Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58
  1. #21
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    Marrdro wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    Code:
    BB         Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Shank         Favre              pH
                             Peterson
    I think the example above is what you are gonna see as our base set more than the one we are used to ....ala two TE set....

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Sauce       Favre             Shanc
                           Peterson
    For this discussion however, I would envision the set would look like this with PH in the BF.......

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load       Rice
                 WR          Favre              Shank    
                              PH
    I don't think you will see the Vikes trying to stretch the field out of the play, unless of course the OL is dominating and the Noodle has time for it to develop. Rather, I think you would see something like a screen to Shanks side or PH coming out after Rice and Shanc cleared that side out.

    Hell, you could even have the Noodle shift from under C and drop back into the shotgun with PH lined up on his left.

    Regardless, it a lineup like that on a 3rd and short or 1rst and 10 would cause D-coords to shit thier pants.

    Do I run out the nickle? Almost have to. Now they are subject to the run to the TE side. Do I stay with my heavy package? Now I am exposed across the middle by Shanc and PH if he comes out.
    LMAO. You replace Sauce with "WR" in the second formation. Unless you think AD + Sauce < Harvin + "WR", the talent on the field is clearly worse.

    A few questions need to be answered:
    1. Is Harvin durable enough?
    2. How is Harvin's stamina? If we put him in the backfield to spell AD, when is Harvin going to get a rest, and at what cost?
    3. What can Harvin do out of the backfield that AD can't? We saw him do a lot of wildcat for some nice runs, but is he really the 3rd down scat back we all envision him to be? A lot of us are assuming that he is.

    -V-
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  2. #22
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    V-Unit wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    Code:
    BB         Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Shank         Favre              pH
                             Peterson
    I think the example above is what you are gonna see as our base set more than the one we are used to ....ala two TE set....

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Sauce       Favre             Shanc
                           Peterson
    For this discussion however, I would envision the set would look like this with PH in the BF.......

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load       Rice
                 WR          Favre              Shank    
                              PH
    I don't think you will see the Vikes trying to stretch the field out of the play, unless of course the OL is dominating and the Noodle has time for it to develop. Rather, I think you would see something like a screen to Shanks side or PH coming out after Rice and Shanc cleared that side out.

    Hell, you could even have the Noodle shift from under C and drop back into the shotgun with PH lined up on his left.

    Regardless, it a lineup like that on a 3rd and short or 1rst and 10 would cause D-coords to shit thier pants.

    Do I run out the nickle? Almost have to. Now they are subject to the run to the TE side. Do I stay with my heavy package? Now I am exposed across the middle by Shanc and PH if he comes out.
    LMAO. You replace Sauce with "WR" in the second formation. Unless you think AD + Sauce < Harvin + "WR", the talent on the field is clearly worse.

    A few questions need to be answered:
    1. Is Harvin durable enough?

    2. How is Harvin's stamina? If we put him in the backfield to spell AD, when is Harvin going to get a rest, and at what cost?

    3. What can Harvin do out of the backfield that AD can't? We saw him do a lot of wildcat for some nice runs, but is he really the 3rd down scat back we all envision him to be? A lot of us are assuming that he is.

    4. Harvin was a stud for us on 3rd downs last year. If he now is going to be in the backfield for those situations, does that make us better, or worse?

    -V-
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  3. #23
    Tad7's Avatar
    Tad7 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,441

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    midgensa wrote:
    Tad7 wrote:
    Harvin needs to put on 15 pounds at least if he's gonna spend a significant amount of time in the back field.
    First ... great job there. I mean, everyone here is clearly talking about him spending "significant time" in the backfield ... except, actually, nobody is talking about "significant" time.

    Oh, and I guess that means that Chris Johnson is too small also? Jerome Harrison clearly should be booted out of the league. I mean he clearly is too small to spend "significant" time in the backfield, I guess if you think that 30+ carries three games in a row is not significant.

    I mean shit ... they clearly show that small guys can't do shit. I guess asking Percy for "significant" time spelling Adrian Peterson is ridiculous.
    Well I clicked the link in the first post and saw the question about Harvin being AD's backup. So that would mean Harvin replacing Taylor which to me is significant time between about 100 carries and the other duties.

    And I believe the guys you listed do have 15 or more pounds on Harvin which was part of my point.
    Skol Vikings! Go Cubs!

