Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 64
  1. #11
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,776
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1089728
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1089726
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1089725
    I really think thats what hurt TJ the most was that he really never (except for the first year with Brad) had a Qb that could run the scheme the way the Chiller wanted it run.

    .
    I know this is going to be hard to get your head around but sometimes in a fluid league with finite time and resources it becomes helpful to run the scheme in a way that compliments your QB's abilities rather than forcing them to conform to some wet dream you came up with in the 3rd stall of the locker room.
    You sure have been a bit insulting lately with your replies. No worries, I will over look it, again.

    Anyway, the bigger question then begs, why do you have a QB on your roster who's abilities don't fit the scheme?

    Absolutely makes no sense that the staff would go out and bring a guy in who didn't fit the scheme. That would mean that (say you have 25 players on offense and the other 24 do fit the scheme) 24 players would have to change to accomodate 1.

    Yup, your right, thats pretty hard for me to get my head around. Probably cause it makes no sense.
    yes, because our offensive scheme fit the rest of our players so well [/sarcasm]

    Towards the end of the season, only one player really fit our scheme. That player was Tahi, because his ass was firmly planted on the bench, just what the plays call for.

    If we had ran that O earlier in the season I'm confident we'd have won the superbowl

    but seriously, I can name many ways our O players did not fit our scheme called

    1: timing routes with Berrian. he's just not that kind of player
    2: harvin as an outside receiver, see 1)
    3: Zone blocking with slow fat linemen
    4: Gerhart as a 3rd down/receiving back
    5: Peterson not being used in the short outside passing game
    6: Using guys like berrian, Lewis, in the slot over Camarillo

    Those are some that come to mind off the top of my head. There are others.

    Chilly has been forcing the square peg into the round hole too long. With a healthy Favre, we were able to overcome, and take advantages of mismatches. This season, our WR/QB/OL got hit with injuries, and rather than adapting, we kept forcing that square peg in a hole it has no business being in.

  2. #12
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1089745
    1: timing routes with Berrian. he's just not that kind of player
    And yet he led the NFC in yards per catch in 2008.

    2: harvin as an outside receiver, see 1)
    I will agree to a point, however, based on injuries, you do have to move people around.

    3: Zone blocking with slow fat linemen
    How quickly you forget the 40 times for our OLmen. Besides, the ZBing scheme is designed to support the running game. To date, we have had pretty good luck running the ball, starting with CT in 2006.

    4: Gerhart as a 3rd down/receiving back
    What? You need to look at his stats and then compare them to what CT did with the Bores, on a offense that is designed to maximize the RB in that area.

    5: Peterson not being used in the short outside passing game
    Not sure what you mean here? He wasn't used much in the passing game at all because he couldn't pick up the blitzers and couldn't get into the right area in screens.

    He did, however, this year seem to do pretty good in the short passing stuff. Put up some pretty good stats. Again, not sure what you mean.

    6: Using guys like berrian, Lewis, in the slot over Camarillo
    Again, not sure what you mean here. You watch what the Pats do with their receivers? You could almost say something like splittin TE's out wide as well, but you will still have me scratching my slightly balding head. All teams do it. The Pats are just the best example.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  3. #13
    midgensa's Avatar
    midgensa is offline Jersey Retired Free Kick Specialist 3 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,224

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Seriously ... would you quit with the "led in yards per catch in 2008" thing.

    First off ... that was 2008 ... second off ... you are wrong. Devery Henderson led the NFL (and NFC) in yards per catch in 2008.

    Funny how Favre's 2009 does not matter at all in any argument, but you continually defend Berrian based on his 2008.

  4. #14
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "midgensa" #1089750
    Seriously ... would you quit with the "led in yards per catch in 2008" thing.

    First off ... that was 2008 ... second off ... you are wrong. Devery Henderson led the NFL (and NFC) in yards per catch in 2008.

    Funny how Favre's 2009 does not matter at all in any argument, but you continually defend Berrian based on his 2008.
    Alright, I distinctly remember you correcting me on the NFL thing. If my memory is correct, he lead the NFC, but I will go back and recheck. Something like 20.9 yards per catch if memory servers.

    (EDIT. It was 20.1 and he was second. Big fricken deal. He still had a nice year and the point still stands) :P

    And why should I bring the Noodle into the discussion? He and Berrian never clicked. Berrian has clicked with every other QB he has played with.

