Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11
    magicci's Avatar
    magicci is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    oxnard, ca
    Posts
    5,440

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    poor plaxico. i think the vikes stayed away from him for a different reason. wasn't it his off-field problems?

  2. #12
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    "magicci" wrote:
    poor plaxico. i think the vikes stayed away from him for a different reason. wasn't it his off-field problems?

    More like because he isn't that good of a receiver.

  3. #13
    LuckyVike's Avatar
    LuckyVike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,785

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    "muchluv4smoot" wrote:
    "magicci" wrote:
    poor plaxico. i think the vikes stayed away from him for a different reason. wasn't it his off-field problems?

    More like because he isn't that good of a receiver.
    He wanted a huge contract. The Vikings wanted to give him a small deal to see if he could play good but he wanted a big long contract, something the Vikings didn't want to risk giving him. I'm glad we didn't get 'em either.
    The best part of my day is when I get down on my knees, with my head in my hands, and thank GOD for everything he has given me.

  4. #14
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    "Vikes2611" wrote:
    "muchluv4smoot" wrote:
    "magicci" wrote:
    poor plaxico. i think the vikes stayed away from him for a different reason. wasn't it his off-field problems?

    More like because he isn't that good of a receiver.
    He wanted a huge contract. The Vikings wanted to give him a small deal to see if he could play good but he wanted a big long contract, something the Vikings didn't want to risk giving him. I'm glad we didn't get 'em either.

    Exactly. We didn't want to give him a big contract, because he isn't that good.

    I'm much happier with williamson and taylor added to the WR corp.

  5. #15
    magicci's Avatar
    magicci is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    oxnard, ca
    Posts
    5,440

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    i dont think he succeeded in pittsburgh because the system used there wasnt that suited for his style of play.

  6. #16
    TroyWilliamson is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    204

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    I have to say at the time I was hoping that we would get plaxico but I'm still quite satisfied with what we ended up with.

  7. #17
    magicci's Avatar
    magicci is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    oxnard, ca
    Posts
    5,440

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    at the time i was wanting plax also.

  8. #18
    MrGopher16's Avatar
    MrGopher16 is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,353

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    Yikes...i have him in a couple fantasy leagues too, luckily i didn't pay for any of them!
    ;-)

  9. #19
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    "magicci" wrote:
    i dont think he succeeded in pittsburgh because the system used there wasnt that suited for his style of play.

    I actually think the opposite. In pitt he was the #2 WR, with ward as the #1. Who got all the double teams? Ward. That made it easier for burress and yet he still struggled against single coverage, even as big as he is.

    Pitt is also a heavy run orriented offense, which means opposing teams would be focusing more on stopping the run and would have 8 in the box more often, making burress' job much easier, getting behind the D and downfield.

    Pitt's rushing style of offense would also open up the play action more, which should benefit him getting downfield.

    I think burress was in the right system and I think the wrong system is a pass heavy offense, that is gonna draw more coverages to him.

  10. #20
    TroyWilliamson is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    204

    Re: Good thing we didn't get Plax

    "muchluv4smoot" wrote:
    "magicci" wrote:
    i dont think he succeeded in pittsburgh because the system used there wasnt that suited for his style of play.

    I actually think the opposite. In pitt he was the #2 WR, with ward as the #1. Who got all the double teams? Ward. That made it easier for burress and yet he still struggled against single coverage, even as big as he is.

    Pitt is also a heavy run orriented offense, which means opposing teams would be focusing more on stopping the run and would have 8 in the box more often, making burress' job much easier, getting behind the D and downfield.

    Pitt's rushing style of offense would also open up the play action more, which should benefit him getting downfield.

    I think burress was in the right system and I think the wrong system is a pass heavy offense, that is gonna draw more coverages to him.
    I agree completely.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Playing Saints 1st game a good thing???
    By kalamazooer10 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-22-2010, 05:03 PM
  2. Meet mister big time: Kenny Britt may be next Plax, and that ain't good
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-20-2009, 08:11 AM
  3. Blackout A Good Thing?
    By COJOMAY in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 04:43 PM
  4. Good thing about Osama Bin Laden
    By COJOMAY in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-23-2005, 06:54 AM
  5. The bleeding continues. Good thing he's already suspended.
    By Hooversham in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-18-2005, 05:06 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •