Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 106 of 106
  1. #101
    davike's Avatar
    davike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,750

    Re: Could Childress Win with A QB?

    "Schutz" wrote:
    "davike" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    "davike" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    Well I don't know what third and long draw calls, and when the first down marker is 15 yards away and you throw a one yard swing pass everytime is called, but I call it conservitive.


    But I don't have a problem with you or anything, just don't bring out the "you aren't a nfl coach" comments anymore.
    He called a draw play on third and long maybe 5 times through 12 games.

    I never said anything about not being a NFL coach, I simply stated that I didn't think he understood some of the aspects of the game. I will stand by that. You are fast losing your case. Just admitt that I wasn't wrong.
    How am I losing my case?
    Because you came up with a random number off the top of your head?
    Good lord man, you just don't give up.
    Fine, I'm pretty sure we ran on 3rd and long 243 times.
    You're losing this case fast, just admit I wasn't wrong.
    I was reffering to the fact that you were dissing me about telling BigMoInAZ that I didn't think that he understood some of the complexity of football. I wasn't talking about the side thing about Childress.

    About the running plays on 3rd and long. I considered 3rd and 5 a passing down. So anything 3rd and 5 and over are counted. I included the runs which we got the first down. Here are the official numbers:

    Total: 22

    While we were ahead by a ton: 8
    While we were ahead by a bit and trying to run the clock out: 1

    These next runs were while we were either tied or behind.
    3rd and 10+ yards : 10
    The shortest of these were I believe 3rd and 14. At that point our pass attack was awful. Many of these came in games where we had only a few completions over 10 yards to anyone and most of the passes were to our backs.
    3rd and 5-10 yards: 3. Two of these runs were exactly 5 yards. I believe both were by AD while he was having a huge day.

    Those are pretty normal numbers....ecspecially for a team whose strength is the run. Our pass offense has been virtually non existant except for the past few weeks. I wish I had counted all the times we passed on 3rd downs that were 5 yards and over....there was a ton. But you didn't/don't like Childress, so of course your going to just remember those times when he didn't throw on 3rd down. And of course we should take in consideration that Bevell was calling plays during some of those runs.

    So what else do you have for me?
    So it went from 5 to 22, and I would also like the source.
    Also I talked about the excessive short passes on third and long, can you get some stats on that?
    Also coaching has shown the wiliness for trick plays, and more aggressive play calling.
    Like I said Childress has looked good as of late.
    I watched the same games as you, and I felt the Childress did better when he revved the motor a littler bit instead of trying not to scratch the paint.

    I mostly think your bad attitude about ending with things like "So what else do you have for me?" is what my problem is, that's why I'm getting irritated with you.
    Just try arguing something without coming off as high and mighty I know more than you on the Couch Coaches.

    Honestly after looking at the plays before it and the game situations, I still think I would have changed only about 5 of them to passes. My source is NFL gameday, I went to play-by-play and went through all the third downs in each of the 12 games. That is why it took me a while to post it.

    Short passes? Look at the games, most of the time they had deeper routes on those third downs its just they were either checked down or overlooked. It doesn't mean they called a short pass. Thats the QB.

    I agree that Childress went more for the trick plays and stuff. But I still hold to the fact that Childress was held back in his play calling by Jackson untill he developed and gained confidence. Look at the past couple weeks. We completed more passes to our WRs then I remember in a long time. Was that because Childress just started putting WRs on the field? I don't think so, I think it was because Jackson lacked confidence and rythem and our WRs needed work. Our right side of the line has really been looking good as well. Pass protection has looked good. Our whole offense is understanding the WCO offense better and is looking like they are all on the same page now. Jackson is gaining confidence in his WRs. So Childress can start calling some more complicated plays now. We are seeing more fakes of different sorts, different blocking schemes. Our team is growing and learning.

    I apoligize if its my attitude that is bothering you. I probably shouldn't have thrown in that statement, but I was a bit agitated and I have other shit going on. I officially apoligize for that. I didn't mean to come across that way. No offense but I was also interested in your reply because I though I proved your "running on third and long" arguement wrong with the stats. And when you think you proved someone wrong sometimes you get a bit heady about it.....it happens to everyone. But like I said before, I shouldn't have said that, I apoligize for that.

    Thanks Josdin00 for the sig!

