Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35
  1. #1
    Garland Greene's Avatar
    Garland Greene is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    6,170

    Hypothetical QB Question

    If Holcomb does Start this weekend(or Bollinger God forbid) and he Lights it up ala derek anderson Week 2 vs. the Bungles, well at least has a very good game. If Tjack is helathy the next week does he get his spot back? What is chilly's policy on loosing your spot to an injury, I don't remeber hearing what his take on it was.

  2. #2
    cajunvike's Avatar
    cajunvike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    32,063

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    I think that if Holcomb lights it up, Chilly should get the doctors to say that TJack needs more time to heal...then if Holcomb lights up the Pukers (or just gets through the game without making mistakes), Chilly should conclude that TJack isn't ready and make him the backup until either Holcomb starts losing OR until TJack is REALLY ready.
    BANNED OR DEAD...I'LL TAKE EITHER ONE

  3. #3
    PAvikesfan's Avatar
    PAvikesfan is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,037

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    He will give the spot back to Tavarcrap so he can lose his starting spot fair and square two weeks after he comes back.

    sad but probably true.

  4. #4
    COJOMAY is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,005

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    I leave it up to the coach because he won't listen to my opinion anyway!
    Kentucky Vikes Fan

    When you require nothing, you get nothing; when you expect nothing, you will find nothing; when you embrace nothing, all you will have is nothing.

  5. #5
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    "cajunvike" wrote:
    I think that if Holcomb lights it up, Chilly should get the doctors to say that TJack needs more time to heal...then if Holcomb lights up the Pukers (or just gets through the game without making mistakes), Chilly should conclude that TJack isn't ready and make him the backup until either Holcomb starts losing OR until TJack is REALLY ready.
    This idea has my vote.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  6. #6
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    "Garland" wrote:
    If Holcomb does Start this weekend(or Bollinger God forbid) and he Lights it up ala derek anderson Week 2 vs. the Bungles, well at least has a very good game. If Tjack is helathy the next week does he get his spot back? What is chilly's policy on loosing your spot to an injury, I don't remeber hearing what his take on it was.
    Hopefully, or he will lose his team, his stance is that injury does not cost starters their jobs.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  7. #7
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Garland" wrote:
    If Holcomb does Start this weekend(or Bollinger God forbid) and he Lights it up ala derek anderson Week 2 vs. the Bungles, well at least has a very good game. If Tjack is helathy the next week does he get his spot back? What is chilly's policy on loosing your spot to an injury, I don't remeber hearing what his take on it was.
    Hopefully, or he will lose his team, his stance is that injury does not cost starters their jobs.

    =Z=
    If Holcomb performs well against KC and GB, TJack wouldn't be losing his job because of injury...
    That applies more to when a player is doing well (or at least not bad) and then gets injured.
    As much as I like TJack, he was playing badly when he was injured.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  8. #8
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Garland" wrote:
    If Holcomb does Start this weekend(or Bollinger God forbid) and he Lights it up ala derek anderson Week 2 vs. the Bungles, well at least has a very good game. If Tjack is helathy the next week does he get his spot back? What is chilly's policy on loosing your spot to an injury, I don't remeber hearing what his take on it was.
    Hopefully, or he will lose his team, his stance is that injury does not cost starters their jobs.
    If Holcomb performs well against KC and GB, TJack wouldn't be losing his job because of injury...
    That applies more to when a player is doing well (or at least not bad) and then gets injured.
    As much as I like TJack, he was playing badly when he was injured.
    So what?

    Is Kelly Holcomb going to be the Vikings starter in 2009?
    Because the plan is that Tarvaris will be.
    We all knew all along that there were going to be BRUTAL games for TJack this season.
    He's 1-1 as the starter.

    The reason Holcomb is playing is because Tarvaris is hurt.
    If he's not hurt, he's the starter.
    Holcomb hasn't earned the starter's job - it was given to him.
    Holcomb playing well as the starter (if it happens) is irrelevant.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  9. #9
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Garland" wrote:
    If Holcomb does Start this weekend(or Bollinger God forbid) and he Lights it up ala derek anderson Week 2 vs. the Bungles, well at least has a very good game. If Tjack is helathy the next week does he get his spot back? What is chilly's policy on loosing your spot to an injury, I don't remeber hearing what his take on it was.
    Hopefully, or he will lose his team, his stance is that injury does not cost starters their jobs.
    If Holcomb performs well against KC and GB, TJack wouldn't be losing his job because of injury...
    That applies more to when a player is doing well (or at least not bad) and then gets injured.
    As much as I like TJack, he was playing badly when he was injured.
    So what?

    Is Kelly Holcomb going to be the Vikings starter in 2009?
    Because the plan is that Tarvaris will be.
    We all knew all along that there were going to be BRUTAL games for TJack this season.
    He's 1-1 as the starter.

