.

Ahhh, got ya.
Why would we try to move him to LT?
He is having enough trouble at RT.
Or am I still way off your point?

Purple Floyd
04-03-2009, 08:12 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


He could be a decent backup guard.

I'll agree with you he can play gaurd, but the times I saw him at LT, he didn't look so back either. Course my opinion might be a bit skewed by the game were he tried to keep playing with a dislocated shoulder and still beat his man down..... ::)

Love cats who play hurt.
;D


I was actually talking about the subject of the thread- Cook. ;)
The chances of him looking good at LT are slim to none.

Ahhh, got ya.
Why would we try to move him to LT?
He is having enough trouble at RT.
Or am I still way off your point?


Still off I guess. My Opinion is he will be an OK backup guard and not much else. Look up a few posts. ;)

V4L
04-03-2009, 07:32 PM
Cook will own this year

Purple Floyd
04-04-2009, 10:41 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?

V4L
04-04-2009, 10:55 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?



The starting job

And will do well

Purple Floyd
04-05-2009, 09:30 AM
"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?



The starting job

And will do well


LMAO.

He will be handing out the gatorade.

marstc09
04-05-2009, 09:39 AM
"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?



The starting job

And will do well


There goes my coffee. LMFAO. If Cook wins the job I will treat you to beer for a game.

V4L
04-05-2009, 10:48 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?



The starting job

And will do well


There goes my coffee. LMFAO. If Cook wins the job I will treat you to beer for a game.



How come everytime someone reads something they think is funny they happen to be drinking coffee and spit it everywhere? Ha

And good shit man ill take that deal :) How many beers are we talking?!

marstc09
04-05-2009, 10:55 AM
"V4L" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?



The starting job

And will do well


There goes my coffee. LMFAO. If Cook wins the job I will treat you to beer for a game.



How come everytime someone reads something they think is funny they happen to be drinking coffee and spit it everywhere? Ha

And good shit man ill take that deal :) How many beers are we talking?!


As many as you can drink.
;) I really was drinking coffee. I here Marr say it all the time and it caught on I guess.

V4L
04-05-2009, 10:58 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:




Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?



The starting job

And will do well


There goes my coffee. LMFAO. If Cook wins the job I will treat you to beer for a game.



How come everytime someone reads something they think is funny they happen to be drinking coffee and spit it everywhere? Ha

And good shit man ill take that deal :) How many beers are we talking?!


As many as you can drink.
;) I really was drinking coffee. I here Marr say it all the time and it caught on I guess.



Haha yah Marr always seems to be drinking coffee at the same time he is typing and reading something funny :)

And im down for that my man.. You might go broke tho! :)

Marrdro
04-06-2009, 07:08 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:




Cook will own this year


Own what, the revolving door trophy?



The starting job

And will do well


There goes my coffee. LMFAO. If Cook wins the job I will treat you to beer for a game.



How come everytime someone reads something they think is funny they happen to be drinking coffee and spit it everywhere? Ha

And good pooh man ill take that deal :) How many beers are we talking?!


As many as you can drink.
;) I really was drinking coffee. I here Marr say it all the time and it caught on I guess.

Hasn't it every happened to you?

Office environment, all is dead serious, some yutz posts something damn funny and not expected, you try to hold back the guffaw.....End result.....Coffee all over the monitors.

V4L
04-06-2009, 02:12 PM
Ive laughed.. But I never laugh hard enough to not control where I spit my liquids haha

marstc09
04-08-2009, 03:12 PM
Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1

Marrdro
04-08-2009, 03:15 PM
"marstc09" wrote:



Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1

LOL, I've posted a couple of articles with that little tidbit hidden in them.
Was waiting for you to find it.
;D

ejmat
04-08-2009, 03:21 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1

LOL, I've posted a couple of articles with that little tidbit hidden in them.
Was waiting for you to find it.

;D


I knew once he saw it he would post it here right away.
That is why I left it alone in the other thread and didn't do so myself.
I figured Mars coulod feel a sense of accomplishment.

marstc09
04-08-2009, 03:22 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1

LOL, I've posted a couple of articles with that little tidbit hidden in them.
Was waiting for you to find it.

;D


I knew once he saw it he would post it here right away.
That is why I left it alone in the other thread and didn't do so myself.
I figured Mars coulod feel a sense of accomplishment.


Feels good.
;D

Cook blows.

ejmat
04-08-2009, 03:31 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1

LOL, I've posted a couple of articles with that little tidbit hidden in them.
Was waiting for you to find it.

;D


I knew once he saw it he would post it here right away.
That is why I left it alone in the other thread and didn't do so myself.
I figured Mars coulod feel a sense of accomplishment.


Feels good.
;D

Cook blows.


I'm happy for you kind Sir.

marstc09
04-08-2009, 03:36 PM
Childress opened the door for right tackle Ryan Cook to get some work at center this offseason and training camp. Cook, however, said he has not heard about that possibility from any coaches. Cook, who lost his starting job last season, said he would be willing to try center.

http://blogs.startribune.com/vikingsblog/?p=2702

LOL Chilly has not even told him yet that he sucks at RT. Although the benching kinda says that.

Purple Floyd
04-09-2009, 08:00 AM
"marstc09" wrote:



Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1


Fire Childress.

C Mac D
04-09-2009, 09:17 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1


Fire Childress.


+1

Schutz
04-09-2009, 02:02 PM
"C" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Ryan Cook, the former starting right tackle, will work at right tackle and center this offseason during organized team activities.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_12098280?nclick_check=1


Fire Childress.


+1

+8

singersp
04-22-2009, 07:55 PM
Word has it Ryan Cook was fitted with a new helmet today........

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/p1682453reg.jpg

marstc09
04-22-2009, 10:15 PM
"singersp" wrote:


Word has it Ryan Cook was fitted with a new helmet today........