    You tell me why he and the Noodle couldn't? You already know what my answer is gonna be.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  5. #15
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,776
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1089748
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1089745
    1: timing routes with Berrian. he's just not that kind of player
    And yet he led the NFC in yards per catch in 2008.
    We used him properly then for some reason. Now we don't. Do you not think we've been using him very differently the past two years than we did in 08?
    2: harvin as an outside receiver, see 1)
    I will agree to a point, however, based on injuries, you do have to move people around.
    Lewis and berrian are better fits for outside receivers than harvin. in a 2 receiver set, yes, keep Harvin out there, but we saw Harvin playing as an x or z, rather than his usual Y spot.
    3: Zone blocking with slow fat linemen
    How quickly you forget the 40 times for our OLmen. Besides, the ZBing scheme is designed to support the running game. To date, we have had pretty good luck running the ball, starting with CT in 2006.
    hmm.... how quickly I forget 40 times of linemen. I'll be quite honest, and say I don't know any 40 times of our linemen. Actually, now that I think of it, I can't think of too many plays that call for our OL to run 40 yards downfield. However, what I do recall is seeing our line, specifically both tackles, getting manhandled by fast DE's because they can't get out of a stance and into position fast enough. I also see them miss blocks because they can't move into position quick enough. There's a reason the ZB scheme generally calls for smaller quicker linemen. They need to be quick. Big guys aren't usually as quick. If we had big strong guys who are some of the QUICKest (note, not fastest) linemen in the league, we'd have the best line (ps. we don't). Chilly thinks he's an offensive mastermind and can take an established scheme and turn it upside down and make it work, when in fact, he can't.

    4: Gerhart as a 3rd down/receiving back
    What? You need to look at his stats and then compare them to what CT did with the Bores, on a offense that is designed to maximize the RB in that area.
    Why would I compare him to to CT"s production with the Bears? Why not compare with his production the past two years as a Viking? One would think comparing within the same offense would provide for the best comparison.

    so here it is:
    Gerhart: 21 rec. 167 yards, 8.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(10): 20 rec. 139 yards, 7.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(09): 44 rec. 389 yards, 8.8ypr 1 TD
    Taylor(08): 45 rec. 399 yards, 8.9ypr 2 TD
    Taylor(07): 29 rec. 291 yards, 9.7ypr 0 TD

    So what exactly is your point? That Taylor was much better as a 3rd down/receiving back because his skillset matched what was needed much better than a mediocre powerback who's slower than Favre with two broken ankles? Yeah, I could see that point. Wait, that wasn't your point, it was mine? You don't say....

    [quote]
    5: Peterson not being used in the short outside passing game
    Not sure what you mean here? He wasn't used much in the passing game at all because he couldn't pick up the blitzers and couldn't get into the right area in screens.[/qoute]

    When we run swing passes with Peterson, I see more often than not it works well. Why? Because get him in space with DB's trying to tackle him, and he wins. We used him a bunch in the passing game, but alot was passes within 10 yards of the tackle box. I won't comment on the screens, because I honestly haven't noticed that part much
    He did, however, this year seem to do pretty good in the short passing stuff. Put up some pretty good stats. Again, not sure what you mean.
    I mean type of passes. Yes, he had some decent games, and he put up decent stats. They could have been much better. on 3rd and long, he's a much better option than Gerhart. especially if we plan on putting him out on a route.
    6: Using guys like berrian, Lewis, in the slot over Camarillo
    Again, not sure what you mean here. You watch what the Pats do with their receivers? You could almost say something like splittin TE's out wide as well, but you will still have me scratching my slightly balding head. All teams do it. The Pats are just the best example.
    Yes, and we are not the Pats. Camarillio has been a slot receiver. Only a slot receiver. we play him on the outside and he gets nothing. The pats make it work because they have talented players who can play multiple positions. we don't. It's that simple. They can change their fronts, have complex schemes, etc. Both Favre and now Shiancoe have said we needed to go back to the basics, and learn to do that well, as we were failing hard in that department.

  6. #16
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1089753
    We used him properly then for some reason. Now we don't. Do you not think we've been using him very differently the past two years than we did in 08?
    No we haven't been using him differently. Again, you know my answer on this. I'm not gonna tell you about the Noodles Noodle anymore. I'm tired of it.

