Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39
  1. #31
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "CCthebest" wrote:
    I dont understand how an ex QB coach should have put so much faith in a million dollar QB, to get us to the superbowl. Maybe a HC without all the QB experience BC has, but not one who coached McNabb.

    Did he really think BJ could get it done? Or was BJ just filler till he could hand pick a rookie and coach him to stardom?

    And how can you only give 1 million and change to your QB starter and expect to have a good backup? I mean come on, Mike McMahon, JT, Brooks??? Youd think an ex QB coach could spot at least a little talent.

    Also, what experience does BC have in play calling? Cause, quite frankly, he sucks. Terrible 3rd down conversions, and even worse red zone calls. Yeah yeah dropped passes and penalties hurt but come on. Is his ego so big hes just going to keep calling plays, and not Get our OC to? Or would our OC be that much worse. BC needs free time to actually coach. Is he really that much better then Tice? What were Tice's numbers his rookie year as HC? Not that I like Tice, but I thought BC could at least match his numbers.
    Lots of head coaches call their own plays it has nothing to do with ego.

    I honestly think he wanted to use Daunte Culpepper and at the same time he has Wilf wanting a strict regime that cleans up the team and takes care of buisiness. So when friction arose with Culpepper I think he had to take a stand and he did, and then he had to settle for BJ. He plays him now IMO because he is the best we have.

    Do not dismiss the redzone screwups so easily. Yeah yeah comon doesn't quite cover the impact a dropped pass, a penalty, and a turnover can have.

    We have won 4 games. Do you think Brad Childress has a script of good plays and a script of bad ones lol. How can he call a game like Seattle and then turn around and be at fault in San Fran when he is using the exact same plays?

    If you want to crunch Tice Vs. Childress numbers take into account the roster. What is more impressive to you doing more with less or doing absolutley NOTHING with more (TICE.) Apples and Oranges.
    Tice never had Tomlin. Tomlin probably has made the biggest impact on this team, IMO.
    Tice had Oleary and the Vikes were taking the ball away hand over fist. 2003 he had the #1 offense in the entire NFL. And the #17 run D, #1 D in takeaways, and 23rd over all and he didnt even get a playoffbirth. Sorry you can't even begin to compare the Team Tice had and the Team Childress has. Like I said apples and oranges.

  2. #32
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "CCthebest" wrote:
    I dont understand how an ex QB coach should have put so much faith in a million dollar QB, to get us to the superbowl. Maybe a HC without all the QB experience BC has, but not one who coached McNabb.

    Did he really think BJ could get it done? Or was BJ just filler till he could hand pick a rookie and coach him to stardom?

    And how can you only give 1 million and change to your QB starter and expect to have a good backup? I mean come on, Mike McMahon, JT, Brooks??? Youd think an ex QB coach could spot at least a little talent.

    Also, what experience does BC have in play calling? Cause, quite frankly, he sucks. Terrible 3rd down conversions, and even worse red zone calls. Yeah yeah dropped passes and penalties hurt but come on. Is his ego so big hes just going to keep calling plays, and not Get our OC to? Or would our OC be that much worse. BC needs free time to actually coach. Is he really that much better then Tice? What were Tice's numbers his rookie year as HC? Not that I like Tice, but I thought BC could at least match his numbers.
    Lots of head coaches call their own plays it has nothing to do with ego.

    I honestly think he wanted to use Daunte Culpepper and at the same time he has Wilf wanting a strict regime that cleans up the team and takes care of buisiness. So when friction arose with Culpepper I think he had to take a stand and he did, and then he had to settle for BJ. He plays him now IMO because he is the best we have.

    Do not dismiss the redzone screwups so easily. Yeah yeah comon doesn't quite cover the impact a dropped pass, a penalty, and a turnover can have.

    We have won 4 games. Do you think Brad Childress has a script of good plays and a script of bad ones lol. How can he call a game like Seattle and then turn around and be at fault in San Fran when he is using the exact same plays?