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b21/singersp82759/p1682453reg.jpg


LMFAO! Does he ride this to?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_y8SPNbAAKo8/SFdSSU0gpvI/AAAAAAAACSo/Fhptoyfc4s8/s400/totg-short-bus.jpg

Mark_The_Viking
04-23-2009, 08:15 AM
Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

Marrdro
04-23-2009, 08:22 AM
"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.

V-Unit
04-23-2009, 09:59 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



I think he played well enough to not be a total lost cause. If he works hard this offseason and comes back shows signs of growth, then I think he could easily lock down the starting role. He just has to be more consistent and more focused. The talent to be an average-to-solid RT is there.

Like Marr says, we definitely could have upgraded with a vet, but I'm not sure a rookie with no experience in the scheme or of his fellow OL is going to be able to usurp Cook from day one. Hicks even has a better chance of doing that.

Marrdro
04-23-2009, 11:42 AM
"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



I think he played well enough to not be a total lost cause. If he works hard this offseason and comes back shows signs of growth, then I think he could easily lock down the starting role. He just has to be more consistent and more focused. The talent to be an average-to-solid RT is there.

Like Marr says, we definitely could have upgraded with a vet, but I'm not sure a rookie with no experience in the scheme or of his fellow OL is going to be able to usurp Cook from day one. Hicks even has a better chance of doing that.

Great post V.

Everyone knows I probably over think things to much, however, the true indicator for me was the increased production by Shanc.
To me and my way of thinking, if Shanc was out catching passes, he wasn't in there assisting the RT with pass protection.

marstc09
04-23-2009, 11:45 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.

Marrdro
04-23-2009, 11:53 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.

OK.

Bkfldviking
04-23-2009, 11:57 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.

OK.


and the grass is ALWAYS greener.....

Marrdro
04-23-2009, 11:58 AM
"Bkfldviking" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.

OK.


and the grass is ALWAYS greener.....

Damn, just bumped you again.
3 Columns in one day.
Has to be a record.

jargomcfargo
04-23-2009, 12:16 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



I think he played well enough to not be a total lost cause. If he works hard this offseason and comes back shows signs of growth, then I think he could easily lock down the starting role. He just has to be more consistent and more focused. The talent to be an average-to-solid RT is there.

Like Marr says, we definitely could have upgraded with a vet, but I'm not sure a rookie with no experience in the scheme or of his fellow OL is going to be able to usurp Cook from day one. Hicks even has a better chance of doing that.

Great post V.

Everyone knows I probably over think things to much, however, the true indicator for me was the increased production by Shanc.
To me and my way of thinking, if Shanc was out catching passes, he wasn't in there assisting the RT with pass protection.


More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.

BleedinPandG
04-23-2009, 01:06 PM
"jargomcfargo" wrote:


More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.


I'd like to see a penalty break down for our O-Line... my memory, faulty as it may be, associates a lot of holding and false start penalties with Cook.
In my mind there is nothing in football less excusable then a false start.
With the wear end down, grind it out 3 yards a time, offense we are running, penalties on the O-Line can be a killer.

As for Blitzers, you're right, he can't always block both but he needs to understand which of the two he should block and which the RB should pick up.
He needs to understand where his QB will be dropping back (3 or 5 steps) and where the QB is looking for a route and from that he should determine which guy he should be attempting to block.
Again, my memory is of him getting beat 1 on 1 not having blitzers go by him.
The Blitz generally went right up the middle from what I saw.

With mediocre QB play, mediocre WR play, and a desire to pound the ball the Vikings MUST have a DOMINATING offensive line.
Adequate or not, I don't feel Cook puts the Vikes O-Line in a position to Dominate the way they need to.

V-Unit
04-23-2009, 01:46 PM
"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.


I'd like to see a penalty break down for our O-Line... my memory, faulty as it may be, associates a lot of holding and false start penalties with Cook.
In my mind there is nothing in football less excusable then a false start.
With the wear end down, grind it out 3 yards a time, offense we are running, penalties on the O-Line can be a killer.

As for Blitzers, you're right, he can't always block both but he needs to understand which of the two he should block and which the RB should pick up.
He needs to understand where his QB will be dropping back (3 or 5 steps) and where the QB is looking for a route and from that he should determine which guy he should be attempting to block.
Again, my memory is of him getting beat 1 on 1 not having blitzers go by him.
The Blitz generally went right up the middle from what I saw.

With mediocre QB play, mediocre WR play, and a desire to pound the ball the Vikings MUST have a DOMINATING offensive line.
Adequate or not, I don't feel Cook puts the Vikes O-Line in a position to Dominate the way they need to.


I don't get it. If you have mediocre QB play and mediocre WR play, you don't need a dominating offensive line. You need good QB play and good WR play!

Also, We have already shown an affinity for pounding the ball.

i_bleed_purple
04-23-2009, 01:52 PM
"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.


I'd like to see a penalty break down for our O-Line... my memory, faulty as it may be, associates a lot of holding and false start penalties with Cook.
In my mind there is nothing in football less excusable then a false start.
With the wear end down, grind it out 3 yards a time, offense we are running, penalties on the O-Line can be a killer.

As for Blitzers, you're right, he can't always block both but he needs to understand which of the two he should block and which the RB should pick up.
He needs to understand where his QB will be dropping back (3 or 5 steps) and where the QB is looking for a route and from that he should determine which guy he should be attempting to block.
Again, my memory is of him getting beat 1 on 1 not having blitzers go by him.
The Blitz generally went right up the middle from what I saw.

With mediocre QB play, mediocre WR play, and a desire to pound the ball the Vikings MUST have a DOMINATING offensive line.
Adequate or not, I don't feel Cook puts the Vikes O-Line in a position to Dominate the way they need to.


I don't get it. If you have mediocre QB play and mediocre WR play, you don't need a dominating offensive line. You need good QB play and good WR play!