  2. #102
    Schutz's Avatar
    Schutz is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Could Childress Win with A QB?

    "davike" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    "davike" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    "davike" wrote:
    [quote author=Schutz link=topic=39792.msg684620#msg684620 date=1196739736]
    Well I don't know what third and long draw calls, and when the first down marker is 15 yards away and you throw a one yard swing pass everytime is called, but I call it conservitive.


    But I don't have a problem with you or anything, just don't bring out the "you aren't a nfl coach" comments anymore.
    He called a draw play on third and long maybe 5 times through 12 games.

    I never said anything about not being a NFL coach, I simply stated that I didn't think he understood some of the aspects of the game. I will stand by that. You are fast losing your case. Just admitt that I wasn't wrong.
    How am I losing my case?
    Because you came up with a random number off the top of your head?
    Good lord man, you just don't give up.
    Fine, I'm pretty sure we ran on 3rd and long 243 times.
    You're losing this case fast, just admit I wasn't wrong.
    I was reffering to the fact that you were dissing me about telling BigMoInAZ that I didn't think that he understood some of the complexity of football. I wasn't talking about the side thing about Childress.

    About the running plays on 3rd and long. I considered 3rd and 5 a passing down. So anything 3rd and 5 and over are counted. I included the runs which we got the first down. Here are the official numbers:

    Total: 22

    While we were ahead by a ton: 8
    While we were ahead by a bit and trying to run the clock out: 1

    These next runs were while we were either tied or behind.
    3rd and 10+ yards : 10
    The shortest of these were I believe 3rd and 14. At that point our pass attack was awful. Many of these came in games where we had only a few completions over 10 yards to anyone and most of the passes were to our backs.
    3rd and 5-10 yards: 3. Two of these runs were exactly 5 yards. I believe both were by AD while he was having a huge day.

    Those are pretty normal numbers....ecspecially for a team whose strength is the run. Our pass offense has been virtually non existant except for the past few weeks. I wish I had counted all the times we passed on 3rd downs that were 5 yards and over....there was a ton. But you didn't/don't like Childress, so of course your going to just remember those times when he didn't throw on 3rd down. And of course we should take in consideration that Bevell was calling plays during some of those runs.

    So what else do you have for me?
    So it went from 5 to 22, and I would also like the source.
    Also I talked about the excessive short passes on third and long, can you get some stats on that?
    Also coaching has shown the wiliness for trick plays, and more aggressive play calling.
    Like I said Childress has looked good as of late.
    I watched the same games as you, and I felt the Childress did better when he revved the motor a littler bit instead of trying not to scratch the paint.

    I mostly think your bad attitude about ending with things like "So what else do you have for me?" is what my problem is, that's why I'm getting irritated with you.
    Just try arguing something without coming off as high and mighty I know more than you on the Couch Coaches.

    Honestly after looking at the plays before it and the game situations, I still think I would have changed only about 5 of them to passes. My source is NFL gameday, I went to play-by-play and went through all the third downs in each of the 12 games. That is why it took me a while to post it.

    Short passes? Look at the games, most of the time they had deeper routes on those third downs its just they were either checked down or overlooked. It doesn't mean they called a short pass. Thats the QB.

    I agree that Childress went more for the trick plays and stuff. But I still hold to the fact that Childress was held back in his play calling by Jackson untill he developed and gained confidence. Look at the past couple weeks. We completed more passes to our WRs then I remember in a long time. Was that because Childress just started putting WRs on the field? I don't think so, I think it was because Jackson lacked confidence and rythem and our WRs needed work. Our right side of the line has really been looking good as well. Pass protection has looked good. Our whole offense is understanding the WCO offense better and is looking like they are all on the same page now. Jackson is gaining confidence in his WRs. So Childress can start calling some more complicated plays now. We are seeing more fakes of different sorts, different blocking schemes. Our team is growing and learning.

