Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "Eyedea" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    Can I ask everyone what is wrong with the offense?
    The offense is fine.
    They move the ball fine.
    It's the lack of getting in the endzone.
    Our TEs we have are perfect for this offense.
    What is needed is a WR that catches the ball as a professional should.
    Everyone's so worried about BJs stats.
    Why don't you factor in the dropped deep passes and the penalties that caused them to lose big plays?
    If people would catch the ball effectively BJs stats would be top 10 in the league right now so please get off his back.
    Not only that but factor the defenses we've played thus far.
    Wash, Car, Chi, and Buf (15th, 22th, 4th, 12th respectively).
    Carolina may be 22nd in the league right now but we all know they are much better than that ranking.
    The reason why Chicago is 4th and not first is because they played the Vikings.

    All we need to odo is start designing more plays in the endzone when we get there and everybody will get off this trip.
    I do agree a more proven WR (Porter) would be great.
    But all in all the offense is fine.
    The defensive rankings didn't help your arguement at all.
    Why even mention them, if you agree they are not correct/true?

    If you look at the defensive rankings they are all in the top half of the league except for Carolina.
    I mentioned what I did about them because thier talent is much better than they are ranked right now.

    If you are trying to tell me they aren't moving the ball then I will disagree with you.
    They are ranked 17th in the league.
    Right in the middle (average) which means they are nothing fancy.
    For the most part they have played methodical until they get in the redzone.
    My argument is we need to take more shots in th eendzone when we are there.
    If we were scoring TDs instead of FGs we would be 4-0 right now and this wouldn't even be a conversation.
    The fact that everyone is trying to pin everything on BJ is rediculous when you factor dropped passes and penalties.
    Does that clear up my argument any better?
    Not that I already didn't say it.

    By the way what was your argument?
    If I recall you are wanting a better TE.
    My argument was we don't need that.
    A more experienced and proven WR would be more prudent at this time.
    Therefore I believe I helped my argument quite fine.

  2. #22
    ultravikingfan's Avatar
    ultravikingfan is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    24,514

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "Billy" wrote:
    How bout more passes T Richs way...hes had 3 receptions for 38 yards so far.
    He got good yards because it's kinda like "Oh snap, they passed it to the guy who never gets the ball."

    Why cover a guy who gets it once in a blue moon?

  3. #23
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "ejmat" wrote:
    If you look at the defensive rankings they are all in the top half of the league except for Carolina.
    I mentioned what I did about them because thier talent is much better than they are ranked right now.
    The defensive rankings based on yardage are of much lesser importance than the scoring defense averages.

    Chicago 4 7.2 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 5 0 0
    San Diego 3 7.7 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0
    Baltimore 4 8.2 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0
    Denver 3 10.3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 0
    Atlanta 4 10.5 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 7 0 0
    Kansas City 3 10.7 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0
    New England 4 16.0 7 2 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 5 0 0
    Dallas 3 16.0 5 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 1
    Buffalo 4 16.2 8 2 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 3 1 0
    Minnesota 4 16.2 5 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 0 0
    New Orleans 4 16.2 8 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 3 0 0
    Miami 4 17.8 8 1 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 5 0 0
    Pittsburgh 3 18.0 6 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 0 0
    Philadelphia 4 18.2 8 2 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 6 0 0
    Jacksonville 4 18.5 9 3 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 0 0
    Carolina 4 19.5 8 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 0 1
    St. Louis 4 19.5 9 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 0
    Seattle 4 20.8 9 2 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 7 0 0
    Cincinnati 4 21.2 10 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 5 0 0
    Indianapolis 4 21.8 12 4 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 12 1 0 0
    Cleveland 4 22.2 9 3 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 9 0 0
    Tampa Bay 3 22.3 7 3 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 6 0 0
    New York (A) 4 22.8 11 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 0 2
    Washington 4 22.8 10 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 0 1
    Arizona 4 24.0 9 5 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 9 11 0 0
    Oakland 3 26.3 8 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 1 0
    Houston 4 28.2 13 5 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 8 0 0
    Green Bay 4 28.8 13 5 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 13 8 0 0
    Detroit 4 28.8 12 1 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 10 0 1
    Tennessee 4 30.2 14 8 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 13 8 0 0
    New York (N) 3 30.7 11 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 5 0 0
    San Francisco 4 31.5 15 5 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 15 7 0 0

    So far, then, we've gone against two top 10s, one middle-of-the-pack and one mediocre.


    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  4. #24
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "AWZeus" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    If you look at the defensive rankings they are all in the top half of the league except for Carolina.
    I mentioned what I did about them because thier talent is much better than they are ranked right now.
    The defensive rankings based on yardage are of much lesser importance than the scoring defense averages.