    Suffice it to say, he has had a nice average with every other QB he's played with but one. You go figure it out.

    I for one don't want to keep talking about his limparmed ass anymore.

    Lewis and berrian are better fits for outside receivers than harvin. in a 2 receiver set, yes, keep Harvin out there, but we saw Harvin playing as an x or z, rather than his usual Y spot.
    I'm impressed. Finally got you off that 1, 2 and 3 shit. Again, all teams move their guys around. Not worth discussing as it doesn't fit what your trying to say.
    hmm.... how quickly I forget 40 times of linemen. I'll be quite honest, and say I don't know any 40 times of our linemen. Actually, now that I think of it, I can't think of too many plays that call for our OL to run 40 yards downfield. However, what I do recall is seeing our line, specifically both tackles, getting manhandled by fast DE's because they can't get out of a stance and into position fast enough. I also see them miss blocks because they can't move into position quick enough. There's a reason the ZB scheme generally calls for smaller quicker linemen. They need to be quick. Big guys aren't usually as quick. If we had big strong guys who are some of the QUICKest (note, not fastest) linemen in the league, we'd have the best line (ps. we don't). Chilly thinks he's an offensive mastermind and can take an established scheme and turn it upside down and make it work, when in fact, he can't.
    You don't have to remember their times, you just need to remember the damn good threads (two of them) that were written by Mr. A and I a couple of years ago.

    As to watching our Olmen get beat, it has nothing to do with them being slow or fast. All OLmen get beat. All of them, regardless of how fast or slow they are, thats why TE's, FB's and RB's are assigned to help them block.

    The ZBing scheme has worked for us the whole time it has been employed. What you seem to fail to make the difference on is when those guys are getting beat, in almost all instance it is when they are pass protecting. Again they are not in the ZB'ing scheme then. They are in the type of blocking scheme we are gonna run all the time next year.

    Talk about a coach trying to fit square pegs in a round hole. Now we are gonna quit doing what has made our running game successful (along with AD and CT) and use just the part of the scheme that we suck at.

    Why would I compare him to to CT"s production with the Bears? Why not compare with his production the past two years as a Viking? One would think comparing within the same offense would provide for the best comparison.

    so here it is:
    Gerhart: 21 rec. 167 yards, 8.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(10): 20 rec. 139 yards, 7.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(09): 44 rec. 389 yards, 8.8ypr 1 TD
    Taylor(08): 45 rec. 399 yards, 8.9ypr 2 TD
    Taylor(07): 29 rec. 291 yards, 9.7ypr 0 TD

    So what exactly is your point? That Taylor was much better as a 3rd down/receiving back because his skillset matched what was needed much better than a mediocre powerback who's slower than Favre with two broken ankles? Yeah, I could see that point. Wait, that wasn't your point, it was mine? You don't say....
    Why look at what he did two years ago with us. You need to look at what he did this year. Isn't that what we are comparing. One player vs another player in the given year.

    Hell, it doesn't make any damn sense to compare a seasoned Vet when he was in his prime from back in the day vs a rook who is just learning.

    Everything after you tried to do that was just basically data dumped, including the joke you tried to make at the end as it doesn't apply.

    Again, Toby did better this year than CT did in the same role. How is that trying to fit a square peg into a round hole?

    When we run swing passes with Peterson, I see more often than not it works well. Why? Because get him in space with DB's trying to tackle him, and he wins. We used him a bunch in the passing game, but alot was passes within 10 yards of the tackle box. I won't comment on the screens, because I honestly haven't noticed that part much
    Thats because AD wasn't very successfull running screens. When he could get to the right spot, he was devastating. Hell, he even scored TD's out of the. One of his first TD's was a screen play. Problem was, he couldn't execute them. Thats why the staff didn't run them much with him in there.

    Kindof flies in the face of your peg theory as in this instance, they didn't try to fit a square peg in a round hole.


    Yes, and we are not the Pats. Camarillio has been a slot receiver. Only a slot receiver. we play him on the outside and he gets nothing. The pats make it work because they have talented players who can play multiple positions. we don't. It's that simple. They can change their fronts, have complex schemes, etc. Both Favre and now Shiancoe have said we needed to go back to the basics, and learn to do that well, as we were failing hard in that department.
    Or do they have a QB who can hit the receiver when he is open.

