Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 47 of 47
  1. #41
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Texans sign WR Bethel Johnson

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    3 KR Returns for 78 yards in the first preseason game...sounds healthy to me.
    We didn't do to bad without him.

    ;D
    TOTAL RETURN YARDAGE (Not including kickoffs)


    91

    Number-Yards: Punt Returns














    2-6

    Number-Yards: Kickoff Returns













    3-75

    Number-Yards: Interception Returns









    3-85
    1. I'm saying that health can't possibly be a reason for cutting him. He was ready to go by week one of the preseason. Injury had nothing to do with the roster move.
    2. We both know Marr that including interception returns on the issue we're talking about is just ridiculous.
    3. I'm fine with Carter and Moore returning kicks, we have neglected ST all offseason, and rightfully so because we ahd much more pressing needs. I dread having a starter like Williamson back there.
    I know.
    Just hadn't traded shots across the bow with ya for a few weeks.
    Thought I would see if you were still out there.

    ;D

    As far as starters working in special teams, I am torn on that one as well.
    I put alot of stock in field position and the impact special teams play can have on the game especially when it comes to how demoralizing a big run can be.
    In short, I guess what I am trying to say is that if a starter makes us better at special teams and it helps us get a win vice a loss, then he should be on special teams.
    It's nice that you realize I'm not going to let you get away with stupid points, and I'm not going anywhere.

    Starters on special teams? I just think if a player is good enough to provide major contribution on offense/defense, it is not worth losing him elsewhere. A fifth receiver who is a good KR is phenomenal for that reason, and if a backup can return kicks, but the starter is marginally better, let the fresh backup come in and focus on that job.

    If Williamson gets injured, where would we miss him more? ST or on offense? Williamson may not be the best example but I think you get my point.

    If we are talking about Hester or maybe even Ginn things are different. Williamson is a good KR, but Carter is too. I choose Carter.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  2. #42
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Texans sign WR Bethel Johnson

    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    3 KR Returns for 78 yards in the first preseason game...sounds healthy to me.
    We didn't do to bad without him.

    ;D
    TOTAL RETURN YARDAGE (Not including kickoffs)


    91

    Number-Yards: Punt Returns














    2-6

    Number-Yards: Kickoff Returns













    3-75

    Number-Yards: Interception Returns









    3-85
    1. I'm saying that health can't possibly be a reason for cutting him. He was ready to go by week one of the preseason. Injury had nothing to do with the roster move.
    2. We both know Marr that including interception returns on the issue we're talking about is just ridiculous.
    3. I'm fine with Carter and Moore returning kicks, we have neglected ST all offseason, and rightfully so because we ahd much more pressing needs. I dread having a starter like Williamson back there.
    I know.
    Just hadn't traded shots across the bow with ya for a few weeks.
    Thought I would see if you were still out there.

    ;D

    As far as starters working in special teams, I am torn on that one as well.
    I put alot of stock in field position and the impact special teams play can have on the game especially when it comes to how demoralizing a big run can be.
    In short, I guess what I am trying to say is that if a starter makes us better at special teams and it helps us get a win vice a loss, then he should be on special teams.
    It's nice that you realize I'm not going to let you get away with stupid points, and I'm not going anywhere.

    Starters on special teams? I just think if a player is good enough to provide major contribution on offense/defense, it is not worth losing him elsewhere. A fifth receiver who is a good KR is phenomenal for that reason, and if a backup can return kicks, but the starter is marginally better, let the fresh backup come in and focus on that job.

    If Williamson gets injured, where would we miss him more? ST or on offense? Williamson may not be the best example but I think you get my point.
    If we are talking about Hester or maybe even Ginn things are different. Williamson is a good KR, but Carter is too. I choose Carter.
    None of my points are stupid. They all serve a purpose in the greater scheme of things. In this case it proves we don't need him.
    ;D

    Nope I don't get it.
    I think that whoever gives us the best chance at performing at a top level, vice just below that
    is the guy I want.

    Are you saying that Hester won't return kicks now because he is starting on Offense?
    Seems to be somewere else you were championing keeping this guy cause he could do both KR/PR and start as a WR.
    Madness my friend, madness.
    ;D

    Additionally, its crazy to keep up the myth that players get hurt on special teams at a higher rate than starters to.
    Think about it.
    Using your player of choice (T-will), how many times/play does he run across the middle or go deep vice how many times he would field a kick or a punt.

    Odds alone cause one to believe that he would get hurt first playing on O vice Special teams.