Also, We have already shown an affinity for pounding the ball.


but if you have GOOD QB and WR play, then you no longer have mediocre QB and WR play, making that a moot point :P

Thats like saying, If I got caught for kidnapping, someone will tell me i need a good lawyer, but then someone else would tell me i shouldn't kidnap, which really isn't an option at that point.

BleedinPandG
04-23-2009, 02:45 PM
"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.


I'd like to see a penalty break down for our O-Line... my memory, faulty as it may be, associates a lot of holding and false start penalties with Cook.
In my mind there is nothing in football less excusable then a false start.
With the wear end down, grind it out 3 yards a time, offense we are running, penalties on the O-Line can be a killer.

As for Blitzers, you're right, he can't always block both but he needs to understand which of the two he should block and which the RB should pick up.
He needs to understand where his QB will be dropping back (3 or 5 steps) and where the QB is looking for a route and from that he should determine which guy he should be attempting to block.
Again, my memory is of him getting beat 1 on 1 not having blitzers go by him.
The Blitz generally went right up the middle from what I saw.

With mediocre QB play, mediocre WR play, and a desire to pound the ball the Vikings MUST have a DOMINATING offensive line.
Adequate or not, I don't feel Cook puts the Vikes O-Line in a position to Dominate the way they need to.


I don't get it. If you have mediocre QB play and mediocre WR play, you don't need a dominating offensive line. You need good QB play and good WR play!

Also, We have already shown an affinity for pounding the ball.


Sorry, replace "play" with "talent".
A good offensive line will make any QB in the league look better and the WR core to go with them.

As for this affinity.
Go back and review the 4th quarters of last year.
See how often we were able to grind out first downs by pounding it down the defenses throat 3 consecutive times.
I bet you'll find we couldn't do it.
In fact, I bet you'll find a lot of 3rd and longs.

V-Unit
04-23-2009, 03:10 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.


I'd like to see a penalty break down for our O-Line... my memory, faulty as it may be, associates a lot of holding and false start penalties with Cook.
In my mind there is nothing in football less excusable then a false start.
With the wear end down, grind it out 3 yards a time, offense we are running, penalties on the O-Line can be a killer.

As for Blitzers, you're right, he can't always block both but he needs to understand which of the two he should block and which the RB should pick up.
He needs to understand where his QB will be dropping back (3 or 5 steps) and where the QB is looking for a route and from that he should determine which guy he should be attempting to block.
Again, my memory is of him getting beat 1 on 1 not having blitzers go by him.
The Blitz generally went right up the middle from what I saw.

With mediocre QB play, mediocre WR play, and a desire to pound the ball the Vikings MUST have a DOMINATING offensive line.
Adequate or not, I don't feel Cook puts the Vikes O-Line in a position to Dominate the way they need to.


I don't get it. If you have mediocre QB play and mediocre WR play, you don't need a dominating offensive line. You need good QB play and good WR play!

Also, We have already shown an affinity for pounding the ball.


but if you have GOOD QB and WR play, then you no longer have mediocre QB and WR play, making that a moot point :P

Thats like saying, If I got caught for kidnapping, someone will tell me i need a good lawyer, but then someone else would tell me i shouldn't kidnap, which really isn't an option at that point.


All I'm saying is granted that:
We have mediocre QB play
We have mediocre WR play
We have solid OL play

We should be trying to upgrade QB and WR, not OL. Your analogy does not apply. Are you telling me that it is too late to upgrade QB/WR, and that only OL can be upgraded?

To make your analogy accurate, upgrading OL is like hiring a lawyer in advance because you know are about to kidnap. In reality, you just shouldn't kidanp.

i_bleed_purple
04-23-2009, 03:13 PM
"V" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.


I'd like to see a penalty break down for our O-Line... my memory, faulty as it may be, associates a lot of holding and false start penalties with Cook.
In my mind there is nothing in football less excusable then a false start.
With the wear end down, grind it out 3 yards a time, offense we are running, penalties on the O-Line can be a killer.

As for Blitzers, you're right, he can't always block both but he needs to understand which of the two he should block and which the RB should pick up.
He needs to understand where his QB will be dropping back (3 or 5 steps) and where the QB is looking for a route and from that he should determine which guy he should be attempting to block.
Again, my memory is of him getting beat 1 on 1 not having blitzers go by him.
The Blitz generally went right up the middle from what I saw.

With mediocre QB play, mediocre WR play, and a desire to pound the ball the Vikings MUST have a DOMINATING offensive line.
Adequate or not, I don't feel Cook puts the Vikes O-Line in a position to Dominate the way they need to.


I don't get it. If you have mediocre QB play and mediocre WR play, you don't need a dominating offensive line. You need good QB play and good WR play!

Also, We have already shown an affinity for pounding the ball.


but if you have GOOD QB and WR play, then you no longer have mediocre QB and WR play, making that a moot point :P

Thats like saying, If I got caught for kidnapping, someone will tell me i need a good lawyer, but then someone else would tell me i shouldn't kidnap, which really isn't an option at that point.


All I'm saying is granted that:
We have mediocre QB play
We have mediocre WR play
We have solid OL play

We should be trying to upgrade QB and WR, not OL. Your analogy does not apply. Are you telling me that it is too late to upgrade QB/WR, and that only OL can be upgraded?

To make your analogy accurate, upgrading OL is like hiring a lawyer in advance because you know are about to kidnap. In reality, you just shouldn't kidanp.


no, what I'm saying is its obvious we have no intention of truly upgrading any of those positions, we seem to be content with mediocrity.
the least we can do is put them in a better position to succeed.

V-Unit
04-23-2009, 04:58 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:




More than once, the pressure from that side was due to Schiancoe running his route rather than blocking the blitzing backer. Cook can't block two people.
But I do remember the previous year, when they had to help Cook with the tight end, or have Kliensasser motion to his side, frequently.
He has a ways to go. But he did improve.