    Look, running a 5 route from the slot is still a 5 route when you are split wide, in fact it should be easier cause you are battling a small CB and no traffic, instead of a strong LB and possibly a S in the box.

    As I said earlier, can we please stop trying to get me going on the Noodle. I really really really am sick and tired of talking about him.

    In the end, Cam can be split wide. They did it with him in the Phins and he had a worse QB. Lewis's great TD catch from you know who came when he was split out wide.

    Your discussion point that the Chiller put the WR's in roles they didn't fit is absolutely crazy talk and you know it.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  7. #17
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,776
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1089757
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1089753
    We used him properly then for some reason. Now we don't. Do you not think we've been using him very differently the past two years than we did in 08?
    No we haven't been using him differently. Again, you know my answer on this. I'm not gonna tell you about the Noodles Noodle anymore. I'm tired of it.

    Suffice it to say, he has had a nice average with every other QB he's played with but one. You go figure it out.

    I for one don't want to keep talking about his limparmed ass anymore.
    You're the one who brought Favre into this, not me.

    Your argument is bull anyway. You say he did better with every other QB, but then again, he played a different style of play in a Harvin/Riceless offense prior to Favre as well. They play him differently. We see alot more timing based routes, ins, outs, hooks, comebacks, etc. in 08, we saw him do exceptionally well on slants and seams. Those were his two routes, but that's not what we saw the past couple years. Harvin took a bunch of those plays away from him, as did Rice.
    Lewis and berrian are better fits for outside receivers than harvin. in a 2 receiver set, yes, keep Harvin out there, but we saw Harvin playing as an x or z, rather than his usual Y spot.
    I'm impressed. Finally got you off that 1, 2 and 3 shit. Again, all teams move their guys around. Not worth discussing as it doesn't fit what your trying to say.
    Because 1,2,3 isn't a position, it's a type of receiver. but I'm not going to keep going on about that.
    hmm.... how quickly I forget 40 times of linemen. I'll be quite honest, and say I don't know any 40 times of our linemen. Actually, now that I think of it, I can't think of too many plays that call for our OL to run 40 yards downfield. However, what I do recall is seeing our line, specifically both tackles, getting manhandled by fast DE's because they can't get out of a stance and into position fast enough. I also see them miss blocks because they can't move into position quick enough. There's a reason the ZB scheme generally calls for smaller quicker linemen. They need to be quick. Big guys aren't usually as quick. If we had big strong guys who are some of the QUICKest (note, not fastest) linemen in the league, we'd have the best line (ps. we don't). Chilly thinks he's an offensive mastermind and can take an established scheme and turn it upside down and make it work, when in fact, he can't.
    You don't have to remember their times, you just need to remember the damn good threads (two of them) that were written by Mr. A and I a couple of years ago.

    As to watching our Olmen get beat, it has nothing to do with them being slow or fast. All OLmen get beat. All of them, regardless of how fast or slow they are, thats why TE's, FB's and RB's are assigned to help them block.

    The ZBing scheme has worked for us the whole time it has been employed. What you seem to fail to make the difference on is when those guys are getting beat, in almost all instance it is when they are pass protecting. Again they are not in the ZB'ing scheme then. They are in the type of blocking scheme we are gonna run all the time next year.
    Right, so Ap running into a wall of defenders every play isn't run blocking? That isn't poor zone blocking execution? The problem with the ZB scheme, as pointed out by Mr. A as well, is that if one guy misses, the whole line misses. everyone gets out of position, then we need to rely on Peterson to do it all. I saw somewhere, I don't have a link, but Peterson led the league in yards after contact? Or was damn high up there. Why? Because he keeps getting hit in the backfield or within a yard of the LOS.
    Talk about a coach trying to fit square pegs in a round hole. Now we are gonna quit doing what has made our running game successful (along with AD and CT) and use just the part of the scheme that we suck at.
    Man Pass blocking is much, much different than man run blocking. To claim because we suck at pass blocking, we will suck at run blocking using a man scheme indicates you either don't understand line play, or just are arguing for the sake of arguing something. I suspect it's the latter
    Why would I compare him to to CT"s production with the Bears? Why not compare with his production the past two years as a Viking? One would think comparing within the same offense would provide for the best comparison.