    Gonna do a bit of research (probably gonna be hard to find) to see how many KR/PR get injured on special teams every year.
    Bet I find it is pretty low and a very low risk when it comes to wins and losses my friend.

    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  3. #43
    Prophet's Avatar
    Prophet is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    17,388

    Re: Texans sign WR Bethel Johnson

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    ...
    Gonna do a bit of research (probably gonna be hard to find) to see how many KR/PR get injured on special teams every year.
    Bet I find it is pretty low and a very low risk when it comes to wins and losses my friend.
    Not sure you're going to find those stats.
    I'm willing to bet that if you standardize the comparison by comparing the amount of time on the field to injuries that the special team folks win the injury contest.
    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  4. #44
    cajunvike's Avatar
    cajunvike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    32,063

    Re: Texans sign WR Bethel Johnson

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    [quote author=V link=topic=35640.msg617084#msg617084 date=1187056352]
    3 KR Returns for 78 yards in the first preseason game...sounds healthy to me.
    We didn't do to bad without him.

    ;D
    TOTAL RETURN YARDAGE (Not including kickoffs)


    91

    Number-Yards: Punt Returns














    2-6

    Number-Yards: Kickoff Returns













    3-75

    Number-Yards: Interception Returns









    3-85
    1. I'm saying that health can't possibly be a reason for cutting him. He was ready to go by week one of the preseason. Injury had nothing to do with the roster move.
    2. We both know Marr that including interception returns on the issue we're talking about is just ridiculous.
    3. I'm fine with Carter and Moore returning kicks, we have neglected ST all offseason, and rightfully so because we ahd much more pressing needs. I dread having a starter like Williamson back there.
    I know.
    Just hadn't traded shots across the bow with ya for a few weeks.
    Thought I would see if you were still out there.

    ;D

    As far as starters working in special teams, I am torn on that one as well.
    I put alot of stock in field position and the impact special teams play can have on the game especially when it comes to how demoralizing a big run can be.
    In short, I guess what I am trying to say is that if a starter makes us better at special teams and it helps us get a win vice a loss, then he should be on special teams.
    It's nice that you realize I'm not going to let you get away with stupid points, and I'm not going anywhere.

    Starters on special teams? I just think if a player is good enough to provide major contribution on offense/defense, it is not worth losing him elsewhere. A fifth receiver who is a good KR is phenomenal for that reason, and if a backup can return kicks, but the starter is marginally better, let the fresh backup come in and focus on that job.

    If Williamson gets injured, where would we miss him more? ST or on offense? Williamson may not be the best example but I think you get my point.
    If we are talking about Hester or maybe even Ginn things are different. Williamson is a good KR, but Carter is too. I choose Carter.
    None of my points are stupid. They all serve a purpose in the greater scheme of things. In this case it proves we don't need him.
    ;D

    Nope I don't get it.
    I think that whoever gives us the best chance at performing at a top level, vice just below that
    is the guy I want.

    Are you saying that Hester won't return kicks now because he is starting on Offense?
    Seems to be somewere else you were championing keeping this guy cause he could do both KR/PR and start as a WR.
    Madness my friend, madness.

    ;D

    Additionally, its crazy to keep up the myth that players get hurt on special teams at a higher rate than starters to.
    Think about it.
    Using your player of choice (T-will), how many times/play does he run across the middle or go deep vice how many times he would field a kick or a punt.

    Odds alone cause one to believe that he would get hurt first playing on O vice Special teams.

    Gonna do a bit of research (probably gonna be hard to find) to see how many KR/PR get injured on special teams every year.
    Bet I find it is pretty low and a very low risk when it comes to wins and losses my friend.


    [/quote]

    VICE???
    Is that the PP.O net nanny subbing another word in for you or what?
    ???
    BANNED OR DEAD...I'LL TAKE EITHER ONE

  5. #45
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Texans sign WR Bethel Johnson

    VICE???
    Is that the PP.O net nanny subbing another word in for you or what?
    Not a net thing.
    I just like to use it instead of, instead fo.
    Easier to type and fits in Power Point Briefs better vice instead of.

    I also catch myself doing wrt for With Respect To and iso for In Support Of.

    Military short hand I guess.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #46
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Texans sign WR Bethel Johnson

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    [quote author=V link=topic=35640.msg617084#msg617084 date=1187056352]
    3 KR Returns for 78 yards in the first preseason game...sounds healthy to me.
    We didn't do to bad without him.