    I apoligize if its my attitude that is bothering you. I probably shouldn't have thrown in that statement, but I was a bit agitated and I have other pooh going on. I officially apoligize for that. I didn't mean to come across that way. No offense but I was also interested in your reply because I though I proved your "running on third and long" arguement wrong with the stats. And when you think you proved someone wrong sometimes you get a bit heady about it.....it happens to everyone. But like I said before, I shouldn't have said that, I apoligize for that.
    [/quote]

    Fair enough, no harm no foul.
    As long as you didn't mean anything I'm sorry if I got a little testy.
    We're all Monday morning QBs here, and that's all that matters.
    As far as waiting for Jackson to develop I guess I can see that, he did have a couple of games in his short career where he wasn't too confident throwing long.
    I believe the phrase "excellence of execution" comes to mind.
    I just spent too many Sundays where I'd just see Chester come in and I'd just be like......oh no.........and sure enough a draw up the gut.
    I just figured if we were going to run on 3rd and long we might as well put in AP to open up some passing lanes, or try to bounce AP or Taylor to the outside.
    Also when we threw to the flats we should have just tossed it off to AP a little more, even if it meant a couple less carries.
    We're also THIRD WORST in Third down conversions which had a lot to do with I felt was conservative play calling.
    But I we don't live in Childress's head, and maybe he didn't feel T-Jack could make those throws down field.

    As far as T-Jack I think his big thing for being able to go down field right now is his pocket presence, it almost looks like a different QB in the pocket right now.
    I just felt if T-Jack was his starter he might as well give him a chance to throw a 10-15 yard pass to the sideline where he could throw it away or throw a pass only the WR could catch.


    But maybe we can just agree that it's great that the Vikings are starting to gel a little bit.
    And we can definitely agree Childress's/coaching staff's play calling has been looking pretty good lately.

  3. #103
    davike's Avatar
    davike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,750

    Re: Could Childress Win with A QB?

    "Schutz" wrote:
    "davike" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    "davike" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    [quote author=davike link=topic=39792.msg684622#msg684622 date=1196740382]
    [quote author=Schutz link=topic=39792.msg684620#msg684620 date=1196739736]
    Well I don't know what third and long draw calls, and when the first down marker is 15 yards away and you throw a one yard swing pass everytime is called, but I call it conservitive.


    But I don't have a problem with you or anything, just don't bring out the "you aren't a nfl coach" comments anymore.
    He called a draw play on third and long maybe 5 times through 12 games.

    I never said anything about not being a NFL coach, I simply stated that I didn't think he understood some of the aspects of the game. I will stand by that. You are fast losing your case. Just admitt that I wasn't wrong.
    How am I losing my case?
    Because you came up with a random number off the top of your head?
    Good lord man, you just don't give up.
    Fine, I'm pretty sure we ran on 3rd and long 243 times.
    You're losing this case fast, just admit I wasn't wrong.
    I was reffering to the fact that you were dissing me about telling BigMoInAZ that I didn't think that he understood some of the complexity of football. I wasn't talking about the side thing about Childress.

    About the running plays on 3rd and long. I considered 3rd and 5 a passing down. So anything 3rd and 5 and over are counted. I included the runs which we got the first down. Here are the official numbers:

    Total: 22

    While we were ahead by a ton: 8
    While we were ahead by a bit and trying to run the clock out: 1

    These next runs were while we were either tied or behind.
    3rd and 10+ yards : 10
    The shortest of these were I believe 3rd and 14. At that point our pass attack was awful. Many of these came in games where we had only a few completions over 10 yards to anyone and most of the passes were to our backs.
    3rd and 5-10 yards: 3. Two of these runs were exactly 5 yards. I believe both were by AD while he was having a huge day.

    Those are pretty normal numbers....ecspecially for a team whose strength is the run. Our pass offense has been virtually non existant except for the past few weeks. I wish I had counted all the times we passed on 3rd downs that were 5 yards and over....there was a ton. But you didn't/don't like Childress, so of course your going to just remember those times when he didn't throw on 3rd down. And of course we should take in consideration that Bevell was calling plays during some of those runs.

    So what else do you have for me?
    So it went from 5 to 22, and I would also like the source.
    Also I talked about the excessive short passes on third and long, can you get some stats on that?
    Also coaching has shown the wiliness for trick plays, and more aggressive play calling.
    Like I said Childress has looked good as of late.
    I watched the same games as you, and I felt the Childress did better when he revved the motor a littler bit instead of trying not to scratch the paint.

    I mostly think your bad attitude about ending with things like "So what else do you have for me?" is what my problem is, that's why I'm getting irritated with you.
    Just try arguing something without coming off as high and mighty I know more than you on the Couch Coaches.

