Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11
    ThorSPL's Avatar
    ThorSPL is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    3,422

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    DiehardVikesFan wrote:
    Right now I say get both in there and if Sanford continues to outplay Johnson then we have a new starter.

    Johnson is really disappointing though because I remember Mayock (one of the few TV guys I trust) saying he was the best tackler in the draft.
    There's something about him I like - and something that just bugs me. It's like the kid oozes talent but he's afraid on the field - hesitant to just play ball. He may end up being a late bloomer like EJ - who knows?


    Trust me, I'm a doctor.

    www.twitter.com/ThorSPL

  2. #12
    Big C2 is offline Training Camp
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    46

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    Johnson is really disappointing though because I remember Mayock (one of the few TV guys I trust) saying he was the best tackler in the draft.
    I totally agree. Mayock is the ONLY guy I trust in the draft. I love the fact that he covered the Vikings preseason games the last couple times. TJ was his top rated safety so I really am suprised not to see that production. I really thought he was the perfect player for a run stopping offense. Hopefully he is a late bloomer like ThorSPL mentioned.
    None

  3. #13
    Freakout is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    846
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    ThorSPL wrote:
    DiehardVikesFan wrote:
    Right now I say get both in there and if Sanford continues to outplay Johnson then we have a new starter.

    Johnson is really disappointing though because I remember Mayock (one of the few TV guys I trust) saying he was the best tackler in the draft.
    There's something about him I like - and something that just bugs me. It's like the kid oozes talent but he's afraid on the field - hesitant to just play ball. He may end up being a late bloomer like EJ - who knows?
    Reminds me of McCauley. Both have the athletic ability you want at their positions but the mental game is seriously lacking.

  4. #14
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    Why are we always so quick to throw a kid under the bus.

    As I said in the "Post Game" thread. One should take into account that the presence of Whinny (and possibly Jasper) could have alot to do with the improved play at S.

    Here's a novel idea, how about we give them both a couple 3 years to develop before we go ahead and claim that they don't tackle or have mental issues related to the game?

    I for one love that both seem to be able to play the position enough for the team to win. At this point in thier careers, that all we as fans should really expect out of them.
    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
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    Big C2 wrote:
    Johnson is really disappointing though because I remember Mayock (one of the few TV guys I trust) saying he was the best tackler in the draft.
    I totally agree. Mayock is the ONLY guy I trust in the draft. I love the fact that he covered the Vikings preseason games the last couple times. TJ was his top rated safety so I really am suprised not to see that production. I really thought he was the perfect player for a run stopping offense. Hopefully he is a late bloomer like ThorSPL mentioned.
    Best point of the whole thread...

    I kindof liken it to the discussions we had surrounding El Syd vs cats like Colston who came out and produced instantaneously.

    Believe it or not, rookies take a few years to get NFL ready. Not all of them are instant probowlers.

    Problem is, most fans want a cat to be that instant star. Runnign around laying the lumber and making interceptions when the truth of it is, us Vikings fans are gonna have to get used to the staff trotting kids out there who are gonna learn in front of our eyes which in turn means mistakes.

    As I pointed out with Cook. If you have a problem with rookies and issues, blame the coaches, not the kid. Who by the way, is out there playing his ass off trying not to make those mistakes.

    In the long run, its the coaches who make the decision to play them, not the kids.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #16
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    oaklandzoo24 wrote:
    I say why not put Sanford in. We are in prime position to take the North so why not give Sanford some more PT so we can see what we have in him. If he gives up a couple TDs we can persevere through it, put TJ back in (not T-Jack), and still get the 2nd seed.
    I like that idea as well. Truth be told, I think we are gonna see a few more cats get some reps over the next 3 games.

    That my friends is a good thing, in the grander scheme of things.
    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
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,869

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    Haven't see much of his coverage abilities. He had a great game against the Bengals in run support.

    I did notice on Benson's big run, that Sanford was unable to overtake him and make the tackle. Griffin chased down Benson and made the tackle. That is, Griffin is faster than Benson who's faster than Sanford. And I didn't think Griffin was all that fast.

    I wouldn't mind seeing more of Sanford, I have not been happy with Tyrell's progress...although not sure Sanford is the answer.

    To Marrdro's point of giving players 3 years to show whether they can make it. I think that is unrealistic, there is not enough spots on a roster to keep players on it with the hope that they magically evolve into good players at some point. I won't argue that many players if given the opportunity could turn into great NFL players, I just don't think that the current dynamics of NFL teams allow for a lot of long term growth investment in players. When young players (especially 7th round picks) get the chance to play, they better show something or their NFL careers will be short.