    ;D
    TOTAL RETURN YARDAGE (Not including kickoffs)


    91

    Number-Yards: Punt Returns














    2-6

    Number-Yards: Kickoff Returns













    3-75

    Number-Yards: Interception Returns









    3-85
    1. I'm saying that health can't possibly be a reason for cutting him. He was ready to go by week one of the preseason. Injury had nothing to do with the roster move.
    2. We both know Marr that including interception returns on the issue we're talking about is just ridiculous.
    3. I'm fine with Carter and Moore returning kicks, we have neglected ST all offseason, and rightfully so because we ahd much more pressing needs. I dread having a starter like Williamson back there.
    I know.
    Just hadn't traded shots across the bow with ya for a few weeks.
    Thought I would see if you were still out there.

    ;D

    As far as starters working in special teams, I am torn on that one as well.
    I put alot of stock in field position and the impact special teams play can have on the game especially when it comes to how demoralizing a big run can be.
    In short, I guess what I am trying to say is that if a starter makes us better at special teams and it helps us get a win vice a loss, then he should be on special teams.
    It's nice that you realize I'm not going to let you get away with stupid points, and I'm not going anywhere.

    Starters on special teams? I just think if a player is good enough to provide major contribution on offense/defense, it is not worth losing him elsewhere. A fifth receiver who is a good KR is phenomenal for that reason, and if a backup can return kicks, but the starter is marginally better, let the fresh backup come in and focus on that job.

    If Williamson gets injured, where would we miss him more? ST or on offense? Williamson may not be the best example but I think you get my point.
    If we are talking about Hester or maybe even Ginn things are different. Williamson is a good KR, but Carter is too. I choose Carter.
    None of my points are stupid. They all serve a purpose in the greater scheme of things. In this case it proves we don't need him.
    ;D

    Nope I don't get it.
    I think that whoever gives us the best chance at performing at a top level, vice just below that
    is the guy I want.

    Are you saying that Hester won't return kicks now because he is starting on Offense?
    Seems to be somewere else you were championing keeping this guy cause he could do both KR/PR and start as a WR.
    Madness my friend, madness.

    ;D

    Additionally, its crazy to keep up the myth that players get hurt on special teams at a higher rate than starters to.
    Think about it.
    Using your player of choice (T-will), how many times/play does he run across the middle or go deep vice how many times he would field a kick or a punt.

    Odds alone cause one to believe that he would get hurt first playing on O vice Special teams.

    Gonna do a bit of research (probably gonna be hard to find) to see how many KR/PR get injured on special teams every year.
    Bet I find it is pretty low and a very low risk when it comes to wins and losses my friend.

    [/quote]

    No, we don't need him, but if Carter and Williamson are equally good returning kicks, Johnson was better.

    I also said marginally better, and that things change if we consider top KR like Hester. The Bears have no one like Hester to return. Williamson is not comparable.

    A player who plays offense and special teams has more chance of getting hurt than a player who just plays offense. Are you suggesting the Falcons made a bad decision by not putting Mike Vick back at KR?

    I didn't say he would start (I believe). I said he was better than McMullen. I still believe that. You say he doesn't fit our scheme when he is exactly the type of receiver that Williamson and Wade are.

    In the end, I just think that if Carter can produce the same at KR that Williamson can (not a bad assumption), then use Carter. It gives us a rested Williamson so that we can go deep on the first play from scrimmage, fresh legs for our KR so he has a better chance of scoring on each return, and less injury risk for our starting receiver. I don't see a downside.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  7. #47
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Texans sign WR Bethel Johnson

    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    [quote author=Marrdro link=topic=35640.msg617228#msg617228 date=1187095102]
    [quote author=V link=topic=35640.msg617084#msg617084 date=1187056352]
    3 KR Returns for 78 yards in the first preseason game...sounds healthy to me.
    We didn't do to bad without him.

    ;D
    TOTAL RETURN YARDAGE (Not including kickoffs)


    91

    Number-Yards: Punt Returns














    2-6

    Number-Yards: Kickoff Returns













    3-75

    Number-Yards: Interception Returns









    3-85
    1. I'm saying that health can't possibly be a reason for cutting him. He was ready to go by week one of the preseason. Injury had nothing to do with the roster move.
    2. We both know Marr that including interception returns on the issue we're talking about is just ridiculous.
    3. I'm fine with Carter and Moore returning kicks, we have neglected ST all offseason, and rightfully so because we ahd much more pressing needs. I dread having a starter like Williamson back there.
    I know.
    Just hadn't traded shots across the bow with ya for a few weeks.
    Thought I would see if you were still out there.

