Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 52
  1. #41
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    Which is it?
    Check the dates on those. Between them I did some research and was enlighted by someone on this site about how little we actually have our Mike on the field.

    Believe it or not, I know its a hard concept for you to understand (.....snicker...... ), I changed my mind in between them based on those two tidbits along with my findings on how poorly EJ played (at first) and how much better he played after the Chiller took over when he moved back to the Mike after playing outside for a spell.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  2. #42
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Marrdro View Post
    So now he's going to be given a shot at a spot behind those guys. Isn't that a bit different than your contention that the signing of this bust for a mere pittance is a indication that they are going to trade one of them?

    You tell me who he is going to beat out and make the 53 day roster and I will relent on my contention that he is camp fodder.

    To be anything other than CAMP FODDER he will have to make the roster and I don't see that happening.
    My contention was never that he was signed to replace Allen or Robison. I had said that one of those two could possibly be traded and Griffen put in to start.

    My guess is he could beat out George Johnson (who?) who is 2nd on the depth chart behind Robison or D'Aundre Reed who is 3rd on the chart. Currently no one is behind Griffen at the RDE.

    BTW, I find it interesting that you labeled Jackson as a bust when you just claimed some of our picks who are no longer with the team can't be busts because they are on another team?

    Isn't Jackson on our team? You know, thru this thing you think I forgot called FREE AGENCY?
    Last edited by singersp; 05-03-2013 at 08:28 AM.

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

  3. #43
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally Posted by Marrdro View Post
    Check the dates on those. Between them I did some research and was enlighted by someone on this site about how little we actually have our Mike on the field.

    Believe it or not, I know its a hard concept for you to understand (.....snicker...... ), I changed my mind in between them based on those two tidbits along with my findings on how poorly EJ played (at first) and how much better he played after the Chiller took over when he moved back to the Mike after playing outside for a spell.

    Question. Not ripping on either of you, just wondering. Would we have our mike on the field more if he was faster in coverage, or would we continue to keep him in tight for the run?
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

  4. #44
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    My contention was never that he was signed to replace Allen or Robison. I had said that one of those two could possibly be traded and Griffen put in to start.

    My guess is he could beat out George Johnson (who?) who is 2nd on the depth chart behind Robison or D'Aundre Reed who is 3rd on the chart. Currently no one is behind Griffen at the RDE.
    I can't see Allen getting traded, but as much as I like Rob, I could see that happening. He has shown he can play the position at a high level, His contract is not too cumbersome, and he is relatively young. Making that possible was Griff playing as well as he did when given the opportunity last year.
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

  5. #45
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916
    Quote Originally Posted by marshallvike View Post
    Question. Not ripping on either of you, just wondering. Would we have our mike on the field more if he was faster in coverage, or would we continue to keep him in tight for the run?
    I'm not sure if I have the answer old friend. I'm still doing more on the "Research" I mentioned. i'm actually trying to see what other 4-3 defenses do around the league.

    I can tell you that my early findings (data is at home) show that the Mike regardless of who he is, is on the field alot in the base as long as the team is behind or pretty close in the score.

    When he comes off, when the other team is behind and they are chucking ball around alot and not just in obvious passing downs 2nd & long, 3rd & long.

    What I'm not sure of is if that is a shift from how they used to do it back in the day or is it something that always happens. Pretty hard to figure that out.

    My guess is that its always been that way because it isn't like the Mike is, or has, been a option in pass coverage other than trying to stay with a TE or RB.

    Have there been a select few over the years that can run with a WR and still play the run, sure, but not that many.

    EDIT...On a side note, you can rip on me all you want as long as we are talking football.......
    Last edited by Marrdro; 05-03-2013 at 08:42 AM.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #46
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by marshallvike View Post
    I can't see Allen getting traded, but as much as I like Rob, I could see that happening. He has shown he can play the position at a high level, His contract is not too cumbersome, and he is relatively young. Making that possible was Griff playing as well as he did when given the opportunity last year.
    Just to clarify. Those trade talks I was speaking of were post day 1 draft & pre-day 2 draft thinking they would use 1 or the other as trade bait for some day 2 picks to grab a MLB.

    Now that the draft is over, they won't trade them this year.

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

  7. #47
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    Just to clarify. Those trade talks I was speaking of were post day 1 draft & pre-day 2 draft thinking they would use 1 or the other as trade bait for some day 2 picks to grab a MLB.

    Now that the draft is over, they won't trade them this year.
    Trying to worm your way out now I see.....snicker......JK. Couldn't resist that one.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  8. #48
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Marrdro View Post
    Check the dates on those. Between them I did some research and was enlighted by someone on this site about how little we actually have our Mike on the field.

    Believe it or not, I know its a hard concept for you to understand (.....snicker...... ), I changed my mind in between them based on those two tidbits along with my findings on how poorly EJ played (at first) and how much better he played after the Chiller took over when he moved back to the Mike after playing outside for a spell.
    Marty change his mind after being enlightened? I would have never guessed that! LOL!

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

  9. #49
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Marrdro View Post
    Trying to worm your way out now I see.....snicker......JK. Couldn't resist that one.
    Not at all. You can even go back & check out the post. Might be in the T'eo thread.

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

  10. #50
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    Just to clarify. Those trade talks I was speaking of were post day 1 draft & pre-day 2 draft thinking they would use 1 or the other as trade bait for some day 2 picks to grab a MLB.

    Now that the draft is over, they won't trade them this year.
    I remember that talk going on. I may just be messed up in my old head, but are teams allowed to trade vets during the draft? I thought I remembered hearing a couple of years ago that vets could not be traded during the draft. I can't think of any of those type of trades in the past few years. Again it may just be something my head made up on me.
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

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
  •