    Right now, I would guess that safety is a strong point of emphasis in the offseason.

  8. #18
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    tastywaves wrote:
    Haven't see much of his coverage abilities. He had a great game against the Bengals in run support.

    I did notice on Benson's big run, that Sanford was unable to overtake him and make the tackle. Griffin chased down Benson and made the tackle. That is, Griffin is faster than Benson who's faster than Sanford. And I didn't think Griffin was all that fast.

    I wouldn't mind seeing more of Sanford, I have not been happy with Tyrell's progress...although not sure Sanford is the answer.

    To Marrdro's point of giving players 3 years to show whether they can make it. I think that is unrealistic, there is not enough spots on a roster to keep players on it with the hope that they magically evolve into good players at some point. I won't argue that many players if given the opportunity could turn into great NFL players, I just don't think that the current dynamics of NFL teams allow for a lot of long term growth investment in players. When young players (especially 7th round picks) get the chance to play, they better show something or their NFL careers will be short.

    Right now, I would guess that safety is a strong point of emphasis in the offseason.
    Why is it unrealistic?

    Take Griff for instance. There is no reason at all that they can't take a look at a kid or two (one on ST's, other on PS) for two or three years before we opt to let Griff go, say after his 2nd or 3rd contract if the roster is comprised of a mix of youth, vets and FA's.

    Now if you had a roster that comprised of nothing but old guys that were either not performing anymore or two expensive to hold, and you had to predominantly field a team of 1rst and 2nd year players, yes, I can see that.

    Back to this team, I see no issue with letting a guy spend a year or two on the PS as he develops and then promote him up to STs and let him rotate in a bit to get some "Real" game time tape as a measure of maturation.

    Kindof the way they used to do things back when they had a heck of alot more draft rounds than 7 my friend.
    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
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    Marrdro wrote:
    Why are we always so quick to throw a kid under the bus.

    As I said in the "Post Game" thread. One should take into account that the presence of Whinny (and possibly Jasper) could have alot to do with the improved play at S.

    Here's a novel idea, how about we give them both a couple 3 years to develop before we go ahead and claim that they don't tackle or have mental issues related to the game?

    I for one love that both seem to be able to play the position enough for the team to win. At this point in thier careers, that all we as fans should really expect out of them.
    I could so derail this thread but I won't in regards to throwing people under the bus.

    Anyways this is almost the end of his 2nd year starting. If he has not learned to tackle by then, what makes you think he will figure that part out. I can understand the mental mistakes.

    Truth be told, when you put a rookie in and he appears to be playing better, of course people are going to want him to start.

    Here is a novel idea, go with who is getting the job done. We are making a playoff push not creating holiday cookies.

  10. #20
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re:Sanford or Johnson?

    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Why are we always so quick to throw a kid under the bus.

    As I said in the "Post Game" thread. One should take into account that the presence of Whinny (and possibly Jasper) could have alot to do with the improved play at S.

    Here's a novel idea, how about we give them both a couple 3 years to develop before we go ahead and claim that they don't tackle or have mental issues related to the game?

    I for one love that both seem to be able to play the position enough for the team to win. At this point in thier careers, that all we as fans should really expect out of them.
    I could so derail this thread but I won't in regards to throwing people under the bus.

    Anyways this is almost the end of his 2nd year starting. If he has not learned to tackle by then, what makes you think he will figure that part out. I can understand the mental mistakes.

    Truth be told, when you put a rookie in and he appears to be playing better, of course people are going to want him to start.

    Here is a novel idea, go with who is getting the job done. We are making a playoff push not creating holiday cookies.
    Since when don't we derail threads?

    I have see nothing wrong with putting a player in who is playing better. My only point was and still is, we should look at the bigger picture when we say that he played better.

    I believe Whinny's presence alone should make the cat playing on the backside better.

    As to your point of 2 years. Weren't you one of the crew who was ready to get rid of Griff?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Jamarca Sanford to start at SS
    By MulletMullitia in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-06-2011, 12:36 AM
  2. Congratz Marrdro on the Jamarca Sanford (33) G!!!
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 04-20-2010, 09:55 AM
  3. The Official Jamarca Sanford Fan Club
    By ChesterTheMolester in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 01-06-2010, 11:33 AM
  4. 7th round pick Jamarca Sanford
    By skum in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-22-2009, 12:00 PM
  5. Tyrell Johnson psyched for first game action - Johnson far from star-struck
    By singersp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-09-2008, 07:55 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
  •