    X MARKS THE SPOT

  4. #24
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    V-Unit wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    Code:
    BB         Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Shank         Favre              pH
                             Peterson
    I think the example above is what you are gonna see as our base set more than the one we are used to ....ala two TE set....

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Sauce       Favre             Shanc
                           Peterson
    For this discussion however, I would envision the set would look like this with PH in the BF.......

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load       Rice
                 WR          Favre              Shank    
                              PH
    I don't think you will see the Vikes trying to stretch the field out of the play, unless of course the OL is dominating and the Noodle has time for it to develop. Rather, I think you would see something like a screen to Shanks side or PH coming out after Rice and Shanc cleared that side out.

    Hell, you could even have the Noodle shift from under C and drop back into the shotgun with PH lined up on his left.

    Regardless, it a lineup like that on a 3rd and short or 1rst and 10 would cause D-coords to shit thier pants.

    Do I run out the nickle? Almost have to. Now they are subject to the run to the TE side. Do I stay with my heavy package? Now I am exposed across the middle by Shanc and PH if he comes out.
    LMAO. You replace Sauce with "WR" in the second formation. Unless you think AD + Sauce < Harvin + "WR", the talent on the field is clearly worse.

    A few questions need to be answered:
    1. Is Harvin durable enough?
    2. How is Harvin's stamina? If we put him in the backfield to spell AD, when is Harvin going to get a rest, and at what cost?
    3. What can Harvin do out of the backfield that AD can't? We saw him do a lot of wildcat for some nice runs, but is he really the 3rd down scat back we all envision him to be? A lot of us are assuming that he is.

    -V-
    Wow, tough crowd today. First I didn't use the exact verbiage for Z so my post was understandable by him, now you are hacking on me for not moving my WR up on the line. Pretty soon I expect to see yellow flags thrown around here......LOL

    1. Is Harvin durable enough?

    Enough for what? To take 3 or 4 snaps out of the backfield? I would think that his performance at the collegiate level should be enough to answer that basic question. Just in case....YES. He is durable enough. As I said in another post, I think it is alot tougher on him catching a ball going over the middle when a LB'r or S hit him in full stride than getting tackled.
    How is Harvin's stamina? If we put him in the backfield to spell AD, when is Harvin going to get a rest, and at what cost?
    Again, not sure how many reps you envision we are talking about here. You do realize that he takes reps off at WR right? What is to say that the staff didn't manage a 3 down series with him on the bench and then bring him out for a snap at RB?

    3. What can Harvin do out of the backfield that AD can't? We saw him do a lot of wildcat for some nice runs, but is he really the 3rd down scat back we all envision him to be? A lot of us are assuming that he is.
    You saw that I mentioned more than just 3rd downs right? I envision them using him in that formation on first downs as well and nothing says he has to run out of that formation. If the defense played into our hands and ran a heavy package out (to stop the run), the Noodle could just audible and put him in motion.

    Again, it isn't like I am saying we are gonna replace AD. I'm saying that we can get the ball in PH's hands in situations that could/would dictate to the defense instead of them dictating to us.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    999

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    Tad7 wrote:
    Harvin needs to put on 15 pounds at least if he's gonna spend a significant amount of time in the back field.
    he's already had ankle problems in the past, 15 pounds won't help that.

  6. #26
    Tad7's Avatar
    Tad7 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,441

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    DiehardVikesFan wrote:
    Tad7 wrote:
    Harvin needs to put on 15 pounds at least if he's gonna spend a significant amount of time in the back field.
    he's already had ankle problems in the past, 15 pounds won't help that.
    yeah I personally don't want Harvin's role to change much from last year, if at all.

    I was just saying if he's supposed to be the new Chester Taylor, blocking on 3rd down and stuff, 185 pounds isn't gonna cut it.
    Skol Vikings! Go Cubs!

    X MARKS THE SPOT

  7. #27
    midgensa's Avatar
    midgensa is offline Jersey Retired Free Kick Specialist 3 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,304

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    Tad7 wrote:
    midgensa wrote:
    Tad7 wrote:
    Harvin needs to put on 15 pounds at least if he's gonna spend a significant amount of time in the back field.
    First ... great job there. I mean, everyone here is clearly talking about him spending "significant time" in the backfield ... except, actually, nobody is talking about "significant" time.

