PDA

View Full Version : Game 9 Official Thoughts, Rants & Observations



ultravikingfan
11-09-2008, 04:19 PM
It's about time!

Almost gave the game away!

ultravikingfan
11-09-2008, 04:19 PM
Fuck the Packers!

BadlandsVikings
11-09-2008, 04:21 PM
Childress can stay for awhile

huxx
11-09-2008, 04:22 PM
We did a lot to lose but AD is the man!

That would have been the season if we didn't win.
Now we've still got a chance.

Way to pull it out Vikes...great D

V-Unit
11-09-2008, 04:24 PM
What more can you ask for from a defensive unit? Nothing.

D played perfect football today. Perfect.

El Vikingo
11-09-2008, 04:24 PM
WE WONN BABY!!

1ST PLACE NORTH!

Tad7
11-09-2008, 04:25 PM
No question about who gets the game ball here.

I'm so happy right now, I can't be negative yet. Maybe tomorrow
;D ;D ;D ;D

keystonevike
11-09-2008, 04:25 PM
Wide right ! IT'S NO GOOD!!! WE WIN , BABY!!!! ;D

Freakout
11-09-2008, 04:25 PM
Gus and Childress almost lost the game for us.

Defense was amazing.

Special teams still sucked.

Jilly
11-09-2008, 04:27 PM
GUS YOU OWE ADRIAN THE BIGGEST STEAK IN TOWN!!!

I love you Allen.

Freya
11-09-2008, 04:27 PM
Dang. That was close.
Special teams suck.

gabe_menendez
11-09-2008, 04:27 PM
Good game... Im glad we won...Chilli still not as aggressive on offense but i dont blame him with gus throwing 3 picks, still did good leadin his team though....

SharperImage
11-09-2008, 04:28 PM
AD SAVED US...HELL OFA GM BY THE DEFENSE...It would of been a shutout if gus diddnt suck major ass

cogitans
11-09-2008, 04:30 PM
Fuck the Packers

Great job AD

Good game Taylor

I love our D

Man up ST

Fuck the Packers

V4L
11-09-2008, 04:30 PM
Just what I expected

besides the score

I thought the Packers would thrive on the turnovers

Good game tho!!

AngloVike
11-09-2008, 04:31 PM
AD - top man for his commitment and determination not to be beaten today

Jared Allen - love his drive and effort, having said that all the D played well today

Gus - due a bad game and today was it, luckily for you the rest of the team saved your jiggly butt today

Ben Leber - great hit on Rodgers.. however if you do that again and the bugger gets up then we'll fire you for lack of effort
;D

In all nice to finally get a win against the Pack but when you get two safeties in a game, are up 21-10 in the game and have the ball, then you expect to win by more than one point. Still a win is a win and with Chicago losing then the division is open yet again.

scottishvike
11-09-2008, 04:32 PM
After falling short on the 4&1 AD showed what he is all about on that last TD drive, we still nearly managed to blow it at the end though. I was beginning to forget what it feels like to beat the Pukers, Skol everyone
;D

Freya
11-09-2008, 04:33 PM
Oh another thought.......

Ferrotte sucks.

Garland Greene
11-09-2008, 04:33 PM
Help Wanted: A Good QB Must be available immediatly.

We need help BIG TIME at QB

AD what can we say.

Defense great game.

ST . I hate the fact that Kluwe and Longwell get put into this category when the usually play solid games(except Kluwe in Chicago) BUt there are still issues.

V-Unit
11-09-2008, 04:33 PM
We played good football today save for 4 plays.

Our problems are ones that can be fixed.

That was a good win!

realviking
11-09-2008, 04:33 PM
Glad we won, but man, my kingdom for a quarterback!

delviking
11-09-2008, 04:36 PM
great job AD

God hopefully we get some major help at Qb in the off-season

Special teams great job to kluwe
good job to longwell
Poor ST coverage again dang it

Gus what the Hell

great job D

triedandtruevikesfan
11-09-2008, 04:36 PM
We deserved the win, but god almighty I hate gus today.

V4L
11-09-2008, 04:37 PM
AP took that game on his shoulders

AP is the MVP of the league thus far IMO.. Him or Brees

C Mac D
11-09-2008, 04:38 PM
Great Win today! Chilly's fist over Green Bay, good stuff!!!

V4L
11-09-2008, 04:41 PM
Is chillys offense kicking ass or is AD kicking ass?

jdvike
11-09-2008, 04:42 PM
Who cares..we beat the Packers



fuck the pack

VKG4LFE
11-09-2008, 04:44 PM
Oh my God life is great today now that we beat the effin cheesedicks! I can easily go to school tomorrow and have no problems!!!

We should still fire chilly though, he just doesn't get it!

V4L
11-09-2008, 04:45 PM
Brad Chilldress did nothing wrong today

you can debate the 4th down call.. I call it showing guts and belief in your players when they are playing great

Otherwise no beef at all

midgensa
11-09-2008, 04:48 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Brad Chilldress did nothing wrong today

you can debate the 4th down call.. I call it showing guts and belief in your players when they are playing great

Otherwise no beef at all


I was just thinking earlier that I had few problems with Chilly today and it was nice to not be pissed at him.
I think Gus was obviously terrible and not where we need him to be. But Childress fed his horse and got the win in spite of three terrible turnovers and another punt return for a TD.
There does need to be a major shakeup for the special teams at some point ... and it should come in the form of Childress stepping in and getting in their face if not in the form of firing the coordinator.
All in all ... outside of the 4th down, which I didnt hate going for it, but should have punted, I think Chilly had a fairly good day.

Jilly
11-09-2008, 04:48 PM
"jdvike" wrote:


Who cares..we beat the Packers



floop the pack


+1

jdvike
11-09-2008, 04:49 PM
My question is ...where are all the Packer fans? You can bet they would be here had we lost.
:P

BBQ Platypus
11-09-2008, 04:51 PM
Wow...we came gol 'darnit close to losing that game.
If that had happened, I would almost certainly have kicked a hole through my TV set.
With the way our defense played, we gol 'darnit well BETTER have won.

I don't favor benching Gus like some people do - he really IS our best option.
We ARE that weak at quarterback.
And he's been serviceable for most of the season (5-2 as a starter now).
But he really sucked today.
Two touchdown passes, but three interceptions.
When we needed it, though, the rest of our offense came through when he couldn't.

Here are my grades for the game:

QB: D - What happened to the Gus from last week? Maybe the Green Bay defense just did a good job against the pass, but three interceptions is unacceptable no matter which way you slice it.
RBs: A+ - I think it's official now. Adrian Peterson is less than God, but more than a man. He REALLY saved the day for us, carrying that last drive on his shoulders. Chester did well, too.
WRs/TEs: F - I'm sorry, boys. You're all very good students, but you just didn't show up for class today.
OL: B+ - Pass protection was...decent, I guess. But what really brings this grade up is the run blocking, which was much better this week than in previous weeks.
DL: A - Now THIS is how a line is supposed to play. Rodgers was on his jiggly butt all day long. This D-line is a gold standard for consistently great play.
LBs: B+/A- - They were great coming on the blitz.
Not quite as good against the run as last week, but they did well.
DBs: A- - They didn't do much, but they didn't get burned deep, either.
With the help of the D-line, they held Rodgers to 142 yards passing, which is pretty gol 'darnit good.

Special Teams: C- - Our coverage was pretty bad.
We gave up a punt return.
It wasn't as bad as the New Orleans game, though.
Also, Longwell missed a field goal.

Coaching: B- - The coaching wasn't great, but the turnovers made it look worse than it was.
The only real headscratcher here was Childress going for it on 4th down (you know which play I mean).
I was sorely tempted to downgrade this to a C+, but hey, we won the game, so I'm going to be a bit more lenient here.
I certainly don't hate Childress as much as I did a couple weeks ago.

Overall Grade: B - We came dangerously close to losing this game.
And it shouldn't have been close at all.
But you know what?
Who cares?
WE BEAT THE PACKERS!!!
YEAH!!!!!!!!!!


I'm on an emotional high right now, which I expect will carry me through the rest of the day.
YEAH!!!
WE WON!!!!!!!

marstc09
11-09-2008, 04:53 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Fuck the Packers!


Well said. Puckers cry you bitches!

ultravikingfan
11-09-2008, 04:54 PM
"El" wrote:


WE WONN BABY!!

1ST PLACE NORTH!


How are we in 1st?

The Bears are 3-0 in the Division and we are 2-2.
And we lost to the Bears too.

jdvike
11-09-2008, 04:55 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"El" wrote:


WE WONN BABY!!

1ST PLACE NORTH!


How are we in 1st?

The Bears are 3-0 in the Division and we are 2-2.
And we lost to the Bears too.

Well mathematically/in the standings
we are...don't kill the mans buzz
;)

tke0933
11-09-2008, 05:00 PM
A win in the division is great!
A win overall is good too.
I don't think we threw down field as much as we could have.
That would have opened up the run a little more, but again, a win is a win.

ThorSPL
11-09-2008, 05:01 PM
What to say....

Playcalling was .... what it always is.
QB: Gus... is doing everything that T-Jack was benched for....
his throws were awful today, his INT's were absolutely ridiculous..... He looked horrible.
I would not be upset if we put T-Jack back in; Gus is not bringing much more to the table than T-Jack... he reads quicker but CAN NOT MOVE... Meh, I have to watch this game once more to see if we just had NO receivers open or what the heck the deal was; but his passes were very very poor today.

WR: Did we have WR's out there today?
Rice needs to be in the game more...

TE: Didn't so much show up today... we'll say good job blocking?!?

RB: We have two amazing players out there.... 'nuff said.

OL: Good game overall... false starts and holdings are unfortunate.

DL: Amazing; they will begin getting credit where it is due soon enough.

LB: Few leaks in the run game but overall they played extremely well.

CB: Great job out there boys.... AW and CG did a good job bottling up some damn fine WR's.


ST:
Cover a freaking punt....seriously.
We do so well for most of the game then BAM..

scottishvike
11-09-2008, 05:02 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Brad Chilldress did nothing wrong today

you can debate the 4th down call.. I call it showing guts and belief in your players when they are playing great

Otherwise no beef at all


I was just thinking earlier that I had few problems with Chilly today and it was nice to not be pissed at him.
I think Gus was obviously terrible and not where we need him to be. But Childress fed his horse and got the win in spite of three terrible turnovers and another punt return for a TD.
There does need to be a major shakeup for the special teams at some point ... and it should come in the form of Childress stepping in and getting in their face if not in the form of firing the coordinator.
All in all ... outside of the 4th down, which I didnt hate going for it, but should have punted, I think Chilly had a fairly good day.


I would have punted too mainly because of the way our defense was playing, but at the same time I can see why he went for it as our running game was looking immense and it was only a yard. So I personally don't have a problem with Childress for going for it, I bet he aged a few years when Crosby lined up that FG at the end though.

FuadFan
11-09-2008, 05:03 PM
That was quite a stressful one my insides were twisting in knots the whole 4th quarter. AD did what we needed out of him in the end and we knock the Packers down to third SKOL VIKINGS!


P.S Ultra this is week ten not nine.

tke0933
11-09-2008, 05:04 PM
Special teams showed their weakness again.
Can someone that plays on special teams tackle?
We did good the last couple of weeks but what happened today?
We might need to look at this area during the off season.

V4L
11-09-2008, 05:06 PM
Oh MARRDRO!!!

Did u see Vinny wiff his tackle on that punt return for a TD?!

Classical Vinny like we have been saying all year

VikingsTw
11-09-2008, 05:07 PM
We needed that win big time and its good to get that Packer Victory under Childress's belt. I thought Frerotte was god awful today but we managed as a team to gut this one out. Berrian with no porduction is quite disappointing but none of the WR's other than the Backs had very a very good game. Props to the Packers Secondary and what they do in coverage.

The defense was awesome and JA looked normal regardless of injury, those guys are playing very well and this should continue into the season.

As far as specail teams goes we had a couple returns get away from us but I must acknowledge the rising play of our Safety Abdullah on the return coverage unit.

As the season continues we can ill afford to give TD's to other team on offense, this just can't happen and its happened two weeks in a row on inaccurate passess from Gus. Other than that alot of the team is living up to what expectations I had coming into the season and we're seeing glimpses of a very solid football team.

ultravikingfan
11-09-2008, 05:07 PM
"FuadFan" wrote:


That was quite a stressful one my insides were twisting in knots the whole 4th quarter. AD did what we needed out of him in the end and we knock the Packers down to third SKOL VIKINGS!


P.S Ultra this is week ten not nine.


I know.
It's our 9th game.

ultravikingfan
11-09-2008, 05:08 PM
"jdvike" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"El" wrote:


WE WONN BABY!!

1ST PLACE NORTH!


How are we in 1st?

The Bears are 3-0 in the Division and we are 2-2.
And we lost to the Bears too.

Well mathematically/in the standings
we are...don't kill the mans buzz
;)


Not even mathematically.
We are 2nd.

VikingsTw
11-09-2008, 05:11 PM
No doubt we're second, we're for sure ahead of the Packers but we're yet to beat the Bears and we get our chance at the Metrodome after our two week road trips which are very big games leading up to that Matchup.

CCthebest
11-09-2008, 05:13 PM
Thank god we won this game dispite Dickless and Gus.

Our D played its heart out. Allen is worth every penny and more.

AD more then made up for the 4th down fumble. We are so lucky to have him. And CT is awesome. Maybe we can get a real QB for CT+ next year?

Our ST is HORRIBLE. Missed FG, We cant cover. Why is Griffin even on ST? I love seeing him get hit though. He got spanked today.

Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???

scottishvike
11-09-2008, 05:14 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.

vikesfargo
11-09-2008, 05:19 PM
The Vikings have pulled one game above .500 for the first time this year. Anytime the Vikings play the Packers, it's going to be a hard-fought contest. Despite suffering three interceptions, the Vikings played better fundamental football than the Packers, and just enough for the win.

Adrian Peterson had a huge game with 225 total yards and the go-ahead touchdown in the closing minutes of the game. Chester Taylor, Shiancoe, Sidney Rice, and Bobby Wade all turned in solid performances. Bernard Berrian was shut out by excellent corner play. Pass protection and OL play were excellent.

Gus Frerrotte threw off-target all afternoon. Unfortunately, his three INTs led to 17 points for the Packers.

The Vikings special teams coverage units again had an uneven day, surrendering the return for a TD. Longwell was solid, making 1 of 2 from the very deep 50+ yard level. Kluwe did fine.

In addition to Peterson, the defense led the Vikings to this victory. They limited the Packers to just a single field goal off a conventional drive. All of the Packers' other points came off turnovers or special teams. In addition, the defense scored two safeties and kept relentless pressure on the Packers QB, Rodgers, for the whole game. The Packers had just 23 minutes in time of possession today.

The difference in the game was literally two safeties for the Vikings versus one field goal for the Packers.

Our punt returns were again solid. Fielding the ball and getting yardage where available. Unfortunately, Charles Gordon suffered a serious injury during a punt return. I am praying for him.

It was inspiring to see Kenechi Udeze co-captain the Vikings today.

Bucs are next.

cogitans
11-09-2008, 05:20 PM
"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.
LMAO

Good one.

That's also good reason to protect his pro bowl body from any Packer inflicted STDs

tke0933
11-09-2008, 05:21 PM
On the 4th and one, I agree about going for it, but I would have run the ball up the middle either with a QB sneak or Peterson up the middle.
Going outside was just to much of a gamble.

Formo
11-09-2008, 05:21 PM
"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


Genius!
ROFFLECOPTAR!!!!

kjdaddy
11-09-2008, 05:23 PM
"Formo" wrote:


"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


Genius!
ROFFLECOPTAR!!!!


your sig makes me sad.

kjdaddy
11-09-2008, 05:25 PM
"tke0933" wrote:


On the 4th and one, I agree about going for it, but I would have run the ball up the middle either with a QB sneak or Peterson up the middle.
Going outside was just to much of a gamble.

I thought it was over at that point.
AD had a better idea later.

V4L
11-09-2008, 05:26 PM
SKOL VIKES!

tke0933
11-09-2008, 05:28 PM
How often did we try to throw longer than 10 yds?
What happened to the vertical game to open up the running game?

marstc09
11-09-2008, 05:28 PM
QB: I have defended Gus for a long time now but I am done. This guy is terrible. Sure he can make a few plays but so can TJ. I think I will eat crow and say we took TJ out too early. Gus will lead us nowhere. At least TJ is young and can learn. Getting a QB should be the #1 priority this off season. #1 draft pick and hopefully Farve!

RB: Peterson and Chester run this offense.

WR: Where were they today? I blame Gus. Glad to see Rice back.

OL: Seemed to protect pretty well but I am not impressed by the run blocking. Ryan Cook should not be our starter next year. OT should be the #2 priority.

DL: Clifton was Allens bitch today. Fuck you Packer fans for thinking he is god and saying Allen is overrated. Who is overrated now? This line was dominate today. Rodgers is still pissing his pants. Much respect to Allen for playing injured and sticking it to the much hated Pukers. He made a difference between a win and a lose.

LB: These guys are getting better every game. Napo is filling in nicely. Greenway and Leber are very good football players. Close to the best LB core in the league when Henderson is here.

CB: The DL helped them out big time. Holding Rodgers under 200 is impressive.

S: Not much to say here. Sharper should have had a pick. Williams is a beast in the run defense.

ST: That return killed us. We need to fix our defending returns now! Kluwe had some outstanding punts. Longwell should not be missing FGs at home.

Coaching: Still say FIRE CHILDRESS. What the fuck was he thinking going for it when our D was so dominant. Once again another poor coaching decision. There is a time and place to go for it and that was not it.

Other notes:

- Lets see how many Pucker fans show up here this week. I am guessing none except for a couple regulars.
- I wish Gordon well.
- Man I am so upset I could not be there for that win. I loved it how they played that "beat on my drum all day" song after the missed FG. I would have loved to see the faces on the Puker fans.
:'(
- FUCK THE PACKERS AND THIER FANS! I hope they drive home goes well for all those there.

V4L
11-09-2008, 05:30 PM
Chilly is the man

Formo
11-09-2008, 05:35 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


QB: I have defended Gus for a long time now but I am done. This guy is terrible. Sure he can make a few plays but so can TJ. I think I will eat crow and say we took TJ out too early. Gus will lead us nowhere. At least TJ is young and can learn. Getting a QB should be the #1 priority this off season. #1 draft pick and hopefully Farve!

RB: Peterson and Chester run this offense.

WR: Where were they today? I blame Gus. Glad to see Rice back.

OL: Seemed to protect pretty well but I am not impressed by the run blocking. Ryan Cook should not be our starter next year. OT should be the #2 priority.

DL: Clifton was Allens bitch today. Fuck you Packer fans for thinking he is god and saying Allen is overrated. Who is overrated now? This line was dominate today. Rodgers is still pissing his pants. Much respect to Allen for playing injured and sticking it to the much hated Pukers. He made a difference between a win and a lose.

LB: These guys are getting better every game. Napo is filling in nicely. Greenway and Leber are very good football players. Close to the best LB core in the league when Henderson is here.

CB: The DL helped them out big time. Holding Rodgers under 200 is impressive.

S: Not much to say here. Sharper should have had a pick. Williams is a beast in the run defense.

ST: That return killed us. We need to fix our defending returns now! Kluwe had some outstanding punts. Longwell should not be missing FGs at home.

Coaching: Still say FIRE CHILDRESS. What the fuck was he thinking going for it when our D was so dominant. Once again another poor coaching decision. There is a time and place to go for it and that was not it.

Other notes:

- Lets see how many Pucker fans show up here this week. I am guessing none except for a couple regulars.
- I wish Gordon well.
- Man I am so upset I could not be there for that win. I loved it how they played that "beat on my drum all day" song after the missed FG. I would have loved to see the faces on the Puker fans.
:'(
- FUCK THE PACKERS AND THIER FANS! I hope they drive home goes well for all those there.


+1 on everything.
The closest to a disagreement I have with you are STs.
But not too much off base with them.

