Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 136
  1. #101
    gagarr's Avatar
    gagarr is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,411

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    OK, I quite after page 5.
    Few comments......

    a.
    I voted for Rice.
    Has nothing to do with who I think is a better reciever.
    It has everything to do with what I believe the staff tries to do in our base offense (2 WR sets).
    A slot guy (Harvin) isn't part of that package.

    b.
    Harvin will be used in unique sets starting with 3 WR packages.
    If anyone isn't on the field it will be the designated inside (slot guy), in this case B-wade.

    c.
    (More of a question rather than a comment) Haven't we learned that on both sides of the ball thier are pieces and parts that best fit the down and distance.
    The coaching staff will rotate in the best package (talent as well a fresh) that best suites the desired endstate.
    Having said that, Why does everyone dwell on who is the starter.


    It wouldn't suprise me at all to see combinations like the following with respect to WR sets..... (Caveat(s) - Insert Holt for AA based on who makes the roster - Notice I didn't use #1, #2, #3 etc. Doesn't exist in a WCO)

    BB
    Rice
    B-wade
    Holt/AA
    PH

    BB





    B-wade






    El Syd
    BB





    PH










    El Syd
    BB





    PH










    B-wade
    BB





    AA










    El Syd
    BB





    PH











    BW





    El Syd
    BB





    PH











    AA





    El Syd
    AA





    PH











    BW





    El Syd

    Again, does it really matter who the hell starts?

    :
    I want to see all 5 designated WR's in the huddle, TJ, and no RB.

    The I want them to line up in a:
    Standard 5 WR set, with TJ running or passing.
    or a 4WR set with PH at RB and then run a screen or flea flicker (the Robert Smith - Randall Cunningham was always fun to watch)

    I think the Vikes have a talented enough receiving corps and, with the addition of Loadholt, an O line that can provide protection for the Vikings to occasionally open up an aggressive passing game.
    [size=12pt]
    Page 148.5 **Doleman 150.5 **Randle 137.5 **Allen 73+
    [/size]

  2. #102
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "VikingsTw]<br" wrote:
    [quote]

    Your "Illusion" is your attemt to redefine potential to mean something it doesn't.

    And while potential IS the combination of the physical and mental, it
    - again - exits in an undefined state.
    Once it MANIFESTS, it is no longer potential, it becomes FACT.

    "VikingsTw]Potential" wrote:
    [quote]

    This is a given.
    In fact, this is what I have been saying all along.
    But mental isn't the majority.
    It depends upon the player.
    It's the combination of physical, mental, and spirit (determination or heart).
    There is no sure fire formula.
    That's why "potential" can be so deceptive.

    "VikingsTw]Potential" wrote:
    [tr][td]physical talent alone will not determine the future of a player[/td][/tr][/table], as we seen with Troy Williamson. The combination of "mental talent" along with "physical talent" will determine a players success into the future and how much potential they really have. There is no such thing as potential being "nothing". Everyone has potential but where is at on a scale from 1 to 10? How is his mental game? Then what’s his physical Talent? Those who have weak mental games have far less potential than those who do have that Talent. That is why Scouting is so important, anyone can determine who has the physical body to do the job, but the mental talent has to be observed by the experts, it’s practically invisible, you cannot see the conscious as opposed to seeing the physical talent. Who's got the Heart, the Passion and Drive to succeed?
    One paragraph above you said potential doesn't determine success, now you've back tracked and said potential absolutely determines a player's future.
    What???


    Then you start trying to seperate the elements of potential as if sto say that they determine everything.
    They DON'T.
    No matter how many times you try and make it so, it will never BE so.
    I provided a definition of potential which CLEARLY stated what Potential means.
    It was one from Webster's Dictionary.
    I can't get any clearer than that.
    The fact taht you don't like that definition won't alter it one iota.

    "VikingsTw]Guys" wrote:
    [quote]

    Why you insist on trying to break this ficticious "Mental Talent" off as a seperate entity is beyond me.
    It is still a part of potential, and it is in fact tested and gauged throughout the pre-draft assessment period.
    There's the Wunderlick test, and the battery of interviews that potential draftees undergo.
    They talk to coaches, other players, friends, etc.


    But it's still all "potential" until the player DOES something.

    "VikingsTw]To" wrote:
    [quote]

    I said that every team in the NFL thought Tom Brady had less potential than the players drafted ahead of him.
    The fact taht they were all WRONG in no way refudiates what I said.
    What it DOES show is that potential alone means jack.
    Sorry if you can't see that.