    If you want to crunch Tice Vs. Childress numbers take into account the roster. What is more impressive to you doing more with less or doing absolutley NOTHING with more (TICE.) Apples and Oranges.
    Tice never had Tomlin. Tomlin probably has made the biggest impact on this team, IMO.
    Tice had Oleary and the Vikes were taking the ball away hand over fist. 2003 he had the #1 offense in the entire NFL. And the #17 run D, #1 D in takeaways, and 23rd over all and he didnt even get a playoffbirth. Sorry you can't even begin to compare the Team Tice had and the Team Childress has. Like I said apples and oranges.

    O'Leary's 2003 pass defense ranked 26th compared to Tomlin's 18th

    O'Leary's 2003 run defense ranked 17th compared to Tomlin's at #1

    O'Leary's 2003 total defense ranked 23rd compared to Tomlin's at #6

    23rd is pretty low on the totem pole compared to 6th.

    While we put up a lot of points on offense in 2003 & were stingy against the run, we still gave up far to many scores through the air & lost ball games.

    IMO, Tomlin is far better at coaching defense than O'leary was during O'Leary's short tenure here.

    Comparing those two are apples & oranges.

    That is why I brought up Tice never had Tomlin.

    The same could be said in the obverse. If Childress had Tice's 2003 offense, we'd be sitting real pretty about now.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  3. #33
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "CCthebest" wrote:
    I dont understand how an ex QB coach should have put so much faith in a million dollar QB, to get us to the superbowl. Maybe a HC without all the QB experience BC has, but not one who coached McNabb.

    Did he really think BJ could get it done? Or was BJ just filler till he could hand pick a rookie and coach him to stardom?

    And how can you only give 1 million and change to your QB starter and expect to have a good backup? I mean come on, Mike McMahon, JT, Brooks??? Youd think an ex QB coach could spot at least a little talent.

    Also, what experience does BC have in play calling? Cause, quite frankly, he sucks. Terrible 3rd down conversions, and even worse red zone calls. Yeah yeah dropped passes and penalties hurt but come on. Is his ego so big hes just going to keep calling plays, and not Get our OC to? Or would our OC be that much worse. BC needs free time to actually coach. Is he really that much better then Tice? What were Tice's numbers his rookie year as HC? Not that I like Tice, but I thought BC could at least match his numbers.
    Lots of head coaches call their own plays it has nothing to do with ego.

    I honestly think he wanted to use Daunte Culpepper and at the same time he has Wilf wanting a strict regime that cleans up the team and takes care of buisiness. So when friction arose with Culpepper I think he had to take a stand and he did, and then he had to settle for BJ. He plays him now IMO because he is the best we have.

    Do not dismiss the redzone screwups so easily. Yeah yeah comon doesn't quite cover the impact a dropped pass, a penalty, and a turnover can have.

    We have won 4 games. Do you think Brad Childress has a script of good plays and a script of bad ones lol. How can he call a game like Seattle and then turn around and be at fault in San Fran when he is using the exact same plays?

    If you want to crunch Tice Vs. Childress numbers take into account the roster. What is more impressive to you doing more with less or doing absolutley NOTHING with more (TICE.) Apples and Oranges.
    Tice never had Tomlin. Tomlin probably has made the biggest impact on this team, IMO.
    Tice had Oleary and the Vikes were taking the ball away hand over fist. 2003 he had the #1 offense in the entire NFL. And the #17 run D, #1 D in takeaways, and 23rd over all and he didnt even get a playoffbirth. Sorry you can't even begin to compare the Team Tice had and the Team Childress has. Like I said apples and oranges.

    O'Leary's 2003 pass defense ranked 26th compared to Tomlin's 18th

    O'Leary's 2003 run defense ranked 17th compared to Tomlin's at #1

    O'Leary's 2003 total defense ranked 23rd compared to Tomlin's at #6

    23rd is pretty low on the totem pole compared to 6th.

    While we put up a lot of points on offense in 2003 & were stingy against the run, we still gave up far to many scores through the air & lost ball games.

    IMO, Tomlin is far better at coaching defense than O'leary was during O'Leary's short tenure here.

    Comparing those two are apples & oranges.

    That is why I brought up Tice never had Tomlin.

    The same could be said in the obverse. If Childress had Tice's 2003 offense, we'd be sitting real pretty about now.
    The differences are still amazing. Having the #1 offense in the NFL in with the #1 Defense in takeaways. Not even a shot in hell in a comparison. Sorry.