Gus sucked.
Him along with great corner play was the reason we didn't hear Berrian's name.

Peterson put the team on his shoulders and WILLED the victory.
Game ball goes to him, no doubt.

Bevell/Chilly's offense is horrible.
How are they still working?

Special teams played solid, except for that return for a TD.
The Packers didn't have good starting position until that return.
Longwell's missed FG..
that happens.
Wouldn't have to worry about it if the freakin' offense (read: QB/coach) did it's damn job, though.

My goats:
Gus, offensive coaching

My heros:
Adrian Peterson, defense..
Especially Allen with bum shoulder.

Formo
11-09-2008, 05:36 PM
"kjdaddy" wrote:


"Formo" wrote:


"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


Genius!
ROFFLECOPTAR!!!!


your sig makes me sad.

Knowing this..
makes me happy.

V4L
11-09-2008, 05:37 PM
"Formo" wrote:


"kjdaddy" wrote:


"Formo" wrote:


"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


Genius!
ROFFLECOPTAR!!!!


your sig makes me sad.

Knowing this..
makes me happy.



That's the same dance I did after the game!!

ThorSPL
11-09-2008, 05:37 PM
"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


+1
Post of the day

Formo
11-09-2008, 05:41 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


- Man I am so upset I could not be there for that win. I loved it how they played that "beat on my drum all day" song after the missed FG. I would have loved to see the faces on the Puker fans.
:'(


Yes..
I noticed that too.
They also played it when Adrian scored that TD, too.

I was like..
"YEAH!!!!
EAT IT PACKERS!!!"

MaxVike
11-09-2008, 05:44 PM
With props to BBQ (thanks for the Template).

QB: D - Gus looked off virtually the entire game.
I really can't remember any real good throws...
Seemed like he was low with his throws all day today.
A little more air under a couple of the throws and they are not picks.
He's gonna have a tough film reading session with his coaches methinks.
RBs: A+ - It was clear that Woodson and Harris were on their game today with the WRs.
This was a game that the running game and the defense needed to win.
Great catch and run for a TD by Taylor.
Adrian Peterson absolutely took the game over after his fumble on 4th down previously.
I do not recall a running back as intense or determined at the end of a game.
That was a HOF performance today in my opinion.
We need to put that one in the memory bank.
Special, special player...wow.
WRs/TEs: D - Completely got schooled by Woodson and Harris.
Part of it was attributable to Gus throwing like shit today.
Did Rice get hurt again?
AA was in the game late.
Maybe because he can beat the press?
OL: A - Sorry, if Gus' interceptions were attributable to being pressured, I'd downgrade the A.
But, anytime you rush for that many yards and give your QB the necessary time to be effective, that's a good day.

DL: A - Another great game by the front four.
I've stated a couple of times that I thought these four would be featured on some pregame shows this year.
Based on the last couple of weeks, I think it's coming soon.
Jared Allen played great but had one stupid penalty.
Buck and Aikman, particularly Aikman, though, continually pointed out how good Allen is.
Kevin Williams is just a force...he seems to have a knack for dominating when he needs to make a play.
Edwards was decent vs the run, they went at him a few times.
Good job fellas, if not for AD, you get the game ball.
LBs: A- - Sirius NFL radio, specifically Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan, pointed out this week that the Vikes linebackers
will immediately blitz when they see the RB stay in for protection.
This is not a called blitz by Frazier, it's part of the scheme.
They did a great job today.
Love seeing LBers flying around making plays...THAT's football to me.
DBs: A- - Aaron Rodgers throwing for 142 yards?
Enough said.
Now, let's examine this a little further...how many times have we talked about how mediocre DBs look really good with a pass rush?
Case in point, today.
Each of the DBs, however, made a good play, or two, throughout the game.

Special Teams: D - Coverage sucks for the most part.
4th punt return for TD is unnacceptable.
As I posted on the Yell earlier today, I'm tired of seeing Circui on the ground in the coverage game...he sucks IMO.
Hicks and Tahi instill fear in the NFL coverage Teams, not.
I expect our kicker to make the 54 yarder inside...he needs to make the 47 yarder too.


Coaching: B - I find this grade difficult because I'm still pissed about Chilly going for it with 9 minutes left.
That said, the game plan was solid, defense and offense.
Defense executed extremely well.
Gus did not.
I'm also still just at a loss for how crappy our special teams are.
This unit and our QB play are the achilles heal(s) of this edition of the Vikings.
We won, so, even though you made an aweful decision to go for it, I'll give it a B.
Lose this game and go 0-6 vs the Packers and you are raking leaves after the season if I'm the Owner.

Overall Grade: B - Great win.
Crucial win.
Closer than it should have been, win.

marstc09
11-09-2008, 05:44 PM
"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


Post of the year.

V4L
11-09-2008, 05:45 PM
Cedric made Jennings look like Kelly Campbell

LincolnVike
11-09-2008, 05:49 PM
Several issues with this game that I didn't like:

- Why Berrian was never used (Al "Hairy Ass" Harris probly had something to do with it).
- Why we almost punted it away on 4th and 1 with 9:19 to go in the 4th and down in the score
- Childress is back to his ol' coaching self
- This game should have been put away early.

Having said all that, we pulled out a win this week.
And when it comes to a major division rival like that Porkers/Slackers/whathaveyou, it instantly makes for a great week next week.

LincolnVike
11-09-2008, 05:51 PM
Forgot to mention:

Best wishes and speedy recovery to Charles Gordon.

tclawmen
11-09-2008, 05:52 PM
This was a great win by the vikes but the team continues to display the good..the bad..and the ugly!!
The good.....A. Peterson, C. Taylor
J. Allen and the overall defensive effort as a unit
The bad.......Childress (terrible use of the challenge and clock management....again)
The ugly.......Gus (absolutely terrible today) special teams...again!!! (they just suck)
This team is not good enough to continue to overcome the special teams play. They are giving up field position and points at an alarming rate and while I dont know what the problem is, I sure hope the team takes a hard look at the coaches and the players being used.

VKG4LFE
11-09-2008, 05:53 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


+1
Post of the day


I would have to agree, that made me laugh out loud!! wow, great post!

V4L
11-09-2008, 05:53 PM
Just gotta point out to Marrdro that Vinny sucks once again

Anemic Offense
11-09-2008, 05:53 PM
Everyone's getting down on the 4th down call.
I loved the call to go for it.
Regardless of how good our D was playing, it still had to go through our special teams to get to them.
With how they were playing today, the pukers could have easily been in just as great of field position or better.
Peterson wasn't going down on that run, the puker just made a great play to strip the ball.
If he hadn't, Peterson had a clear shot to the endzone.

My only real problem with Childress today is the same problem I have every game.
He has no hurry up offense whatsoever.
A screen to Shiancoe with 30 seconds left in the half?
Really?

A win is great, a win over the pukers even better, but Gus was awful, and I'm tired of winning close games in which we dominated the stat sheet.
Is it too much to ask our team to go and blow out the opposing team for once?
Do they have to give me a heart attack every week?

i_bleed_purple
11-09-2008, 05:57 PM
did you see Peterson's face after he scored that TD?
it was a look of pure intensity.

JellyBean2144
11-09-2008, 05:59 PM
My only thought(s); Thank God that we have Adrian Peterson.We need a legit Quarterback. And I tip my hat to our defense. They played so-so. Could have been better, but I will take 4 sacks, 2 forced fumbles, any day. Now if only we can put together a string of games where we play all out. Balls to the floor. Kick some butt...football!! We got the talent. Let's so it.

Go, Vikings!!!!

kevoncox
11-09-2008, 06:00 PM
I'll keep this short and Sweet.

QB - D - Gus what happened, you seem so up and down. Great one week, terrible the next. While you are the better option over TJ you are doing somethings he did, minus the holding on to the ball too long and connecting on the deep ball.

RB - A+ - Willed a team to win. Period. AD asked the team to get on his back and ride him to victory. CT's play was amazing

WR -C- Didn't do much but Rice's TD catch was nice. They blocked well.

TE - With the lack of QB production all our TEs and WRs would suffer.

OL - B+ - It's a mixed bag. Mac is a monster and should make the Pro Bowl. He is simply destroying monster DEs. Mario last week Alex Brown before than and now GBs DE. He is moving well, blocking well and playing well.
Since Mac has been back, AD has gone for 100+ for 4 out of 5 games. There is a reason. On a sad note, Cook needs to GTFO. Now! FS, Facemask. Hicks please start.

DL - A+ - Allen and KW, nuff said.

OLB - B+ - Solid games by all. Greenway is a beast, Leber, I loved the hit on ARod. Do it again.

Cb - B - AW is a always solid. Griffen played well but still gave up some plays.

S - B-

Special teams - F -
What has to be done to solve this. We have the REAL Special Team.
We cant cover kickoffs, we cant cover punts, we cant return kickoffs, we cant punts.
- F -

LincolnVike
11-09-2008, 06:01 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


did you see Peterson's face after he scored that TD?
it was a look of pure intensity.

...and his face after learning that Childress was going to punt on 4th and 1.
He was playing with some real heart today...something that some members of the team need to do.

kevoncox
11-09-2008, 06:03 PM
By the way that 'condom" is a skully/ wave cap.
It's primary use is to make your hair wavy. It's secondary use in football is to keep sweat out off your face and out of your eyes. Works pretty well btw!

keystonevike
11-09-2008, 06:03 PM
"tke0933" wrote:


Special teams showed their weakness again.
Can someone that plays on special teams tackle?
We did good the last couple of weeks but what happened today?
We might need to look at this area during the off season.

I just hope the poor kick/punt coverage doesn't bite us in the jiggly-butt at a crucial time during the rest of the season.

keystonevike
11-09-2008, 06:05 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


Post of the year.

It gets my vote.

VKG4LFE
11-09-2008, 06:06 PM
I was pumped to see AD go after Childress when he was going to punt on 4th and 1. I wish there would've been a better play call on 4th and 1 however. Oh well, we win all is good!

i_bleed_purple
11-09-2008, 06:07 PM
QB -D-
the line gave him time, Peterson helped with taking ht epressure off him, and the recievers got open.
2 of those picks were a result of a poor throw, one was a terrible decision.
He needs to tighten up on his accuracy otherwise we'll get destroyed when we play a real team

RB - A+ - Great performance.
CT led the game in recieving yards, Peterson had a monster game.
Not enough can be said about it

WR/TE -C
a couple of key drops, but they didn't have much opportunity to do well because of QB production.

OL - A
- Great game by them.
Frerotte had all day to throw most of the time, helped Peterson get close to 200, great performance (except by Cook)

DL - A+ - can anyone say Purple People Eaters version 2?
absolutely devastating.
Allen was in Rogers face all day.
I remember one stat they showed, at one point, Rogers had 24 dropbacks, knocked down 4 times, and hurried 10 times.
that is pure dominance

OLB - B+ - Decent game, covered their zones well, tackled well, solid game

Cb - B - AW had a good game, Griffin got lucky as hell on that TD to Jennings that was nullified by a false start. did an otherwise decent job of keeping the recievers in check tho.

S - B-

Special teams - F -
What has to be done to solve this. We have the REAL Special Team.
We cant cover kickoffs, we cant cover punts, we cant return kickoffs, we cant punts.

V4L
11-09-2008, 06:11 PM
I would like to point out that Cedric gave up on that TD play called back to jennings due to penelty

He had a great game

marstc09
11-09-2008, 06:18 PM
Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fucking sucks.

V4L
11-09-2008, 06:19 PM
Yup idk why I support him

Articnv
11-09-2008, 06:24 PM
u contriol the ball for 12 minutes more then the opstion ad runs for
190 odd yards and still
have to count on field go to miss.


At
gives up yet another td


Gus throw
3 picks

We can win the
divsion but with this play we wont go
anywhere in the playoffs

jkjuggalo
11-09-2008, 06:29 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.

grpape
11-09-2008, 06:29 PM
It seems that the offensive play calling is fine. There was more than once AD and CT were on the field. AD beat Bigby down the sideline, but Gus didn't make the throw. He had time but made a bad decision and payed for it. They showed another play where the team got the pick they wanted and had Wade wide open down the field. Gus made the wrong throw again and it cost us. Even Aikman was saying that Gus should know that the pick is the first thing he should be looking for. I don't know what to say.

I really can't blame Chilly or Bevell anymore. They are calling screens and putting the right calls in at the right time. Gus is just making bad decisions and worse throws. Man, some of his throws were just brutal.

We did win, and have a shot at the division. But, I just don't see anything coming out of it with Gus running the team. It really is a shame.

MaxVike
11-09-2008, 06:31 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Just gotta point out to Marrdro that Vinny sucks once again




Right there along with you.
I think he is aweful, just aweful.

COJOMAY
11-09-2008, 06:32 PM
http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/502*364/2vike.jpg
Sore shoulder? What sore shoulder!

marstc09
11-09-2008, 06:34 PM
"jkjuggalo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.


I am starting to think he did bench him to early.
:-

MaxVike
11-09-2008, 06:36 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/502*364/2vike.jpg
Sore shoulder? What sore shoulder!


Cojo...his game today reminds me of another great Viking...Mr Jim Marshall.
Kinda interesting, skydiving for Marshall, running with the Bulls in Spain for Allen.
These guys are men on and off the field, and simply will not sit down.
MEN in a man's game.
Simply loved hearing the #1 FOX Team repeatedly say, "how good is this guy?"

LAVike
11-09-2008, 06:37 PM
You could just see on Peterson's face after the Vikings bungled the last quarter and fell behind, "...Screw this...I'm takin' over this game!"
Wow...what a player.

Formo
11-09-2008, 06:50 PM
"LAVike" wrote:


You could just see on Peterson's face after the Vikings bungled the last quarter and fell behind, "...Screw this...I'm takin' over this game!"
Wow...what a player.


Yes.

Yes you did.

COJOMAY
11-09-2008, 06:54 PM
"MaxVike" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/502*364/2vike.jpg
Sore shoulder? What sore shoulder!


Cojo...his game today reminds me of another great Viking...Mr Jim Marshall.
Kinda interesting, skydiving for Marshall, running with the Bulls in Spain for Allen.
These guys are men on and off the field, and simply will not sit down.
MEN in a man's game.
Simply loved hearing the #1 FOX Team repeatedly say, "how good is this guy?"



Can you imagine what this team could be with a good QB and a couple of good downfield receivers?

kevoncox
11-09-2008, 06:56 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.


I am starting to think he did bench him to early.
:-\


With Tj its more than that. He cannot complete balls over 10 yards. I believe his carrer percentage is 27%. Defenses will stack the box and that will cause him to panic. He lacks poise. WHile Gus had some god aweful throws, Defenses had to back off to protect the deep ball. I beleive the packs threw some zones that confused him. Lets not for get this packer team is first in INTS. They locked down the outside deep ball and stopped the run. Gus was aweful today but was great last week. TJ is consistantly aweful.

vikinggreg
11-09-2008, 07:17 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.


I am starting to think he did bench him to early.
:-\


With Tj its more than that. He cannot complete balls over 10 yards. I believe his carrer percentage is 27%. Defenses will stack the box and that will cause him to panic. He lacks poise. WHile Gus had some god aweful throws, Defenses had to back off to protect the deep ball. I beleive the packs threw some zones that confused him. Lets not for get this packer team is first in INTS. They locked down the outside deep ball and stopped the run. Gus was aweful today but was great last week. TJ is consistantly aweful.


Packers do have a top rank secondary but Gus was in the tank today.

Peterson finally got to get his big game against the packers and the same with the dline, nice to see Rodgers get knocked around like he should have been in week one.

Special teams must have thought Gus wasn't helping the packers enough and had to give up the big return.

PurplePowerPunch
11-09-2008, 07:18 PM
Gus almost gave the game away, and the ST is still horrible. WE BEAT THE PACK!!!!!!!!!

jkjuggalo
11-09-2008, 07:29 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.


I am starting to think he did bench him to early.
:-\


With Tj its more than that. He cannot complete balls over 10 yards. I believe his carrer percentage is 27%. Defenses will stack the box and that will cause him to panic. He lacks poise. WHile Gus had some god aweful throws, Defenses had to back off to protect the deep ball. I beleive the packs threw some zones that confused him. Lets not for get this packer team is first in INTS. They locked down the outside deep ball and stopped the run. Gus was aweful today but was great last week. TJ is consistantly aweful.


They both are inconsistent, each having about half of their games be okay and the other half suck.
The difference is TJ is young, and can therefore (hopefully) improve with experience.
He can also run and escape the rush.
They both complete about the same percentage of passes, so I don't think Gus has some kind of great accuracy advantage.
It also seems like Gus throws more interceptions when we are ahead or tied, while TJ seemed to throw more INTs when we were down and he was forcing things.
I don't know if that's a statistical fact, just seems like that is what sticks out in my memory.

scottishvike
11-09-2008, 07:31 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.


I am starting to think he did bench him to early.
:-\


With Tj its more than that. He cannot complete balls over 10 yards. I believe his carrer percentage is 27%. Defenses will stack the box and that will cause him to panic. He lacks poise. WHile Gus had some god aweful throws, Defenses had to back off to protect the deep ball. I beleive the packs threw some zones that confused him. Lets not for get this packer team is first in INTS. They locked down the outside deep ball and stopped the run. Gus was aweful today but was great last week. TJ is consistantly aweful.


The only advantage I would say T-Jack has is his running ability, throwing wise he is worse than Frerrote, I would only bring Jackson back if we fall out of play-off contention. Regardless of who starts now we need to get the position sorted for next year with a new guy. Although I still have the fear that T-Jack might end up not getting any game time for the rest of this season, look good in training camp/pre-season
then coming back in at the start of next year.

marshallvike
11-09-2008, 07:31 PM
"JellyBean2144" wrote:


My only thought(s); Thank God that we have Adrian Peterson.We need a legit Quarterback. And I tip my hat to our defense. They played so-so. Could have been better, but I will take 4 sacks, 2 forced fumbles, any day. Now if only we can put together a string of games where we play all out. Balls to the floor. Kick some butt...football!! We got the talent. Let's so it.

Go, Vikings!!!!


PLAYED SO-SO!!!!
the pukers scored 7 on int return, 7 on punt return, field goal after gus gave them the ball at our 40, field goal after AD gave them the ball at our 41. seems to me they can only be held accountable for 7 points today. AND THEY SCORED 4!!! they were only -3 for the entire game.

hx38596
11-09-2008, 07:32 PM
What a game!

Question:
What would the outcome be if Favre was there?


//glad he's gone...

marstc09
11-09-2008, 07:43 PM
"hx38596" wrote:


What a game!

Question:
What would the outcome be if Favre was there?


//glad he's gone...


You think Driver is wondering why the fuck he is gone. I would take an old man who turned a 4-12 team to 6-3 so far. Silly Packturds.

marshallvike
11-09-2008, 07:43 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.


I am starting to think he did bench him to early.
:-\


With Tj its more than that. He cannot complete balls over 10 yards. I believe his carrer percentage is 27%. Defenses will stack the box and that will cause him to panic. He lacks poise. WHile Gus had some god aweful throws, Defenses had to back off to protect the deep ball. I beleive the packs threw some zones that confused him. Lets not for get this packer team is first in INTS. They locked down the outside deep ball and stopped the run. Gus was aweful today but was great last week. TJ is consistantly aweful.


excellent thoughts KC. i don't usually think about gus' play from the running game standpoint. it really does seem that he has opened it up for AD.
the past two games have made me wish gus had signed a long term contract with anyone else in the NFC North, but he is ours and he really is the best of what we have,(sorry to say)

vikinggreg
11-09-2008, 08:08 PM
"marshallvike" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


Gus top 3 for INTs in the NFL! The difference between him, Favre, Brees and Cutler. They throw TD passes. Gus fricken sucks.


Yup, and Gus had has an entire career to improve.
We benched TJack too early, especially considering he only really played one "bad" game out of 2 to start the year after being injured in preseason.
Hopefully Chilly and Co. can figure something out really quick because Gus really has been just as inconsistent as TJ.