    "VikingsTw]"it" wrote:
    [quote]

    I'm not sure where you came up with "Mental Talent", but it isn't a seperate part of the potential package.
    Everything else you're saying supports everything I've been trying to explain.
    Nevertheless, it's still just potential until they DO something.

    "VikingsTw]I" wrote:
    [quote]

    He had hand-eye issues.
    That was noted in college as well, the Vikings chose to ignore that thinking they could teach him to overcome...they were wrong.
    The bottom line is that he failed to live up to his potential.
    To say he was weak minded is presumtuous and pretty insulting.
    He simply had road blocks that he couldn't overcome.

    "VikingsTw]The" wrote:
    [quote]

    See, this refutes what you said earlier too.


    First you say that the "Mental Talent" is undefinable, then you say that some teams use the draft effectively...implying that they can mysteriously define this "mental Talent".
    Bull pucky!!!

    The Draft IS a crap shoot.
    Each team tries to minimize the guess work; they use scouting, film study, private work outs, pro days, mental tests, psych tests, and background investigations to try and draw as complete a picture as they can.
    They compile all this information, and rank the players accordingly.

    yet the PROOF that it's a crap shoot lies in the number of Busts that occur each season.
    guys that are taken early that never pan out.
    Guys who are taken late who blossom and explode all over the NFL.
    It's all guess work...minimized as much as possible, but guess work nonetheless.


    "VikingsTw]There" wrote:
    [quote]

    No, I have no idea what they'll do.


    I hope Rice can turn it on this season - he was a disappointment last season.

    I hope HArvin becomes what they say he can be.
    He could really be a game breaker.

    But, until they DO, they just have POTENTIAL.
    Granted, both have high potential, but so did Williamson.
    So, until they DO something, they remain undefined.


    "VikingsTw]I've" wrote:
    [quote]

    What you're defining is their potential.
    You can't define what they WILL do because they haven't done ANYTHING yet.
    Rice has had 2 seasons, one of which was disappointing, and Harvin has yet to play 1 down in the NFL.
    There is nothing to "Define" him with.

    So, as I said before, you're guessing - which is absolutely fine.
    But you AREN'T defining them, because you can't.
    You simply don't have the data available to you to do so.
    It's not an indictment of you, it's a simple statement of fact.

    "VikingsTw]There" wrote:
    [quote]

    What?
    What I said - repeatedly - is that in the NFL potential means jack.
    Every guy in the NFL is chuck full of potential...that's why they're there.
    But until you DO something with it, until it manifests (at which time it ceases to be "potential" and becomes reality), it means jack.

    "VikingsTw]Maximizing" wrote:
    [quote]

    Again, so much gibber jabber.
    This is all part of potential.


    "VikingsTw]The" wrote:
    [quote]

    I get your message, I really do.
    But you're simply defining things incorrectly.


    And, again, I don't agree that Williamson failed due to "mental" issues, I believe it was a hand-eye issue.
    A physical issue.

    "VikingsTw]Players" wrote:
    [quote]

    And nothing you've said here supports your claims above or refutes anything I've written.

    "VikingsTw]Zack" wrote:

    Here we go again, trying to seperate components to support a redefinition.
    Still isn't working....

    [quote author=VikingsTw]Without Potential you have "nothing", its "everything", a team with no potential is going to be a complete failure. All the players who ever succeeded on the NFL Level started with Potential, normally maximizing it or having a decent level of balance between mental and physical talents. A player with all the physical talent in the world will fall flat on his face without Mental Talent to control his physical material. Now whether that happens to Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin is to be seen, we all have our different view points.
    Again, mental talent is a part of potential.
    Please, save us both a lot of time, look up the actual definition of "POTENTIAL" (Since you obviously didn't believe the one I posted as being real).
    You're talking in circles and you're no closer to being right now then you were at the start of this.

    Caine

  3. #103
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    Of course it matters who starts, if Rice is healthy he's definitly going to be the starter and we need him to do what he was drafted for. Rice is an explosive player, we need his production. If we have to watch an average Bobby Wade, thats what our Passing game will reflect. We need Harvin and Rice to take us to the next level in the passing game.

    I think Rice is definitly the #2 Barring injury, and thats key, he has had issues in that department. I think he will outgrow that, become a man and leader.

    Harvin is likely to be #3, we need to get him the ball as much as possible, super explosive, use him as Punt Returner also, making us a better specail teams unit.
    Again with the #1, #2, #3 designations.
    I give up on this.
    :'( :'( :'(

    As to who starts, you realize that last year our "Starters were"......