    so here it is:
    Gerhart: 21 rec. 167 yards, 8.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(10): 20 rec. 139 yards, 7.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(09): 44 rec. 389 yards, 8.8ypr 1 TD
    Taylor(08): 45 rec. 399 yards, 8.9ypr 2 TD
    Taylor(07): 29 rec. 291 yards, 9.7ypr 0 TD

    So what exactly is your point? That Taylor was much better as a 3rd down/receiving back because his skillset matched what was needed much better than a mediocre powerback who's slower than Favre with two broken ankles? Yeah, I could see that point. Wait, that wasn't your point, it was mine? You don't say....
    Why look at what he did two years ago with us. You need to look at what he did this year. Isn't that what we are comparing. One player vs another player in the given year.
    No. I could compare Berrian to Rice and come to the conclusion Berrian is a better player based on that logic. You compare using the best method to fairly compare a guy. Comparing a player to a guy in an entirely different scheme used an entirely different way will not provide a valid comparason. Hell, culpepper had a hell of a season, he should be our QB. I mean, it's all about comparing a player with another player at a given point in time right?
    Hell, it doesn't make any damn sense to compare a seasoned Vet when he was in his prime from back in the day vs a rook who is just learning.
    Sure it does. It's showing a guy with the right skillset can be much better than a guy doing something he's not used to and not designed to do. That's why I want to see more of Booker and less Gerhart. Gerhart has his time and place, but 3rd and long is not it.

    Everything after you tried to do that was just basically data dumped, including the joke you tried to make at the end as it doesn't apply.
    ah, because you don't like it, then it doesn't apply
    Again, Toby did better this year than CT did in the same role. How is that trying to fit a square peg into a round hole?
    Hmm... two different teams, with two different players. yeah, that's the same role. I'd say the fact he did significantly better here, then dropped off with the Bears would indicate something is much different. I'd say the fact he did well here, while Gerhart didn't would indicate something is wrong. Gerhart was not a pass catcher in College, why do you think he'd all of a sudden be successful at it here in the Pros? We had the same deal with Peterson, he was never much of a receiver in OU, that's why we had Taylor.
    When we run swing passes with Peterson, I see more often than not it works well. Why? Because get him in space with DB's trying to tackle him, and he wins. We used him a bunch in the passing game, but alot was passes within 10 yards of the tackle box. I won't comment on the screens, because I honestly haven't noticed that part much
    Thats because AD wasn't very successfull running screens. When he could get to the right spot, he was devastating. Hell, he even scored TD's out of the. One of his first TD's was a screen play. Problem was, he couldn't execute them. Thats why the staff didn't run them much with him in there.
    Umm, no, his first TD was not a screen play. It was a swing pass.

    Kindof flies in the face of your peg theory as in this instance, they didn't try to fit a square peg in a round hole.
    whatever you say


    Yes, and we are not the Pats. Camarillio has been a slot receiver. Only a slot receiver. we play him on the outside and he gets nothing. The pats make it work because they have talented players who can play multiple positions. we don't. It's that simple. They can change their fronts, have complex schemes, etc. Both Favre and now Shiancoe have said we needed to go back to the basics, and learn to do that well, as we were failing hard in that department.
    Or do they have a QB who can hit the receiver when he is open.
    Valid point.
    Look, running a 5 route from the slot is still a 5 route when you are split wide, in fact it should be easier cause you are battling a small CB and no traffic, instead of a strong LB and possibly a S in the box.
    Are you trying to tell me that a receiver should be able to play either position just the same? History would prove you wrong. If not, what's your point? Arguing just to argue again?
    As I said earlier, can we please stop trying to get me going on the Noodle. I really really really am sick and tired of talking about him.
    That's twice now you've tried to bring him up, I haven't said a word
    In the end, Cam can be split wide. They did it with him in the Phins and he had a worse QB. Lewis's great TD catch from you know who came when he was split out wide.