I am starting to think he did bench him to early.
:-\


With Tj its more than that. He cannot complete balls over 10 yards. I believe his carrer percentage is 27%. Defenses will stack the box and that will cause him to panic. He lacks poise. WHile Gus had some god aweful throws, Defenses had to back off to protect the deep ball. I beleive the packs threw some zones that confused him. Lets not for get this packer team is first in INTS. They locked down the outside deep ball and stopped the run. Gus was aweful today but was great last week. TJ is consistantly aweful.


excellent thoughts KC. i don't usually think about gus' play from the running game standpoint. it really does seem that he has opened it up for AD.
the past two games have made me wish gus had signed a long term contract with anyone else in the NFC North, but he is ours and he really is the best of what we have,(sorry to say)


Dallas might have given the Vikings Bollinger and Johnson for Gus a few weeks ago......Childress might have thought about it too :o

hx38596
11-09-2008, 08:12 PM
"marstc09" wrote:


"hx38596" wrote:


What a game!

Question:
What would the outcome be if Favre was there?


//glad he's gone...


You think Driver is wondering why the floop he is gone. I would take an old man who turned a 4-12 team to 6-3 so far. Silly Packturds.


Yeah, i knew this all would play out in the end...
The packer organization looking like a bunch of fools with thier off season shenanigans.
On the day the jets ripped one, packers lost thier season...

Packer season -----
dead.
;D

Big C
11-09-2008, 08:18 PM
Gus had a really rough game but I think he should still start. He has got this offense clicking so don't mess with it. The Packers are one of the best pass defense teams and lead the league in interceptions, so I am not suprised that a mediocre QB struggled against them. At the same time though, the WRs need to make some plays.
They dropped a number of balls again today and just can't come up with a difficult catch.

Chilly called a good game. However, his decision for a conservative offense two minutes before the half was unacceptable. We were ahead by 7 points and started the offense with good field position, but he was fine with running the clock out. You need a killer instinct in this league to get it done. That conservative approach is what bring every fricking game we play down to the last nail biting minute. We don't blow out a team when we have the chance.

We run to the right REALLY well and get stuffed on the runs to the left almost 90% of the time. What the hell?! I thought the left was our strength.

V4L
11-09-2008, 08:33 PM
Great Great Great!

BBQ Platypus
11-09-2008, 08:48 PM
"Formo" wrote:


"marstc09" wrote:


- Man I am so upset I could not be there for that win. I loved it how they played that "beat on my drum all day" song after the missed FG. I would have loved to see the faces on the Puker fans.
:'(


Yes..
I noticed that too.
They also played it when Adrian scored that TD, too.

I was like..
"YEAH!!!!
EAT IT PACKERS!!!"


Me, too.
Except with me it was "SUCK IT DOWN!"

Tad7
11-09-2008, 08:53 PM
Love this pic
8)

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/2008/09000d5d80c56a79_gallery_600.jpg

BadlandsVikings
11-09-2008, 08:58 PM
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/2008/09000d5d80c56747_gallery_600.jpghttp://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/2008/09000d5d80c57e4c_gallery_600.jpg

COJOMAY
11-09-2008, 09:03 PM
"BadlandsViking" wrote:


http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/2008/09000d5d80c56747_gallery_600.jpg


That's the most emotion I've ever seen from him.

Buy the way, time to bring things back down to earth for a moment. We won the game by one point -- less than the number of points GB won over us. That leaves GB the winner in a tie situation. Just thought you may want to know that. Hate to hurt your day.

V4L
11-09-2008, 09:06 PM
GO SYD DAVY!

PurpleMafia
11-09-2008, 09:22 PM
Adrian Peterson came into this game trailing Clinton Portis (who is on BYE this week) by 172 yards for the lead in rushing yards. He ends the week up 20 yards. Name another player in the NFL that could do that, other than AP.

V4L
11-09-2008, 09:25 PM
"PurpleMafia" wrote:


Adrian Peterson came into this game trailing Clinton Portis (who is on BYE this week) by 172 yards for the lead in rushing yards. He ends the week up 20 yards. Name another player in the NFL that could do that, other than AP.



Not many man.. Not many at all

I was hoping he would get that extra 8 to get his 3rd career 200 yard game

NodakPaul
11-09-2008, 09:28 PM
"Big" wrote:


Gus had a really rough game but I think he should still start. He has got this offense clicking so don't mess with it. The Packers are one of the best pass defense teams and lead the league in interceptions, so I am not suprised that a mediocre QB struggled against them. At the same time though, the WRs need to make some plays.
They dropped a number of balls again today and just can't come up with a difficult catch.

Chilly called a good game. However, his decision for a conservative offense two minutes before the half was unacceptable. We were ahead by 7 points and started the offense with good field position, but he was fine with running the clock out. You need a killer instinct in this league to get it done. That conservative approach is what bring every fricking game we play down to the last nail biting minute. We don't blow out a team when we have the chance.

We run to the right REALLY well and get stuffed on the runs to the left almost 90% of the time. What the hell?! I thought the left was our strength.


Pretty much summed up my thoughts.

People are unhappy with Gus, and they should be.
But let's keep in mind that he was facing a Green Bay defense that leads the league in INTs.
We shouldn't have been surprised to see one or two.
What I did like about Gus is that he didn't implode after throwing the picks.
I don't think that TJack could have done that.

Mad props to AD firing up the offense on the sidelines.
I love the emotion in that guy.

Mad props to our Defense.
GB's offense didn't do shit.
All of their points came off from turnovers of special teams.
Allen was a monster out there.
And he had a very classy interview after the game where he addressed the Houston fines.
He said very bluntly that he would never, NEVER maliciously try and hurt somebody.
But his job is to try and get to the QB, and he throws everything he has into it every single play.

Two minute offense was stupid.
Other than that, I thought the playcalling was good.
We has a few well placed screens that made them pay for the blitz.
I would have liked to see more play action, but hard to do play action when you are running the ball so much.

All in all we won, and I am very, VERY happy.
The NFC North title is absolutely within our grasp.
I am hoping that next week Green Bay and Chicago end in a tie... :)

PurplePackerEater
11-09-2008, 09:32 PM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


Fuck the Packers!


Yep!
;D

Braddock
11-09-2008, 09:37 PM
"JellyBean2144" wrote:


My only thought(s); Thank God that we have Adrian Peterson.We need a legit Quarterback. And I tip my hat to our defense. They played so-so. Could have been better, but I will take 4 sacks, 2 forced fumbles, any day. Now if only we can put together a string of games where we play all out. Balls to the floor. Kick some butt...football!! We got the talent. Let's so it.

Go, Vikings!!!!


Wow, I don't know what more you could ask from a D than what we got today. Sure Packer penalties helped, but god damn, 2 safeties?

mewario
11-09-2008, 09:38 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


"BadlandsViking" wrote:


http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/2008/09000d5d80c56747_gallery_600.jpg


That's the most emotion I've ever seen from him.

Buy the way, time to bring things back down to earth for a moment. We won the game by one point -- less than the number of points GB won over us. That leaves GB the winner in a tie situation. Just thought you may want to know that. Hate to hurt your day.


Um.. I don't know where you got that info, but that's incorrect.
Here's the correct tiebreaking procedures taken from NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures)

If, at the end of the regular season, two or more clubs in the same division finish with identical won-lost-tied percentages, the following steps will be taken until a champion is determined.

Two Clubs

1. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games between the clubs).

2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division.

3. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games.

4. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.

5. Strength of victory.

6. Strength of schedule.

7. Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.

8. Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.

9. Best net points in common games.

10. Best net points in all games.

11. Best net touchdowns in all games.

Anemic Offense
11-09-2008, 09:41 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


Two minute offense was stupid.
Other than that, I thought the playcalling was good.
We has a few well placed screens that made them pay for the blitz.
I would have liked to see more play action, but hard to do play action when you are running the ball so much.


That's actually when it's easiest to play action.
It's when you're throwing every down that the other team doesn't bite.

"NodakPaul" wrote:


All in all we won, and I am very, VERY happy.
The NFC North title is absolutely within our grasp.
I am hoping that next week Green Bay and Chicago end in a tie... :)


It would actually be best for us if Green Bay beat Chicago seeing as the Bears haven't lost a division game yet. I can't cheer for them though.
I tried once, almost threw up...

purplehelmut
11-09-2008, 09:41 PM
Hate to pee on everyone's parade, but what a lousy way to win a ballgame.
A crummy missed field goal when we should have blown this team out- we beat these guys up and down the field all frickin' day.
WTF Gus?
The guy played like a lost little rookie.
Those weren't just INTs, they were pathetic INTs.
And one for a TD.
Special teams?
Puuuleeeze!
Thank goodness we've got superior players like AD.
He's the reason I watch.
And Allen?
That debate has been put to bed-he's a freak!
The defense pulled our fat out of the fire and AD simply refused to lose.
And Chidress?
Get a clue man.
The fourth down was the mark of an inexperienced and lost coach.
You simply must punt in that situation with the way our defense was playing.
As it was we again gave them points that almost cost the game.
Oh, and Taylor is the most underrated guy on the team- gives it up and makes plays with no whining about his lack of carries.

PurplePeopleEaters
11-09-2008, 09:42 PM
It's truly remarkable how easily the Vikings can change my mood on a Sunday. Half time, I'm as happy as can be, looking for the Vikings to march down the field in the second half and extend their lead. Less than a quarter later, I'm wallowing in my misery as the Vikings look poised for another defeat at the hands of Mike McCarthy. Only then does the team that has always found a way to tug on my heart strings come back with a huge Adrian Peterson touchdown Brad Childress' first win over the Packers.

I cannot believe that just a few weeks ago many were complaining about the Jared Allen signing saying that he wouldn't live up to the money he was payed. He may not get a sack every play but he never gives up and is the new heart and soul of this defense with Henderson gone. The guy played through an injury that listed him as doubtful and made a HUGE impact. There were very few plays that Rodgers dropped back that he didn't have a face full of turf and Allen was a big part of that. No one should doubt that this is a top 10 defense any longer. If only we had put that kind of pressure on Rodgers and Manning in week one and two.. I said it pre-game and I'll say it again now. Allen is our modern day version of Jim Marshall.

Gus had a bad game but in no way does that mean it's Jackson's turn. Gus has been a huge part of this teams contention this season. Every QB has an off week and that's precisely what happened to Gus this week. If this becomes a trend, then yes, it may be time to see another change, but based on his body of work this season, there's no reason to believe that he will play this badly in each game from here on out.

Adrian Peterson is the best running back in the NFL... and it's only year two.
Adrian has a chance to do something special and become one of the greatest RB's of all time. Now all we have to do is hope he doesn't get injured and continue to put the pieces around him... that and make sure he never leaves Minnesota.

Beating the Packers for the first time in 3 years feels great.

Anemic Offense
11-09-2008, 09:46 PM
"purplehelmut" wrote:


Hate to pee on everyone's parade, but what a lousy way to win a ballgame.
A crummy missed field goal when we should have blown this team out- we beat these guys up and down the field all frickin' day.
WTF Gus?
The guy played like a lost little rookie.
Those weren't just INTs, they were pathetic INTs.
And one for a TD.
Special teams?
Puuuleeeze!
Thank goodness we've got superior players like AD.
He's the reason I watch.
And Allen?
That debate has been put to bed-he's a freak!
The defense pulled our fat out of the fire and AD simply refused to lose.
And Chidress?
Get a clue man.
The fourth down was the mark of an inexperienced and lost coach.
You simply must punt in that situation with the way our defense was playing.
As it was we again gave them points that almost cost the game.
Oh, and Taylor is the most underrated guy on the team- gives it up and makes plays with no whining about his lack of carries.


Again, I trust AD to make that 4th and 1 conversion far more than I trust our special ed. teams to not give up a big return.
I still say that going for it was the right decision.

Braddock
11-09-2008, 10:21 PM
"Anemic" wrote:


"purplehelmut" wrote:


Hate to pee on everyone's parade, but what a lousy way to win a ballgame.
A crummy missed field goal when we should have blown this team out- we beat these guys up and down the field all frickin' day.
WTF Gus?
The guy played like a lost little rookie.
Those weren't just INTs, they were pathetic INTs.
And one for a TD.
Special teams?
Puuuleeeze!
Thank goodness we've got superior players like AD.
He's the reason I watch.
And Allen?
That debate has been put to bed-he's a freak!
The defense pulled our fat out of the fire and AD simply refused to lose.
And Chidress?
Get a clue man.
The fourth down was the mark of an inexperienced and lost coach.
You simply must punt in that situation with the way our defense was playing.
As it was we again gave them points that almost cost the game.
Oh, and Taylor is the most underrated guy on the team- gives it up and makes plays with no whining about his lack of carries.


Again, I trust AD to make that 4th and 1 conversion far more than I trust our special ed. teams to not give up a big return.

I still say that going for it was the right decision.


Yeah, I was fine with that call too. Had the ball not gotten stripped he would have made it for a first down. Also, I get nervous anytime Kluwe goes on the field. Not b/c of him, he roxors, but b/c our ST tackling is atrocious.

PurpleMafia
11-09-2008, 10:52 PM
<rant>

I still can't believe that I had to have a huge argument with a member on here at the end of the game, defending why AP is our starter, and Mewelde Moore isn't.
::) I mean, I would understand a few haters after a bad game or a loss, but after a 200 yard performance topped off with the game winning touchdown run? Unbelievable. What does the man have to do to convince some people? I already have enough arguments as to why AP > Joseph Addai (as I live in Indiana), but Mewelde Moore of all people? I just don't know what he has left to prove. I mean, he has pretty much done all you can do in 2 years in the NFL, right?

</rant>

PurpleMafia
11-09-2008, 10:59 PM
"Anemic" wrote:


"purplehelmut" wrote:


Hate to pee on everyone's parade, but what a lousy way to win a ballgame.
A crummy missed field goal when we should have blown this team out- we beat these guys up and down the field all frickin' day.
WTF Gus?
The guy played like a lost little rookie.
Those weren't just INTs, they were pathetic INTs.
And one for a TD.
Special teams?
Puuuleeeze!
Thank goodness we've got superior players like AD.
He's the reason I watch.
And Allen?
That debate has been put to bed-he's a freak!
The defense pulled our fat out of the fire and AD simply refused to lose.
And Chidress?
Get a clue man.
The fourth down was the mark of an inexperienced and lost coach.
You simply must punt in that situation with the way our defense was playing.
As it was we again gave them points that almost cost the game.
Oh, and Taylor is the most underrated guy on the team- gives it up and makes plays with no whining about his lack of carries.


Again, I trust AD to make that 4th and 1 conversion far more than I trust our special ed. teams to not give up a big return.

I still say that going for it was the right decision.

In no way should AP be blamed for this 4th and 1. The way I see it, it was a 1 yard run, and he bounced it to the outside. This means one of two things. He was either trying to do way too much, or his line crumbled in front of him. If you look back on the play now, you will see every single offensive lineman that started the play, ended up on the ground within a nano-second. He was not trying to do too much, all he wanted was the first down. The line executed so poorly that the best running back in the NFL couldn't even run it inside for a single yard. The fumble is completely irrelevant. Had the line even somewhat done their job, we would have converted for the first, and the fumble never would have happened. In no way can you blame AP for his line's inability to block. In fact, they sucked all day. That was the hardest earned 200 yard game I have ever seen. He didn't follow a block all day. On one of his best runs, I distinctly remember him designed to run off-tackle inside left. He ended up bouncing outside left, then back to the middle, and then ended up running down the right sideline. Think through the blame. Was it really his fault? No chance.

huxx
11-09-2008, 11:00 PM
"scottishvike" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Why was AD wearing a condom on his head???


Because he was F*****G the Packers defence all game long.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!

That's the best thing I've read on here in a long time.

mnvikes61
11-09-2008, 11:04 PM
"PurpleMafia" wrote:


"Anemic" wrote:


"purplehelmut" wrote:


Hate to pee on everyone's parade, but what a lousy way to win a ballgame.
A crummy missed field goal when we should have blown this team out- we beat these guys up and down the field all frickin' day.
WTF Gus?
The guy played like a lost little rookie.
Those weren't just INTs, they were pathetic INTs.
And one for a TD.
Special teams?
Puuuleeeze!
Thank goodness we've got superior players like AD.
He's the reason I watch.
And Allen?
That debate has been put to bed-he's a freak!
The defense pulled our fat out of the fire and AD simply refused to lose.
And Chidress?
Get a clue man.
The fourth down was the mark of an inexperienced and lost coach.
You simply must punt in that situation with the way our defense was playing.
As it was we again gave them points that almost cost the game.
Oh, and Taylor is the most underrated guy on the team- gives it up and makes plays with no whining about his lack of carries.

Again, I trust AD to make that 4th and 1 conversion far more than I trust our special ed. teams to not give up a big return.

I still say that going for it was the right decision.

In no way should AP be blamed for this 4th and 1. The way I see it, it was a 1 yard run, and he bounced it to the outside. This means one of two things. He was either trying to do way too much, or his line crumbled in front of him. If you look back on the play now, you will see every single offensive lineman that started the play, ended up on the ground within a nano-second. He was not trying to do too much, all he wanted was the first down. The line executed so poorly that the best running back in the NFL couldn't even run it inside for a single yard. The fumble is completely irrelevant. Had the line even somewhat done their job, we would have converted for the first, and the fumble never would have happened. In no way can you blame AP for his line's inability to block. In fact, they sucked all day. That was the hardest earned 200 yard game I have ever seen. He didn't follow a block all day. On one of his best runs, I distinctly remember him designed to run off-tackle inside left. He ended up bouncing outside left, then back to the middle, and then ended up running down the right sideline. Think through the blame. Was it really his fault? No chance.

That's not
true. I can't recall every play, but I know that on the TD run in the 4th quarter the line, Kleinsasser
Cook and Herrera, opened up a huge hole on the right hand side

ragz
11-09-2008, 11:50 PM
i wonder how many people were repeating those words i've been hearing for weeks, "maybe we woulda won the green bay game week one if ferrotte started."
this is a perfect example of a qb killing you as compared to what alot of other people were trying to make jacksons performances into.


i think today is another example though of us being just more talented than the team we were playing, and that is the sole reason we won today.
the defense was better, peterson was better, and green bay had no business being in the game.
we had a thread last week with posters talking about us not having to blow people out cuz were not that kinda team.
well maybe thats the problem, the thinking that when you have 200 more yards, have a 13 minute top advantage, run 20+ more plays, that we are supposed to win by just one point on a missed field goal by the other team.
we proved today that we are talented enough to play with alot of teams, but are we gonna be able to win the division with games like this? or is this an example of why we lose so many tight games.
childress was not good today and i think started to get scared of ferrotte, and probably rightly so.
fortunately green bay could not stop peterson.
the whole team starts to play as if they are afraid of blowing a game.
i dont think the defense did today, but everything else did, and probably not peterson either.
and to me thats a direct reflexion on childress cuz it feels like he starts to coach that way.


watching us dominate today and probably make rogers look the worse hes looked so far, which is what i was expecting week one, it makes me believe we deserve to be in the playoffs no doubt.
the problem is i think childress is gonna end up costing us a game if not more and we dont have that much room for error.
and ferrotte has to shake this game off as just being a horrendous fluke.
too many of his picks directly lead to teams points.
if he was being asked to manage a game today, then the few passes you do throw can not lead to 17 points off of turnovers.
if he doesnt get the costly turnovers taken care of, odds are hes gonna end up costing us a game.
so in a game where we did so many things right, i'm still scared shitless we ain't gonna pull it off.