    BB






    Hicks
    Hutch
    Birk
    Herrera
    Cook





    Rice




















    TJ










    Shanc




















    FB (whats his name)



















    AD

    And our opening set was........

    BB






    Hicks
    Hutch
    Birk
    Herrera
    Cook














    Sauce






    TJ









    Shanc




















    FB (whats his name)



















    AD

    What did it matter that Rice was our "Starter"?
    Absolutely nothing my friend.
    Again, it all gets back do packages, sets and what the staff wants to do and has nothing to do with who is the best or not.

    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
    VikingsTw is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,144

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "Caine" wrote:


    Caine
    So according to you my definition of Potential is inaccurate, I can accept that but I will never agree with it. Potential is a combination of Physical Material, the physical being combined with the Conscious Talent that controls the physical material aka Human Body.

    Potential and Talent do not exist in an undefined state. Potential and Talent are defined by Talent Evaluators all over the world, on the collegiate and NFL levels. It can certainly be defined and determined, predicted or speculated on.

    It was fact that 12 years ago Adrian Peterson was going to become what he is, it was destined to happen, he had the entire package, he had the "it" factor that must be identified and defined. Cris Carter had the "it" factor and I believe both Sindey Rice and Percy Harvin have the same Talents.

    Mental Talent is by far the majority; it’s the controlling factor of the physical body. However it is true you must have the physical ability to compete, and then it’s the mental talent that takes you where you need be. The conscious is all controlling over the physical body or naturally gifted tools.

    There is a sure fire formula and it equals the "it" factor. A solid combination of physical and mental talent leads to great success. A serious lack of one or the other is detrimental to the potential. Randy Moss had it all, mental talent and serious physical ability, the combination lead to Hall of Famer. Rod Woodson, very talented mentally good physical structure.

    Potential is only deceptive to those who believe it to be. -TW

    No, I said "Physical" Potential does not determine success, what kind of potential are you talking about? There are certainly different elements; it’s unfortunate that you have a hard time comprehending. The combination of both mental and physical potential/talent will equate the results. You can't have success until you have both in check; remember I'm a Jockey Physically, that prevented me from being a MLB in the NFL. You have to have the entire package.

    The potential in the Webster’s dictionary is going to be completely irrelevant to this discussion but accurate, I don't disagree with it. I think for starters everyone has Potential, EVERYONE. Whether that potential is fulfilled is another story. The elements of potential in football players is obviously going to be described differently than the Elements it takes to successfully build a computer, design an internet website, or create software. Physically there is hardly any preference, mental is most everything. Right now we are talking about Football Players, so first off they have to physically be a presence, and then mentally they can work there physical being. Again most is mental but in Football it’s vital to have at least the minimal physical tools. The different Elements of a player’s talent pool will determine his future. It's normally a combination that leads to the "it factor".

    The Mental Talent is a completely different entity than the physical body; they are actually two in one but dependent on each other. There is Mind then Body, once the Mind is gone the body no longer functions, but the body remains physically present for a certain time period. Mental Talent-Potential and Physical Talent-Potential are definitely different elements.


    I couldn't agree more about Potential being just potential until he produces, potential and production are two different things, just because you have potential doesn't mean you have produced. But keep in mind it doesn't mean one won't produce. That’s where I stand with Harvin and Rice, Rice has already produced, but not to full potential. Harvin just got drafted, he hasn't even had the opportunity on the NFL Level but he dominated college and looks to keep going.

    Potential is everything, like you stated before if half the teams would have known what Brady was going to develop into they would have drafted him early. The problem was that the Potential was underrated, all along Tom Brady had tremendous Potential because of his Mental Game. Not a fast guy, not a body builder but a bright young kid with passion and extreme mental talent.

    Mental Talent is definitely separate from Physical Talent, two different things combined in one Body and Soul; together they create one or "it". Who's got the "it" factor?

    Troy Williamson was definitely weak minded there was nothing wrong his physical talent, he was a little thin but not enough to prevent him from being extremely productive. All it is Honesty, I'm not trying to be a jerk to Troy Williamson, in fact I love Troy Williamson as a Human. The truth is he lacked mental toughness and ability, nothing was wrong with his hands physically, he had all his fingers and normal hand size, and he was worked on by the Nike Camp. The reason I new Troy was lacking mental game had to do with his inconsistencies, he caught some very good passes, some tough catches, deep passes, a few great games ect. The problem was Mental Weakness, a lack of consistent focus and confidence. All going back to his mental ability. Physically nothing was wrong with Troy for expect maybe some Hamstring or Groin problems. His eyes were fine, I used to think that was an excuse but eventually it was a big joke. The biggest thing Williamson had to overcome was his own Mental Game.