  4. #34
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    [quote author=CCthebest link=topic=28944.msg494888#msg494888 date=1162918783]
    I dont understand how an ex QB coach should have put so much faith in a million dollar QB, to get us to the superbowl. Maybe a HC without all the QB experience BC has, but not one who coached McNabb.

    Did he really think BJ could get it done? Or was BJ just filler till he could hand pick a rookie and coach him to stardom?

    And how can you only give 1 million and change to your QB starter and expect to have a good backup? I mean come on, Mike McMahon, JT, Brooks??? Youd think an ex QB coach could spot at least a little talent.

    Also, what experience does BC have in play calling? Cause, quite frankly, he sucks. Terrible 3rd down conversions, and even worse red zone calls. Yeah yeah dropped passes and penalties hurt but come on. Is his ego so big hes just going to keep calling plays, and not Get our OC to? Or would our OC be that much worse. BC needs free time to actually coach. Is he really that much better then Tice? What were Tice's numbers his rookie year as HC? Not that I like Tice, but I thought BC could at least match his numbers.
    Lots of head coaches call their own plays it has nothing to do with ego.

    I honestly think he wanted to use Daunte Culpepper and at the same time he has Wilf wanting a strict regime that cleans up the team and takes care of buisiness. So when friction arose with Culpepper I think he had to take a stand and he did, and then he had to settle for BJ. He plays him now IMO because he is the best we have.

    Do not dismiss the redzone screwups so easily. Yeah yeah comon doesn't quite cover the impact a dropped pass, a penalty, and a turnover can have.

    We have won 4 games. Do you think Brad Childress has a script of good plays and a script of bad ones lol. How can he call a game like Seattle and then turn around and be at fault in San Fran when he is using the exact same plays?

    If you want to crunch Tice Vs. Childress numbers take into account the roster. What is more impressive to you doing more with less or doing absolutley NOTHING with more (TICE.) Apples and Oranges.
    Tice never had Tomlin. Tomlin probably has made the biggest impact on this team, IMO.
    Tice had Oleary and the Vikes were taking the ball away hand over fist. 2003 he had the #1 offense in the entire NFL. And the #17 run D, #1 D in takeaways, and 23rd over all and he didnt even get a playoffbirth. Sorry you can't even begin to compare the Team Tice had and the Team Childress has. Like I said apples and oranges.

    O'Leary's 2003 pass defense ranked 26th compared to Tomlin's 18th

    O'Leary's 2003 run defense ranked 17th compared to Tomlin's at #1

    O'Leary's 2003 total defense ranked 23rd compared to Tomlin's at #6

    23rd is pretty low on the totem pole compared to 6th.

    While we put up a lot of points on offense in 2003 & were stingy against the run, we still gave up far to many scores through the air & lost ball games.

    IMO, Tomlin is far better at coaching defense than O'leary was during O'Leary's short tenure here.

    Comparing those two are apples & oranges.

    That is why I brought up Tice never had Tomlin.

    The same could be said in the obverse. If Childress had Tice's 2003 offense, we'd be sitting real pretty about now.
    The differences are still amazing. Having the #1 offense in the NFL in with the #1 Defense in takeaways. Not even a shot in hell in a comparison. Sorry.
    [/quote]

    I'm not trying to compare them. I wondering how Tice would have done with todays defense & how Childress would do withe 2003 offense.

    Take aways are great, but the determining factors are the give-away take-away margin & do you capitalize on those turnovers. If you give them the ball right back without scoring, you haven't taken advantage of that turnover.

    I believe the margin in 2003 was 11.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  5. #35
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    [quote author=Del Rio link=topic=28944.msg494889#msg494889 date=1162919064]
    [quote author=CCthebest link=topic=28944.msg494888#msg494888 date=1162918783]
    I dont understand how an ex QB coach should have put so much faith in a million dollar QB, to get us to the superbowl. Maybe a HC without all the QB experience BC has, but not one who coached McNabb.

    Did he really think BJ could get it done? Or was BJ just filler till he could hand pick a rookie and coach him to stardom?

    And how can you only give 1 million and change to your QB starter and expect to have a good backup? I mean come on, Mike McMahon, JT, Brooks??? Youd think an ex QB coach could spot at least a little talent.