PurplePeopleEaters
11-09-2008, 11:56 PM
"ragz" wrote:


i wonder how many people were repeating those words i've been hearing for weeks, "maybe we woulda won the green bay game week one if ferrotte started."
this is a perfect example of a qb killing you as compared to what alot of other people were trying to make jacksons performances into.


i think today is another example though of us being just more talented than the team we were playing, and that is the sole reason we won today.
the defense was better, peterson was better, and green bay had no business being in the game.
we had a thread last week with posters talking about us not having to blow people out cuz were not that kinda team.
well maybe thats the problem, the thinking that when you have 200 more yards, have a 13 minute top advantage, run 20+ more plays, that we are supposed to win by just one point on a missed field goal by the other team.
we proved today that we are talented enough to play with alot of teams, but are we gonna be able to win the division with games like this? or is this an example of why we lose so many tight games.
childress was not good today and i think started to get scared of ferrotte, and probably rightly so.
fortunately green bay could not stop peterson.
the whole team starts to play as if they are afraid of blowing a game.
i dont think the defense did today, but everything else did, and probably not peterson either.
and to me thats a direct reflexion on childress cuz it feels like he starts to coach that way.


watching us dominate today and probably make rogers look the worse hes looked so far, which is what i was expecting week one, it makes me believe we deserve to be in the playoffs no doubt.
the problem is i think childress is gonna end up costing us a game if not more and we dont have that much room for error.
and ferrotte has to shake this game off as just being a horrendous fluke.
too many of his picks directly lead to teams points.
if he was being asked to manage a game today, then the few passes you do throw can not lead to 17 points off of turnovers.
if he doesnt get the costly turnovers taken care of, odds are hes gonna end up costing us a game.
so in a game where we did so many things right, i'm still scared shitless we ain't gonna pull it off.




I'm with you all the way on the third paragraph. The optimist part of me keeps saying that Green Bay leads the league in INT's but a lot of those throws were just plain horrible. It's annoying that we get to the real meat of our schedule right now too. The next three games are key.

i_bleed_purple
11-09-2008, 11:57 PM
"ragz" wrote:


i wonder how many people were repeating those words i've been hearing for weeks, "maybe we woulda won the green bay game week one if ferrotte started."
this is a perfect example of a qb killing you as compared to what alot of other people were trying to make jacksons performances into.


i think today is another example though of us being just more talented than the team we were playing, and that is the sole reason we won today.
the defense was better, peterson was better, and green bay had no business being in the game.
we had a thread last week with posters talking about us not having to blow people out cuz were not that kinda team.
well maybe thats the problem, the thinking that when you have 200 more yards, have a 13 minute top advantage, run 20+ more plays, that we are supposed to win by just one point on a missed field goal by the other team.
we proved today that we are talented enough to play with alot of teams, but are we gonna be able to win the division with games like this? or is this an example of why we lose so many tight games.
childress was not good today and i think started to get scared of ferrotte, and probably rightly so.
fortunately green bay could not stop peterson.
the whole team starts to play as if they are afraid of blowing a game.
i dont think the defense did today, but everything else did, and probably not peterson either.
and to me thats a direct reflexion on childress cuz it feels like he starts to coach that way.


watching us dominate today and probably make rogers look the worse hes looked so far, which is what i was expecting week one, it makes me believe we deserve to be in the playoffs no doubt.
the problem is i think childress is gonna end up costing us a game if not more and we dont have that much room for error.
and ferrotte has to shake this game off as just being a horrendous fluke.
too many of his picks directly lead to teams points.
if he was being asked to manage a game today, then the few passes you do throw can not lead to 17 points off of turnovers.
if he doesnt get the costly turnovers taken care of, odds are hes gonna end up costing us a game.
so in a game where we did so many things right, i'm still scared shitless we ain't gonna pull it off.



I think what was key in this game compared to the first one is that our D line is starting to click.
In the past couple of games, they've been putting mad pressure on opposing QB's.
Had they done that from week one, we could very well be 7-2 now.

Barack Obama
11-10-2008, 12:26 AM
Erin Rodgers reminds me of Rex Grossman.
Rexy started out hot, showing some nice deep passes, had the media licking his nut sack, but he holds on to the ball too long and went downhill fast.
I hope Erin follows in his footsteps
;D.
Those jump balls to Jennings are gonna catch up to him.

V-Unit
11-10-2008, 12:26 AM
"ragz" wrote:


i wonder how many people were repeating those words i've been hearing for weeks, "maybe we woulda won the green bay game week one if ferrotte started."
this is a perfect example of a qb killing you as compared to what alot of other people were trying to make jacksons performances into.


i think today is another example though of us being just more talented than the team we were playing, and that is the sole reason we won today.
the defense was better, peterson was better, and green bay had no business being in the game.
we had a thread last week with posters talking about us not having to blow people out cuz were not that kinda team.
well maybe thats the problem, the thinking that when you have 200 more yards, have a 13 minute top advantage, run 20+ more plays, that we are supposed to win by just one point on a missed field goal by the other team.
we proved today that we are talented enough to play with alot of teams, but are we gonna be able to win the division with games like this? or is this an example of why we lose so many tight games.
childress was not good today and i think started to get scared of ferrotte, and probably rightly so.
fortunately green bay could not stop peterson.
the whole team starts to play as if they are afraid of blowing a game.
i dont think the defense did today, but everything else did, and probably not peterson either.
and to me thats a direct reflexion on childress cuz it feels like he starts to coach that way.


watching us dominate today and probably make rogers look the worse hes looked so far, which is what i was expecting week one, it makes me believe we deserve to be in the playoffs no doubt.
the problem is i think childress is gonna end up costing us a game if not more and we dont have that much room for error.
and ferrotte has to shake this game off as just being a horrendous fluke.
too many of his picks directly lead to teams points.
if he was being asked to manage a game today, then the few passes you do throw can not lead to 17 points off of turnovers.
if he doesnt get the costly turnovers taken care of, odds are hes gonna end up costing us a game.
so in a game where we did so many things right, i'm still scared shitless we ain't gonna pull it off.



You know, I almost agree with you, but the problem is not the team's attitude or strategy towards winning games. We have seen the offense work very well save for the miscues. Fact is, turnovers and special teams miscues have been a big part of every game this year, except for the Colts I think. If we were losing more games like we lost to the Colts, I would say the offense is too conservative, but that is clearly not the problem.

Our offense works if we can play clean football. Gus simply must take better care of the ball. ST is still a pain in our necks. Our problems are simple, and I take pleasure from that.

Morever, we have heavily criticized Chilly in the past for games where we come out flat, penalties, and uninspired efforts from our players. Today was very different. Our players were clearly ready to play. Penalties were not great but solid. Both offensive and defense gameplans worked. We saw some great playcalling.

I'm not saying that this team should have to grind out every game we play, I'm just saying expect it to happen and accept it. That is how the team is built.

I disagree with saying that our style of play does not give us much room for error. We give ourselves plenty of room for error, but we make too many errors! A missed FG, Pick six, punt return for TD. Fumble on 4th and 1. 3 picks. The Saints game and Bears games are other clear examples.

I also disagree with saying that our playcalling is as if we are afraid of blowing the game. That was last year. How can you say we were too conservative when the play that got them back in the game was a pick six. Gus was trying to make a play, but he made a bad one. We stuck to the gameplan the entire game and in the end that was what got us the win.

UTVikfan
11-10-2008, 01:19 AM
Coaching:A. Childress/Bevels KAO actually was KAO minus /sigh Ferrote. Letting AD change his mind on the 4th when he was gonna do the correct thing, to me was great. I like the mix, the gameplan, the whole nine yards. I would still like to see Childress fired, but, this game was a great game by them.
Special Teams: D. The ONLY reason for a D, was a catch at the 5 on a punt, and, of course the return. Otherwise (even a missed FG) we had GREAT field position, and they didn't return worth crap. CANNOT let them return them for a TD. We will break a record for most ST TD's allowed this year, umm, yay?
DLine: OMFG, what a game! TWO safeties. 3 points allowed on normal drives. Aaron Rodgers is NOT gonna shake this game off next week. If he thinks of purple, he will pee his pants. JAllen is all we thought we were getting. Last I knew the packers had a good O....oops, hahahha.
LB's: I oh so miss EJ, but, wow. Nice hit Leber! Considering we had a DE with a bad wing, run game was stopped, QB was ready to cry because of blitzes, and not much O. WTG!
DB's:WOW! Very, very good receivers did very, very little. You KNOW if they were open, Rodgers woulda hit them, he held the ball to long. And said (maybe) so in his pc. If they were open...
QB: Ferotte is still Ferotte. 15 years, of on off, 50% completion and WTF was that plays. He is no better than TJ. One hoppers, delay of game (he is a vetern so no more of that, right?), not in the ball park throws, hold on and take the sack. Yep he's got that all. Has for 15 years. /shrug no difference between him and TJ, except if TJ does that, there are a million posts for him to be bench for Brooks Bollinger, LOL. I am hoping Chillies gameball will give him the power to pull his QB's head out. Not counting on that though.

Jim Kleinsasser #40
11-10-2008, 02:12 AM
I think everyone is being way too hard on Gus. All those interceptions just show Gus’s high football IQ. He obviously knew that if we put our punting team on the field it would be a touchdown. ::)

Mr-holland
11-10-2008, 02:51 AM
Didn't you guys loved the fact when we won, Pat and Greenway directly went to childress..

phillyviking
11-10-2008, 03:47 AM
AD is simply amazing. The guy just refuses to go down without an all-out war.

This is the kind of playcalling that drives me nuts:

First and 10, run by Peterson, 12 yards, first down.
ON THE VERY NEXT PLAY:
First and 10, run by Peterson, 0 yards, second and 10.

GAH. It worked once, but you probably won't get that gift twice, Chili. Change it up, get creative, toss in a playaction or something.

But, I guess I can't rag on Childress too much since he got his first win over the hated Packers.


It's truly remarkable how easily the Vikings can change my mood on a Sunday. Half time, I'm as happy as can be, looking for the Vikings to march down the field in the second half and extend their lead. Less than a quarter later, I'm wallowing in my misery as the Vikings look poised for another defeat at the hands of Mike McCarthy. Only then does the team that has always found a way to tug on my heart strings come back with a huge Adrian Peterson touchdown Brad Childress' first win over the Packers.

I know what you mean. I think this team is making me bipolar or something. Either that or they're just going to drive me to drink.

tke0933
11-10-2008, 05:07 AM
Good defensive play, some bad throws by Gus( a little more air would have helped), shaky ST play but all in all a good game because of the win.
Just a personal opinion but I would have liked to see some pass plays down the field.
Unless we did some when I was visiting the head, we didn't try to go long except for the time Green Bay jumped off side.
Where was the long ball today?

El Vikingo
11-10-2008, 06:42 AM
My points.

-I ve booked my room for the mental hospital for the end of the season
-Hitting the floor of your
apart with your fists ,hurts a lot ,most of all the day after .
-AD is king and JA is the son of the devil.
- Chiller was lucky to win the game ,he burned two stupids TO .Don´t take the flower out of your ass Childress.
-Our D rocks,special mention M.Williams.
-Our Special teams are special.
-We keep moving the chains.
-I like what I am seeing in the field lately.
-Fuck you puckers.


5-4 ,keep the winning mentality,If you take us to the playoffs ,i won´t mind going to the mental hospital.


Vamos Vikingos!!



YES WE CAN
;D

ragz
11-10-2008, 07:45 AM
"V" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


i wonder how many people were repeating those words i've been hearing for weeks, "maybe we woulda won the green bay game week one if ferrotte started."
this is a perfect example of a qb killing you as compared to what alot of other people were trying to make jacksons performances into.


i think today is another example though of us being just more talented than the team we were playing, and that is the sole reason we won today.
the defense was better, peterson was better, and green bay had no business being in the game.
we had a thread last week with posters talking about us not having to blow people out cuz were not that kinda team.
well maybe thats the problem, the thinking that when you have 200 more yards, have a 13 minute top advantage, run 20+ more plays, that we are supposed to win by just one point on a missed field goal by the other team.
we proved today that we are talented enough to play with alot of teams, but are we gonna be able to win the division with games like this? or is this an example of why we lose so many tight games.
childress was not good today and i think started to get scared of ferrotte, and probably rightly so.
fortunately green bay could not stop peterson.
the whole team starts to play as if they are afraid of blowing a game.
i dont think the defense did today, but everything else did, and probably not peterson either.
and to me thats a direct reflexion on childress cuz it feels like he starts to coach that way.


watching us dominate today and probably make rogers look the worse hes looked so far, which is what i was expecting week one, it makes me believe we deserve to be in the playoffs no doubt.
the problem is i think childress is gonna end up costing us a game if not more and we dont have that much room for error.
and ferrotte has to shake this game off as just being a horrendous fluke.
too many of his picks directly lead to teams points.
if he was being asked to manage a game today, then the few passes you do throw can not lead to 17 points off of turnovers.
if he doesnt get the costly turnovers taken care of, odds are hes gonna end up costing us a game.
so in a game where we did so many things right, i'm still scared shitless we ain't gonna pull it off.



You know, I almost agree with you, but the problem is not the team's attitude or strategy towards winning games. We have seen the offense work very well save for the miscues. Fact is, turnovers and special teams miscues have been a big part of every game this year, except for the Colts I think. If we were losing more games like we lost to the Colts, I would say the offense is too conservative, but that is clearly not the problem.

Our offense works if we can play clean football. Gus simply must take better care of the ball. ST is still a pain in our necks. Our problems are simple, and I take pleasure from that.

Morever, we have heavily criticized Chilly in the past for games where we come out flat, penalties, and uninspired efforts from our players. Today was very different. Our players were clearly ready to play. Penalties were not great but solid. Both offensive and defense gameplans worked. We saw some great playcalling.

I'm not saying that this team should have to grind out every game we play, I'm just saying expect it to happen and accept it. That is how the team is built.

I disagree with saying that our style of play does not give us much room for error. We give ourselves plenty of room for error, but we make too many errors! A missed FG, Pick six, punt return for TD. Fumble on 4th and 1. 3 picks. The Saints game and Bears games are other clear examples.

I also disagree with saying that our playcalling is as if we are afraid of blowing the game. That was last year. How can you say we were too conservative when the play that got them back in the game was a pick six. Gus was trying to make a play, but he made a bad one. We stuck to the gameplan the entire game and in the end that was what got us the win.

but what you're forgetting is that instead of poor first halves we have had 10 point leads in the new orleans, greenbay game, 14 points in the houston game, and then of course the indy game, to go along with the games you mentioned.


how many three outs did we have in the 3rd quarter of the n.o. game, probably about the same as the indy game?
and then the barely 7 points we scored on houston in the 2nd half when they couldnt stop our pass in the first half.
how many 3 and outs this past week in the 3rd quarter and then mix in the pick and uh oh, i see a pattern.
we had great field postion the whole game too, it wasn't like we had to drive 80 yards.


of the punt returns we've given up, probably 4 have been in the 3rd.
i mean who cares when the flat is happening, the fact that it does, continues to be the problem.
how many other balls besides ferrottes terrible pick did we go downfield with in the 2nd half?
even that throw was the underneath route, instead of going the deeper play to an open wade.
haha, even the carolina game we were pretty much holding on and the defense just took over.



i understand you wanna defend your boy childress, but the list of these games are more than half that we've played.
i think thats more an example of playing to lose and holding on for dear life, then it does that we are this new team.
you wanna know what the new part of this team is, that we are just more talented than who we play, so games that are being given away, we have pulled out cuz you dont have to have a great play call for allen to destory an ot, or for peterson to stiff arm or juke a safety.


in the end what has been the biggest differences in our wins and losses?
the defense winning or losing the game.
we needed stops in the green bay game, indy game, chicago game and they gave it up when it mattered.
new orleans,
green bay(in minny), houston, carolina, and detroit, big plays by the defense at some point that held on to our one score leads.
now you can talk about childress or ferrotte, but in all our wins the defense has been the determining factor.
not to mention they have showed signs of dominance when our offense is still a different team from one quarter to the next.
theres a reason so much hype was given to us, and thats becuz we have enough talent but for some reason, even in games we dominate we do enough to have to sweat out any victory.
its no accident

BleedinPandG
11-10-2008, 08:42 AM
"ragz" wrote:


but what you're forgetting is that instead of poor first halves we have had 10 point leads in the new orleans, greenbay game, 14 points in the houston game, and then of course the indy game, to go along with the games you mentioned.


how many three outs did we have in the 3rd quarter of the n.o. game, probably about the same as the indy game?
and then the barely 7 points we scored on houston in the 2nd half when they couldnt stop our pass in the first half.
how many 3 and outs this past week in the 3rd quarter and then mix in the pick and uh oh, i see a pattern.
we had great field postion the whole game too, it wasn't like we had to drive 80 yards.


of the punt returns we've given up, probably 4 have been in the 3rd.
i mean who cares when the flat is happening, the fact that it does, continues to be the problem.
how many other balls besides ferrottes terrible pick did we go downfield with in the 2nd half?
even that throw was the underneath route, instead of going the deeper play to an open wade.
haha, even the carolina game we were pretty much holding on and the defense just took over.



i understand you wanna defend your boy childress, but the list of these games are more than half that we've played.
i think thats more an example of playing to lose and holding on for dear life, then it does that we are this new team.
you wanna know what the new part of this team is, that we are just more talented than who we play, so games that are being given away, we have pulled out cuz you dont have to have a great play call for allen to destory an ot, or for peterson to stiff arm or juke a safety.


in the end what has been the biggest differences in our wins and losses?

the defense winning or losing the game.
we needed stops in the green bay game, indy game, chicago game and they gave it up when it mattered.
new orleans,
green bay(in minny), houston, carolina, and detroit, big plays by the defense at some point that held on to our one score leads.
now you can talk about childress or ferrotte, but in all our wins the defense has been the determining factor.
not to mention they have showed signs of dominance when our offense is still a different team from one quarter to the next.
theres a reason so much hype was given to us, and thats becuz we have enough talent but for some reason, even in games we dominate we do enough to have to sweat out any victory.
its no accident




You mean that same defense that forgot how to cover receivers the 2nd half of the Indy game?
Or are you talking about the Defense that gave up 47 points to the Bears?
That same "dominant" defense is the reason we lost 2 games as well.

Chilly plays conservatively with a lead.
With Gus' history of throwing INTs, that's not a bad plan.
The last thing you want to do when you have a lead is throw a pick-6 and Gus has done that, more than once.
When you look at the strength of our team, our O Line & running game, we should be able to grind out a 2nd half win.
We are built to get the lead and then drain the clock with long sustained drives.
When we are executing well, i.e. not getting dropped for losses in the running game and not getting O Line penalties, we can do just that.

V-Unit
11-10-2008, 09:50 AM
"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


but what you're forgetting is that instead of poor first halves we have had 10 point leads in the new orleans, greenbay game, 14 points in the houston game, and then of course the indy game, to go along with the games you mentioned.


how many three outs did we have in the 3rd quarter of the n.o. game, probably about the same as the indy game?
and then the barely 7 points we scored on houston in the 2nd half when they couldnt stop our pass in the first half.
how many 3 and outs this past week in the 3rd quarter and then mix in the pick and uh oh, i see a pattern.
we had great field postion the whole game too, it wasn't like we had to drive 80 yards.


of the punt returns we've given up, probably 4 have been in the 3rd.
i mean who cares when the flat is happening, the fact that it does, continues to be the problem.
how many other balls besides ferrottes terrible pick did we go downfield with in the 2nd half?
even that throw was the underneath route, instead of going the deeper play to an open wade.
haha, even the carolina game we were pretty much holding on and the defense just took over.



i understand you wanna defend your boy childress, but the list of these games are more than half that we've played.
i think thats more an example of playing to lose and holding on for dear life, then it does that we are this new team.
you wanna know what the new part of this team is, that we are just more talented than who we play, so games that are being given away, we have pulled out cuz you dont have to have a great play call for allen to destory an ot, or for peterson to stiff arm or juke a safety.


in the end what has been the biggest differences in our wins and losses?

the defense winning or losing the game.
we needed stops in the green bay game, indy game, chicago game and they gave it up when it mattered.
new orleans,
green bay(in minny), houston, carolina, and detroit, big plays by the defense at some point that held on to our one score leads.
now you can talk about childress or ferrotte, but in all our wins the defense has been the determining factor.
not to mention they have showed signs of dominance when our offense is still a different team from one quarter to the next.
theres a reason so much hype was given to us, and thats becuz we have enough talent but for some reason, even in games we dominate we do enough to have to sweat out any victory.
its no accident




You mean that same defense that forgot how to cover receivers the 2nd half of the Indy game?
Or are you talking about the Defense that gave up 47 points to the Bears?
That same "dominant" defense is the reason we lost 2 games as well.