    Your discussion point that the Chiller put the WR's in roles they didn't fit is absolutely crazy talk and you know it.
    Ah, so Harvin should be played from the wideout position? It won't make a difference? There's a reason guys get labeled as a slot receiver. Because they're better at it. The positions aren't the same. Some guys excel on the outside, some on the inside. Some can do anything (true #1's ). Your discussion point stating otherwise is absolutely crazy talk and you know it

  8. #18
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1089764
    Right, so Ap running into a wall of defenders every play isn't run blocking? That isn't poor zone blocking execution? The problem with the ZB scheme, as pointed out by Mr. A as well, is that if one guy misses, the whole line misses. everyone gets out of position, then we need to rely on Peterson to do it all. I saw somewhere, I don't have a link, but Peterson led the league in yards after contact? Or was damn high up there. Why? Because he keeps getting hit in the backfield or within a yard of the LOS.
    You make me work harder answering your quotes that Purple Floyd does. I am gonna give you the nickname Quote instead of him. :laugh:

    AD running into a wall of defenders is a good point, but in alof of instances it was his fault as well. Lets not forget the video of Theenimy coaching him "Tuff Love" on the NFL Network channel.

    Theenimy (and AD) both admitted that he wasn't patient and in most instances, his first two steps didn't set up the blocks the way they should causing the blog you refer to as a wall.

    The OL did mess up. Some of that was poor execution on their part, some of it was poor execution on AD's part and some of it was just good execution on the defenses part.

    In the end, you don't have the rushing yards like we've had since the ZB scheme was installed and the production out of our backup backs without someone doing their job blocking.

    No. I could compare Berrian to Rice and come to the conclusion Berrian is a better player based on that logic. You compare using the best method to fairly compare a guy. Comparing a player to a guy in an entirely different scheme used an entirely different way will not provide a valid comparason. Hell, culpepper had a hell of a season, he should be our QB. I mean, it's all about comparing a player with another player at a given point in time right?
    What? How does that have anything to do with putting Toby out there in 3rd down situations?

    You said he didn't work. I used CT, a third down back, in a offense that is designed for the back as an example that he did just fine in that role.

    Mark my words, you are gonna like you some Toby before his career is over.

    I think your just hung up on his size, like you are the OLmen, believing that he is slow, when in fact he is 1/10th of a second slower than AD in his forty times.

    Sure it does. It's showing a guy with the right skillset can be much better than a guy doing something he's not used to and not designed to do. That's why I want to see more of Booker and less Gerhart. Gerhart has his time and place, but 3rd and long is not it.
    Why?

    He had 5 attempts in situations were he needed to get 10+ yards and avg 13.4 yards (AD had 18.3) in those attempts. 3rd and long he avg 7.8 yards (AD had 6.5 yds)

    Is he AD? Hell no. But for a rook with limited touches, he did fine. With some offseason work, his numbers should only go up.

    Hmm... two different teams, with two different players. yeah, that's the same role. I'd say the fact he did significantly better here, then dropped off with the Bears would indicate something is much different. I'd say the fact he did well here, while Gerhart didn't would indicate something is wrong. Gerhart was not a pass catcher in College, why do you think he'd all of a sudden be successful at it here in the Pros? We had the same deal with Peterson, he was never much of a receiver in OU, that's why we had Taylor.
    I didn't say I expected him to excel at it coming out of college. Again, twisting my words. Go check my stuff on him this year, you will see that I was very surprised when he did well at it.


    Umm, no, his first TD was not a screen play. It was a swing pass.
    When you gonna learn. I didn't say first. I said one of his first.

    I can tell you this, I think you and I wouldn't have anything to talk about if you actually read what I typed. Boy would these night shifts be boring. LOL :P


    Are you trying to tell me that a receiver should be able to play either position just the same? History would prove you wrong. If not, what's your point? Arguing just to argue again?
    Nope, not what I'm saying. I am saying that a guy who can run a 5 route out of the slot should be able to run the same route out of another position.

    Ah, so Harvin should be played from the wideout position? It won't make a difference? There's a reason guys get labeled as a slot receiver. Because they're better at it. The positions aren't the same. Some guys excel on the outside, some on the inside. Some can do anything (true #1's ). Your discussion point stating otherwise is absolutely crazy talk and you know it
    What I know is your just mixing apples and oranges.

    Of course a guy is better in one position than another. Doesn't mean he can't shift.

    Hell, your one of the biggest for asking to see things like 2 RB's in the backfield. Isn't that asking them to do something that is out of their comfort level?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #19
    V4L's Avatar
    V4L
    V4L is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    20,612

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Adrian Peterson has scored 2 recieving TDS in his career

    1 was a swing pass in his rookie season

    Other was this year

    "one of his first TDs was a screen" is not true

  10. #20
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: NFL Network: Shiancoe Talks Favre, More

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1089764
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1089757
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1089753
    We used him properly then for some reason. Now we don't. Do you not think we've been using him very differently the past two years than we did in 08?
    No we haven't been using him differently. Again, you know my answer on this. I'm not gonna tell you about the Noodles Noodle anymore. I'm tired of it.