    Mental Talent is not undefinable, although I did say that it’s hard to gauge or identify, its invisible to some but a job to identify for others.

    The draft is definitely a Crap Shoot for teams with poor talent evaluators. Like you said teams do what they do to scout the players, all teams draft boards are different, nobody is the same. Some are better than others, it's less of a crap shoot to them, they hit often, to others is a complete Crap Shoot, couldn't draft to save their lives...

    Our current organization, the combination of Brad Childress, Rick Spielman and Scott Studwell are an impressive group IMO. I'm thankful they have run our drafts the past 3 years and should for several years to come. I think we have one of the better Front Offices in the NFL due to our talent evaluating abilities. This is what Childess means when he has to get the "feel" for someone, the Mental Game. It's all guess work like you said but some are better at it then others, thats a no brainer.

    You have no idea what they'll do but you can pick and prod my posts as if you know exactly what.... I can understand if you’re talking about Harvin, maybe you never seen what he can do, or there is a lack of research. Rice has made some incredible plays and displayed huge potential and did it with production on the NFL Level. All you do is "hope"
    then wait to see it... Speculation is fun, its even better when you’re right. I just have a hard time believing you when you say you don't know, you don't even have an idea? Are you worried you might be wrong? The wait and see approach is great but it’s definitely the cautious route.

    I can define anything I want, it’s called speculation and guess work, its OK if you don't agree with it, just say I don't agree. Nobody tells me what to do, especially in terms of predicting and whatnot. Just say I don't believe you can do that. I respect that and could care less, it don't affect my mind set. I still define things in my own opinion, I never made it law on PP.O so Chill out. I'm not forcing it down anyone’s throat.

    The only players who manifest their potential are those with a high level of mental talent, hence why it’s very important and the biggest factor right behind possessing the minimal physical ability. Again Williamson had high physical talent and very low mental talent, obviously it didn't work out, you can't have one without the other, it is truly a combination.

    In Caine's mind there is nothing to define Harvin and Rice, IMO there is. It's as simple as a difference in opinion. I have a definition for both players, I know them pretty well. Some people need to see production to define, not me, I don't have to see it to believe it or know it.

    Everything I said in the Ryan Leaf paragraph supports what I've been saying the entire time. Physical Potential means nothing without the Mental Game. Two different elements.

    My definitions are very very clear; anyone who may read this should have no problem. If they do, It wouldn’t surprise me, especially a biased eye. I never rejected the definition of potential; I just further described it in terms of what makes a great football player. The different Elements that you reject.

  5. #105
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,495

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    "Caine" wrote:


    Caine
    So according to you my definition of Potential is inaccurate, I can accept that but I will never agree with it. Potential is a combination of Physical Material, the physical being combined with the Conscious Talent that controls the physical material aka Human Body.

    Potential and Talent do not exist in an undefined state. Potential and Talent are defined by Talent Evaluators all over the world, on the collegiate and NFL levels. It can certainly be defined and determined, predicted or speculated on.

    It was fact that 12 years ago Adrian Peterson was going to become what he is, it was destined to happen, he had the entire package, he had the "it" factor that must be identified and defined. Cris Carter had the "it" factor and I believe both Sindey Rice and Percy Harvin have the same Talents.

    Mental Talent is by far the majority; it’s the controlling factor of the physical body. However it is true you must have the physical ability to compete, and then it’s the mental talent that takes you where you need be. The conscious is all controlling over the physical body or naturally gifted tools.

    There is a sure fire formula and it equals the "it" factor. A solid combination of physical and mental talent leads to great success. A serious lack of one or the other is detrimental to the potential. Randy Moss had it all, mental talent and serious physical ability, the combination lead to Hall of Famer. Rod Woodson, very talented mentally good physical structure.

    Potential is only deceptive to those who believe it to be. -TW

    No, I said "Physical" Potential does not determine success, what kind of potential are you talking about? There are certainly different elements; it’s unfortunate that you have a hard time comprehending. The combination of both mental and physical potential/talent will equate the results. You can't have success until you have both in check; remember I'm a Jockey Physically, that prevented me from being a MLB in the NFL. You have to have the entire package.