Chilly plays conservatively with a lead.
With Gus' history of throwing INTs, that's not a bad plan.
The last thing you want to do when you have a lead is throw a pick-6 and Gus has done that, more than once.
When you look at the strength of our team, our O Line & running game, we should be able to grind out a 2nd half win.
We are built to get the lead and then drain the clock with long sustained drives.
When we are executing well, i.e. not getting dropped for losses in the running game and not getting O Line penalties, we can do just that.


It's very simple Ragz.

I blame Chilly for the ST miscues, penalties, and a flat team coming out of the tunnell.
I blame Gus for the INTs.

If you think that the former has been a bigger problem than the latter, then that is where we disagree. Either way, those are problems than can and hopefully will be solved.

I give Chilly credit for AD's performance. Last year against GB we greatly underutilized our star back. Chilly made a change for the better.
I give Chilly credit for benching TJ. The offense has simply been better with Gus. The deep strike is working and opening up running lanes and underneath routes that were not there with TJ at the helm.
I give Chilly credit for the defensive play. He is the head coach, not the offensive coach. I would like to think he had some input about how to beat a WCO.

Your criticisms of Chilly are usually somewhat legit ragz, but refuse to give Chilly any credit, for anything, and that is what makes you a hater.

vikings4life33
11-10-2008, 09:57 AM
great win. i would like to see all are starters on SP. we can not give games any like we almost did here.

PurpleTide
11-10-2008, 10:00 AM
We have some work to td. Gus has to protect the ball, the special teams were playing well until that punt return, which just can't happen. We showed heart and overcame all the bs to win this game which we should have won far more easily, but when we had too we made plays in crucial times.

AngloVike
11-10-2008, 11:20 AM
Did anyone notice how much Aikman & Buck kept talking up Mason Crosby all afternoon saying how he was the best kicker in the league?

how did they work that out as there are other kickers with more points and FGs on the board than him.

Mind I did laugh when he missed, not just for our win, but for the sound of the wind leaving the commentary booth as Buck's empty head imploded with shock.

Suick
11-10-2008, 11:25 AM
My obsevations:

Ferrott: Yuck, I was calling for TJ after the 2nd INT. We'll have to give him a pass on this one though

AD: I hope he fumbles (early) every game, once he does that..........look out.

Allen: Good thing he's got that huge contract. The fines are going to be mounting.

Leber: 12 yd run at Rogers then splat......awesome

Rogers: aka Vikings tackling dummy

M. Williams: Saved our a$$es with that open field tackle

BB: WTF?

ragz
11-10-2008, 11:38 AM
"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


but what you're forgetting is that instead of poor first halves we have had 10 point leads in the new orleans, greenbay game, 14 points in the houston game, and then of course the indy game, to go along with the games you mentioned.


how many three outs did we have in the 3rd quarter of the n.o. game, probably about the same as the indy game?
and then the barely 7 points we scored on houston in the 2nd half when they couldnt stop our pass in the first half.
how many 3 and outs this past week in the 3rd quarter and then mix in the pick and uh oh, i see a pattern.
we had great field postion the whole game too, it wasn't like we had to drive 80 yards.


of the punt returns we've given up, probably 4 have been in the 3rd.
i mean who cares when the flat is happening, the fact that it does, continues to be the problem.
how many other balls besides ferrottes terrible pick did we go downfield with in the 2nd half?
even that throw was the underneath route, instead of going the deeper play to an open wade.
haha, even the carolina game we were pretty much holding on and the defense just took over.



i understand you wanna defend your boy childress, but the list of these games are more than half that we've played.
i think thats more an example of playing to lose and holding on for dear life, then it does that we are this new team.
you wanna know what the new part of this team is, that we are just more talented than who we play, so games that are being given away, we have pulled out cuz you dont have to have a great play call for allen to destory an ot, or for peterson to stiff arm or juke a safety.


in the end what has been the biggest differences in our wins and losses?
the defense winning or losing the game.
we needed stops in the green bay game, indy game, chicago game and they gave it up when it mattered.
new orleans,
green bay(in minny), houston, carolina, and detroit, big plays by the defense at some point that held on to our one score leads.
now you can talk about childress or ferrotte, but in all our wins the defense has been the determining factor.
not to mention they have showed signs of dominance when our offense is still a different team from one quarter to the next.
theres a reason so much hype was given to us, and thats becuz we have enough talent but for some reason, even in games we dominate we do enough to have to sweat out any victory.
its no accident




You mean that same defense that forgot how to cover receivers the 2nd half of the Indy game?
Or are you talking about the Defense that gave up 47 points to the Bears?
That same "dominant" defense is the reason we lost 2 games as well.

Chilly plays conservatively with a lead.
With Gus' history of throwing INTs, that's not a bad plan.
The last thing you want to do when you have a lead is throw a pick-6 and Gus has done that, more than once.
When you look at the strength of our team, our O Line & running game, we should be able to grind out a 2nd half win.
We are built to get the lead and then drain the clock with long sustained drives.
When we are executing well, i.e. not getting dropped for losses in the running game and not getting O Line penalties, we can do just that.


It's very simple Ragz.

I blame Chilly for the ST miscues, penalties, and a flat team coming out of the tunnell.
I blame Gus for the INTs.

If you think that the former has been a bigger problem than the latter, then that is where we disagree. Either way, those are problems than can and hopefully will be solved.

I give Chilly credit for AD's performance. Last year against GB we greatly underutilized our star back. Chilly made a change for the better.
I give Chilly credit for benching TJ. The offense has simply been better with Gus. The deep strike is working and opening up running lanes and underneath routes that were not there with TJ at the helm.
I give Chilly credit for the defensive play. He is the head coach, not the offensive coach. I would like to think he had some input about how to beat a WCO.

Your criticisms of Chilly are usually somewhat legit ragz, but refuse to give Chilly any credit, for anything, and that is what makes you a hater.

ill give him credit, ill give him credit for finally finding some ways to get taylor involved after a year and half of having 2 talented running backs.
but at what price, that berrian has no catches?
it doesnt strike you as strange that he was afraid to live with jacksons mistakes so thats why we played close to the vest but all of a sudden we could live with ferrotte throwing multiple picks per week, which by the way teams have scored off of in one way or another more often than not?
his game management, player management have been detriments to us.
then you factor in the fact that the problems you keep saying is the issue, he can't fix.


and anyone that believes our running game working yesterday had anything to do with our "explosive" passing game is again just reaching for something positive to say.
we dominated the line of scrimmage and peterson made alot of plays out of nothing.
they weren't dropping guys outta the box, especially at the end of our game, yet ferrotte was terrible.
i dont mind you guys looking for the bright side, god knows i'm not going to look for it, but lets not lie to ourselves.
since everyones enormous praise for his 4 int performance against chicago he has thrown 4 picks that have lead to 24 points.
you can talk about his 2 tds yesterday but you know the truth is he threw a 3 yard flare and taylor did the rest and then threw a 3 yard slant.
and i'm not even counting the points that his 4 picks lead to in the chicago game.
so what is the positive side of your qb giving the other team 30+ points over 3 games?
and childress i dont even have to talk about much anymore cuz hes proven his worth.
if i gave childress credit for every big game peterson had, i would make people start to think that childress is his lead blocker.

V-Unit
11-10-2008, 01:17 PM
"ragz" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


but what you're forgetting is that instead of poor first halves we have had 10 point leads in the new orleans, greenbay game, 14 points in the houston game, and then of course the indy game, to go along with the games you mentioned.


how many three outs did we have in the 3rd quarter of the n.o. game, probably about the same as the indy game?
and then the barely 7 points we scored on houston in the 2nd half when they couldnt stop our pass in the first half.
how many 3 and outs this past week in the 3rd quarter and then mix in the pick and uh oh, i see a pattern.
we had great field postion the whole game too, it wasn't like we had to drive 80 yards.


of the punt returns we've given up, probably 4 have been in the 3rd.
i mean who cares when the flat is happening, the fact that it does, continues to be the problem.
how many other balls besides ferrottes terrible pick did we go downfield with in the 2nd half?
even that throw was the underneath route, instead of going the deeper play to an open wade.
haha, even the carolina game we were pretty much holding on and the defense just took over.



i understand you wanna defend your boy childress, but the list of these games are more than half that we've played.
i think thats more an example of playing to lose and holding on for dear life, then it does that we are this new team.
you wanna know what the new part of this team is, that we are just more talented than who we play, so games that are being given away, we have pulled out cuz you dont have to have a great play call for allen to destory an ot, or for peterson to stiff arm or juke a safety.


in the end what has been the biggest differences in our wins and losses?

the defense winning or losing the game.
we needed stops in the green bay game, indy game, chicago game and they gave it up when it mattered.
new orleans,
green bay(in minny), houston, carolina, and detroit, big plays by the defense at some point that held on to our one score leads.
now you can talk about childress or ferrotte, but in all our wins the defense has been the determining factor.
not to mention they have showed signs of dominance when our offense is still a different team from one quarter to the next.
theres a reason so much hype was given to us, and thats becuz we have enough talent but for some reason, even in games we dominate we do enough to have to sweat out any victory.
its no accident




You mean that same defense that forgot how to cover receivers the 2nd half of the Indy game?
Or are you talking about the Defense that gave up 47 points to the Bears?
That same "dominant" defense is the reason we lost 2 games as well.

Chilly plays conservatively with a lead.
With Gus' history of throwing INTs, that's not a bad plan.
The last thing you want to do when you have a lead is throw a pick-6 and Gus has done that, more than once.
When you look at the strength of our team, our O Line & running game, we should be able to grind out a 2nd half win.
We are built to get the lead and then drain the clock with long sustained drives.
When we are executing well, i.e. not getting dropped for losses in the running game and not getting O Line penalties, we can do just that.


It's very simple Ragz.

I blame Chilly for the ST miscues, penalties, and a flat team coming out of the tunnell.
I blame Gus for the INTs.

If you think that the former has been a bigger problem than the latter, then that is where we disagree. Either way, those are problems than can and hopefully will be solved.

I give Chilly credit for AD's performance. Last year against GB we greatly underutilized our star back. Chilly made a change for the better.
I give Chilly credit for benching TJ. The offense has simply been better with Gus. The deep strike is working and opening up running lanes and underneath routes that were not there with TJ at the helm.
I give Chilly credit for the defensive play. He is the head coach, not the offensive coach. I would like to think he had some input about how to beat a WCO.

Your criticisms of Chilly are usually somewhat legit ragz, but refuse to give Chilly any credit, for anything, and that is what makes you a hater.

ill give him credit, ill give him credit for finally finding some ways to get taylor involved after a year and half of having 2 talented running backs.
but at what price, that berrian has no catches?
it doesnt strike you as strange that he was afraid to live with jacksons mistakes so thats why we played close to the vest but all of a sudden we could live with ferrotte throwing multiple picks per week, which by the way teams have scored off of in one way or another more often than not?
his game management, player management have been detriments to us.
then you factor in the fact that the problems you keep saying is the issue, he can't fix.


and anyone that believes our running game working yesterday had anything to do with our "explosive" passing game is again just reaching for something positive to say.
we dominated the line of scrimmage and peterson made alot of plays out of nothing.
they weren't dropping guys outta the box, especially at the end of our game, yet ferrotte was terrible.
i dont mind you guys looking for the bright side, god knows i'm not going to look for it, but lets not lie to ourselves.
since everyones enormous praise for his 4 int performance against chicago he has thrown 4 picks that have lead to 24 points.
you can talk about his 2 tds yesterday but you know the truth is he threw a 3 yard flare and taylor did the rest and then threw a 3 yard slant.

and i'm not even counting the points that his 4 picks lead to in the chicago game.
so what is the positive side of your qb giving the other team 30+ points over 3 games?
and childress i dont even have to talk about much anymore cuz hes proven his worth.
if i gave childress credit for every big game peterson had, i would make people start to think that childress is his lead blocker.





Hate Hate Hate Hate Hate.

V4L
11-10-2008, 01:19 PM
"V" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


but what you're forgetting is that instead of poor first halves we have had 10 point leads in the new orleans, greenbay game, 14 points in the houston game, and then of course the indy game, to go along with the games you mentioned.


how many three outs did we have in the 3rd quarter of the n.o. game, probably about the same as the indy game?
and then the barely 7 points we scored on houston in the 2nd half when they couldnt stop our pass in the first half.
how many 3 and outs this past week in the 3rd quarter and then mix in the pick and uh oh, i see a pattern.
we had great field postion the whole game too, it wasn't like we had to drive 80 yards.


of the punt returns we've given up, probably 4 have been in the 3rd.
i mean who cares when the flat is happening, the fact that it does, continues to be the problem.
how many other balls besides ferrottes terrible pick did we go downfield with in the 2nd half?
even that throw was the underneath route, instead of going the deeper play to an open wade.
haha, even the carolina game we were pretty much holding on and the defense just took over.



i understand you wanna defend your boy childress, but the list of these games are more than half that we've played.
i think thats more an example of playing to lose and holding on for dear life, then it does that we are this new team.
you wanna know what the new part of this team is, that we are just more talented than who we play, so games that are being given away, we have pulled out cuz you dont have to have a great play call for allen to destory an ot, or for peterson to stiff arm or juke a safety.


in the end what has been the biggest differences in our wins and losses?

the defense winning or losing the game.
we needed stops in the green bay game, indy game, chicago game and they gave it up when it mattered.
new orleans,
green bay(in minny), houston, carolina, and detroit, big plays by the defense at some point that held on to our one score leads.
now you can talk about childress or ferrotte, but in all our wins the defense has been the determining factor.
not to mention they have showed signs of dominance when our offense is still a different team from one quarter to the next.
theres a reason so much hype was given to us, and thats becuz we have enough talent but for some reason, even in games we dominate we do enough to have to sweat out any victory.
its no accident




You mean that same defense that forgot how to cover receivers the 2nd half of the Indy game?
Or are you talking about the Defense that gave up 47 points to the Bears?
That same "dominant" defense is the reason we lost 2 games as well.

Chilly plays conservatively with a lead.
With Gus' history of throwing INTs, that's not a bad plan.
The last thing you want to do when you have a lead is throw a pick-6 and Gus has done that, more than once.
When you look at the strength of our team, our O Line & running game, we should be able to grind out a 2nd half win.
We are built to get the lead and then drain the clock with long sustained drives.
When we are executing well, i.e. not getting dropped for losses in the running game and not getting O Line penalties, we can do just that.


It's very simple Ragz.

I blame Chilly for the ST miscues, penalties, and a flat team coming out of the tunnell.
I blame Gus for the INTs.

If you think that the former has been a bigger problem than the latter, then that is where we disagree. Either way, those are problems than can and hopefully will be solved.

I give Chilly credit for AD's performance. Last year against GB we greatly underutilized our star back. Chilly made a change for the better.
I give Chilly credit for benching TJ. The offense has simply been better with Gus. The deep strike is working and opening up running lanes and underneath routes that were not there with TJ at the helm.
I give Chilly credit for the defensive play. He is the head coach, not the offensive coach. I would like to think he had some input about how to beat a WCO.

Your criticisms of Chilly are usually somewhat legit ragz, but refuse to give Chilly any credit, for anything, and that is what makes you a hater.

ill give him credit, ill give him credit for finally finding some ways to get taylor involved after a year and half of having 2 talented running backs.
but at what price, that berrian has no catches?
it doesnt strike you as strange that he was afraid to live with jacksons mistakes so thats why we played close to the vest but all of a sudden we could live with ferrotte throwing multiple picks per week, which by the way teams have scored off of in one way or another more often than not?
his game management, player management have been detriments to us.
then you factor in the fact that the problems you keep saying is the issue, he can't fix.


and anyone that believes our running game working yesterday had anything to do with our "explosive" passing game is again just reaching for something positive to say.
we dominated the line of scrimmage and peterson made alot of plays out of nothing.
they weren't dropping guys outta the box, especially at the end of our game, yet ferrotte was terrible.
i dont mind you guys looking for the bright side, god knows i'm not going to look for it, but lets not lie to ourselves.
since everyones enormous praise for his 4 int performance against chicago he has thrown 4 picks that have lead to 24 points.
you can talk about his 2 tds yesterday but you know the truth is he threw a 3 yard flare and taylor did the rest and then threw a 3 yard slant.

and i'm not even counting the points that his 4 picks lead to in the chicago game.
so what is the positive side of your qb giving the other team 30+ points over 3 games?
and childress i dont even have to talk about much anymore cuz hes proven his worth.
if i gave childress credit for every big game peterson had, i would make people start to think that childress is his lead blocker.





Hate Hate Hate Hate Hate.




He said nothing but facts there man

Its true Gus almost gives games away

He gets bailed out by the D and Peterson every game

Im not being negative.. It's just the truth

Del Rio
11-10-2008, 01:29 PM
Its pretty obvious something needs to be done about QB before next season starts. I would hate to piss away an excellent run game and an amazing defense because we have 2nd hand QB's. I dont care if we have to trade away future picks players whatever.

Gus played a horrid game yesterday he had open WR's he just couldnt hit them, and quite often it wasnt even a pressure situation.

That being said we are winning.

V4L
11-10-2008, 01:35 PM
If Gus has another game like this or the Bears game or the Lions game we need to consider Jackson again

Jackson was atleast protecting the ball

Gus isn't

We are winning so don't change it.. But if we get another like those games we gotta make a move

i_bleed_purple
11-10-2008, 01:39 PM
"ragz" wrote:


"V" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


but what you're forgetting is that instead of poor first halves we have had 10 point leads in the new orleans, greenbay game, 14 points in the houston game, and then of course the indy game, to go along with the games you mentioned.


how many three outs did we have in the 3rd quarter of the n.o. game, probably about the same as the indy game?
and then the barely 7 points we scored on houston in the 2nd half when they couldnt stop our pass in the first half.
how many 3 and outs this past week in the 3rd quarter and then mix in the pick and uh oh, i see a pattern.
we had great field postion the whole game too, it wasn't like we had to drive 80 yards.


of the punt returns we've given up, probably 4 have been in the 3rd.
i mean who cares when the flat is happening, the fact that it does, continues to be the problem.
how many other balls besides ferrottes terrible pick did we go downfield with in the 2nd half?
even that throw was the underneath route, instead of going the deeper play to an open wade.
haha, even the carolina game we were pretty much holding on and the defense just took over.



i understand you wanna defend your boy childress, but the list of these games are more than half that we've played.
i think thats more an example of playing to lose and holding on for dear life, then it does that we are this new team.
you wanna know what the new part of this team is, that we are just more talented than who we play, so games that are being given away, we have pulled out cuz you dont have to have a great play call for allen to destory an ot, or for peterson to stiff arm or juke a safety.


in the end what has been the biggest differences in our wins and losses?

the defense winning or losing the game.
we needed stops in the green bay game, indy game, chicago game and they gave it up when it mattered.
new orleans,
green bay(in minny), houston, carolina, and detroit, big plays by the defense at some point that held on to our one score leads.
now you can talk about childress or ferrotte, but in all our wins the defense has been the determining factor.
not to mention they have showed signs of dominance when our offense is still a different team from one quarter to the next.
theres a reason so much hype was given to us, and thats becuz we have enough talent but for some reason, even in games we dominate we do enough to have to sweat out any victory.
its no accident




You mean that same defense that forgot how to cover receivers the 2nd half of the Indy game?
Or are you talking about the Defense that gave up 47 points to the Bears?
That same "dominant" defense is the reason we lost 2 games as well.

Chilly plays conservatively with a lead.
With Gus' history of throwing INTs, that's not a bad plan.
The last thing you want to do when you have a lead is throw a pick-6 and Gus has done that, more than once.
When you look at the strength of our team, our O Line & running game, we should be able to grind out a 2nd half win.
We are built to get the lead and then drain the clock with long sustained drives.
When we are executing well, i.e. not getting dropped for losses in the running game and not getting O Line penalties, we can do just that.


It's very simple Ragz.