I have no problem with drafting a tackle to replace Cook, none the less.
I question Cook's upside.


I'd like to see a penalty break down for our O-Line... my memory, faulty as it may be, associates a lot of holding and false start penalties with Cook.
In my mind there is nothing in football less excusable then a false start.
With the wear end down, grind it out 3 yards a time, offense we are running, penalties on the O-Line can be a killer.

As for Blitzers, you're right, he can't always block both but he needs to understand which of the two he should block and which the RB should pick up.
He needs to understand where his QB will be dropping back (3 or 5 steps) and where the QB is looking for a route and from that he should determine which guy he should be attempting to block.
Again, my memory is of him getting beat 1 on 1 not having blitzers go by him.
The Blitz generally went right up the middle from what I saw.

With mediocre QB play, mediocre WR play, and a desire to pound the ball the Vikings MUST have a DOMINATING offensive line.
Adequate or not, I don't feel Cook puts the Vikes O-Line in a position to Dominate the way they need to.


I don't get it. If you have mediocre QB play and mediocre WR play, you don't need a dominating offensive line. You need good QB play and good WR play!

Also, We have already shown an affinity for pounding the ball.


but if you have GOOD QB and WR play, then you no longer have mediocre QB and WR play, making that a moot point :P

Thats like saying, If I got caught for kidnapping, someone will tell me i need a good lawyer, but then someone else would tell me i shouldn't kidnap, which really isn't an option at that point.


All I'm saying is granted that:
We have mediocre QB play
We have mediocre WR play
We have solid OL play

We should be trying to upgrade QB and WR, not OL. Your analogy does not apply. Are you telling me that it is too late to upgrade QB/WR, and that only OL can be upgraded?

To make your analogy accurate, upgrading OL is like hiring a lawyer in advance because you know are about to kidnap. In reality, you just shouldn't kidanp.


no, what I'm saying is its obvious we have no intention of truly upgrading any of those positions, we seem to be content with mediocrity.
the least we can do is put them in a better position to succeed.


Still, the downfall of this team will not be because we couldn't protect our mediocre QB. It will be our mediocre QB.

You must fix the root of the problem.

C Mac D
04-23-2009, 04:59 PM
"V" wrote:


You must fix the root of the problem.


We did, Gus Ferrotte is no longer on the team.

V4L
04-23-2009, 05:13 PM
"C" wrote:


"V" wrote:


You must fix the root of the problem.


We did, Gus Ferrotte is no longer on the team.



+1

Brad can go too

oaklandzoo24
04-23-2009, 05:20 PM
The root of the problem was Bevell and whoever the hell was our ST coach.

C Mac D
04-23-2009, 05:44 PM
"oaklandzoo24" wrote:


The root of the problem was Bevell and whoever the hell was our ST coach.


Bevell is not in charge of our Offense... he's an OC purely by title.

seaniemck7
04-23-2009, 05:55 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.


Didn't Hicks already do this at the end of the year before getting hurt?
Everyone talks about Cook not being the answer, media, fans, draftniks, etc.
No one ever mentions Hicks.
Does a rookie come in and beat out Hicks too?
or is Hicks value to us greater as a backup to all positions?

ejmat
04-23-2009, 05:57 PM
"C" wrote:


"oaklandzoo24" wrote:


The root of the problem was Bevell and whoever the hell was our ST coach.


Bevell is not in charge of our Offense... he's an OC purely by title.


Proof???????????

marstc09
04-23-2009, 06:35 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.


Didn't Hicks already do this at the end of the year before getting hurt?
Everyone talks about Cook not being the answer, media, fans, draftniks, etc.
No one ever mentions Hicks.
Does a rookie come in and beat out Hicks too?
or is Hicks value to us greater as a backup to all positions?



Haven't you learned the first time by placing an interior lineman on the outside. Some guys are not built for that. Yes they both were ok but we want good not mediocre.

seaniemck7
04-23-2009, 06:49 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Mark_The_Viking" wrote:


Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.


Didn't Hicks already do this at the end of the year before getting hurt?
Everyone talks about Cook not being the answer, media, fans, draftniks, etc.
No one ever mentions Hicks.
Does a rookie come in and beat out Hicks too?
or is Hicks value to us greater as a backup to all positions?



Haven't you learned the first time by placing an interior lineman on the outside. Some guys are not built for that. Yes they both were ok but we want good not mediocre.


So that begs the question: does the 5th-7th rated rookie OT with short arms provide us a better option than guys who have been in our system for 3(+) years?


I am hoping for an impact player from our 1st rounder. I just hope an OT (if we draft one there) can be just that.
But I am skeptical.
:-

marstc09
04-23-2009, 07:06 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:




Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.


Didn't Hicks already do this at the end of the year before getting hurt?
Everyone talks about Cook not being the answer, media, fans, draftniks, etc.
No one ever mentions Hicks.
Does a rookie come in and beat out Hicks too?
or is Hicks value to us greater as a backup to all positions?



Haven't you learned the first time by placing an interior lineman on the outside. Some guys are not built for that. Yes they both were ok but we want good not mediocre.


So that begs the question: does the 5th-7th rated rookie OT with short arms provide us a better option than guys who have been in our system for 3(+) years?


I am hoping for an impact player from our 1st rounder. I just hope an OT (if we draft one there) can be just that.
But I am skeptical.
:-\


Short arms? Does that matter with a huge wingspan? Plus I read it has nothing to do with a RT.


Rare size and wingspan

Lets see the IMO 5th best tackle in all of college football draft picks, yes he will beat out a Center that had no business being even drafted where he was. Cook is not a tackle and he is not very good.


Scouts love his physicality and consistency


Cognizant pass blocker who recognizes the blitz and adjusts accordingly.