    The potential in the Webster’s dictionary is going to be completely irrelevant to this discussion but accurate, I don't disagree with it. I think for starters everyone has Potential, EVERYONE. Whether that potential is fulfilled is another story. The elements of potential in football players is obviously going to be described differently than the Elements it takes to successfully build a computer, design an internet website, or create software. Physically there is hardly any preference, mental is most everything. Right now we are talking about Football Players, so first off they have to physically be a presence, and then mentally they can work there physical being. Again most is mental but in Football it’s vital to have at least the minimal physical tools. The different Elements of a player’s talent pool will determine his future. It's normally a combination that leads to the "it factor".

    The Mental Talent is a completely different entity than the physical body; they are actually two in one but dependent on each other. There is Mind then Body, once the Mind is gone the body no longer functions, but the body remains physically present for a certain time period. Mental Talent-Potential and Physical Talent-Potential are definitely different elements.


    I couldn't agree more about Potential being just potential until he produces, potential and production are two different things, just because you have potential doesn't mean you have produced. But keep in mind it doesn't mean one won't produce. That’s where I stand with Harvin and Rice, Rice has already produced, but not to full potential. Harvin just got drafted, he hasn't even had the opportunity on the NFL Level but he dominated college and looks to keep going.

    Potential is everything, like you stated before if half the teams would have known what Brady was going to develop into they would have drafted him early. The problem was that the Potential was underrated, all along Tom Brady had tremendous Potential because of his Mental Game. Not a fast guy, not a body builder but a bright young kid with passion and extreme mental talent.

    Mental Talent is definitely separate from Physical Talent, two different things combined in one Body and Soul; together they create one or "it". Who's got the "it" factor?

    Troy Williamson was definitely weak minded there was nothing wrong his physical talent, he was a little thin but not enough to prevent him from being extremely productive. All it is Honesty, I'm not trying to be a jerk to Troy Williamson, in fact I love Troy Williamson as a Human. The truth is he lacked mental toughness and ability, nothing was wrong with his hands physically, he had all his fingers and normal hand size, and he was worked on by the Nike Camp. The reason I new Troy was lacking mental game had to do with his inconsistencies, he caught some very good passes, some tough catches, deep passes, a few great games ect. The problem was Mental Weakness, a lack of consistent focus and confidence. All going back to his mental ability. Physically nothing was wrong with Troy for expect maybe some Hamstring or Groin problems. His eyes were fine, I used to think that was an excuse but eventually it was a big joke. The biggest thing Williamson had to overcome was his own Mental Game.

    Mental Talent is not undefinable, although I did say that it’s hard to gauge or identify, its invisible to some but a job to identify for others.

    The draft is definitely a Crap Shoot for teams with poor talent evaluators. Like you said teams do what they do to scout the players, all teams draft boards are different, nobody is the same. Some are better than others, it's less of a crap shoot to them, they hit often, to others is a complete Crap Shoot, couldn't draft to save their lives...

    Our current organization, the combination of Brad Childress, Rick Spielman and Scott Studwell are an impressive group IMO. I'm thankful they have run our drafts the past 3 years and should for several years to come. I think we have one of the better Front Offices in the NFL due to our talent evaluating abilities. This is what Childess means when he has to get the "feel" for someone, the Mental Game. It's all guess work like you said but some are better at it then others, thats a no brainer.

    You have no idea what they'll do but you can pick and prod my posts as if you know exactly what.... I can understand if you’re talking about Harvin, maybe you never seen what he can do, or there is a lack of research. Rice has made some incredible plays and displayed huge potential and did it with production on the NFL Level. All you do is "hope"
    then wait to see it... Speculation is fun, its even better when you’re right. I just have a hard time believing you when you say you don't know, you don't even have an idea? Are you worried you might be wrong? The wait and see approach is great but it’s definitely the cautious route.

    I can define anything I want, it’s called speculation and guess work, its OK if you don't agree with it, just say I don't agree. Nobody tells me what to do, especially in terms of predicting and whatnot. Just say I don't believe you can do that. I respect that and could care less, it don't affect my mind set. I still define things in my own opinion, I never made it law on PP.O so Chill out. I'm not forcing it down anyone’s throat.

    The only players who manifest their potential are those with a high level of mental talent, hence why it’s very important and the biggest factor right behind possessing the minimal physical ability. Again Williamson had high physical talent and very low mental talent, obviously it didn't work out, you can't have one without the other, it is truly a combination.