I blame Chilly for the ST miscues, penalties, and a flat team coming out of the tunnell.
I blame Gus for the INTs.

If you think that the former has been a bigger problem than the latter, then that is where we disagree. Either way, those are problems than can and hopefully will be solved.

I give Chilly credit for AD's performance. Last year against GB we greatly underutilized our star back. Chilly made a change for the better.
I give Chilly credit for benching TJ. The offense has simply been better with Gus. The deep strike is working and opening up running lanes and underneath routes that were not there with TJ at the helm.
I give Chilly credit for the defensive play. He is the head coach, not the offensive coach. I would like to think he had some input about how to beat a WCO.

Your criticisms of Chilly are usually somewhat legit ragz, but refuse to give Chilly any credit, for anything, and that is what makes you a hater.

ill give him credit, ill give him credit for finally finding some ways to get taylor involved after a year and half of having 2 talented running backs.
but at what price, that berrian has no catches?
it doesnt strike you as strange that he was afraid to live with jacksons mistakes so thats why we played close to the vest but all of a sudden we could live with ferrotte throwing multiple picks per week, which by the way teams have scored off of in one way or another more often than not?
his game management, player management have been detriments to us.
then you factor in the fact that the problems you keep saying is the issue, he can't fix.


and anyone that believes our running game working yesterday had anything to do with our "explosive" passing game is again just reaching for something positive to say.
we dominated the line of scrimmage and peterson made alot of plays out of nothing.
they weren't dropping guys outta the box, especially at the end of our game, yet ferrotte was terrible.
i dont mind you guys looking for the bright side, god knows i'm not going to look for it, but lets not lie to ourselves.
since everyones enormous praise for his 4 int performance against chicago he has thrown 4 picks that have lead to 24 points.
you can talk about his 2 tds yesterday but you know the truth is he threw a 3 yard flare and taylor did the rest and then threw a 3 yard slant.

and i'm not even counting the points that his 4 picks lead to in the chicago game.
so what is the positive side of your qb giving the other team 30+ points over 3 games?
and childress i dont even have to talk about much anymore cuz hes proven his worth.
if i gave childress credit for every big game peterson had, i would make people start to think that childress is his lead blocker.





you do have some points, but think of this.
with Tj in, sure, maybe he threw less picks,
but he also couldn't move the ball consistantly.
I'd rather throw 3 picks, but give the offense a chance to put up 30 points than throw no picks, but only score 7 points on offense.
Gus gives us the chance to put up yards and points, Tj doesn't.
He can't copmlete the long ball, and is hesitant throwing short balls.

NodakPaul
11-10-2008, 01:44 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:



you do have some points, but think of this.
with Tj in, sure, maybe he threw less picks,
but he also couldn't move the ball consistantly.
I'd rather throw 3 picks, but give the offense a chance to put up 30 points than throw no picks, but only score 7 points on offense.
Gus gives us the chance to put up yards and points, Tj doesn't.
He can't copmlete the long ball, and is hesitant throwing short balls.


QFT.

V4L
11-10-2008, 01:48 PM
I agree somewhat IBP

I think Jackson can put up the same ammount of points as Gus and I think the D would continue to grow like they are

Im sick of Gus giving teams points

If our D wasnt so damn good and if AP wasnt so damn good Gus would be grilled

i_bleed_purple
11-10-2008, 01:51 PM
"V4L" wrote:


I agree somewhat IBP

I think Jackson can put up the same ammount of points as Gus and I think the D would continue to grow like they are

Im sick of Gus giving teams points

If our D wasnt so damn good and if AP wasnt so damn good Gus would be grilled





but yo ucan't deny that with jackson in there, our 3rd down pct is worse, our ability to keep drives alive was worse, everything relied on Peterson and te running game.
if they stack the box, we were screwed since its hard to throw short passes with 8 in the box, and Jackson has a hard time with long passes.
With jackson there, we HAD to rely on our defense keeping a team to under 14 points to win.
Something that is not realistic all the time.

happy camper
11-10-2008, 01:52 PM
It was an ugly win but since wins are hard to come by lately vs the Packers I'll take it.

I think it was a pretty memorable game with a lot of heated moments. Adrian Peterson's work on our final drive was amazing and I think one of his defining moments of his young career. Probably Adrian's third best game after the Chargers and Bears games of last season.

I think Rodgers did a good job of selling that late hit but Allen could have also done a better job of pulling out of it.

C Mac D
11-10-2008, 01:54 PM
"happy" wrote:


It was an ugly win but since wins are hard to come by lately vs the Packers I'll take it.

I think it was a pretty memorable game with a lot of heated moments. Adrian Peterson's work on our final drive was amazing and I think one of his defining moments of his young career. Probably Adrian's third best game after the Chargers and Bears games of last season.

I think Rodgers did a good job of selling that late hit but Allen could have also done a better job of pulling out of it.


Peterson said it was the most rewarding game of his career, over the Bears game and Chargers game from last season.

V4L
11-10-2008, 01:54 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


I agree somewhat IBP

I think Jackson can put up the same ammount of points as Gus and I think the D would continue to grow like they are

Im sick of Gus giving teams points

If our D wasnt so damn good and if AP wasnt so damn good Gus would be grilled





but yo ucan't deny that with jackson in there, our 3rd down pct is worse, our ability to keep drives alive was worse, everything relied on Peterson and te running game.
if they stack the box, we were screwed since its hard to throw short passes with 8 in the box, and Jackson has a hard time with long passes.
With jackson there, we HAD to rely on our defense keeping a team to under 14 points to win.
Something that is not realistic all the time.




For his first two games back when the whole team was sloppy and he was coming off injury yes.. As was our lone deep threat
Berrian

Idk how he would go now

I personally think if Gus keeps playing the way he is we gotta atleast look into throwing him back in

Gus is the luckiest QB in the league

i_bleed_purple
11-10-2008, 01:55 PM
"happy" wrote:


It was an ugly win but since wins are hard to come by lately vs the Packers I'll take it.

I think it was a pretty memorable game with a lot of heated moments. Adrian Peterson's work on our final drive was amazing and I think one of his defining moments of his young career. Probably Adrian's third best game after the Chargers and Bears games of last season.

I think Rodgers did a good job of selling that late hit but Allen could have also done a better job of pulling out of it.


The only reason it was flagged was because Allen hit him helmet to helmet.
If you rewatch, Leber's hit was just as late, maybe even a bit later, but he wasn't flagged because he hit him with his shoulder, not helmet.
IMO, it was a proper call both times

Jereamiah
11-10-2008, 02:01 PM
I feel great today. Just went and checked out some packer forums: Awesome. Read the before and after (game) posts and just had to laugh. There were some serious 35-0 predictions (for the pack) Also, most of the posts were about how the refs cost 'em the game and the "illegal" forward pass. Folks going nuts about how there was a packer in the area. That was until some guy showed a cool diagram pointing out how the "pass" never even made it to the line of scrimmage. Awesome. We can always count on the special teams to let one go. Hope that gets some extra attention. Also, that tipped pass that went to the pack reciever, I thought "Oh man, here we go." stuff like that always seems to go the pack's way at the Dome. Remember that pass a few years back. Never touched the ground, bouced off feet, ankles, legs, and then just rolled easy as can be into a pack recievers hands. This one turned out great though. Awesome.

i_bleed_purple
11-10-2008, 02:03 PM
"Jereamiah" wrote:


I feel great today. Just went and checked out some packer forums: Awesome. Read the before and after (game) posts and just had to laugh. There were some serious 35-0 predictions (for the pack) Also, most of the posts were about how the refs cost 'em the game and the "illegal" forward pass. Folks going nuts about how there was a packer in the area. That was until some guy showed a cool diagram pointing out how the "pass" never even made it to the line of scrimmage. Awesome. We can always count on the special teams to let one go. Hope that gets some extra attention. Also, that tipped pass that went to the pack reciever, I thought "Oh man, here we go." stuff like that always seems to go the pack's way at the Dome. Remember that pass a few years back. Never touched the ground, just rolles easy as can be into a pack recievers hands. This one turned out great though. Awesome.


the play that comes to mind was the play last week where sharper and griffin ran into each other, popped the ball into the air and was caught for a TD.

TheKnuck
11-10-2008, 02:07 PM
this game reminded me of the bears game.
we gave them too many opportunities to put us away.
we just got one better break in the end.
Our defense was awesome.
I don't remember seeing so much pressure on an opposing qb in so long.
Great stuff, great hits, great tackles, great coaching.
Man i'm sure Rodgers is still soaking in a hot tub trying to relieve some pain!!!!


Run offense was boo yaa!!!!
Pass offense, not so much.
Wade looked like williamson on two throws, berrian shut down.
thank god chester busted that one loose.


and of course the dreaded special teams.
That longwell miss from 47 haunted us, thank god it went our way in the end.
another punt return for td, how does this happen in proffesional ball?
I mean after it has already happened to a team.
are we gonna go back to kicking the ball out of bounds on kickoffs and punt returns?
Geez, just when you thought that problem was solved, BOOM, Nope, back where we started.
fire, fire, fire, the special teams coach.
that could've cost us the game too.
take the week 1 punt return and we win too.
i'm still disgusted over that part of our team.
did the farwell injury really make it that bad?


anyway, great game going down to the wire, of course it was expected, always is.
sure bet for nfl network rerun.

V4L
11-10-2008, 02:19 PM
After seeing Crosby nail that 47 yarder right before half and it easily could have made 55+ I was soooooooooooooooooooooo nervous at the end

I thought it was no problem

I was thinking what we could do with 30 seconds and no timeouts

I hate these nailbiters but atleast it was against the pack!

V-Unit
11-10-2008, 02:34 PM
Is Madieu Williams possibly the final piec of the puzzle that our defense needed? They have been lights out the last two weeks, and he has much a definite upgrade over the rookie, let alone Dwight Smith.

He has been so good that it just took me a couple of minutes to remember Dwight Smith's name!

I'm extremely excited about our current defensive makeup. They have kept us in all 9 games, and are starting to get even better. Harris has been a wonderful replacement, Sharper has been silent, but sometimes that a good thing. In general, all question marks about the D have been answered positively. Hopefully Gordon is not missed too much.

We will need the D to play close to that level until Gus and the ST figure their stuff out.

V4L
11-10-2008, 02:36 PM
"V" wrote:


Is Madieu Williams possibly the final piec of the puzzle that our defense needed? They have been lights out the last two weeks, and he has much a definite upgrade over the rookie, let alone Dwight Smith.

He has been so good that it just took me a couple of minutes to remember Dwight Smith's name!

I'm extremely excited about our current defensive makeup. They have kept us in all 9 games, and are starting to get even better. Harris has been a wonderful replacement, Sharper has been silent, but sometimes that a good thing. In general, all question marks about the D have been answered positively. Hopefully Gordon is not missed too much.

We will need the D to play close to that level until Gus and the ST figure their stuff out.




Yes Madieu is much better then Tyrell

So far im into the 2nd half of the game on my Tivo and i've seen him with some nice hits.. One was to break up a pass..

And he had a pass deflection

He has been playing near the line alot which is awesome.. I wouldn't have trusted Tyrell to do that

He is helping on covering one on one and covers like a corner

Purple Floyd
11-10-2008, 03:07 PM
"V" wrote:


Is Madieu Williams possibly the final piec of the puzzle that our defense needed? They have been lights out the last two weeks, and he has much a definite upgrade over the rookie, let alone Dwight Smith.

He has been so good that it just took me a couple of minutes to remember Dwight Smith's name!

I'm extremely excited about our current defensive makeup. They have kept us in all 9 games, and are starting to get even better. Harris has been a wonderful replacement, Sharper has been silent, but sometimes that a good thing. In general, all question marks about the D have been answered positively. Hopefully Gordon is not missed too much.

We will need the D to play close to that level until Gus and the ST figure their stuff out.


I certainly think that is possible.

That makes it all the more interesting to think ho good the defense could have been with a healthy E.J in the middle.

Yfz01
11-10-2008, 03:23 PM
So... When did Sharper decide that he was a big hitter ???

Sharper could have had two interceptions this year(by my count) but he goes for the knockout hit instead of waiting for the tip drill(which would be a good thing if the ball was caught)

CJ(of the Lions) said that Sharper is one of the hardest hitting safeties in the league.

pack93z
11-10-2008, 03:23 PM
I thought it very classy of the Vikes to have Udeze there as a captain.. spare a couple of returns the rest of the game sucked as a Packer fan.

Glad to hear that kid is bouncing back..

pack93z
11-10-2008, 03:24 PM
Oh yeah.. the hidden Packer bennie in the loss.. Chilly may make a return to the sidelines in 09'
;D

V4L
11-10-2008, 03:25 PM
"Yfz01" wrote:


So... When did Sharper decide that he was a big hitter ???

Sharper could have had two interceptions this year(by my count) but he goes for the knockout hit instead of waiting for the tip drill(which would be a good thing if the ball was caught)

CJ(of the Lions) said that Sharper is one of the hardest hitting safeties in the league.



He does hit hard

And he trys to get into position and not wait for a tip drill

marstc09
11-10-2008, 03:29 PM
"V" wrote:


Is Madieu Williams possibly the final piec of the puzzle that our defense needed? They have been lights out the last two weeks, and he has much a definite upgrade over the rookie, let alone Dwight Smith.

He has been so good that it just took me a couple of minutes to remember Dwight Smith's name!

I'm extremely excited about our current defensive makeup. They have kept us in all 9 games, and are starting to get even better. Harris has been a wonderful replacement, Sharper has been silent, but sometimes that a good thing. In general, all question marks about the D have been answered positively. Hopefully Gordon is not missed too much.

We will need the D to play close to that level until Gus and the ST figure their stuff out.


Our average margin of losing is 7 points. I am starting to wonder if we could have been undefeated with Madieu. See V I can be positive!
;D

bleedpurple
11-10-2008, 03:59 PM
Great game, i just hate how we dominate and still have a nail bitter in the end.... nerve racking... ppl can't live like this...!!!

and as fare as I bleed purple, i agree with you.... maybe Tjack didn't throw a lot of pics, but the way gus has been playing lately, I would like to see the offense as it is present with TJack in there... atleast he takes care of the ball... maybe the bench will do him some good, but either way, i don't think it's fair to bench a guy, only to open up the offense for the next guy, have him throw 7 pics in the last 3 games,....

like i had been saying i'm for Gus being in there right now, i just think you have to (given Gus's interceptions lately, ) could have atleast called the game like we do at present with TJ in there to see if he can do it... if not we draft a QB....

i_bleed_purple
11-10-2008, 04:00 PM
"bleedpurple" wrote:


Great game, i just hate how we dominate and still have a nail bitter in the end.... nerve racking... ppl can't live like this...!!!

and as fare as I bleed purple, i agree with you.... maybe Tjack didn't throw a lot of pics, but the way gus has been playing lately, I would like to see the offense as it is present with TJack in there... atleast he takes care of the ball... maybe the bench will do him some good, but either way, i don't think it's fair to bench a guy, only to open up the offense for the next guy, have him throw 7 pics in the last 3 games,....

like i had been saying i'm for Gus being in there right now, i just think you have to (given Gus's interceptions lately, ) could have atleast called the game like we do at present with TJ in there to see if he can do it... if not we draft a QB....




Id be interested in seeing a game called the same way with TJ in there too, but the fact is, i don't have faith in him to make all the throws and reads the way Gus does.
It would be something to try against a weak team maybe.

bleedpurple
11-10-2008, 04:23 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


Great game, i just hate how we dominate and still have a nail bitter in the end.... nerve racking... ppl can't live like this...!!!

and as fare as I bleed purple, i agree with you.... maybe Tjack didn't throw a lot of pics, but the way gus has been playing lately, I would like to see the offense as it is present with TJack in there... atleast he takes care of the ball... maybe the bench will do him some good, but either way, i don't think it's fair to bench a guy, only to open up the offense for the next guy, have him throw 7 pics in the last 3 games,....

like i had been saying i'm for Gus being in there right now, i just think you have to (given Gus's interceptions lately, ) could have atleast called the game like we do at present with TJ in there to see if he can do it... if not we draft a QB....




Id be interested in seeing a game called the same way with TJ in there too, but the fact is, i don't have faith in him to make all the throws and reads the way Gus does.
It would be something to try against a weak team maybe.


while that may be true... before he was benched i think it would have served the future plans of the time better by doing so....

atleast this way, we'd have a better idea of what he could do going forward... I mean hey!.. he couldn't have been any worse than gus was out there against the packers and the bears...

i_bleed_purple
11-10-2008, 04:32 PM
"bleedpurple" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


Great game, i just hate how we dominate and still have a nail bitter in the end.... nerve racking... ppl can't live like this...!!!

and as fare as I bleed purple, i agree with you.... maybe Tjack didn't throw a lot of pics, but the way gus has been playing lately, I would like to see the offense as it is present with TJack in there... atleast he takes care of the ball... maybe the bench will do him some good, but either way, i don't think it's fair to bench a guy, only to open up the offense for the next guy, have him throw 7 pics in the last 3 games,....

like i had been saying i'm for Gus being in there right now, i just think you have to (given Gus's interceptions lately, ) could have atleast called the game like we do at present with TJ in there to see if he can do it... if not we draft a QB....




Id be interested in seeing a game called the same way with TJ in there too, but the fact is, i don't have faith in him to make all the throws and reads the way Gus does.
It would be something to try against a weak team maybe.


while that may be true... before he was benched i think it would have served the future plans of the time better by doing so....

atleast this way, we'd have a better idea of what he could do going forward... I mean hey!.. he couldn't have been any worse than gus was out there against the packers and the bears...


thats where we see differently.
sure he might not have thrown 7 INT's between the two games, but he wouldn't have completed many passes, he probably would have been sacked more and would be lucky to top 100 yards.
IMO its more important to have a guy that is capable of connecting on some passes to keep the defense honest and throw 3 picks, than someone who's scared to throw into coverage, resulting in 0 picks, but few yards and no sustained drives.

Purple Floyd
11-10-2008, 04:56 PM
You cannot call the game the same way with Jackson as you do with Gus because they are two totally different QB's. You have to call to their strengths. Jackson can throw deeper but not with the same accuracy as Gus. He can throw a tighter spiral in the short passes with more velocity but he doesn't do as good a job with placing the ball in the right spot as consistently as Gus does. Then again Gus is not exactly pinpoint accurate, but the WR's do look like they are catching the ball and running with it better than they were with Jackson and that is important.

NodakPaul
11-10-2008, 05:08 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


You cannot call the game the same way with Jackson as you do with Gus because they are two totally different QB's. You have to call to their strengths. Jackson can throw deeper but not with the same accuracy as Gus. He can throw a tighter spiral in the short passes with more velocity but he doesn't do as good a job with placing the ball in the right spot as consistently as Gus does. Then again Gus is not exactly pinpoint accurate, but the WR's do look like they are catching the ball and running with it better than they were with Jackson and that is important.


Just ask Shainco, who has become rather dependable since Gus took over...
It think the WR corps is more comfortable with Gus's passes.

V4L
11-10-2008, 05:13 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


You cannot call the game the same way with Jackson as you do with Gus because they are two totally different QB's. You have to call to their strengths. Jackson can throw deeper but not with the same accuracy as Gus. He can throw a tighter spiral in the short passes with more velocity but he doesn't do as good a job with placing the ball in the right spot as consistently as Gus does. Then again Gus is not exactly pinpoint accurate, but the WR's do look like they are catching the ball and running with it better than they were with Jackson and that is important.


Just ask Shainco, who has become rather dependable since Gus took over...
It think the WR corps is more comfortable with Gus's passes.



Not really

Check the last two games

And if he had caught some of the passes he dropped with jackson which were right there he would be doing the same as he is now

Just took him some time to get into the swing of things

He did the same stuff in Gus's first start

SamOchoCinco
11-10-2008, 05:16 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


You cannot call the game the same way with Jackson as you do with Gus because they are two totally different QB's. You have to call to their strengths. Jackson can throw deeper but not with the same accuracy as Gus. He can throw a tighter spiral in the short passes with more velocity but he doesn't do as good a job with placing the ball in the right spot as consistently as Gus does. Then again Gus is not exactly pinpoint accurate, but the WR's do look like they are catching the ball and running with it better than they were with Jackson and that is important.