Ryan Cook is none of the above.

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/eben-britton?id=71219#player-profile-tab-set-1:player-profile-tab-analysis

seaniemck7
04-23-2009, 07:11 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:






Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.


Didn't Hicks already do this at the end of the year before getting hurt?
Everyone talks about Cook not being the answer, media, fans, draftniks, etc.
No one ever mentions Hicks.
Does a rookie come in and beat out Hicks too?
or is Hicks value to us greater as a backup to all positions?



Haven't you learned the first time by placing an interior lineman on the outside. Some guys are not built for that. Yes they both were ok but we want good not mediocre.


So that begs the question: does the 5th-7th rated rookie OT with short arms provide us a better option than guys who have been in our system for 3(+) years?


I am hoping for an impact player from our 1st rounder. I just hope an OT (if we draft one there) can be just that.
But I am skeptical.
:-\


Short arms? Does that matter with a huge wingspan? Plus I read it has nothing to do with a RT.


Rare size and wingspan

Lets see the IMO 5th best tackle in all of college football draft picks, yes he will beat out a Center that had no business being even drafted where he was. Cook is not a tackle and he is not very good.


Scouts love his physicality and consistency


Cognizant pass blocker who recognizes the blitz and adjusts accordingly.

Ryan Cook is none of the above.

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/eben-britton?id=71219#player-profile-tab-set-1:player-profile-tab-analysis


Nice post.
Thanks for boosting my confidence.


So I am assuming that you believe Hick's value to the team is his ability to back up all of the positions, and not as the fulltime RT starter?

marstc09
04-23-2009, 07:14 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:








Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.


Didn't Hicks already do this at the end of the year before getting hurt?
Everyone talks about Cook not being the answer, media, fans, draftniks, etc.
No one ever mentions Hicks.
Does a rookie come in and beat out Hicks too?
or is Hicks value to us greater as a backup to all positions?



Haven't you learned the first time by placing an interior lineman on the outside. Some guys are not built for that. Yes they both were ok but we want good not mediocre.


So that begs the question: does the 5th-7th rated rookie OT with short arms provide us a better option than guys who have been in our system for 3(+) years?


I am hoping for an impact player from our 1st rounder. I just hope an OT (if we draft one there) can be just that.
But I am skeptical.
:-\


Short arms? Does that matter with a huge wingspan? Plus I read it has nothing to do with a RT.


Rare size and wingspan

Lets see the IMO 5th best tackle in all of college football draft picks, yes he will beat out a Center that had no business being even drafted where he was. Cook is not a tackle and he is not very good.


Scouts love his physicality and consistency


Cognizant pass blocker who recognizes the blitz and adjusts accordingly.

Ryan Cook is none of the above.

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/eben-britton?id=71219#player-profile-tab-set-1:player-profile-tab-analysis


Nice post.
Thanks for boosting my confidence.


So I am assuming that you believe Hick's value to the team is his ability to back up all of the positions, and not as the fulltime RT starter?


I am just not a fan of guys playing out of position. Plus who knows what kind of dumb shit McKinnie will do next.

seaniemck7
04-23-2009, 07:20 PM
Another good point. Man I am getting excited for this damn draft.
I just wish I wasn't so freaking busy at work (still here atm).

marstc09
04-23-2009, 07:23 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


Another good point. Man I am getting excited for this damn draft.
I just wish I wasn't so freaking busy at work (still here atm).


I am having a hard time deciding between a RT and WR.

seaniemck7
04-23-2009, 08:19 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


Another good point. Man I am getting excited for this gol 'darnit draft.
I just wish I wasn't so freaking busy at work (still here atm).


I am having a hard time deciding between a RT and WR.


I am right there with you.
Like I said, I am hoping for an impact player, and I think both positions can be impacted by our #1 pick.
That is if Ricky picks the right one.

marstc09
04-23-2009, 08:34 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


Another good point. Man I am getting excited for this gol 'darnit draft.
I just wish I wasn't so freaking busy at work (still here atm).


I am having a hard time deciding between a RT and WR.

That is if Ricky picks the right one.



You mean Chilman or Spieldress.

seaniemck7
04-23-2009, 08:57 PM
LOL Speildress.


Whoever turns in the card, I guess.
:D
I dont want to get Marr too fired up before Saturday.

ejmat
04-23-2009, 09:52 PM
Let's trade for Shawn Andrews.
2nd rounder should do it.

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 08:19 AM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"seaniemck7" wrote:








Honestly. Is he really THAT bad?

There are a few of us on here who don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, he has his issues and we could've probably found a Vet to upgrade the position, however, I don't know if a T taken at 22 or later is gonna beat him out right away so we could be forced to watch him a bit more next year.



Britton can beat out Cook.


Didn't Hicks already do this at the end of the year before getting hurt?
Everyone talks about Cook not being the answer, media, fans, draftniks, etc.
No one ever mentions Hicks.
Does a rookie come in and beat out Hicks too?
or is Hicks value to us greater as a backup to all positions?



Haven't you learned the first time by placing an interior lineman on the outside. Some guys are not built for that. Yes they both were ok but we want good not mediocre.


So that begs the question: does the 5th-7th rated rookie OT with short arms provide us a better option than guys who have been in our system for 3(+) years?


I am hoping for an impact player from our 1st rounder. I just hope an OT (if we draft one there) can be just that.
But I am skeptical.
:-\


Short arms? Does that matter with a huge wingspan? Plus I read it has nothing to do with a RT.


Rare size and wingspan

Lets see the IMO 5th best tackle in all of college football draft picks, yes he will beat out a Center that had no business being even drafted where he was. Cook is not a tackle and he is not very good.


Scouts love his physicality and consistency


Cognizant pass blocker who recognizes the blitz and adjusts accordingly.

Ryan Cook is none of the above.