    Also, what experience does BC have in play calling? Cause, quite frankly, he sucks. Terrible 3rd down conversions, and even worse red zone calls. Yeah yeah dropped passes and penalties hurt but come on. Is his ego so big hes just going to keep calling plays, and not Get our OC to? Or would our OC be that much worse. BC needs free time to actually coach. Is he really that much better then Tice? What were Tice's numbers his rookie year as HC? Not that I like Tice, but I thought BC could at least match his numbers.
    Lots of head coaches call their own plays it has nothing to do with ego.

    I honestly think he wanted to use Daunte Culpepper and at the same time he has Wilf wanting a strict regime that cleans up the team and takes care of buisiness. So when friction arose with Culpepper I think he had to take a stand and he did, and then he had to settle for BJ. He plays him now IMO because he is the best we have.

    Do not dismiss the redzone screwups so easily. Yeah yeah comon doesn't quite cover the impact a dropped pass, a penalty, and a turnover can have.

    We have won 4 games. Do you think Brad Childress has a script of good plays and a script of bad ones lol. How can he call a game like Seattle and then turn around and be at fault in San Fran when he is using the exact same plays?

    If you want to crunch Tice Vs. Childress numbers take into account the roster. What is more impressive to you doing more with less or doing absolutley NOTHING with more (TICE.) Apples and Oranges.
    Tice never had Tomlin. Tomlin probably has made the biggest impact on this team, IMO.
    Tice had Oleary and the Vikes were taking the ball away hand over fist. 2003 he had the #1 offense in the entire NFL. And the #17 run D, #1 D in takeaways, and 23rd over all and he didnt even get a playoffbirth. Sorry you can't even begin to compare the Team Tice had and the Team Childress has. Like I said apples and oranges.

    O'Leary's 2003 pass defense ranked 26th compared to Tomlin's 18th

    O'Leary's 2003 run defense ranked 17th compared to Tomlin's at #1

    O'Leary's 2003 total defense ranked 23rd compared to Tomlin's at #6

    23rd is pretty low on the totem pole compared to 6th.

    While we put up a lot of points on offense in 2003 & were stingy against the run, we still gave up far to many scores through the air & lost ball games.

    IMO, Tomlin is far better at coaching defense than O'leary was during O'Leary's short tenure here.

    Comparing those two are apples & oranges.

    That is why I brought up Tice never had Tomlin.

    The same could be said in the obverse. If Childress had Tice's 2003 offense, we'd be sitting real pretty about now.
    The differences are still amazing. Having the #1 offense in the NFL in with the #1 Defense in takeaways. Not even a shot in hell in a comparison. Sorry.
    [/quote]

    I'm not trying to compare them. I wondering how Tice would have done with todays defense & how Childress would do withe 2003 offense.

    Take aways are great, but the determining factors are the give-away take-away margin & do you capitalize on those turnovers. If you give them the ball right back without scoring, you haven't taken advantage of that turnover.

    I believe the margin in 2003 was 11.
    [/quote]

    You don't have the #1 offense in the NFL and not score points with turnovers. It would be interesting to see if it was reversed. It all goes back to the initial comparison that was not brought up by you, to which I said which is worse:

    Doing less with more

    or

    Doing more with less

    IMO Tice had more, and we had less. I have a feeling that this defense is going to rank about where the 2003 defense did by the end of the season especially in pass defense. So I guess half-way through the season is not a good enough point to roll out the golden fleece carpet for Tomlin. We've had run defenses as high as 10th under Tice. It is the pass that gets us and it still does. Going to be interesting to see if it gets exploited even more.

  6. #36
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    [quote author=singersp link=topic=28944.msg495191#msg495191 date=1162955590]
    [quote author=Del Rio link=topic=28944.msg494889#msg494889 date=1162919064]
    [quote author=CCthebest link=topic=28944.msg494888#msg494888 date=1162918783]
    I dont understand how an ex QB coach should have put so much faith in a million dollar QB, to get us to the superbowl. Maybe a HC without all the QB experience BC has, but not one who coached McNabb.

    Did he really think BJ could get it done? Or was BJ just filler till he could hand pick a rookie and coach him to stardom?

    And how can you only give 1 million and change to your QB starter and expect to have a good backup? I mean come on, Mike McMahon, JT, Brooks??? Youd think an ex QB coach could spot at least a little talent.