    In Caine's mind there is nothing to define Harvin and Rice, IMO there is. It's as simple as a difference in opinion. I have a definition for both players, I know them pretty well. Some people need to see production to define, not me, I don't have to see it to believe it or know it.

    Everything I said in the Ryan Leaf paragraph supports what I've been saying the entire time. Physical Potential means nothing without the Mental Game. Two different elements.

    My definitions are very very clear; anyone who may read this should have no problem. If they do, It wouldn’t surprise me, especially a biased eye. I never rejected the definition of potential; I just further described it in terms of what makes a great football player. The different Elements that you reject.
    Eh, take Caine with a grain of salt. He likes to sit on his thrown in Wisconsin and believe his opinion is right on everything.

    Don't tell him the world expands beyond Wisconsin.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  6. #106
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    "Caine" wrote:


    Caine
    snip
    WOT...... ;D
    Even though I don't agree with all your points, worth the read.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  7. #107
    VikingsTw is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,144

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    Of course it matters who starts, if Rice is healthy he's definitly going to be the starter and we need him to do what he was drafted for. Rice is an explosive player, we need his production. If we have to watch an average Bobby Wade, thats what our Passing game will reflect. We need Harvin and Rice to take us to the next level in the passing game.

    I think Rice is definitly the #2 Barring injury, and thats key, he has had issues in that department. I think he will outgrow that, become a man and leader.

    Harvin is likely to be #3, we need to get him the ball as much as possible, super explosive, use him as Punt Returner also, making us a better specail teams unit.
    Again with the #1, #2, #3 designations.
    I give up on this.

    :'( :'( :'(

    As to who starts, you realize that last year our "Starters were"......

    BB






    Hicks
    Hutch

    Birk
    Herrera
    Cook





    Rice




















    TJ











    Shanc





















    FB (whats his name)




















    AD

    And our opening set was........

    BB






    Hicks
    Hutch

    Birk
    Herrera
    Cook














    Sauce







    TJ










    Shanc





















    FB (whats his name)




















    AD

    What did it matter that Rice was our "Starter"?
    Absolutely nothing My Sexy Little Pixie.
    Again, it all gets back do packages, sets and what the staff wants to do and has nothing to do with who is the best or not.

    What do mean what does it matter? Would you rather have Sidney Rice be the starter or Bobby Wade? According to the Poll for this Thread, people want to see Rice step up his game and a very high percentage believe he's the man for #2.

    The problem with Wade in on certain sets is a predicimate you send to the defense. Wade does not scare any DB's, but he is a good run blocker, alot of times we dictate what we are doing with our offensive personal. This really needs to change, Rice needs to be a full time starter, a consistent threat anywhere on the field and a good run blocker. We need a true #1 and #2, the defenses don't get so cocky when they don't know whats coming.

    I think the bottom line is that Bobby Wade's reps are going to be cut back tremendously if Rice and Harvin are a go. I would be really surprised if he started a game if nobody was injured. I would like to see Wade in on certain sets but by no means as the only WR or an outside WR. We need to be consistent with our starters, and leave the guess work for the defense as to what we are running. Our recent playcalling can be easily predicted by the personal we send on the field. We have to get less predictable.

  8. #108
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    What do mean what does it matter? Would you rather have Sidney Rice be the starter or Bobby Wade? According to the Poll for this Thread, people want to see Rice step up his game and a very high percentage believe he's the man for #2.
    OK, lets define starter.
    To me it is the guy who is on the field for the first snap.
    After that, down and distance dictactes who is on the field based on thier skill set.

    By the way, much like Coaching staffs, I don't give a squat what a poll says.
    What the hell do yutz's like me know about the chess game O-coords play against D-Coords.

    Again, its all about taking advantage of what is on the field and the weakness of that personel package.

    The problem with Wade in on certain sets is a predicimate you send to the defense. Wade does not scare any DB's, but he is a good run blocker, alot of times we dictate what we are doing with our offensive personal. This really needs to change, Rice needs to be a full time starter, a consistent threat anywhere on the field and a good run blocker. We need a true #1 and #2, the defenses don't get so cocky when they don't know whats coming.
    Again with the #1 and #2 mindset.
    Lets see if we can get rid of that.
    Were does the #1 and #2 lineup in the WCO?

    As to your points.
    Sure, B-wade doesn't scare a DB when it comes to a deep route but trust me, he gives them fits when/if he is on the field and the staff is in a 1rst and short with a package like this.......