Just ask Shainco, who has become rather dependable since Gus took over...
It think the WR corps is more comfortable with Gus's passes.


#81 has never been good. even with gus. he is nothing more than just a backup tightend

V4L
11-10-2008, 05:17 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


Great game, i just hate how we dominate and still have a nail bitter in the end.... nerve racking... ppl can't live like this...!!!

and as fare as I bleed purple, i agree with you.... maybe Tjack didn't throw a lot of pics, but the way gus has been playing lately, I would like to see the offense as it is present with TJack in there... atleast he takes care of the ball... maybe the bench will do him some good, but either way, i don't think it's fair to bench a guy, only to open up the offense for the next guy, have him throw 7 pics in the last 3 games,....

like i had been saying i'm for Gus being in there right now, i just think you have to (given Gus's interceptions lately, ) could have atleast called the game like we do at present with TJ in there to see if he can do it... if not we draft a QB....




Id be interested in seeing a game called the same way with TJ in there too, but the fact is, i don't have faith in him to make all the throws and reads the way Gus does.
It would be something to try against a weak team maybe.


while that may be true... before he was benched i think it would have served the future plans of the time better by doing so....

atleast this way, we'd have a better idea of what he could do going forward... I mean hey!.. he couldn't have been any worse than gus was out there against the packers and the bears...


thats where we see differently.
sure he might not have thrown 7 INT's between the two games, but he wouldn't have completed many passes, he probably would have been sacked more and would be lucky to top 100 yards.
IMO its more important to have a guy that is capable of connecting on some passes to keep the defense honest and throw 3 picks, than someone who's scared to throw into coverage, resulting in 0 picks, but few yards and no sustained drives.



He barley completes less passes then Gus

He actually gets sacked less then Gus

And I wouldn't use two games to decide what throws he can make.. Expecially the first two coming off of an injury with your main weapon not healthy as well

I would rather have a QB who gives you 7-17 points then one who gets you 21 but gives up 17

bleedpurple
11-10-2008, 05:21 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


Great game, i just hate how we dominate and still have a nail bitter in the end.... nerve racking... ppl can't live like this...!!!

and as fare as I bleed purple, i agree with you.... maybe Tjack didn't throw a lot of pics, but the way gus has been playing lately, I would like to see the offense as it is present with TJack in there... atleast he takes care of the ball... maybe the bench will do him some good, but either way, i don't think it's fair to bench a guy, only to open up the offense for the next guy, have him throw 7 pics in the last 3 games,....

like i had been saying i'm for Gus being in there right now, i just think you have to (given Gus's interceptions lately, ) could have atleast called the game like we do at present with TJ in there to see if he can do it... if not we draft a QB....




Id be interested in seeing a game called the same way with TJ in there too, but the fact is, i don't have faith in him to make all the throws and reads the way Gus does.
It would be something to try against a weak team maybe.


while that may be true... before he was benched i think it would have served the future plans of the time better by doing so....

atleast this way, we'd have a better idea of what he could do going forward... I mean hey!.. he couldn't have been any worse than gus was out there against the packers and the bears...


thats where we see differently.
sure he might not have thrown 7 INT's between the two games, but he wouldn't have completed many passes, he probably would have been sacked more and would be lucky to top 100 yards.
IMO its more important to have a guy that is capable of connecting on some passes to keep the defense honest and throw 3 picks, than someone who's scared to throw into coverage, resulting in 0 picks, but few yards and no sustained drives.



He barley completes less passes then Gus

He actually gets sacked less then Gus

And I wouldn't use two games to decide what throws he can make.. Expecially the first two coming off of an injury with your main weapon not healthy as well

I would rather have a QB who gives you 7-17 points then one who gets you 21 but gives up 17


I agree... hey i'm not saying making the move wasn't the right one, nor am I saying TJ could have made it.. nor am I saying TJ would do this or that!...

All i am saying is i just would have like to see what the kid can do before benching him... that's all... just get an idea of where he is at while he is in there... maybe he doesn't do anything.. maybe he does great.. but we don't know either way!!

V4L
11-10-2008, 05:22 PM
Im in the same boat man

If Gus plays like he has latley against the Bears and Lions and Packers then I think it would be a good idea to atleast get Jackson some reps

See if he has learned anything or not

I mean he wasn't horrible and it was the beginning of the season

He did also rush for 65 yards against the Pack... So he does have that going

bleedpurple
11-10-2008, 05:26 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Im in the same boat man

If Gus plays like he has latley against the Bears and Lions and Packers then I think it would be a good idea to atleast get Jackson some reps

See if he has learned anything or not

I mean he wasn't horrible and it was the beginning of the season

He did also rush for 65 yards against the Pack... So he does have that going


i was making this point in reference to the 2 games earlier in the season...

Unless Gus get's hurt, i doubt it would be a good idea to put TJ in there and mess with the chemistry and confidence we have built up over the last 7 games....

I think TJ needs to sit and learn and watch how Gus prepares for each game.... But based on an article i read the other day, sounds like TJ is kind of sulking talking about how it's hard to be focused and stay prepared when you don't know when your going to play....

this is as much evident from the last few plays of the titans game....

COJOMAY
11-10-2008, 05:56 PM
After rewatching the game, I found another Childress boo-boo. He called a time-out later in the first half and it allowed the Pack more time to kick that field goal on their next drive.

marshallvike
11-10-2008, 06:11 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


After rewatching the game, I found another Childress boo-boo. He called a time-out later in the first half and it allowed the Pack more time to kick that field goal on their next drive.


i think gus' int had more to do with that field goal than the time out.

El Vikingo
11-10-2008, 08:30 PM
Vikes Won
Packers Lost.


And that´s the bottom line cause ( don´t remember how it follows...
;D)

C Mac D
11-10-2008, 08:59 PM
"El" wrote:


Vikes Won
Packers Lost.


And that´s the bottom line cause ( don´t remember how it follows...
;D)


It's been too long...

It feels great... it was nice to see Rogers get demolished.

happy camper
11-10-2008, 09:22 PM
In regards to the last two drives of the half:

I guess Childress gets criticized for not being aggressive enough but I really thought we should have not taken the timeout just in case we did not get a first down (which we didn't) and then I thought we should have just ran the ball a couple of times and let it go into halftime during our last drive of the half. When Allen tackled Rodgers in the endzone and we got two points. I was like, "Okay cool, NOW let it go into halftime", but we elected instead to try for more points and Gus threw the interception.

I think it was a bad decision to a) take the timeout on third down b) get greedy and try for more points right before halftime

jargomcfargo
11-10-2008, 09:48 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Brad Chilldress did nothing wrong today

you can debate the 4th down call.. I call it showing guts and belief in your players when they are playing great

Otherwise no beef at all


I was at the game and have to agree 100%.
The players seem to like Childress the best I could tell. They were friendly with him in the pre game warm ups.
And for those who said the players aren't playing hard for Childress; I've got news.
They were definately fired up and playing hard for someone.
There were several players going up and down the sidelines firing up fellow players before the game.
These players are motivated and want to win.
The players made a lot of mistakes that I don't think have much of anything to do with Childress.
In fact, I think Childress, or maybe Bevell, won this game when they realized Gus couldn't win it with his arm, and simply shoved it down their throats with Peterson.

This team could be very good if it stopped making so darn many mistakes. The defense was incredible.

One other thing. The special teams didn't suck all day. They covered well at some crucial times.Rodgers was pinned deep a couple of times, leading to 4 points.

Winning with 4 turnovers is rare. Just think how good we could be
with few mistakes and a good Quarterback.

I don't think the problem is Childress.

Randy Moss
11-10-2008, 10:06 PM
"happy" wrote:


In regards to the last two drives of the half:

I guess Childress gets criticized for not being aggressive enough but I really thought we should have not taken the timeout just in case we did not get a first down (which we didn't) and then I thought we should have just ran the ball a couple of times and let it go into halftime during our last drive of the half. When Allen tackled Rodgers in the endzone and we got two points. I was like, "Okay cool, NOW let it go into halftime", but we elected instead to try for more points and Gus threw the interception.

I think it was a bad decision to a) take the timeout on third down b) get greedy and try for more points right before halftime


But they started on like the 45.
Why would you not try to get at least a field goal?

Purple Floyd
11-10-2008, 10:07 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


You cannot call the game the same way with Jackson as you do with Gus because they are two totally different QB's. You have to call to their strengths. Jackson can throw deeper but not with the same accuracy as Gus. He can throw a tighter spiral in the short passes with more velocity but he doesn't do as good a job with placing the ball in the right spot as consistently as Gus does. Then again Gus is not exactly pinpoint accurate, but the WR's do look like they are catching the ball and running with it better than they were with Jackson and that is important.


Just ask Shainco, who has become rather dependable since Gus took over...
It think the WR corps is more comfortable with Gus's passes.



Not really

Check the last two games

And if he had caught some of the passes he dropped with jackson which were right there he would be doing the same as he is now

Just took him some time to get into the swing of things

He did the same stuff in Gus's first start


That is the point. If Jackson had the placement and touch that Gus has he would have caught some of those. The WR's are finding it easier to catch the balls from gus that they were from TJ and the passes are thrown so that they can get more yards after the catch. look at how berrian's YPC has skyrocketed since Gus took over and how his numbers have gone up.

jargomcfargo
11-10-2008, 10:38 PM
"grpape" wrote:


It seems that the offensive play calling is fine. There was more than once AD and CT were on the field. AD beat Bigby down the sideline, but Gus didn't make the throw. He had time but made a bad decision and payed for it. They showed another play where the team got the pick they wanted and had Wade wide open down the field. Gus made the wrong throw again and it cost us. Even Aikman was saying that Gus should know that the pick is the first thing he should be looking for. I don't know what to say.

I really can't blame Chilly or Bevell anymore. They are calling screens and putting the right calls in at the right time. Gus is just making bad decisions and worse throws. Man, some of his throws were just brutal.

We did win, and have a shot at the division. But, I just don't see anything coming out of it with Gus running the team. It really is a shame.


That's very observant for someone who didn't see the game live. When you are live you get to see the receivers and the coverage that TV doesn't show.

There were some plays with unusual offensive formations. They had to be inserted for this game since I haven't seen them before.
The first pick against Gus was one of those plays.
As you mentioned, both Taylor and AD were in the game.
Taylor was in the backfield and AD was lined up as the wide receiver along the right sideline, one on one.
Peterson beat his man running straight down the sideline. Gus looked over there before he cleared, then threw left center toward Wade, who was covered anyway, and directly to Green Bay. It should have been an easy TD to Peterson.
One time they had Kliensasser as the wide receiver. He broke free but Gus was too late and ended up throwing it away.

I was watching the pre game warm up throws by Gus and TJ.
Gus was off on quite a few throws. I started to think TJ was better until he hit Rice in the ankle on a 15 yard pass.

Crossing routes are the worst for Gus. He is almost always behind the receiver. The more straight across the field, the worse he is. I think it's age and reflexes.
He's better on vertical routes, where the receiver can adjust a little to the ball.
He really had the underthrows yesterday with a bunch of carpet skippers.
He had Berrian wide open and threw it away. Reminded me of TJ against the Colts.
I could see him looking for the open man but not seeing him or seeing him to late on several occasions.
He really had pretty good protection but played like he was under pressure.

Gus was the main reason for the offenses problems. Gus could not win the game. Childress or Bevell knew it and ran. That decision allowed us to come back from behind and win. Not to mention a little luck going our way at the end for a change.

PS. Now that I've watched the replay I see they showed Peterson getting open and Gus looking his way briefly on the first pick. It was a missed opportunity for 6 as was the miss to Berrian.

Schutz
11-11-2008, 02:14 AM
What a roller coaster of emotion.
I listened to the game on the radio since I was at work and I went from being very happy to wanting to throw the radio.
I'm glad AP had a big game along with Chester, they are the motor that keeps the offense going.
I guess I can't say for sure how bad Gus was since I didn't see it but was it as bad as Paul Allen was making it sound at times?
I heard the phrases thrown behind and hit the turf from time to time.
Defense sounded pretty stout though with some great pressure on the QB.

I try to be as positive as I can about a win, since a win is a win.
The game was a lot closer than it should have been but at least Childress finally figured out how to beat Green Bay, or I guess I should say AP found a way to beat Green Bay.
Go Vikings.

singersp
11-11-2008, 06:03 AM
You see what happens when you play more man-to-man coverage instead of giving up the big cushion?
;)

Marrdro
11-11-2008, 09:30 AM
Welllllllllll, didn't that feel good?
;D
Damn I love to see our team beat those damn PUKERS even though it wasn't pretty at times.

Props

a. RB's.
At one point (midway through the 3rd I think) AD/CT had all of our offense except 16 yards.
Some of those can be attributed to a
catch by Tahi.

b. Leber and especially Chad.
Those two cats have stepped up big in EJ's absence.
Were are the Chad haters today?
I still remember who you are.
;D

c.
DL.
Love the rotation used by Leslie and the different paths/routes/stunts he employed to get pressure from the front 4.
Great game by all especially JA.

d.
Secondary.
A couple of those sacks were clear coverage sacks. Additionally, Rodgers had to throw it away a couple of times because no one was open.

e.
Kluwe.
Almost a perfect game of kicking.
Seems like a bit of an ass chewing has woke him the effffff up.

f.
Leslie.
Know your working it my friend.
Love the rotation on the DL, love the use of the extra S during passing situations, love the complexity of your scheme which confused the shit out of ole PUKER boy.

The bad.

a. QB.
Damn Gus.
Are you just making your reads a bit slower than the recievers or are you just that inaccurate.
Gotta get the ball out in front of the recievers not on thier back shoulders or feet.
I say we burn a high draft pick on a QB and shortly after that we burn a high draft pick on a kicker.

b.
Ole PUKER Boy Ryan Shortwell.
Missed a FG and then when we need to pin them deep so they have to march the whole field to kick a FG to win, he kicks it short and gives them great field position.
That dude needs to go.
I say we burn a high draft pick on a Kicker right after we burn a high draft pick on a QB.

c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the damn PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.

d.
Chiller.
No love for you my friend.

jargomcfargo
11-11-2008, 10:08 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:




The bad.

a. QB.
gol 'darnit Gus.
Are you just making your reads a bit slower than the recievers or are you just that inaccurate.



It's definately both.

Marrdro
11-11-2008, 10:22 AM
"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:




The bad.

a. QB.
gol 'darnit Gus.
Are you just making your reads a bit slower than the recievers or are you just that inaccurate.



It's definately both.

The Bores definately worked to take the pass away on Sunday with alot of success, however, when he missed B-wade deep to throw to Shanc who was double (almost triple) covered was simply amazing.
Almost like he isn't seeing what the Defense is doing.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't that why TJ was replaced?
Not reading Defenses and making inaccurate throws that cost us the game?
:o
::)

Dekay
11-11-2008, 10:26 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.

Marrdro
11-11-2008, 10:36 AM
"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.

Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.
:'(
:'(
:'(

El Vikingo
11-11-2008, 11:00 AM
They came,they got their ass kicked ,they left.


5-4




Fuck the Pack.




Bring us Los Bucaneros!!!!

jmcdon00
11-11-2008, 11:25 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.

Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.

:'(
:'(
:'(

You mean fiscally responsible yutz's? Yep that's me.(I'm against welfare/bailouts/loopholes for billionairs and was willing too sell my tickets at a 600% mark up, didn't get that so I went, and was glad I did).
Just out of curiousity have you helped with the stadium effort? I'm gonna wait until they raise my taxes but it is unlikely they will raise yours(out of state) so you could go ahead and send a check now. ;)

jessejames09
11-11-2008, 11:38 AM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.

Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.

:'(
:'(
:'(

You mean fiscally responsible yutz's? Yep that's me.(I'm against welfare/bailouts/loopholes for billionairs and was willing too sell my tickets at a 600% mark up, didn't get that so I went, and was glad I did).
Just out of curiousity have you helped with the stadium effort? I'm gonna wait until they raise my taxes but it is unlikely they will raise yours(out of state) so you could go ahead and send a check now. ;)


Why would anyone send any money to keep a team hundreds of kilometers away from themselves.

Shouldn't the people who benefit by having the team in MN help pay to keep them there. Would you vote to have your taxes increased to help keep the team? Or would you merely abide by the law and pay your taxes if such a hike were passed.

Zeus
11-11-2008, 11:49 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.


Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.

:'(
:'(
:'(


As opposed to the ones who don't come to the stadium at all and just whine from afar?

=Z=

jmcdon00
11-11-2008, 12:08 PM
"jessejames09" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.

Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.

:'(
:'(
:'(

You mean fiscally responsible yutz's? Yep that's me.(I'm against welfare/bailouts/loopholes for billionairs and was willing too sell my tickets at a 600% mark up, didn't get that so I went, and was glad I did).
Just out of curiousity have you helped with the stadium effort? I'm gonna wait until they raise my taxes but it is unlikely they will raise yours(out of state) so you could go ahead and send a check now. ;)


Why would anyone send any money to keep a team hundreds of kilometers away from themselves.

Shouldn't the people who benefit by having the team in MN help pay to keep them there. Would you vote to have your taxes increased to help keep the team? Or would you merely abide by the law and pay your taxes if such a hike were passed.



Lot's of questions, I was just trying to be a smart ass not start a debate, but I'll try to answer.
Marrdro likes the MN vikings as much as anybody. If they leave they will likely no longer be the vikings so I would think he has an interest too.
People who benefit from the the vikings should support them, through ticket sales ad revenues, merchandise, but not through additional taxes IMHO. I would not vote to for a tax increase to keep them here, that's not the governments job. If they raise taxes I along with everyone else will pay for it, but I still wont agree with it. I would support increased ticket prices and or seat licensing fees, additional costs for merchandise, more commercials during vikings games, whatever they have to do to raise the money they claim to need without raising taxes.

MN_SkolVikings_NC
11-11-2008, 12:31 PM
I currently live out of MN, so I will not say that the voters of the great state of Minnesota should or should not vote to support a new stadium.
However, I do find it hard to beleive that 50 million a year for the arts (you guys voted for it) is money that is better spent than it is to help fund a new stadium that will bring in revenue year long by being able to host the NCAA tournaments, perhaps a SB, and all the other things that a climate controlled stadium could do for the state.

I don't think anyone will disagree that the Metrodome is almost shameful in how old it is compared to the stadiums across the NFL (all of which except maybe 1 or two involved state funding).

jargomcfargo
11-11-2008, 12:39 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:




The bad.

a. QB.
gol 'darnit Gus.
Are you just making your reads a bit slower than the recievers or are you just that inaccurate.



It's definately both.

The Bores definately worked to take the pass away on Sunday with alot of success, however, when he missed B-wade deep to throw to Shanc who was double (almost triple) covered was simply amazing.
Almost like he isn't seeing what the Defense is doing.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't that why TJ was replaced?
Not reading Defenses and making inaccurate throws that cost us the game?

:o
::)


It is much easier to see the QB make his reads as the patterns develop when you sit upper deck.
Gus acted like he was under pressure that really wasn't there. He would look off his primary to quickly and missed seeing open receivers. Or he was too late seeing the open man. He couldn't seem to anticipate the receiver getting separation in advance. And by the time he saw it they were covered.
If he didn't throw to the primary, he seemed to want to unload the ball right away to the secondary receiver. He played anxious.
In addition he was dreadfully short and late with his passes all day, including pre game warm ups.

All in all it was certainly no better than TJ would have likely been.

Reminds me of the tale of two turds once again!

NodakPaul
11-11-2008, 12:42 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


Lot's of questions, I was just trying to be a smart jiggly butt not start a debate, but I'll try to answer.
Marrdro likes the MN vikings as much as anybody. If they leave they will likely no longer be the vikings so I would think he has an interest too.
People who benefit from the the vikings should support them, through ticket sales ad revenues, merchandise, but not through additional taxes IMHO. I would not vote to for a tax increase to keep them here, that's not the governments job. If they raise taxes I along with everyone else will pay for it, but I still wont agree with it. I would support increased ticket prices and or seat licensing fees, additional costs for merchandise, more commercials during vikings games, whatever they have to do to raise the money they claim to need without raising taxes.


