Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 59
  1. #1
    Redmption's Avatar
    Redmption is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    307

    Childress on Peterson

    I'm surprised I didnt see this posted or any commentary on Brads press conference today.

    Last thing I’d say before I take questions is we understand here that we have a great talent in Adrian Peterson and we are trying to grow him just like we attempt to grow all of our young guys.
    I am sure his role will increase as we go through the rest of this football season, but there will be times and situations where situations will dictate that we have other folks in the football game.
    That was kind of a left-handed game as I mentioned kind of football game.
    I go back through and look at touches and play called and that type of thing.
    When you have a 48-play game of which there are only 17 plays in the first half, he touches the ball seven out of 17 plays.
    I go down through how many was he in for, 11 plays in the first series.
    He had five touches; he was in for six plays.
    We were backed up in the second series.
    He was in for two, had a great protection. We were three and out; he didn’t touch the ball.
    The third series, he touched it two of three times.
    Fourth series we take a knee and the half is over.


    In the second half, seven of 11 he is in for he touches the football.
    He touches it one of three, we’re out.
    He touches it one of three, we’re out.
    We have a blocked field goal in an eight-play series; he is in for four and he touches it two.
    So you catch my point.
    The last series three series 10, 11, and 12, we are down 10 with 10:29 to go.
    He is in for two, three pass plays, he doesn’t touch it; 0-5, 0-3, 0-2, he is not in the last two series. The last two series were at 6:29 and 0:23 to go. As I mentioned to you, his role will continue to increase. Just like everybody you want to see somebody have success. There are things that he does better than others and obviously the goal is to get him to do all things well within this offense. Just as most people, they don’t know it all after five games.
    "

    The way he breaks it down makes everyone sound stupid for questioning how many touches Peterson gets...


  2. #2
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    Very nice my friend.
    Were did you get this from?

    This is exactly what Z and I were trying to point out using play by play breakdown from the NFL Page but it just doesn't go into this detail

    Again, very nice indeed.

    For all of you Pooo Poooers, I will ask, and I'm sure Z will ask, were should've he been in there/used more?
    :

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

  3. #3
    Redmption's Avatar
    Redmption is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    307

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    Vikings.com, Brad Childress press conference today.

    Thats why we listen to people who know football like players and coaches, not windbags and dumb espn analysts. I do think Peterson was not in a key points he probably should have, but he was still getting a lions size share of the offensive work load.

  4. #4
    jessejames09's Avatar
    jessejames09 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,233

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    I thought Peterson would be on top first.... :

  5. #5
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,615

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    They don't question how ineffective our offense is, which is what Childress seemed like he was explaining (3 and out, 3 and out, 3 and out etc.), they question why he's still splitting the ball with Taylor when he averages 30% more yards/ carry and it our only offensive star.

    We're still passing the ball more than running, which is ridonkulous considering the weapons we have in the running game and the complete ineffectiveness of our passing game.


    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

  6. #6
    Redmption's Avatar
    Redmption is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    307

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    They don't question how ineffective our offense is, which is what Childress seemed like he was explaining (3 and out, 3 and out, 3 and out etc.), they question why he's still splitting the ball with Taylor when he averages 30% more yards/ carry and it our only offensive star.

    We're still passing the ball more than running, which is ridonkulous considering the weapons we have in the running game and the complete ineffectiveness of our passing game.
    Actually all I hear about Peterson is how he doesnt get enough carries. I just read today that Peterson should get 20-25 while Chester gets 10-15... Well Chester had less than 15 this past game, so where do all these carries come from when there are none to be had, and since the other part of the offense is failing? T-Jack completed some huge 3rd downs in the Bears game which allowed for sustained drives and more run attempts. When you dont complete crud like in the Dallas game, drives end and you cant run, period.

  7. #7
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    They don't question how ineffective our offense is, which is what Childress seemed like he was explaining (3 and out, 3 and out, 3 and out etc.), they question why he's still splitting the ball with Taylor when he averages 30% more yards/ carry and it our only offensive star.

    We're still passing the ball more than running, which is ridonkulous considering the weapons we have in the running game and the complete ineffectiveness of our passing game.
    I read it different.
    He was explaining precentages against numbers of plays in as way to show how many, not how little AD was getting in on plays.

    I'll give ya the "We pass to much" comment only cause you used ridonkulous.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  8. #8
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    They don't question how ineffective our offense is, which is what Childress seemed like he was explaining (3 and out, 3 and out, 3 and out etc.), they question why he's still splitting the ball with Taylor when he averages 30% more yards/ carry and it our only offensive star.