    Chicago 4 7.2 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 5 0 0
    San Diego 3 7.7 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0
    Baltimore 4 8.2 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0
    Denver 3 10.3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 0
    Atlanta 4 10.5 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 7 0 0
    Kansas City 3 10.7 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0
    New England 4 16.0 7 2 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 5 0 0
    Dallas 3 16.0 5 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 1
    Buffalo 4 16.2 8 2 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 3 1 0
    Minnesota 4 16.2 5 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 0 0
    New Orleans 4 16.2 8 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 3 0 0
    Miami 4 17.8 8 1 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 5 0 0
    Pittsburgh 3 18.0 6 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 0 0
    Philadelphia 4 18.2 8 2 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 6 0 0
    Jacksonville 4 18.5 9 3 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 0 0
    Carolina 4 19.5 8 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 0 1
    St. Louis 4 19.5 9 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 0
    Seattle 4 20.8 9 2 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 7 0 0
    Cincinnati 4 21.2 10 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 5 0 0
    Indianapolis 4 21.8 12 4 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 12 1 0 0
    Cleveland 4 22.2 9 3 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 9 0 0
    Tampa Bay 3 22.3 7 3 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 6 0 0
    New York (A) 4 22.8 11 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 0 2
    Washington 4 22.8 10 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 0 1
    Arizona 4 24.0 9 5 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 9 11 0 0
    Oakland 3 26.3 8 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 1 0
    Houston 4 28.2 13 5 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 8 0 0
    Green Bay 4 28.8 13 5 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 13 8 0 0
    Detroit 4 28.8 12 1 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 10 0 1
    Tennessee 4 30.2 14 8 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 13 8 0 0
    New York (N) 3 30.7 11 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 5 0 0
    San Francisco 4 31.5 15 5 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 15 7 0 0

    So far, then, we've gone against two top 10s, one middle-of-the-pack and one mediocre.


    =Z=
    So basically it turns out to be the same.
    But you are right as far as rankings by yardage.
    However, I used that because I wanted to prove we were moving the ball just fine contrary to some people's belief.
    The bottom line is we are moving the ball.
    We are taking chances down the field.
    The problem is we are haulting becasue we aren't taking shots in the endzone when we get in the redzone.
    Look what happened when we were trying to come back against the Bills.
    We score a TD because we threw it in the endzone.
    We also dropped what should have been a TD.
    We did the same against Washington when we threw to the endzone

  5. #25
    Eyedea's Avatar
    Eyedea is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    430

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "ejmat" wrote:
    "Eyedea" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    Can I ask everyone what is wrong with the offense?
    The offense is fine.
    They move the ball fine.
    It's the lack of getting in the endzone.
    Our TEs we have are perfect for this offense.
    What is needed is a WR that catches the ball as a professional should.
    Everyone's so worried about BJs stats.
    Why don't you factor in the dropped deep passes and the penalties that caused them to lose big plays?
    If people would catch the ball effectively BJs stats would be top 10 in the league right now so please get off his back.
    Not only that but factor the defenses we've played thus far.
    Wash, Car, Chi, and Buf (15th, 22th, 4th, 12th respectively).
    Carolina may be 22nd in the league right now but we all know they are much better than that ranking.
    The reason why Chicago is 4th and not first is because they played the Vikings.

    All we need to odo is start designing more plays in the endzone when we get there and everybody will get off this trip.
    I do agree a more proven WR (Porter) would be great.
    But all in all the offense is fine.
    The defensive rankings didn't help your arguement at all.
    Why even mention them, if you agree they are not correct/true?

    If you look at the defensive rankings they are all in the top half of the league except for Carolina.
    I mentioned what I did about them because thier talent is much better than they are ranked right now.

    If you are trying to tell me they aren't moving the ball then I will disagree with you.
    They are ranked 17th in the league.
    Right in the middle (average) which means they are nothing fancy.
    For the most part they have played methodical until they get in the redzone.
    My argument is we need to take more shots in th eendzone when we are there.
    If we were scoring TDs instead of FGs we would be 4-0 right now and this wouldn't even be a conversation.
    The fact that everyone is trying to pin everything on BJ is rediculous when you factor dropped passes and penalties.
    Does that clear up my argument any better?
    Not that I already didn't say it.

    By the way what was your argument?
    If I recall you are wanting a better TE.
    My argument was we don't need that.
    A more experienced and proven WR would be more prudent at this time.
    Therefore I believe I helped my argument quite fine.
    I was only questioning the reason for bring up the rankings.
    Why say, "if you see the rankings they have played hard opponents. However, this one team's ranking is wrong and should be lower..."
    Your logic is flawed because one of your reasons you use, you later say is incorrect...