    Also, what experience does BC have in play calling? Cause, quite frankly, he sucks. Terrible 3rd down conversions, and even worse red zone calls. Yeah yeah dropped passes and penalties hurt but come on. Is his ego so big hes just going to keep calling plays, and not Get our OC to? Or would our OC be that much worse. BC needs free time to actually coach. Is he really that much better then Tice? What were Tice's numbers his rookie year as HC? Not that I like Tice, but I thought BC could at least match his numbers.
    Lots of head coaches call their own plays it has nothing to do with ego.

    I honestly think he wanted to use Daunte Culpepper and at the same time he has Wilf wanting a strict regime that cleans up the team and takes care of buisiness. So when friction arose with Culpepper I think he had to take a stand and he did, and then he had to settle for BJ. He plays him now IMO because he is the best we have.

    Do not dismiss the redzone screwups so easily. Yeah yeah comon doesn't quite cover the impact a dropped pass, a penalty, and a turnover can have.

    We have won 4 games. Do you think Brad Childress has a script of good plays and a script of bad ones lol. How can he call a game like Seattle and then turn around and be at fault in San Fran when he is using the exact same plays?

    If you want to crunch Tice Vs. Childress numbers take into account the roster. What is more impressive to you doing more with less or doing absolutley NOTHING with more (TICE.) Apples and Oranges.
    Tice never had Tomlin. Tomlin probably has made the biggest impact on this team, IMO.
    Tice had Oleary and the Vikes were taking the ball away hand over fist. 2003 he had the #1 offense in the entire NFL. And the #17 run D, #1 D in takeaways, and 23rd over all and he didnt even get a playoffbirth. Sorry you can't even begin to compare the Team Tice had and the Team Childress has. Like I said apples and oranges.

    O'Leary's 2003 pass defense ranked 26th compared to Tomlin's 18th

    O'Leary's 2003 run defense ranked 17th compared to Tomlin's at #1

    O'Leary's 2003 total defense ranked 23rd compared to Tomlin's at #6

    23rd is pretty low on the totem pole compared to 6th.

    While we put up a lot of points on offense in 2003 & were stingy against the run, we still gave up far to many scores through the air & lost ball games.

    IMO, Tomlin is far better at coaching defense than O'leary was during O'Leary's short tenure here.

    Comparing those two are apples & oranges.

    That is why I brought up Tice never had Tomlin.

    The same could be said in the obverse. If Childress had Tice's 2003 offense, we'd be sitting real pretty about now.
    The differences are still amazing. Having the #1 offense in the NFL in with the #1 Defense in takeaways. Not even a shot in hell in a comparison. Sorry.
    [/quote]

    I'm not trying to compare them. I wondering how Tice would have done with todays defense & how Childress would do withe 2003 offense.

    Take aways are great, but the determining factors are the give-away take-away margin & do you capitalize on those turnovers. If you give them the ball right back without scoring, you haven't taken advantage of that turnover.

    I believe the margin in 2003 was 11.
    [/quote]

    You don't have the #1 offense in the NFL and not score points with turnovers. It would be interesting to see if it was reversed. It all goes back to the initial comparison that was not brought up by you, to which I said which is worse:

    Doing less with more

    or

    Doing more with less

    IMO Tice had more, and we had less. I have a feeling that this defense is going to rank about where the 2003 defense did by the end of the season especially in pass defense. So I guess half-way through the season is not a good enough point to roll out the golden fleece carpet for Tomlin. We've had run defenses as high as 10th under Tice. It is the pass that gets us and it still does. Going to be interesting to see if it gets exploited even more.
    [/quote]

    True

    It seems like we have been getting burned by the short pass & YAC for several years now.

    That is our weakness & teams will continue to exploit it until we can put a stop to it.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  7. #37
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "whackthepack" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    The one thing that was stressed when we hired Childress was that the vikings head coaching job was the cream of the crop because they had an already talented roster compared to other job openings and they also had tons of cap room and an owner who was not afraid to spend money to get a championship.

    Childress was hailed on this site and the media if I am not mistaken, as a "QB developing machine".
    That point was made both in reference to his work at Wisconsin and Philly with McNabb and also after the draft when we drafted Jackson.