    We're still passing the ball more than running, which is ridonkulous considering the weapons we have in the running game and the complete ineffectiveness of our passing game.
    Well you need to be able to pass in order to open up the running game. If all you do is run, run, run, defenses will simply stuff the box & AD's production will go down, like we saw last week.

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

  9. #9
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,615

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    "Redmption" wrote:
    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    They don't question how ineffective our offense is, which is what Childress seemed like he was explaining (3 and out, 3 and out, 3 and out etc.), they question why he's still splitting the ball with Taylor when he averages 30% more yards/ carry and it our only offensive star.

    We're still passing the ball more than running, which is ridonkulous considering the weapons we have in the running game and the complete ineffectiveness of our passing game.
    Actually all I hear about Peterson is how he doesnt get enough carries. I just read today that Peterson should get 20-25 while Chester gets 10-15... Well Chester had less than 15 this past game, so where do all these carries come from when there are none to be had, and since the other part of the offense is failing? T-Jack completed some huge 3rd downs in the Bears game which allowed for sustained drives and more run attempts. When you dont complete crud like in the Dallas game, drives end and you cant run, period.
    Let's see, we had 49 offensive plays, we SHOULD be running the ball 60% of the time, that amounts to about 30 carries (20 for AP and 10 for Chester).
    Why did he put the game in Tarvaris' hands, especially given the way he's played this season?

    3rd downs in the Bear's game with the ball in T-Jack's hands:

    3-10-CHI 33
    (7:30) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass incomplete short left to 19-B.Wade.

    (:27) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass short middle to 19-B.Wade to MIN 40 for 7 yards (20-A.Archuleta). Penalty on CHI-91-T.Harris, Defensive Offside, declined.

    3-3-MIN 36
    (10:59) 7-T.Jackson pass incomplete short right to 19-B.Wade.

    3-5-MIN 21
    (6:36) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson sacked at MIN 18 for -3 yards (96-A.Brown). Penalty on MIN-62-R.Cook, Offensive Holding, declined.

    3-2-CHI 49
    (:58) 7-T.Jackson pass incomplete short right to 49-T.Richardson.

    3-3-MIN 27
    (7:46) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass incomplete short right to 19-B.Wade [91-T.Harris].

    3-10-MIN 36
    (14:53) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass to 18-S.Rice ran ob at MIN 49 for 13 yards.

    3-8-MIN 34
    (7:45) (Shotgun) 7-T.Jackson pass short left to 19-B.Wade to MIN 43 for 9 yards (54-B.Urlacher, 55-L.Briggs).


    Tarvaris was 3 of 8 on 3rd down conversions (37.5%), he was far less than stellar so I'm not sure where your argument is coming from

    He was also a ridiculous 0 for 8 on 3rd down conversions against the Cowboys.
    Meaning everytime Chilly decided to put the ball in Tarvaris' hands to keep a drive alive, we ended up kicking.




    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

  10. #10
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Childress on Peterson

    "singersp" wrote:
    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    They don't question how ineffective our offense is, which is what Childress seemed like he was explaining (3 and out, 3 and out, 3 and out etc.), they question why he's still splitting the ball with Taylor when he averages 30% more yards/ carry and it our only offensive star.

    We're still passing the ball more than running, which is ridonkulous considering the weapons we have in the running game and the complete ineffectiveness of our passing game.
    Well you need to be able to pass in order to open up the running game. If all you do is run, run, run, defenses will simply stuff the box & AD's production will go down, like we saw last week.
    The ratio of Peterson-Taylor we are using is about 50-50, which I think is perfect. I can understand those who say the OL is the problem, I can understand those who say the QB is the problem, but I can't understand those who say Taylor is the problem because he takes carries away from Peterson. AD is seeing plenty of PT, but one weapon in a team sport is not enough. Taylor may be the only other offensive weapon we have.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Childress wants 20 to 30 carries for Peterson
    By NodakPaul in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-29-2009, 05:13 PM
  2. Childress & Peterson Address the Media
    By marstc09 in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-09-2008, 12:02 PM
  3. Childress: There's room for Peterson to improve
    By COJOMAY in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-11-2008, 11:02 AM
  4. Childress Needs to Let up On Peterson Running
    By Webby in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-16-2007, 08:28 PM
  5. Childress on Peterson: 'A willing learner, a willing worker'
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-25-2007, 11:41 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
  •