    Oh, and I guess that means that Chris Johnson is too small also? Jerome Harrison clearly should be booted out of the league. I mean he clearly is too small to spend "significant" time in the backfield, I guess if you think that 30+ carries three games in a row is not significant.

    I mean shit ... they clearly show that small guys can't do shit. I guess asking Percy for "significant" time spelling Adrian Peterson is ridiculous.
    Well I clicked the link in the first post and saw the question about Harvin being AD's backup. So that would mean Harvin replacing Taylor which to me is significant time between about 100 carries and the other duties.

    And I believe the guys you listed do have 15 or more pounds on Harvin which was part of my point.
    Actually ... they don't ... which is why I listed them. See, I know how to use Google. Not that difficult really.

    And both of those guys got "significant" playing time. But I guess they should be kicked to the curb because they are too small.

  8. #28
    midgensa's Avatar
    midgensa is offline Jersey Retired Free Kick Specialist 3 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,304

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    Tad7 wrote:
    DiehardVikesFan wrote:
    Tad7 wrote:
    Harvin needs to put on 15 pounds at least if he's gonna spend a significant amount of time in the back field.
    he's already had ankle problems in the past, 15 pounds won't help that.
    yeah I personally don't want Harvin's role to change much from last year, if at all.

    I was just saying if he's supposed to be the new Chester Taylor, blocking on 3rd down and stuff, 185 pounds isn't gonna cut it.
    There is a big difference in 185 and 192 ... so since he is actually 192 ... Google again ... then do you actually only want 8 pounds?

  9. #29
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    Marrdro wrote:
    V-Unit wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    Code:
    BB         Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Shank         Favre              pH
                             Peterson
    I think the example above is what you are gonna see as our base set more than the one we are used to ....ala two TE set....

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Sauce       Favre             Shanc
                           Peterson
    For this discussion however, I would envision the set would look like this with PH in the BF.......

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load       Rice
                 WR          Favre              Shank    
                              PH
    I don't think you will see the Vikes trying to stretch the field out of the play, unless of course the OL is dominating and the Noodle has time for it to develop. Rather, I think you would see something like a screen to Shanks side or PH coming out after Rice and Shanc cleared that side out.

    Hell, you could even have the Noodle shift from under C and drop back into the shotgun with PH lined up on his left.

    Regardless, it a lineup like that on a 3rd and short or 1rst and 10 would cause D-coords to shit thier pants.

    Do I run out the nickle? Almost have to. Now they are subject to the run to the TE side. Do I stay with my heavy package? Now I am exposed across the middle by Shanc and PH if he comes out.
    LMAO. You replace Sauce with "WR" in the second formation. Unless you think AD + Sauce < Harvin + "WR", the talent on the field is clearly worse.

    A few questions need to be answered:
    1. Is Harvin durable enough?
    2. How is Harvin's stamina? If we put him in the backfield to spell AD, when is Harvin going to get a rest, and at what cost?
    3. What can Harvin do out of the backfield that AD can't? We saw him do a lot of wildcat for some nice runs, but is he really the 3rd down scat back we all envision him to be? A lot of us are assuming that he is.

    -V-
    Wow, tough crowd today. First I didn't use the exact verbiage for Z so my post was understandable by him, now you are hacking on me for not moving my WR up on the line. Pretty soon I expect to see yellow flags thrown around here......LOL

    1. Is Harvin durable enough?

    Enough for what? To take 3 or 4 snaps out of the backfield? I would think that his performance at the collegiate level should be enough to answer that basic question. Just in case....YES. He is durable enough. As I said in another post, I think it is alot tougher on him catching a ball going over the middle when a LB'r or S hit him in full stride than getting tackled.
    How is Harvin's stamina? If we put him in the backfield to spell AD, when is Harvin going to get a rest, and at what cost?
    Again, not sure how many reps you envision we are talking about here. You do realize that he takes reps off at WR right? What is to say that the staff didn't manage a 3 down series with him on the bench and then bring him out for a snap at RB?

    3. What can Harvin do out of the backfield that AD can't? We saw him do a lot of wildcat for some nice runs, but is he really the 3rd down scat back we all envision him to be? A lot of us are assuming that he is.
    You saw that I mentioned more than just 3rd downs right? I envision them using him in that formation on first downs as well and nothing says he has to run out of that formation. If the defense played into our hands and ran a heavy package out (to stop the run), the Noodle could just audible and put him in motion.