    Last year we were 9-7 and we supposedly upgraded the roster and the coaching staff in the off season so it would stand to figure that we should be in a position this year to have a better record than last year. If we end up with the same record as last year after upgrading the talent and staff then I would say we would not have gotten a good return on our investment.

    The one thing that was stated that we needed was a new standard of accountability in terms of both on the field performance and off field behavior and we would be a contender. I think it is safe to say that even though we have certainly seen less tolerance of shoddy behavior ( Even though the stairwell sex and the drunken police chase still happened) the coach has certainly dealt with it well, but it has not translated to chemistry or success on the field.

    I am not sure how much time should be considered acceptable in order for the team and the staff to be on the same page but to me that time is closer to training camp than it is mid-season. One thing to consider is that even if they get some sort of chemistry by game 12 or so, it is too late to be of any use this season and we all know that with free agency this team and staff will look different next year so anything we accomplished with chemistry this year will be a moot point next year.

    If the QB couldn't get the ball to the receivers in training camp, if the receivers couldn't catch the ball in training camp they should have been replaced with people who could and if the OL couldn't execute a blocking scheme in training camp they should have addressed it then because the season begins with game 1, not game 10,11 or 12. and in this league you cannot be successful learning on the fly.

    As stated earlier, if the team was 4-12 last year and needed a complete rebuild I would understand being .500 at mid- season but with a team that supposedly only needed a few tweaks to get to the playoffs we should be better than 4-4 and certainly should be good enough to score at least one touchdown against one of the worst defenses in the NFL.

    When Childress made that statement we still had Koren Robinson who should have been our # 1 receiver, and Daunte was still the top QB when he returned from his injury.
    But Daunte forced his way out, and Robinson drinking and running from the police changed 2 key positions and left our offense short at receiver and QB!

    If Daunte's injury would have been handled the right way he would be about ready to come in and start, and with doing it the right way he would probably not be the basket case he is right now!

    Having Koren with Williamson, Taylor and Marcus as the top 4 WR's maybe things would have gone differently for this offense, but that is all speculation because the 2 of them are not here.
    They may have gone different, but every team has injuries. The ones that can adjust to those injuriessucceed and the ones that don't fail. We got shellac'd by a patriots team that revamped their offensive line and have a receiving corps of nobodies. They are still able to put up points and execute an offensive scheme even with all of the changes,including Deion Branch being traded at the last minute.Green Bay also lost their top receiver and never replaced him but farve and their new coaching staff with a retooled offensive line still put up 420 yards against buffalo and have been scoring points regularly. And Culpepper being gone is a moot point because he sucks anyway. If QB was a problem, then they could have went after Drew Brees with their money,he has New Orleans at 6-2 with a new coaching staff, new o-line etc. Just like we have, but they had far less talent to start with. And they are not even getting the reggie bush production yet.


    In this day and age you need to get your ducks in a row before you start preseason and by the time you kick off the first game you neeed to hit the ground running or you are dead in the water. Now if that wasn't a boatload of cliche' lol ;D

  8. #38
    jmmcgorman's Avatar
    jmmcgorman is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    53

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    Time, Time, and more Time

    It takes time
    I agree and have posted many times about how it is our receivers.
    Without getting into all that again, i think that as for the rest of the team that acumen is right.

    Childress had Pep and K-Rob, I watched every game last year, and K-Rob is no Marvin Harrison, but he sure ran good routes and had a nack for getting open.
    I remember the long bomb touchdown against detroit.
    K-Rob has had a 1200 yard season before, whether it would have been a big one or not, he would have made a difference in this team.

    Marcus runs good routes, i don't remember which game it was but it was a stop and go route up the seam and johnson threw the ball before marcus was even looking and they connected and on the post it sounds corny but on tv and watching what all the other guys on offense were doing it looks amazing.


    I don't think it is completely childress, yes he should rely on an oc to help out, but its not just the play calling.

    I agree that BJ is in there to bring up someone, whether that be TJack or whoever.