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/eben-britton?id=71219#player-profile-tab-set-1:player-profile-tab-analysis


Nice post.
Thanks for boosting my confidence.


So I am assuming that you believe Hick's value to the team is his ability to back up all of the positions, and not as the fulltime RT starter?

Don't buy into his hype.
He knows deep down that no T taken at 22 (even Britton) will beat out Cook.
Only way we were gonna get a upgrade at RT this year (atleast initially) was to bring a Vet in.

Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.

What I hope for is that if we take a T at 22, he is a quick study and will be able to come in about mid year.

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 08:21 AM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


LOL Speildress.


Whoever turns in the card, I guess.
:D
I dont want to get Marr too fired up before Saturday.


LOL.
The Coaches, Scouts and FO pukes already have the board set.
All Speildress needs to do is wait to see who falls to him/them and take the BPA who best fits thier need/wants. ;D

singersp
04-24-2009, 08:26 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 08:28 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.
:o

singersp
04-24-2009, 08:40 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coach 'em up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


I don't know about you, but I think that's a tad bit important if you want to have a passing game.
;)

We need an OL coach who is good at both.

Some say a great QB can overcome the inefficiencies of his OL & make them look very good.

Others say a great O-line will make a mediocre QB look very good.

Which is easier to come by, a great QB or good, solid O-lineman?
;)

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 08:53 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coach 'em up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


I don't know about you, but I think that's a tad bit important if you want to have a passing game.
;)

We need an OL coach who is good at both.

Some say a great QB can overcome the inefficiencies of his OL & make them look very good.

Others say a great O-line will make a mediocre QB look very good.

Which is easier to come by, a great QB or good, solid O-lineman?
;)
I think your preaching to the choir my friend.
:o

seaniemck7
04-24-2009, 08:56 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coach 'em up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


I don't know about you, but I think that's a tad bit important if you want to have a passing game.
;)

We need an OL coach who is good at both.

Some say a great QB can overcome the inefficiencies of his OL & make them look very good.

Others say a great O-line will make a mediocre QB look very good.

Which is easier to come by, a great QB or good, solid O-lineman?
;)
I think your preaching to the choir My Sexy Little Pixie.

:o


Can I get an Amen?

marstc09
04-24-2009, 09:13 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


That must tell you something right there! LMFAO!

Zone blocking is not as complicated as the finesse blocking scheme which Britton ran in college.

Britton understands pass protection. I have read that multiple times. When are you going to understand that Cook is not a OT and Britton is. Britton does not have the learning curve Cook would. Cook would lose out to Britton.

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 09:17 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


That must tell you something right there! LMFAO!

Zone blocking is not as complicated as the finesse blocking scheme which Britton ran in college.

Britton understands pass protection. I have read that multiple times. When are you going to understand that Cook is not a OT and Britton is. Britton does not have the learning curve Cook would. Cook would lose out to Britton.

What?

You do realize that the basic concept of the ZB scheme is for 2 OL men to engage one guy in a zone and then, as the play, dictates, one disengages and shifts to the next guy who enters the zone.

In no way is that process/procedure not complicated or easy to learn.

marstc09
04-24-2009, 09:39 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


That must tell you something right there! LMFAO!

Zone blocking is not as complicated as the finesse blocking scheme which Britton ran in college.

Britton understands pass protection. I have read that multiple times. When are you going to understand that Cook is not a OT and Britton is. Britton does not have the learning curve Cook would. Cook would lose out to Britton.

What?

You do realize that the basic concept of the ZB scheme is for 2 OL men to engage one guy in a zone and then, as the play, dictates, one disengages and shifts to the next guy who enters the zone.

In no way is that process/procedure not complicated or easy to learn.


What is you point?


doing a nice job of adjusting and picking up defenders in space


Britton plays with great awareness


He has good awareness in recognizing the blitz and responding.


Excellent technician who understands angles and positioning.


Britton is smart and reacts quickly to stunts and blitzes and his height gives him a long kick-step, not to mention the long arms, to help deal with speed rushers since he’s not athletic or quick-twitched enough to keep up with them.

Did you not read the strenghths and smarts on this guy? You are failing to miss the point. Cook is not a OT and Britton is. His knows how to play the position. Cook had and still is learning it. Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.

Never said it was easy but Britton will get it before Cook and take over as a starter if drafted.

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 10:53 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:





Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


That must tell you something right there! LMFAO!

Zone blocking is not as complicated as the finesse blocking scheme which Britton ran in college.

Britton understands pass protection. I have read that multiple times. When are you going to understand that Cook is not a OT and Britton is. Britton does not have the learning curve Cook would. Cook would lose out to Britton.

What?

You do realize that the basic concept of the ZB scheme is for 2 OL men to engage one guy in a zone and then, as the play, dictates, one disengages and shifts to the next guy who enters the zone.

In no way is that process/procedure not complicated or easy to learn.


What is you point?


doing a nice job of adjusting and picking up defenders in space


Britton plays with great awareness


He has good awareness in recognizing the blitz and responding.


Excellent technician who understands angles and positioning.


Britton is smart and reacts quickly to stunts and blitzes and his height gives him a long kick-step, not to mention the long arms, to help deal with speed rushers since he’s not athletic or quick-twitched enough to keep up with them.

Did you not read the strenghths and smarts on this guy? You are failing to miss the point. Cook is not a OT and Britton is. His knows how to play the position. Cook had and still is learning it. Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.

Never said it was easy but Britton will get it before Cook and take over as a starter if drafted.

Pretty convince are we?
::)

Have you read the weaknesses of this guy?
My guess is he will get blown away by the speedier edge rushers and wind up a G anyways.

http://www.nfldraftdog.com/2009_NFL_Draft/eben_britton.htm
http://www.draftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/ot/Eben-Britton.php

Look, I like the kid and believe he will/would be a nice addition to the team, but truth be told, if he was a good as you touted he would be going alot higher than to the Vikes at 22 (more likely the Chargers anyways).
Add to that the fact that he will be a rookie and will struggle with the edge rushers cause of his footspeed, short arms and flat inexperience against NFL caliber players and I don't see him beating out Cook (at least initially).