    In other words, if you say the Panther's ranking is wrong, why should I believe the other rankings are right or good indicators?
    Make love to the present, fuck the past
    --Sage Francis

  6. #26
    Eyedea's Avatar
    Eyedea is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    430

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    I do agree with you that we need to take more shots to teh endzone.
    For example, on the first drive last week, it was third and long (after a penalty, I believe), and we ran a draw/screen to Moore.
    He was stopped well before the first down and we kicked a field goal.

    However, I disagree with the statment that an athletic recieving tight end wouldn't help.
    Wiggins excells at catching the dump offs ; he needs others to stretch the field to get open.
    If Wiggins was an excellent blocker, we could live with his average recieving skills, but he's not.
    Like many of our players on offense, he's just average.
    A recieving tight end that can get open downfield, down the seams, is key in attacking the cover two.
    With all three other teams in the division playing a cover two defense, thats atleast 6 games where an athletic tight end can greatly benifit the offense.
    That is why I would rather have a stud tight end and not a stud wide reciever.


    I think the best option for us this offseason is to move Klinsauser to fullback, draft a tight end early (1st two rounds), and then sign a reciever to start along side Williamson.
    Make love to the present, fuck the past
    --Sage Francis

  7. #27
    Eyedea's Avatar
    Eyedea is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    430

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    A tight end would help solve our redzone issues.
    Tight ends should give defenses matchup problems, expessaly the in the red zone.
    Wiggins just doesn't do this, shown in his very low td numbers
    Make love to the present, fuck the past
    --Sage Francis

  8. #28
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "Eyedea" wrote:
    I do agree with you that we need to take more shots to teh endzone.
    For example, on the first drive last week, it was third and long (after a penalty, I believe), and we ran a draw/screen to Moore.
    He was stopped well before the first down and we kicked a field goal.

    However, I disagree with the statment that an athletic recieving tight end wouldn't help.
    Wiggins excells at catching the dump offs ; he needs others to stretch the field to get open.
    If Wiggins was an excellent blocker, we could live with his average recieving skills, but he's not.
    Like many of our players on offense, he's just average.
    A recieving tight end that can get open downfield, down the seams, is key in attacking the cover two.
    With all three other teams in the division playing a cover two defense, thats atleast 6 games where an athletic tight end can greatly benifit the offense.
    That is why I would rather have a stud tight end and not a stud wide reciever.


    I think the best option for us this offseason is to move Klinsauser to fullback, draft a tight end early (1st two rounds), and then sign a reciever to start along side Williamson.
    Yeah these draw plays on third and long and we hand off every single 2nd down no matter what the yardage is to get the 1st down is.


    I agree with the fact a speedy TE would help.
    That always helps.
    However, the TEs we have right now are fine but they are not used.
    I don't believe it's our most needed position.
    We really do not have a #1 WR.
    We are still moving the ball but the problem is get it in the endzone.
    Will a better TE help in that scenerio?
    I'm not for certain.
    I think Wiggy & Sass have good hands.
    I don't think our problem is getting the ball downfield right now.
    It's having WRs that can catch the ball consistently and taking shots in the endzone when we are close enough.


    Spreading the field always helps as you are saying.
    100% agree with that.
    It's not that a speedy TE wouldn't help.
    It's just I don't think it's needed more than a WR at this time.

  9. #29
    DCPologirl is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,280

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "baumy300" wrote:
    We have a "stud" tight end now and we still barely get him the ball...

    And to be honest, Wiggins is the only guy on that team who has shown me he can catch the ball over 50% of the time.
    Well you took the thoughts right outta my head....for GOODNESS SAKE Childress get Wiggy that ball!! >

    DCPologirl:Maybe Randy will make Aaron Brooks look better......roflmao Del Rio: I guarantee he will

  10. #30
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,258

    Re: Maybe a stud TE?

    "ejmat" wrote:
    Can I ask everyone what is wrong with the offense?
    The offense is fine.
    They move the ball fine.
    In four games the Vikings have punted 22 times, lined up to kick a field goal 13 times,
    have scored 4 offensive touchdowns & are 18/60 on 3rd down conversions.

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

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Offense better with no stud WR?
    By Garland Greene in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 09-05-2006, 02:40 PM
  2. Look at This 5-STAR STUD MLB in the Draft . . .
    By sleepagent in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-27-2006, 07:57 AM
  3. Pack signs STUD LB and STUD K...NOT!!!
    By cajunvike in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 03-26-2006, 04:17 PM
  4. Hey,our new punter is a stud!!
    By Paulbedy59 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 09-29-2005, 12:42 PM
  5. Vikings sign STUD rb...
    By Phlegm in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-24-2005, 10:54 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
  •