    Again, it isn't like I am saying we are gonna replace AD. I'm saying that we can get the ball in PH's hands in situations that could/would dictate to the defense instead of them dictating to us.
    1. I'm not hacking you for not moving your WR onto the line. I'm hacking you because you don't even name which receiver would be in the slot in that formation. Mr. No-name at WR means a downgrade when it comes to the talent on the field. Outside of Favre, AD and Harvin are 2 of our best 3 offensive weapons. We should have both of them on the field as much as possible.

    2. Yes, he takes off reps at WR, so he can be a better WR when he's on the field. Thus, our only options would be to:
    A) Play him at RB instead of taking reps off, which could decrease his performance

    or

    B) Play him at RB instead of WR, which would decrease reps taken at his most effective position.

    3. You can go ahead and delete "3rd down" from my 3rd item and my point still remains. People want to put Harvin in the backfield just because he is short. That BS draw play that worked in college isn't going to translate well, mainly because Tebow isn't the QB (yet...). I think he has the skill set of a WR and so WR is what he should play.

    If you want to invent ways to get the ball into his playmaking hands, I can understand that, but having to take AD off of the field to do that seems like the lamest of all possible options if you ask me. At the very least, sign a better spell back so that Harvin can remain at his natural position.

    -V-
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  10. #30
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,692

    Re:Daily Mailbag: Harvin as a RB?

    Marrdro wrote:
    VikingMike wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    V-Unit wrote:
    It's a cool idea, but I don't think it maximizes our talents in the offense.

    Who are we going to put in the slot on 3rd downs if Harvin is in the backfield? Shank? Jaymar Johnson? Pssh. AD in the backfield and Harvin in the slot is by far a better option.

    Now people will cry, "AD isn't good on 3rd downs!" and I say, even so, that is easily our best 3rd down package. That or we grab a real 3rd down back who can give us the same dynamic that Chester did.

    -V-
    I think that's our best package on every down.

    If defenses are gonna stack the box, at least force them to spread out a little, and if they have the wrong package in, they're forced to cover that slot guy(Harvin) with a linebacker or safety.

    *snip*
    Since defenses don't give Peterson any room to move, we need to create some. Not to mention the gadgets we could pull with Harvin and Peterson on running downs.

    There's so much we can do, I'd like to see the Chiller implement some tricky stuff this season.

    Damn good analyses. I agree one of the best ways to beat the "stacking of the box" is to spread out the receivers and force the D to account for other threats besides AD and the run. Very nice job Mr A.
    He always breaks it down good. Now he has taken it to another level and added a new way to depict the "Package".

    Damn him..... :cheer:
    lol, thanks guys.

    The site automatically deleted my spaces between players, so I figured the display code function would work, and voila, there's my formations.

    Marrdro wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    Code:
    BB         Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Shank         Favre              pH
                             Peterson
    I think the example above is what you are gonna see as our base set more than the one we are used to ....ala two TE set....

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load      Rice
                Sauce       Favre             Shanc
                           Peterson
    For this discussion however, I would envision the set would look like this with PH in the BF.......

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load       Rice
                 WR          Favre              Shank    
                              PH
    I don't think you will see the Vikes trying to stretch the field out of the play, unless of course the OL is dominating and the Noodle has time for it to develop. Rather, I think you would see something like a screen to Shanks side or PH coming out after Rice and Shanc cleared that side out.
    I don't know how I feel about the second formation, is the WR in the slot?, or in the backfield along with Harvin? Which makes me think, I'd really like to see something like this once in a while:

    Code:
    BB        Mac Hutch Sully Hererra Load         Rice
              (Shank)                           Shank
                       pH     Favre    (pH)               
                              
                               AP
    Parenthesis represents that they could be lined up on either side, it is not a 13 man formation lol.

    Think of Rice or Berrian running a fly route, clearing out the corner, play-action to Peterson and Harvin on a wheel route.


Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Monday Morning Mailbag
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-14-2010, 09:52 AM
  2. Daily mailbag: Some OL perspective
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-19-2010, 07:12 AM
  3. vikings.com Mailbag
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-20-2009, 09:06 AM
  4. Vikings Monday Morning Mailbag - 7/13
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 07:57 AM
  5. Vikings Mailbag - Answering your questions
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-19-2007, 09:52 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
  •