    Suffice it to say, he has had a nice average with every other QB he's played with but one. You go figure it out.

    I for one don't want to keep talking about his limparmed ass anymore.
    You're the one who brought Favre into this, not me.

    Your argument is bull anyway. You say he did better with every other QB, but then again, he played a different style of play in a Harvin/Riceless offense prior to Favre as well. They play him differently. We see alot more timing based routes, ins, outs, hooks, comebacks, etc. in 08, we saw him do exceptionally well on slants and seams. Those were his two routes, but that's not what we saw the past couple years. Harvin took a bunch of those plays away from him, as did Rice.
    Lewis and berrian are better fits for outside receivers than harvin. in a 2 receiver set, yes, keep Harvin out there, but we saw Harvin playing as an x or z, rather than his usual Y spot.
    I'm impressed. Finally got you off that 1, 2 and 3 shit. Again, all teams move their guys around. Not worth discussing as it doesn't fit what your trying to say.
    Because 1,2,3 isn't a position, it's a type of receiver. but I'm not going to keep going on about that.
    hmm.... how quickly I forget 40 times of linemen. I'll be quite honest, and say I don't know any 40 times of our linemen. Actually, now that I think of it, I can't think of too many plays that call for our OL to run 40 yards downfield. However, what I do recall is seeing our line, specifically both tackles, getting manhandled by fast DE's because they can't get out of a stance and into position fast enough. I also see them miss blocks because they can't move into position quick enough. There's a reason the ZB scheme generally calls for smaller quicker linemen. They need to be quick. Big guys aren't usually as quick. If we had big strong guys who are some of the QUICKest (note, not fastest) linemen in the league, we'd have the best line (ps. we don't). Chilly thinks he's an offensive mastermind and can take an established scheme and turn it upside down and make it work, when in fact, he can't.
    You don't have to remember their times, you just need to remember the damn good threads (two of them) that were written by Mr. A and I a couple of years ago.

    As to watching our Olmen get beat, it has nothing to do with them being slow or fast. All OLmen get beat. All of them, regardless of how fast or slow they are, thats why TE's, FB's and RB's are assigned to help them block.

    The ZBing scheme has worked for us the whole time it has been employed. What you seem to fail to make the difference on is when those guys are getting beat, in almost all instance it is when they are pass protecting. Again they are not in the ZB'ing scheme then. They are in the type of blocking scheme we are gonna run all the time next year.
    Right, so Ap running into a wall of defenders every play isn't run blocking? That isn't poor zone blocking execution? The problem with the ZB scheme, as pointed out by Mr. A as well, is that if one guy misses, the whole line misses. everyone gets out of position, then we need to rely on Peterson to do it all. I saw somewhere, I don't have a link, but Peterson led the league in yards after contact? Or was damn high up there. Why? Because he keeps getting hit in the backfield or within a yard of the LOS.
    Talk about a coach trying to fit square pegs in a round hole. Now we are gonna quit doing what has made our running game successful (along with AD and CT) and use just the part of the scheme that we suck at.
    Man Pass blocking is much, much different than man run blocking. To claim because we suck at pass blocking, we will suck at run blocking using a man scheme indicates you either don't understand line play, or just are arguing for the sake of arguing something. I suspect it's the latter
    Why would I compare him to to CT"s production with the Bears? Why not compare with his production the past two years as a Viking? One would think comparing within the same offense would provide for the best comparison.

    so here it is:
    Gerhart: 21 rec. 167 yards, 8.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(10): 20 rec. 139 yards, 7.0ypr 0 TD
    Taylor(09): 44 rec. 389 yards, 8.8ypr 1 TD
    Taylor(08): 45 rec. 399 yards, 8.9ypr 2 TD
    Taylor(07): 29 rec. 291 yards, 9.7ypr 0 TD