    X








    LT



    LG



    C


    RG

    RT





    Y






    Z





















    QB








    TE



































    RB

    I think the bottom line is that Bobby Wade's reps are going to be cut back tremendously if Rice and Harvin are a go. I would be really surprised if he started a game if nobody was injured. I would like to see Wade in on certain sets but by no means as the only WR or an outside WR. We need to be consistent with our starters, and leave the guess work for the defense as to what we are running. Our recent playcalling can be easily predicted by the personal we send on the field. We have to get less predictable.
    Agree 100% with respect to both Rice and PH's progress.

    Problem is, I think you believe that the staff had B-wade playing the Z because they believe he is a Z when in fact he was playing the Z out of necessity based on our Z's injuries/inability to get off the line cleanly.

    What I see here (not trying to put words in your mouth) is a prime example of another player stepping up (much the way Ray and Keneche have done) and playing out of position and then getting maligned because of it.

    B-wade is a damn good slot guy who can if needed step out and play a Wideout position if called upon.
    Nothing more nothing less.
    Heck, if push came to shove, I bet even ole Bobby would love to move back into his normal position with Rice on the outside being productive as that would open up the middle for him to exploit seams/gaps in the coverage as he is inteneded to do as dictated by the scheme.

    As to predictability, I don't think our alignments are what make us predictable.
    IMHO it has always been what can be executed (or what can't) that has made us predictable not so much as who is on the field in those packages.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #109
    bleedpurple is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,951

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    What do mean what does it matter? Would you rather have Sidney Rice be the starter or Bobby Wade? According to the Poll for this Thread, people want to see Rice step up his game and a very high percentage believe he's the man for #2.
    OK, lets define starter.
    To me it is the guy who is on the field for the first snap.
    After that, down and distance dictactes who is on the field based on thier skill set.

    By the way, much like Coaching staffs, I don't give a squat what a poll says.
    What the hell do yutz's like me know about the chess game O-coords play against D-Coords.

    Again, its all about taking advantage of what is on the field and the weakness of that personel package.

    The problem with Wade in on certain sets is a predicimate you send to the defense. Wade does not scare any DB's, but he is a good run blocker, alot of times we dictate what we are doing with our offensive personal. This really needs to change, Rice needs to be a full time starter, a consistent threat anywhere on the field and a good run blocker. We need a true #1 and #2, the defenses don't get so cocky when they don't know whats coming.
    Again with the #1 and #2 mindset.
    Lets see if we can get rid of that.

    Were does the #1 and #2 lineup in the WCO?

    As to your points.
    Sure, B-wade doesn't scare a DB when it comes to a deep route but trust me, he gives them fits when/if he is on the field and the staff is in a 1rst and short with a package like this.......

    X








    LT



    LG



    C


    RG


    RT





    Y






    Z






















    QB








    TE





































    RB

    I think the bottom line is that Bobby Wade's reps are going to be cut back tremendously if Rice and Harvin are a go. I would be really surprised if he started a game if nobody was injured. I would like to see Wade in on certain sets but by no means as the only WR or an outside WR. We need to be consistent with our starters, and leave the guess work for the defense as to what we are running. Our recent playcalling can be easily predicted by the personal we send on the field. We have to get less predictable.
    Agree 100% with respect to both Rice and PH's progress.

    Problem is, I think you believe that the staff had B-wade playing the Z because they believe he is a Z when in fact he was playing the Z out of necessity based on our Z's injuries/inability to get off the line cleanly.

    What I see here (not trying to put words in your mouth) is a prime example of another player stepping up (much the way Ray and Keneche have done) and playing out of position and then getting maligned because of it.

    B-wade is a gol 'darnit good slot guy who can if needed step out and play a Wideout position if called upon.
    Nothing more nothing less.
    Heck, if push came to shove, I bet even ole Bobby would love to move back into his normal position with Rice on the outside being productive as that would open up the middle for him to exploit seams/gaps in the coverage as he is inteneded to do as dictated by the scheme.

    As to predictability, I don't think our alignments are what make us predictable.
    IMHO it has always been what can be executed (or what can't) that has made us predictable not so much as who is on the field in those packages.
    He may be a good slot receiver, and he may also in deed prefer the slot role... but in my opinion, if Rice does what he needs to do and develops like he's supposed to in year 3, i dont' see how b.wade gets on the field, seeing as how Percy harvin will/is gonna be a better slot option basically bc of his speed and the match up problem he creates going up against a safety...

    as you all know i'm no fan of Wade, but i honestly would rather see those guys in the game than wade... stricking fear or not, we now have better options for that #3 option or Y receiver which is splitting the shit out of hairs if you ask me!!!