By the by.
Cook has basically started at the NFL level at RT.
Agree with me or not, he is now a NFL RT that played C in college.

marstc09
04-24-2009, 11:09 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:







Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


That must tell you something right there! LMFAO!

Zone blocking is not as complicated as the finesse blocking scheme which Britton ran in college.

Britton understands pass protection. I have read that multiple times. When are you going to understand that Cook is not a OT and Britton is. Britton does not have the learning curve Cook would. Cook would lose out to Britton.

What?

You do realize that the basic concept of the ZB scheme is for 2 OL men to engage one guy in a zone and then, as the play, dictates, one disengages and shifts to the next guy who enters the zone.

In no way is that process/procedure not complicated or easy to learn.


What is you point?


doing a nice job of adjusting and picking up defenders in space


Britton plays with great awareness


He has good awareness in recognizing the blitz and responding.


Excellent technician who understands angles and positioning.


Britton is smart and reacts quickly to stunts and blitzes and his height gives him a long kick-step, not to mention the long arms, to help deal with speed rushers since he’s not athletic or quick-twitched enough to keep up with them.

Did you not read the strenghths and smarts on this guy? You are failing to miss the point. Cook is not a OT and Britton is. His knows how to play the position. Cook had and still is learning it. Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.

Never said it was easy but Britton will get it before Cook and take over as a starter if drafted.

Pretty convince are we?

::)

Have you read the weaknesses of this guy?
My guess is he will get blown away by the speedier edge rushers and wind up a G anyways.

http://www.nfldraftdog.com/2009_NFL_Draft/eben_britton.htm
http://www.draftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/ot/Eben-Britton.php

Look, I like the kid and believe he will/would be a nice addition to the team, but truth be told, if he was a good as you touted he would be going alot higher than to the Vikes at 22 (more likely the Chargers anyways).
Add to that the fact that he will be a rookie and will struggle with the edge rushers cause of his footspeed, short arms and flat inexperience against NFL caliber players and I don't see him beating out Cook (at least initially).

By the by.
Cook has basically started at the NFL level at RT.
Agree with me or not, he is now a NFL RT that played C in college.


The only convinced I am is that Ryan Cook blows at RT. He is a guy that got benched for a back up Guard. Agree with me or not, the coaches even know he sucks.

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 11:13 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:









Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


That must tell you something right there! LMFAO!

Zone blocking is not as complicated as the finesse blocking scheme which Britton ran in college.

Britton understands pass protection. I have read that multiple times. When are you going to understand that Cook is not a OT and Britton is. Britton does not have the learning curve Cook would. Cook would lose out to Britton.

What?

You do realize that the basic concept of the ZB scheme is for 2 OL men to engage one guy in a zone and then, as the play, dictates, one disengages and shifts to the next guy who enters the zone.

In no way is that process/procedure not complicated or easy to learn.


What is you point?


doing a nice job of adjusting and picking up defenders in space


Britton plays with great awareness


He has good awareness in recognizing the blitz and responding.


Excellent technician who understands angles and positioning.


Britton is smart and reacts quickly to stunts and blitzes and his height gives him a long kick-step, not to mention the long arms, to help deal with speed rushers since he’s not athletic or quick-twitched enough to keep up with them.

Did you not read the strenghths and smarts on this guy? You are failing to miss the point. Cook is not a OT and Britton is. His knows how to play the position. Cook had and still is learning it. Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.

Never said it was easy but Britton will get it before Cook and take over as a starter if drafted.

Pretty convince are we?

::)

Have you read the weaknesses of this guy?
My guess is he will get blown away by the speedier edge rushers and wind up a G anyways.

http://www.nfldraftdog.com/2009_NFL_Draft/eben_britton.htm
http://www.draftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/ot/Eben-Britton.php

Look, I like the kid and believe he will/would be a nice addition to the team, but truth be told, if he was a good as you touted he would be going alot higher than to the Vikes at 22 (more likely the Chargers anyways).
Add to that the fact that he will be a rookie and will struggle with the edge rushers cause of his footspeed, short arms and flat inexperience against NFL caliber players and I don't see him beating out Cook (at least initially).

By the by.
Cook has basically started at the NFL level at RT.
Agree with me or not, he is now a NFL RT that played C in college.


The only convinced I am is that Ryan Cook blows at RT. He is a guy that got benched for a back up Guard. Agree with me or not, the coaches even know he sucks.

I already did that months ago I think.
:o

marstc09
04-24-2009, 11:17 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:











Cooks time and experience in the system, being coached by real NFL coaches will still dictate that he is penciled in as the day one starter.



I must have missed something. Did we buy the services of another teams OL coach to coach Cook?
:-\
\
Nope, still got the same cat who understands how to get them to run block (ZB scheme) but doesn't quite comprehend how to coachem up on pass protection.

Again, gets back to my point about anyone taken at 22 being groomed as a instant starter.
Look how long he has been working with Cook.

:o


That must tell you something right there! LMFAO!

Zone blocking is not as complicated as the finesse blocking scheme which Britton ran in college.

Britton understands pass protection. I have read that multiple times. When are you going to understand that Cook is not a OT and Britton is. Britton does not have the learning curve Cook would. Cook would lose out to Britton.

What?

You do realize that the basic concept of the ZB scheme is for 2 OL men to engage one guy in a zone and then, as the play, dictates, one disengages and shifts to the next guy who enters the zone.

In no way is that process/procedure not complicated or easy to learn.