    The reason Holcomb is playing is because Tarvaris is hurt.
    If he's not hurt, he's the starter.
    Holcomb hasn't earned the starter's job - it was given to him.
    Holcomb playing well as the starter (if it happens) is irrelevant.

    =Z=
    While most of expect TJ to be the starter in 2009, he has not been appointed as such yet.
    In fact, I believe that Childress makes it a point to encourage competition during training camp.
    And for the record, even if TJack is benched in favor of Holcomb for the remainder of the year, I would be surprised if TJack did not re-earn the spot in camp.

    I knew that there would be some brutal games for TJack.
    It is part of learning.
    And for that reason, I don't think Childress would yank him after only one bad game.
    But Childress didn't yank him.
    He got injured, and thus gave Holcomb the opportunity to start.
    If he goes out and pulls in two decisive victories against KC and GB (and it can be attributed to O, not just D), then I think Childress would be hard pressed to keep him starting instead of TJack.


    Yes, we are building a team that will endure, not just flash for a year.
    But at the same time Childress has a responsibility to Wilf to win games.
    And in a year when ticket sales are down, and there are still six home game with available tickets, I think Wilf would rather see some wins and excitement over the continued experience gaining of TJack.

    Just MHO.
    I still a TJack fan, but I am a Viking's fan first.
    If Holcomb plays well, he will get my vote for the starter job.
    It isn't a knock against TJ, just a realization that he could possibly still learn from Holcomb's veteran presence while he is our #2.


    Maybe this will be moot.
    Maybe Holcomb will play like pooh against KC (although our D will still eek out a win) and TJack will be back in to light up the crowd against GB... ;D
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

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

    Re: Hypothetical QB Question

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Garland" wrote:
    If Holcomb does Start this weekend(or Bollinger God forbid) and he Lights it up ala derek anderson Week 2 vs. the Bungles, well at least has a very good game. If Tjack is helathy the next week does he get his spot back? What is chilly's policy on loosing your spot to an injury, I don't remeber hearing what his take on it was.
    Hopefully, or he will lose his team, his stance is that injury does not cost starters their jobs.
    If Holcomb performs well against KC and GB, TJack wouldn't be losing his job because of injury...
    That applies more to when a player is doing well (or at least not bad) and then gets injured.
    As much as I like TJack, he was playing badly when he was injured.
    So what?

    Is Kelly Holcomb going to be the Vikings starter in 2009?
    Because the plan is that Tarvaris will be.
    We all knew all along that there were going to be BRUTAL games for TJack this season.
    He's 1-1 as the starter.

    The reason Holcomb is playing is because Tarvaris is hurt.
    If he's not hurt, he's the starter.
    Holcomb hasn't earned the starter's job - it was given to him.
    Holcomb playing well as the starter (if it happens) is irrelevant.

    =Z=
    While most of expect TJ to be the starter in 2009, he has not been appointed as such yet.
    In fact, I believe that Childress makes it a point to encourage competition during training camp.
    And for the record, even if TJack is benched in favor of Holcomb for the remainder of the year, I would be surprised if TJack did not re-earn the spot in camp.


    I knew that there would be some brutal games for TJack.
    It is part of learning.
    And for that reason, I don't think Childress would yank him after only one bad game.
    But Childress didn't yank him.
    He got injured, and thus gave Holcomb the opportunity to start.
    If he goes out and pulls in two decisive victories against KC and GB (and it can be attributed to O, not just D), then I think Childress would be hard pressed to keep him starting instead of TJack.


    Yes, we are building a team that will endure, not just flash for a year.
    But at the same time Childress has a responsibility to Wilf to win games.
    And in a year when ticket sales are down, and there are still six home game with available tickets, I think Wilf would rather see some wins and excitement over the continued experience gaining of TJack.

    Just MHO.
    I still a TJack fan, but I am a Viking's fan first.
    If Holcomb plays well, he will get my vote for the starter job.
    It isn't a knock against TJ, just a realization that he could possibly still learn from Holcomb's veteran presence while he is our #2.


    Maybe this will be moot.
    Maybe Holcomb will play like pooh against KC (although our D will still eek out a win) and TJack will be back in to light up the crowd against GB... ;D
    If TJ is benched for Holcomb for the rest of the year its a clear indication that Holcomb is the better QB, which might not be saying much. To say that TJ would come back to be the starter in 2009 after playing like crap, getting benched, then not earning his starting job back through practice, is a bit of a reach.

    For Childress to clearly pick the worse QB in that situation would be a bit mind boggling. No matter what happens, I would like to go into next season with Holcomb and Jackson both still on the team.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hypothetical question
    By PurplePride80 in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-21-2007, 08:29 AM
  2. Hypothetical Question
    By Purplexing in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-24-2007, 11:48 AM
  3. hypothetical question! (its a good one)
    By mr.woo in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-21-2007, 11:27 PM
  4. Hypothetical question
    By Garland Greene in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-28-2007, 07:35 PM
  5. Hypothetical
    By Redmption in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 05-14-2006, 08:47 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
  •