    Honestly after looking at the plays before it and the game situations, I still think I would have changed only about 5 of them to passes. My source is NFL gameday, I went to play-by-play and went through all the third downs in each of the 12 games. That is why it took me a while to post it.

    Short passes? Look at the games, most of the time they had deeper routes on those third downs its just they were either checked down or overlooked. It doesn't mean they called a short pass. Thats the QB.

    I agree that Childress went more for the trick plays and stuff. But I still hold to the fact that Childress was held back in his play calling by Jackson untill he developed and gained confidence. Look at the past couple weeks. We completed more passes to our WRs then I remember in a long time. Was that because Childress just started putting WRs on the field? I don't think so, I think it was because Jackson lacked confidence and rythem and our WRs needed work. Our right side of the line has really been looking good as well. Pass protection has looked good. Our whole offense is understanding the WCO offense better and is looking like they are all on the same page now. Jackson is gaining confidence in his WRs. So Childress can start calling some more complicated plays now. We are seeing more fakes of different sorts, different blocking schemes. Our team is growing and learning.

    I apoligize if its my attitude that is bothering you. I probably shouldn't have thrown in that statement, but I was a bit agitated and I have other pooh going on. I officially apoligize for that. I didn't mean to come across that way. No offense but I was also interested in your reply because I though I proved your "running on third and long" arguement wrong with the stats. And when you think you proved someone wrong sometimes you get a bit heady about it.....it happens to everyone. But like I said before, I shouldn't have said that, I apoligize for that.
    [/quote]

    Fair enough, no harm no foul.
    As long as you didn't mean anything I'm sorry if I got a little testy.
    We're all Monday morning QBs here, and that's all that matters.
    As far as waiting for Jackson to develop I guess I can see that, he did have a couple of games in his short career where he wasn't too confident throwing long.
    I believe the phrase "excellence of execution" comes to mind.
    I just spent too many Sundays where I'd just see Chester come in and I'd just be like......oh no.........and sure enough a draw up the gut.
    I just figured if we were going to run on 3rd and long we might as well put in AP to open up some passing lanes, or try to bounce AP or Taylor to the outside.
    Also when we threw to the flats we should have just tossed it off to AP a little more, even if it meant a couple less carries.
    We're also THIRD WORST in Third down conversions which had a lot to do with I felt was conservative play calling.
    But I we don't live in Childress's head, and maybe he didn't feel T-Jack could make those throws down field.

    As far as T-Jack I think his big thing for being able to go down field right now is his pocket presence, it almost looks like a different QB in the pocket right now.
    I just felt if T-Jack was his starter he might as well give him a chance to throw a 10-15 yard pass to the sideline where he could throw it away or throw a pass only the WR could catch.


    But maybe we can just agree that it's great that the Vikings are starting to gel a little bit.
    And we can definitely agree Childress's/coaching staff's play calling has been looking pretty good lately.
    [/quote]

    I think I can agree with that
    This team has come a long way. I am just hoping it sticks and doesn't vanish again, if it does our young team will be able to be contenders for a long time.

    Thanks Josdin00 for the sig!

  4. #104
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Could Childress Win with A QB?

    I for one, think the playcalling is pretty conservative, and love it.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8

    Re: Could Childress Win with A QB?

    Yes A good QB could bring us home
    Yea Im part of the purple band wagon! Vikes'll win it next year!

  6. #106
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Could Childress Win with A QB?

    Hmmmmmmmm, how should I respond this time.

    Good Marrdro or Bad Marrdro?
    :

    Suffice it to say I believe this staff (not just the Chiller) has worked miracles with this whole team, to include the young Jedi.

    Lets hope the front office Pukes (and that includes Bryzcheapski) help out a bit with a couple of key FA next year.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011

Similar Threads

  1. Childress
    By StillPurple in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 09-15-2008, 11:26 PM
  2. FBI is looking for Childress
    By skum in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-17-2008, 07:16 PM
  3. Childress - His way, like it or not
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 12-04-2007, 02:08 PM
  4. How is Childress doing?
    By theman in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-06-2006, 05:03 PM
  5. Videos: Childress on character & Childress talks draft
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-11-2006, 12:54 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
  •