What is you point?


doing a nice job of adjusting and picking up defenders in space


Britton plays with great awareness


He has good awareness in recognizing the blitz and responding.


Excellent technician who understands angles and positioning.


Britton is smart and reacts quickly to stunts and blitzes and his height gives him a long kick-step, not to mention the long arms, to help deal with speed rushers since he’s not athletic or quick-twitched enough to keep up with them.

Did you not read the strenghths and smarts on this guy? You are failing to miss the point. Cook is not a OT and Britton is. His knows how to play the position. Cook had and still is learning it. Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.

Never said it was easy but Britton will get it before Cook and take over as a starter if drafted.

Pretty convince are we?

::)

Have you read the weaknesses of this guy?
My guess is he will get blown away by the speedier edge rushers and wind up a G anyways.

http://www.nfldraftdog.com/2009_NFL_Draft/eben_britton.htm
http://www.draftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/ot/Eben-Britton.php

Look, I like the kid and believe he will/would be a nice addition to the team, but truth be told, if he was a good as you touted he would be going alot higher than to the Vikes at 22 (more likely the Chargers anyways).
Add to that the fact that he will be a rookie and will struggle with the edge rushers cause of his footspeed, short arms and flat inexperience against NFL caliber players and I don't see him beating out Cook (at least initially).

By the by.
Cook has basically started at the NFL level at RT.
Agree with me or not, he is now a NFL RT that played C in college.


The only convinced I am is that Ryan Cook blows at RT. He is a guy that got benched for a back up Guard. Agree with me or not, the coaches even know he sucks.

I already did that months ago I think.

:o


In your weird why, yes.
:)

Marrdro
04-24-2009, 11:20 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


In your weird why, yes.
:)

I am a bit of a dork.
Wildwoman is hot though so I got that going for me.
;D

singersp
04-25-2009, 08:40 AM
"marstc09" wrote:



Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.



Wonderlic scores don't mean shit in the NFL, IMO.

It has never been a good indicator of how well a player can play.

Marrdro
04-25-2009, 08:45 AM
Top tackles: Tale of the tape

http://min.scout.com/2/859621.html

Marrdro's comments follow:

Mars should like this.
His boy grades out pretty damn good.

jessejames09
04-25-2009, 09:43 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Top tackles: Tale of the tape

http://min.scout.com/2/859621.html

Marrdro's comments follow:

Mars should like this.
His boy grades out pretty damn good.


LOL Britton is this tall; '6-05-6/8'

Apparently 6' 5 3/4" is far to simple for readers.

marstc09
04-25-2009, 11:16 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.



Wonderlic scores don't mean shit in the NFL, IMO.

It has never been a good indicator of how well a player can play.


I disagree. A wonderlic test shows how fast you can process and respond to information. There is a reason the do it. It does mean shit.

marstc09
04-25-2009, 11:19 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Top tackles: Tale of the tape

http://min.scout.com/2/859621.html

Marrdro's comments follow:

Mars should like this.
His boy grades out pretty damn good.


Thanks for the read. If Chargers pass on him, he could be our pick.

singersp
04-25-2009, 12:42 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.



Wonderlic scores don't mean shit in the NFL, IMO.

It has never been a good indicator of how well a player can play.


I disagree. A wonderlic test shows how fast you can process and respond to information. There is a reason they do it. It does mean shit.


Wonderlic scores;

Vince Young: 6

Donovan McNabb: 14

Dan Marino: 15

Ryan Leaf: 27

Drew Henson: 42

;)

marstc09
04-25-2009, 09:14 PM
XlzPFm44Wac
;D

marstc09
08-04-2009, 01:30 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Thought I would repost this. Even Cook knows.

Ryan Cook not surprised to lose starting job for Minnesota Vikings


Cook's job now is to be the "swingman" who can play multiple positions as needed, the role Hicks held.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8826710/Ryan-Cook-not-surprised-to-lose-starting-job-for-Minnesota-Vikings-?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5

You really are desparate to make this happen aren't you.

:o
;D


Looks like I wasn't the only one. Nice job FO.
;D

marstc09
08-04-2009, 01:41 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:












What ever happened to Dan Mozes? I thought he was the heir apparent to Birk.



Let's ask Marrdro
;D


Wasn't Mozes released last year?


Yes


Is he still available? Maybe we can bring him back to take over at C

I was as high on Mozes as I am on Sullivan.
That doesn't mean that I wouldn't want a Vet in though.

::)


Matt Birk was a vet.

Sorry, should've said "A Vet that can pull and read a defense".

;D


Please... so you think the best pulling center in the league somehow forgot how to pull?

How in the hell can he forget?
Maybe he just can't do it anymore, ya think?
WOW.


He was getting slower. I am happy to have a younger and quicker guy in there. From what I have read he is decent at pulling and he came from Notre Dame, so he is no dummy. I forgot where I read it but he is very good at reading a D. I am really excited about the OL this year. Just wish we could figure out a QB. Still dreaming of Favre.

marstc09
08-04-2009, 01:44 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Cook will own this year


Ouch

kevoncox
08-04-2009, 01:45 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.



Wonderlic scores don't mean pooh in the NFL, IMO.

It has never been a good indicator of how well a player can play.


I disagree. A wonderlic test shows how fast you can process and respond to information. There is a reason the do it. It does mean pooh.


Most of football i muscle memory. Catching, throwing, cutting...It's all muscle memory. The wonderlic doesn't mean crap.

marstc09
08-04-2009, 01:46 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:



Britton also scored a 31 on his Wonderlic.



Wonderlic scores don't mean pooh in the NFL, IMO.

It has never been a good indicator of how well a player can play.


I disagree. A wonderlic test shows how fast you can process and respond to information. There is a reason the do it. It does mean pooh.


Most of football i muscle memory. Catching, throwing, cutting...It's all muscle memory. The wonderlic doesn't mean crap.


Ok I surrender