    ;D

    As far as starters working in special teams, I am torn on that one as well.
    I put alot of stock in field position and the impact special teams play can have on the game especially when it comes to how demoralizing a big run can be.
    In short, I guess what I am trying to say is that if a starter makes us better at special teams and it helps us get a win vice a loss, then he should be on special teams.
    It's nice that you realize I'm not going to let you get away with stupid points, and I'm not going anywhere.

    Starters on special teams? I just think if a player is good enough to provide major contribution on offense/defense, it is not worth losing him elsewhere. A fifth receiver who is a good KR is phenomenal for that reason, and if a backup can return kicks, but the starter is marginally better, let the fresh backup come in and focus on that job.

    If Williamson gets injured, where would we miss him more? ST or on offense? Williamson may not be the best example but I think you get my point.
    If we are talking about Hester or maybe even Ginn things are different. Williamson is a good KR, but Carter is too. I choose Carter.
    None of my points are stupid. They all serve a purpose in the greater scheme of things. In this case it proves we don't need him.
    ;D

    Nope I don't get it.
    I think that whoever gives us the best chance at performing at a top level, vice just below that
    is the guy I want.

    Are you saying that Hester won't return kicks now because he is starting on Offense?
    Seems to be somewere else you were championing keeping this guy cause he could do both KR/PR and start as a WR.
    Madness my friend, madness.

    ;D

    Additionally, its crazy to keep up the myth that players get hurt on special teams at a higher rate than starters to.
    Think about it.
    Using your player of choice (T-will), how many times/play does he run across the middle or go deep vice how many times he would field a kick or a punt.

    Odds alone cause one to believe that he would get hurt first playing on O vice Special teams.

    Gonna do a bit of research (probably gonna be hard to find) to see how many KR/PR get injured on special teams every year.
    Bet I find it is pretty low and a very low risk when it comes to wins and losses my friend.

    [/quote]

    No, we don't need him, but if Carter and Williamson are equally good returning kicks, Johnson was better.

    I also said marginally better, and that things change if we consider top KR like Hester. The Bears have no one like Hester to return. Williamson is not comparable.

    A player who plays offense and special teams has more chance of getting hurt than a player who just plays offense. Are you suggesting the Falcons made a bad decision by not putting Mike Vick back at KR?

    I didn't say he would start (I believe). I said he was better than McMullen. I still believe that. You say he doesn't fit our scheme when he is exactly the type of receiver that Williamson and Wade are.
    In the end, I just think that if Carter can produce the same at KR that Williamson can (not a bad assumption), then use Carter. It gives us a rested Williamson so that we can go deep on the first play from scrimmage, fresh legs for our KR so he has a better chance of scoring on each return, and less injury risk for our starting receiver. I don't see a downside.
    [/quote]
    I love these discussions.
    ;D

    You almost had me on your side until you went down this path.

    Read the scouting reports.
    Bethel is a good KR/PR specialist but he sure isn't like B-wade and T-will.
    In fact his inability to run a precise route is a huge detractor when you want your WR's to be good at that in a WCO that is predicated on timing and precision.

    T-will
    Height: 6-1
    Weight: 203 lbs
    4.38 in the 40-yard dash
    Deep threat, good body control.
    http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2005/williamson_troy

    B-wade
    Height: 5-10
    Weight: 190 lbs
    4.54 in the 40-yard dash … 34-inch vertical jump.
    Precise route runner.
    Quick off the line.
    Not a burner.
    http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/wade_bobby

    Big B
    Height: 5-11
    Weight: 200 lbs.
    4.55 in the 40-yard dash … 320-pound bench press … 410-pound squat … 319-pound power clean
    Choppy in his route running, not showing precision cutting coming out of his breaks
    http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/johnson_bethel

    You gotta do better than that my friend.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Similar Threads

  1. Bethel Johnson an Eagle
    By Braddock in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-08-2007, 06:45 PM
  2. Bethel Johnson to the Eagles
    By Displaced_Viking in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-08-2007, 02:35 PM
  3. MOVED: BETHEL JOHNSON
    By ultravikingfan in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-28-2006, 04:41 AM
  4. BETHEL JOHNSON
    By DustinDupont in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-28-2006, 02:28 AM
  5. Bethel Johnson a ViKiNG
    By digital420 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 10-19-2006, 11:02 AM

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
  •