  10. #110
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin competing for the starting spot

    "bleedpurple" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    What do mean what does it matter? Would you rather have Sidney Rice be the starter or Bobby Wade? According to the Poll for this Thread, people want to see Rice step up his game and a very high percentage believe he's the man for #2.
    OK, lets define starter.
    To me it is the guy who is on the field for the first snap.
    After that, down and distance dictactes who is on the field based on thier skill set.

    By the way, much like Coaching staffs, I don't give a squat what a poll says.
    What the hell do yutz's like me know about the chess game O-coords play against D-Coords.

    Again, its all about taking advantage of what is on the field and the weakness of that personel package.

    The problem with Wade in on certain sets is a predicimate you send to the defense. Wade does not scare any DB's, but he is a good run blocker, alot of times we dictate what we are doing with our offensive personal. This really needs to change, Rice needs to be a full time starter, a consistent threat anywhere on the field and a good run blocker. We need a true #1 and #2, the defenses don't get so cocky when they don't know whats coming.
    Again with the #1 and #2 mindset.
    Lets see if we can get rid of that.

    Were does the #1 and #2 lineup in the WCO?

    As to your points.
    Sure, B-wade doesn't scare a DB when it comes to a deep route but trust me, he gives them fits when/if he is on the field and the staff is in a 1rst and short with a package like this.......

    X








    LT



    LG



    C


    RG


    RT





    Y






    Z






















    QB








    TE





































    RB

    I think the bottom line is that Bobby Wade's reps are going to be cut back tremendously if Rice and Harvin are a go. I would be really surprised if he started a game if nobody was injured. I would like to see Wade in on certain sets but by no means as the only WR or an outside WR. We need to be consistent with our starters, and leave the guess work for the defense as to what we are running. Our recent playcalling can be easily predicted by the personal we send on the field. We have to get less predictable.
    Agree 100% with respect to both Rice and PH's progress.

    Problem is, I think you believe that the staff had B-wade playing the Z because they believe he is a Z when in fact he was playing the Z out of necessity based on our Z's injuries/inability to get off the line cleanly.

    What I see here (not trying to put words in your mouth) is a prime example of another player stepping up (much the way Ray and Keneche have done) and playing out of position and then getting maligned because of it.

    B-wade is a gol 'darnit good slot guy who can if needed step out and play a Wideout position if called upon.
    Nothing more nothing less.
    Heck, if push came to shove, I bet even ole Bobby would love to move back into his normal position with Rice on the outside being productive as that would open up the middle for him to exploit seams/gaps in the coverage as he is inteneded to do as dictated by the scheme.

    As to predictability, I don't think our alignments are what make us predictable.
    IMHO it has always been what can be executed (or what can't) that has made us predictable not so much as who is on the field in those packages.
    He may be a good slot receiver, and he may also in deed prefer the slot role... but in my opinion, if Rice does what he needs to do and develops like he's supposed to in year 3, i dont' see how b.wade gets on the field, seeing as how Percy harvin will/is gonna be a better slot option basically bc of his speed and the match up problem he creates going up against a safety...
    as you all know i'm no fan of Wade, but i honestly would rather see those guys in the game than wade... stricking fear or not, we now have better options for that #3 option or Y receiver which is splitting the pooh out of hairs if you ask me!!!
    But that is a point of discussion that I agree with......

    If one were to make a assumption that it will take PH 2 to 3 years to finally get it (I hope its one but I doubt it) then yes, B-wade now becomes expendable at or around when his contract is due (5 year contract signed in 2007).

    IMHO that is a great move by the staff addressing that position early enough to give PH time as well as to have B-wade in the fold for PH to watch/learn from.

    But if you want to sit here and try to discuss the skillsets of B-wade vs Rice, well, you kindof loose me as it is kindof silly when one really thinks about it.
    Shouldn't be a contest between the two of them.
    One is a X and one is a Z.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Percy Harvin vs. Sidney Rice Official Thread
    By b_sandhar_29 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-16-2009, 01:43 AM
  2. Percy Harvin
    By hav0x in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 1176
    Last Post: 08-12-2009, 04:58 AM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-03-2009, 09:28 PM
  4. Sidney Rice gets starting nod in 2008
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 06-05-2008, 06:32 AM

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
  •