  9. #39
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Brad Childress, ex QB coach

    "vikes09" wrote:
    Childress was hailed on this site and the media if I am not mistaken, as a "QB developing machine".
    That point was made both in reference to his work at Wisconsin and Philly with McNabb and also after the draft when we drafted Jackson.


    not so much a "qb developing maching, but a guy who knows the qbs pretty gol' darnit well.
    So far he has aquired JT Osuksalot, Ed McMahon, Brooks Bollinger and his QB hasn't score in almost 3 games. The jury is still out as far as I am concerned


    Last year we were 9-7 and we supposedly upgraded the roster and the coaching staff in the off season so it would stand to figure that we should be in a position this year to have a better record than last year. If we end up with the same record as last year after upgrading the talent and staff then I would say we would not have gotten a good return on our investment.

    we definately improved our coaching staff, and along with new coaches come new styles, gameplans, and (most importantly) their own schemes. this takes time to learn and with a whole new staff. i think we're feeling the effects of it come week 9 of the season, but it will get better with time.

    The defense is considerably better except the secondary where there were 2 major injuries. They deserve credit, but I am still not convinced the offensive staff can coach themselves out of a box. I hope they prove me wrong against GB

    concerning the upgraded players, some were definate upgrades (hutch) and some have been injured (greenway).
    i think this statement was made when we had absolutely NO news, the offseason was nearing an end, and everyone was getting excited for the new season. new players are always praised to no extent, but again it was the only thing that happened in months and everyone was extremely excited.

    The one thing that was stated that we needed was a new standard of accountability in terms of both on the field performance and off field behavior and we would be a contender. I think it is safe to say that even though we have certainly seen less tolerance of shoddy behavior ( Even though the stairwell sex and the drunken police chase still happened) the coach has certainly dealt with it well, but it has not translated to chemistry or success on the field.

    it wasnt supposed to equate to sucess on the field, but a better image of the viking organization. the stairwell incident was handled very well (from a new player, dwight smith) as was the police chase (koren no longer a viking). i would have to say thats helped start the rebuilding of the image the vikes want.

    The off the field problems were blamed for the lack of success so changing the atmosphere was certainly supposed to make the team better
    I am not sure how much time should be considered acceptable in order for the team and the staff to be on the same page but to me that time is closer to training camp than it is mid-season. One thing to consider is that even if they get some sort of chemistry by game 12 or so, it is too late to be of any use this season and we all know that with free agency this team and staff will look different next year so anything we accomplished with chemistry this year will be a moot point next year.

    im saying 9 weeks... ;D

    If the QB couldn't get the ball to the receivers in training camp, if the receivers couldn't catch the ball in training camp they should have been replaced with people who could and if the OL couldn't execute a blocking scheme in training camp they should have addressed it then because the season begins with game 1, not game 10,11 or 12. and in this league you cannot be successful learning on the fly.

    i would consider changing receivers by training camp "learning on the fly". and the coaches probably tried to install their scheme right away, regardless. blocking if anything cant be learned on the fly, and bringing another guy in when training camp is going would probably hinder them and the offensive line's "chemistry".

    Question: If our coaches cannot bring in new guys and plug them into the scheme without disruption, then how come other teams do it on a regular basis?

    As stated earlier, if the team was 4-12 last year and needed a complete rebuild I would understand being .500 at mid- season but with a team that supposedly only needed a few tweaks to get to the playoffs we should be better than 4-4 and certainly should be good enough to score at least one touchdown against one of the worst defenses in the NFL.

    i agree that our offense is bad, but passing offense is the LAST thing to develop in a new scheme. last year we were headed to the superbowl, and the year hadnt started.
    this year most people took a wiser approach and had reasonable (as far as being a baised vikings fan goes 8)) idea of how the season was going to go.

    we have the packers in week 9, so lets cruise past them and go to 5-4!!!
    [glow=red,2,300][/glow]

    I am all for that ;D

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Similar Threads

  1. Brad Childress Doesn't Need to Go, But Someone Does
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 03-13-2009, 10:25 AM
  2. Vote Brad Childress coach of the week?
    By FuadFan in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 12-03-2008, 01:08 PM
  3. Q&A with Minnesota Vikings coach Brad Childress
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-21-2008, 05:28 AM
  4. Coach Brad Childress.
    By baumy300 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 181
    Last Post: 11-06-2007, 06:49 AM
  5. Vikings will name coach: Brad Childress
    By michaelmazid in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 260
    Last Post: 01-24-2007, 12:19 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
  •