Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 105 of 105
  1. #101
    Brick is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    467

    Re: OL - How Bad Is it Really?

    Infidel wrote:
    They did stop him in his tracks fairly often.

    Remember, we're talking about the line and a lot of those yards came from poor tackling beyond the line.

    So I think the beat up packer line did a fairly good job of stopping Peterson.
    28 carries.

    131 yards.

    4.7 ypc.

    1 TD.

    They didn't stop him at all.
    None

  2. #102
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: OL - How Bad Is it Really?

    i_bleed_purple wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    Purple Floyd wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    ConnecticutViking wrote:
    Thanks Madro for the article... What I did get out of it, is that it is most effective with smaller quicker/athletic lines. That's not the Vikes O-Line at all.
    just another reason to wonder what the F Chilly and Bevell are thinking. Installing a blocking scheme that our O-line is not built to execute. No sense utilizing the talent to the best of their ability by fitting the schemes to them.
    Some of us have been making that point since about week 4 of the 2006 season.
    Yep.
    And I almost got on your bandwagon last week. After last nights performance, I'm still saying our issues aren't related to the OL as much as it is related to the guy sticking his hands under the C's ass.
    yesterday was like watching a whole different OL. Not sure what they did different there, but it worked.
    Our starting C was back.

    Again, I think Coop and Cook did a good job, but its not like they are starter material.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  3. #103
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: OL - How Bad Is it Really?

    Infidel wrote:
    They did stop him in his tracks fairly often.

    Remember, we're talking about the line and a lot of those yards came from poor tackling beyond the line.

    So I think the beat up packer line did a fairly good job of stopping Peterson.
    This is about as silly a post as when you questioned me about a QB rolling out......Basically asking me if I was talking about a RB or a QB. LOL.

    Look my friend. Each unit functions best when all the best parts are out there. Just like our WR corps and our secondary, the OL was playing without one of thier best guys.

    Will there be some drop off, yes, but it doesn't mean they are devoid of talent.

    Last night the OL unit was a whole again. Now we need to get the WR corp back and possibly some help from our DL and things will come together.

    Well, that and some better QB play.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  4. #104
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: OL - How Bad Is it Really?

    Infidel wrote:
    I Bleed Purple said:

    yesterday was like watching a whole different OL. Not sure what they did different there, but it worked.
    Well, Mardro is hallucinating again, for one thing, so don't let his wild enthusiasm for blaming Favre throw you.

    They didn't do a lot different.

    1. Our best center came back and played well.

    2. Loadholt got a lot of help from a ref who wasn't calling holding for some reason......wasn't calling anything until Loadholt got too greedy and went for the face mask.

    3. The Packer D-Line was hurting bad. I think they had one guy who was really too small to compete with our big guys but still did fairly well in stopping Peterson.
    Talk about me hallucinating.

    Was the Packer D-line hurting? Yes, but isn't that the goal of the game to identify a weakness and exploit it.

    How was chucking it all over in the 2nd half exploiting that?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  5. #105
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,686

    Re: OL - How Bad Is it Really?

    Marrdro wrote:
    i_bleed_purple wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Mr Anderson wrote:
    Purple Floyd wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    ConnecticutViking wrote:
    Thanks Madro for the article... What I did get out of it, is that it is most effective with smaller quicker/athletic lines. That's not the Vikes O-Line at all.
    just another reason to wonder what the F Chilly and Bevell are thinking. Installing a blocking scheme that our O-line is not built to execute. No sense utilizing the talent to the best of their ability by fitting the schemes to them.
    Some of us have been making that point since about week 4 of the 2006 season.
    Yep.
    And I almost got on your bandwagon last week. After last nights performance, I'm still saying our issues aren't related to the OL as much as it is related to the guy sticking his hands under the C's ass.
    yesterday was like watching a whole different OL. Not sure what they did different there, but it worked.
    Our starting C was back.

    Again, I think Coop and Cook did a good job, but its not like they are starter material.
    We were pulling like crazy last night. Every replay they showed of a Peterson run there was a lineman pulling, they complimented Herrera on it a few times. A lot of our success came on more traditional blocking plays, or at least zone with another element thrown in e.g. a pulling guard.

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011

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
  •