LOL.
Suuuure you weren't trying to start a debate... ;)

Anyway, you left out one important entity that greatly benefits from having the Vikings in state.
The communities.
The city of Minneapolis, Hennepin County, the Twin Cities Metro Area, and the state of Minnesota all see tangible and intangible benefits from the Minnesota Vikings.
Because they benefit, they too should make a contribution to keeping them.
How much of a contribution can be up for debate, but there should be one nonetheless.

BTW, some of the things you listed are not in the Vikings control nor do they benefit them, such as commercials during the games and merchandise costs.
The television stations own the commercial rights, and the networks purchase the games from the NFL - not the Vikings.
And merchandise sales are licensed through the NFL who again have control over the prices, not the Vikes.

I do agree that the majority of the financing should come from the team's revenue.
PSLs, ticket revenue, and naming rights should be able to pay for more than half of the stadium IMHO.
But there will be some additional funds needed, and I believe the communities who will benefit should contribute as well.

jargomcfargo
11-11-2008, 12:46 PM
Wrong thread for a stadium debate?

http://www.purplepride.org/forums/index.php?topic=48760.90

V4L
11-11-2008, 12:50 PM
Oh hey the Vikes beat the Packers!!

V4L
11-11-2008, 01:04 PM
"singersp" wrote:


You see what happens when you play more man-to-man coverage instead of giving up the big cushion?
;)



Yup

You me Marstc and Mr.Anderson were calling for it from the get go

They have used it more the last few weeks and it has been great

HEY
11-11-2008, 03:56 PM
To keep it simple:
The Vikings' D-line and runningbacks won the game. Adrian did great and had almost 200 yards, while Chester Taylor did a good job catching the ball and making plays after the catch.
Gus Frerotte had too many picks. Is it just me, or was he more careful with the ball earlier in the season? Perhaps him getting more and more comfortable is a bad thing cause he'll take more risks.
Also, the Vikings' punt coverage was terrible... again!!!! I couldn't believe that the same guy who made a TD on punt return in the last Packers game would make another one in this game. It was simply pathetic to watch the Vikings players get played around like that.

ragz
11-11-2008, 06:06 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:




The bad.

a. QB.
gol 'darnit Gus.
Are you just making your reads a bit slower than the recievers or are you just that inaccurate.



It's definately both.

The Bores definately worked to take the pass away on Sunday with alot of success, however, when he missed B-wade deep to throw to Shanc who was double (almost triple) covered was simply amazing.
Almost like he isn't seeing what the Defense is doing.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't that why TJ was replaced?
Not reading Defenses and making inaccurate throws that cost us the game?
:o
::)

actually he wasn't really costing us games.
he was just not doing enough according to fans, even though he wasn't being asked to.
i dont remember him ever having a game like this past one.
even in the detroit game where he threw 3+ picks none of them were as detrimental as all 3 of ferrottes.

gregair13
11-11-2008, 06:15 PM
It was a great game. I was emotionally drained after the game and was so happy. Sure Gus was not great, and we almost lost, but meh. We won. And really that is all that matters.

C Mac D
11-11-2008, 06:51 PM
If we had a real QB... that score would have been 28-20...

If we had ST and a QB, the score would have been 28-13...

We are so very close, yet so very far...

i_bleed_purple
11-11-2008, 07:08 PM
"C" wrote:


If we had a real QB... that score would have been 28-20...

If we had ST and a QB, the score would have been 28-13...

We are so very close, yet so very far...


probably wold have been more.
With a real QB who wouldn't throw those 3 picks, we would probably have 35 or more points.
hell, for all you know, with a real qb, we wouldn't have made that punt that was returned.
they got points off of turnovers, so take away 13 points and we're down to 28-3

ragz
11-11-2008, 07:33 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"C" wrote:


If we had a real QB... that score would have been 28-20...

If we had ST and a QB, the score would have been 28-13...

We are so very close, yet so very far...


probably wold have been more.
With a real QB who wouldn't throw those 3 picks, we would probably have 35 or more points.
hell, for all you know, with a real qb, we wouldn't have made that punt that was returned.
they got points off of turnovers, so take away 13 points and we're down to 28-3

actually they scored 17 points off of ferrottes pick, then throw in the 7 off the punt, and they really only drove for 3 points i think.
then factor in we spent the majority of the game in great field position and ferrottes play and the fact that we won by a point and its hard to fathom.
but this real qb thing is getting old guys.
in this thread or another one we listed teams winning with less than what i think you guys are considering real qb.
i think with the talent we have, with a good coach we would be running away with the division.
you guys really think with childress as coach, but we had matt cassel, k.collins, any of the rookie qbs, even kurt warner and on and on that we'd be sitting at 7-2?
i personally dont think so.
since i've heard so much love for garcia and warner over the last couple of years, look at what they were doing with bad coaches on mediocre to bad offense before their previous jobs.
people thought their careers were over.
i'm not sure childress woulda been capable of rejuvenating them.

C Mac D
11-11-2008, 07:57 PM
"ragz" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"C" wrote:


If we had a real QB... that score would have been 28-20...

If we had ST and a QB, the score would have been 28-13...

We are so very close, yet so very far...


probably wold have been more.
With a real QB who wouldn't throw those 3 picks, we would probably have 35 or more points.
hell, for all you know, with a real qb, we wouldn't have made that punt that was returned.
they got points off of turnovers, so take away 13 points and we're down to 28-3

actually they scored 17 points off of ferrottes pick, then throw in the 7 off the punt, and they really only drove for 3 points i think.
then factor in we spent the majority of the game in great field position and ferrottes play and the fact that we won by a point and its hard to fathom.
but this real qb thing is getting old guys.
in this thread or another one we listed teams winning with less than what i think you guys are considering real qb.
i think with the talent we have, with a good coach we would be running away with the division.
you guys really think with childress as coach, but we had matt cassel, k.collins, any of the rookie qbs, even kurt warner and on and on that we'd be sitting at 7-2?
i personally dont think so.
since i've heard so much love for garcia and warner over the last couple of years, look at what they were doing with bad coaches on mediocre to bad offense before their previous jobs.
people thought their careers were over.
i'm not sure childress woulda been capable of rejuvenating them.


Kurt Warner would be lights out on the Vikings this year.

ragz
11-11-2008, 10:12 PM
"C" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"C" wrote:


If we had a real QB... that score would have been 28-20...

If we had ST and a QB, the score would have been 28-13...

We are so very close, yet so very far...


probably wold have been more.
With a real QB who wouldn't throw those 3 picks, we would probably have 35 or more points.
hell, for all you know, with a real qb, we wouldn't have made that punt that was returned.
they got points off of turnovers, so take away 13 points and we're down to 28-3

actually they scored 17 points off of ferrottes pick, then throw in the 7 off the punt, and they really only drove for 3 points i think.
then factor in we spent the majority of the game in great field position and ferrottes play and the fact that we won by a point and its hard to fathom.
but this real qb thing is getting old guys.
in this thread or another one we listed teams winning with less than what i think you guys are considering real qb.
i think with the talent we have, with a good coach we would be running away with the division.
you guys really think with childress as coach, but we had matt cassel, k.collins, any of the rookie qbs, even kurt warner and on and on that we'd be sitting at 7-2?
i personally dont think so.
since i've heard so much love for garcia and warner over the last couple of years, look at what they were doing with bad coaches on mediocre to bad offense before their previous jobs.
people thought their careers were over.
i'm not sure childress woulda been capable of rejuvenating them.


Kurt Warner would be lights out on the Vikings this year.

i have a feeling warner would look like the new york giants warner with us.
just a guess, but thats my point.
just cuz a qb is successful one place doesn't mean its gonna transfer over to another place.
scott mitchell anyone.
the coaching has so much to do with it cuz you have to put your qb in a position that best suits him to be successful.
it might of worked with kurt warner in a short passing game, but if wrs arent getting separation it would lead to picks, or sacks which usually are accompanied by fumbles with warner.
everyone who thinks a qb is the simple solution is ignoring how so many teams are winning with not so good qbs.
we have enough talent to be like a tennesse, but we're not.
not cuz we dont have kerry collins, but becuz we dont have jeff fisher.

Purple Floyd
11-11-2008, 10:25 PM
"C" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"C" wrote:


If we had a real QB... that score would have been 28-20...

If we had ST and a QB, the score would have been 28-13...

We are so very close, yet so very far...


probably wold have been more.
With a real QB who wouldn't throw those 3 picks, we would probably have 35 or more points.
hell, for all you know, with a real qb, we wouldn't have made that punt that was returned.
they got points off of turnovers, so take away 13 points and we're down to 28-3

actually they scored 17 points off of ferrottes pick, then throw in the 7 off the punt, and they really only drove for 3 points i think.
then factor in we spent the majority of the game in great field position and ferrottes play and the fact that we won by a point and its hard to fathom.
but this real qb thing is getting old guys.
in this thread or another one we listed teams winning with less than what i think you guys are considering real qb.
i think with the talent we have, with a good coach we would be running away with the division.
you guys really think with childress as coach, but we had matt cassel, k.collins, any of the rookie qbs, even kurt warner and on and on that we'd be sitting at 7-2?
i personally dont think so.
since i've heard so much love for garcia and warner over the last couple of years, look at what they were doing with bad coaches on mediocre to bad offense before their previous jobs.
people thought their careers were over.
i'm not sure childress woulda been capable of rejuvenating them.


Kurt Warner would be lights out on the Vikings this year.


I am still not convinced any QB would look good with this staff.

petrodemos
11-11-2008, 10:50 PM
there's more game film with frerotte in this system now that hes played more as a starting qb on this viking team and i believe defenses are keying up on it.

this next game at tampa will be interesting to see how frerotte responds. kiffin is amazingly good at game planning so gus will have his work cut out for him.
however i do think frerotte will do better, the play calling wont be as aggressive and he will have very few attempts.

midgensa
11-11-2008, 10:51 PM
You know ... I am watching NFL Replay ... and I am trying to figure out why All Day was not flagged for taking his helmet off after that last touchdown. If I understand everything correctly that is supposed to be a 15-yard penalty.

NodakPaul
11-11-2008, 10:54 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


You know ... I am watching NFL Replay ... and I am trying to figure out why All Day was not flagged for taking his helmet off after that last touchdown. If I understand everything correctly that is a 15-yard penalty.


Two reasons.
First, Dugan hit him from behind and the helmet was cockeyed when he hit the ground.
You get the opportunity to fix it.
Second, there is a difference between the spirit of the rule and the letter of it.
AD was Out of Bounds, not in the field of play when he took it off, and was not flaunting anything.
Yeah, the ref could have flagged it, but I think he made the right choice in not doing so.

midgensa
11-11-2008, 11:03 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


You know ... I am watching NFL Replay ... and I am trying to figure out why All Day was not flagged for taking his helmet off after that last touchdown. If I understand everything correctly that is a 15-yard penalty.


Two reasons.
First, Dugan hit him from behind and the helmet was cockeyed when he hit the ground.
You get the opportunity to fix it.
Second, there is a difference between the spirit of the rule and the letter of it.
AD was Out of Bounds, not in the field of play when he took it off, and was not flaunting anything.
Yeah, the ref could have flagged it, but I think he made the right choice in not doing so.


I mean ... I am not complaining. But he definitely COULD have kept his helmet on. I cannot even imagine how pissed everyone would be if he got flagged for it. And he definitely could have been.
He wasn't though and all is good. I was just thinking that if it was the other way I would have wanted the flag.

NodakPaul
11-11-2008, 11:06 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


You know ... I am watching NFL Replay ... and I am trying to figure out why All Day was not flagged for taking his helmet off after that last touchdown. If I understand everything correctly that is a 15-yard penalty.


Two reasons.
First, Dugan hit him from behind and the helmet was cockeyed when he hit the ground.
You get the opportunity to fix it.
Second, there is a difference between the spirit of the rule and the letter of it.
AD was Out of Bounds, not in the field of play when he took it off, and was not flaunting anything.
Yeah, the ref could have flagged it, but I think he made the right choice in not doing so.


I mean ... I am not complaining. But he definitely COULD have kept his helmet on. I cannot even imagine how pissed everyone would be if he got flagged for it. And he definitely could have been.
He wasn't though and all is good. I was just thinking that if it was the other way I would have wanted the flag.


Nah, in the final few minutes of a football game I hate to see stupid penalties called.
Just let them play the damn game.
That had zero impact on the game, so it was (correctly) not called.
Although to be honest I doubt it would have made a difference.
They returned the kickoff to the 40 anyway.
Had we been backed up another 15 yards we probably would have squibbed it to save time and field position, and they would have had it at the 40 regardless.

Marrdro
11-12-2008, 08:07 AM
"Zeus" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.


Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.

:'(
:'(
:'(


As opposed to the ones who don't come to the stadium at all and just whine from afar?

=Z=

Surely you jest.
Some people have traveled to at least to games (from afar) to support the team.

Marrdro
11-12-2008, 08:10 AM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.

Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.

:'(
:'(
:'(

You mean fiscally responsible yutz's? Yep that's me.(I'm against welfare/bailouts/loopholes for billionairs and was willing too sell my tickets at a 600% mark up, didn't get that so I went, and was glad I did).
Just out of curiousity have you helped with the stadium effort? I'm gonna wait until they raise my taxes but it is unlikely they will raise yours(out of state) so you could go ahead and send a check now. ;)

Paid my fare share of taxes to the great state of MN until 2001 so I would assume that the elected officials used some of that someplace on the shit hole called the metrodome.
My tax dollars stand at the ready to support the Tidewater Vikes when the Zygmiester comes looking for a new venue.
:P

As to Billionairsssss.
Not sure but it seems to me that almost every stadium used by almost every team (to include collegiate sports) is financed by the states somehow especially when the state gets/expectes to get huge windfalls from the events that don't go into the billionairsssss pocket.

V-Unit
11-12-2008, 09:38 AM
"petrodemos" wrote:


there's more game film with frerotte in this system now that hes played more as a starting qb on this viking team and i believe defenses are keying up on it.

this next game at tampa will be interesting to see how frerotte responds. kiffin is amazingly good at game planning so gus will have his work cut out for him.
however i do think frerotte will do better, the play calling wont be as aggressive and he will have very few attempts.


What GB also did, which was in hindsight smart, was rarely rush the passer. Gus usually had all day to throw, but he was throwing in 7-man coverages. That is what led to all the underneath stuff, and the INTs.

It will be interesing to see whether Tampa stays in their cover 2, or tries the man approach like GB did. Hopefully for us they stay in cover 2, and our OL, which has played very well lately, forces them to blitz if they want to create any pressure. That would leave Shank and Wade open all day.

Purple Floyd
11-12-2008, 10:17 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Dekay" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


c.
The fricken Vikings fans who sell thier tickets to the gol 'darnit PUKER fans for this game.
Simply shamefull my friends.
Shamefull indeed.


I couldnt agree more with you. I was at the gophersgame when I was in Minny and I just loved how the students were all dressed up in yellow. 3 whole sections all in Gold (eh well yellow). Its not like the seasonticketholders wont get their tickets sold, bcoz they will. But its shameful to have so many packersfans in our turf. "THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY" a sign says outside, but i couldnt see that!!

And also, if we could dress the dome in purple sometime... and not wear white, yellow, blue or fricking pink it would be awesome to see the dome in purple. And especially!!! Think of how the players would feel when they run out of the vikingship and see the dome in 95% purple.

Thanks my friend.
That would be awesome to see wouldn't it....... ;D

By the way, those yutz's that sell thier tickets for a extra buck or two are probably the same voters who won't help with the stadium effort.

:'(
:'(
:'(

You mean fiscally responsible yutz's? Yep that's me.(I'm against welfare/bailouts/loopholes for billionairs and was willing too sell my tickets at a 600% mark up, didn't get that so I went, and was glad I did).
Just out of curiousity have you helped with the stadium effort? I'm gonna wait until they raise my taxes but it is unlikely they will raise yours(out of state) so you could go ahead and send a check now. ;)

Paid my fare share of taxes to the great state of MN until 2001 so I would assume that the elected officials used some of that someplace on the shit hole called the metrodome.
My tax dollars stand at the ready to support the Tidewater Vikes when the Zygmiester comes looking for a new venue.

:P

As to Billionairsssss.
Not sure but it seems to me that almost every stadium used by almost every team (to include collegiate sports) is financed by the states somehow especially when the state gets/expectes to get huge windfalls from the events that don't go into the billionairsssss pocket.


Could you please outline what those huge windfalls are for me?

gregair13
11-12-2008, 11:35 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80c6ff31

Just in case you missed it on NFLn, here is a nice video of AP's winning run and how the blocking works.

packerbasher
11-12-2008, 11:49 PM
Cook (the new stussie) had yet ANOTHER false start penelty.I swear he gets at least one every game.

jargomcfargo
11-13-2008, 09:51 AM
"packerbasher" wrote:


Cook (the new stussie) had yet ANOTHER false start penelty.I swear he gets at least one every game.


He also had the facemask penalty. Other than that he had a pretty fair day.
He definately is the new Steussie. Frustrating!

V-Unit
11-14-2008, 09:34 AM
The OL played as good a game as you could possible ask from them last Sunday. I'll take two penalties and a sack if it means 192 yards rushing and a QB who usually had plenty of time to throw.

Winning the trench battle on both sides of the ball was a big reason why we won that game.

jargomcfargo
11-14-2008, 09:48 AM
"V" wrote:


The OL played as good a game as you could possible ask from them last Sunday. I'll take two penalties and a sack if it means 192 yards rushing and a QB who usually had plenty of time to throw.

Winning the trench battle on both sides of the ball was a big reason why we won that game.


It was outstanding line play for sure. I loved watching Kampman get owned on the last AD touchdown run.
One thing our receivers do pretty well, that they often aren't given credit for, is their blocking.
Schiancoe seals the back side well. And they all are pretty good down field.

Yfz01
11-14-2008, 02:48 PM
"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"V" wrote:


The OL played as good a game as you could possible ask from them last Sunday. I'll take two penalties and a sack if it means 192 yards rushing and a QB who usually had plenty of time to throw.

Winning the trench battle on both sides of the ball was a big reason why we won that game.


It was outstanding line play for sure. I loved watching Kampman get owned on the last AD touchdown run.
One thing our receivers do pretty well, that they often aren't given credit for, is their blocking.
Schiancoe seals the back side well. And they all are pretty good down field.


Watch Shancoe on AD's runs.
He was not blocking all that well on most of them.

jargomcfargo
11-14-2008, 05:13 PM
"Yfz01" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"V" wrote:


The OL played as good a game as you could possible ask from them last Sunday. I'll take two penalties and a sack if it means 192 yards rushing and a QB who usually had plenty of time to throw.

Winning the trench battle on both sides of the ball was a big reason why we won that game.


It was outstanding line play for sure. I loved watching Kampman get owned on the last AD touchdown run.
One thing our receivers do pretty well, that they often aren't given credit for, is their blocking.
Schiancoe seals the back side well. And they all are pretty good down field.


Watch Shancoe on AD's runs.
He was not blocking all that well on most of them.


I've always criticized Schiancoes blocking skills. But when the play goes away from his side, I've seen him seal the backside pursuit well, including the last AD touchdown run.

V4L
11-14-2008, 05:33 PM
Although I agree Shank has picked up his blocking better he didn't even block on APs last TD run

All he did was jump out into the flats and the safety followed him

jargomcfargo
11-14-2008, 05:58 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Although I agree Shank has picked up his blocking better he didn't even block on APs last TD run

All he did was jump out into the flats and the safety followed him


I'll have to check it again.I'm probably cornfused as usual.

PackSux!
11-14-2008, 06:30 PM
Here is the play.

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80c6ff31

Shank was a decoy to move the safety.

V4L
11-14-2008, 06:57 PM
Yup there it is

Shank has definitley elivated his blocking and pass catching lately thougb