    So what exactly is your point? That Taylor was much better as a 3rd down/receiving back because his skillset matched what was needed much better than a mediocre powerback who's slower than Favre with two broken ankles? Yeah, I could see that point. Wait, that wasn't your point, it was mine? You don't say....
    Why look at what he did two years ago with us. You need to look at what he did this year. Isn't that what we are comparing. One player vs another player in the given year.
    No. I could compare Berrian to Rice and come to the conclusion Berrian is a better player based on that logic. You compare using the best method to fairly compare a guy. Comparing a player to a guy in an entirely different scheme used an entirely different way will not provide a valid comparason. Hell, culpepper had a hell of a season, he should be our QB. I mean, it's all about comparing a player with another player at a given point in time right?
    Hell, it doesn't make any damn sense to compare a seasoned Vet when he was in his prime from back in the day vs a rook who is just learning.
    Sure it does. It's showing a guy with the right skillset can be much better than a guy doing something he's not used to and not designed to do. That's why I want to see more of Booker and less Gerhart. Gerhart has his time and place, but 3rd and long is not it.

    Everything after you tried to do that was just basically data dumped, including the joke you tried to make at the end as it doesn't apply.
    ah, because you don't like it, then it doesn't apply
    Again, Toby did better this year than CT did in the same role. How is that trying to fit a square peg into a round hole?
    Hmm... two different teams, with two different players. yeah, that's the same role. I'd say the fact he did significantly better here, then dropped off with the Bears would indicate something is much different. I'd say the fact he did well here, while Gerhart didn't would indicate something is wrong. Gerhart was not a pass catcher in College, why do you think he'd all of a sudden be successful at it here in the Pros? We had the same deal with Peterson, he was never much of a receiver in OU, that's why we had Taylor.
    When we run swing passes with Peterson, I see more often than not it works well. Why? Because get him in space with DB's trying to tackle him, and he wins. We used him a bunch in the passing game, but alot was passes within 10 yards of the tackle box. I won't comment on the screens, because I honestly haven't noticed that part much
    Thats because AD wasn't very successfull running screens. When he could get to the right spot, he was devastating. Hell, he even scored TD's out of the. One of his first TD's was a screen play. Problem was, he couldn't execute them. Thats why the staff didn't run them much with him in there.
    Umm, no, his first TD was not a screen play. It was a swing pass.

    Kindof flies in the face of your peg theory as in this instance, they didn't try to fit a square peg in a round hole.
    whatever you say


    Yes, and we are not the Pats. Camarillio has been a slot receiver. Only a slot receiver. we play him on the outside and he gets nothing. The pats make it work because they have talented players who can play multiple positions. we don't. It's that simple. They can change their fronts, have complex schemes, etc. Both Favre and now Shiancoe have said we needed to go back to the basics, and learn to do that well, as we were failing hard in that department.
    Or do they have a QB who can hit the receiver when he is open.
    Valid point.
    Look, running a 5 route from the slot is still a 5 route when you are split wide, in fact it should be easier cause you are battling a small CB and no traffic, instead of a strong LB and possibly a S in the box.
    Are you trying to tell me that a receiver should be able to play either position just the same? History would prove you wrong. If not, what's your point? Arguing just to argue again?
    As I said earlier, can we please stop trying to get me going on the Noodle. I really really really am sick and tired of talking about him.
    That's twice now you've tried to bring him up, I haven't said a word
    In the end, Cam can be split wide. They did it with him in the Phins and he had a worse QB. Lewis's great TD catch from you know who came when he was split out wide.

    Your discussion point that the Chiller put the WR's in roles they didn't fit is absolutely crazy talk and you know it.
    Ah, so Harvin should be played from the wideout position? It won't make a difference? There's a reason guys get labeled as a slot receiver. Because they're better at it. The positions aren't the same. Some guys excel on the outside, some on the inside. Some can do anything (true #1's ). Your discussion point stating otherwise is absolutely crazy talk and you know it
    One in a while a post comes along that really sets the world straight and this is one of them. IBP is taking names today lol.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Shiancoe: Not fair to ‘knock’ Favre
    By vikinggreg in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-09-2010, 09:50 PM
  2. Henderson Talks About Playing With Favre
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-18-2009, 11:41 AM
  3. Jets hold "Serious Talks" about Favre
    By CrazyVikingsFan in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 08-03-2008, 03:12 PM
  4. Favre Talks Comeback
    By APAD in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-25-2008, 10:38 PM
  5. Glimmer of hope in Big Ten Network-Comcast talks
    By COJOMAY in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-12-2008, 11:25 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
  •