Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 55
  1. #21
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,686

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "JPPT1974" wrote:
    The OL needs to better protect Jackson as Birk can't be there all the time.
    I don't think it's the interior of the line's pass protection abilities anyone is concerned about.

    McKinnie, Cook, Chase Johnson.... there's your concern list.

  2. #22
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,216

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    It has been for 2 seasons. Going into this season is no different
    A huge overstatement. To be more worried about the OL than Jackson is ludicrous.

    I will admit depth is lacking but still not very worried.
    Not! Our O-Line has not been what it should be for 3 years. Remember what it was like in 2005? Remember waiting for it to gel all year long in 2006? It was questionable last year as well. Especially on the right side & McKinnie getting beat on pass rushes.

    They gave up 38 sacks last year alone.

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

  3. #23
    jargomcfargo's Avatar
    jargomcfargo is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,776

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    It has been for 2 seasons. Going into this season is no different
    A huge overstatement. To be more worried about the OL than Jackson is ludicrous.

    I will admit depth is lacking but still not very worried.
    What is actually ludicrous is to continually contend that there is nothing wrong with an OL that had had Johnson,
    Holcolm, Bollinger, and Jackson all under center and has consistently produced the same results. Pressure from the ends by underwhelming pass blocking at the OT position that creates an environment where the QB has no time to get set, make reads or get in any sort of a comfort zone. I am sure when Bollinger came in that game and got sacked 3 consecutive times and never got a chance to set his feet, that the problem was his and the line did nothing wrong. I disagree.

    That is 100% on the OL.

    You will also notice that the time you state in another post that the line started doing well and put us on a winning streak was also the time we went to a 2 TE formation much more often where we kept the TE's in to bail out the OT's and buy the QB a little more time. When the line can pass block without keeping in extra blockers to help out those who cannot do their job by themselves we will have a much better passing game whether the QB is Jackson, Frerrotte, Booty, Farve, mcNabb or whoever the flavor of the day is.

    If the line cannot block without extra help, it doesn't matter who is under center, just like it hasn't so far, because nobody will be successful.
    I was watching a replay of New England from last season. They set the standard to which I hold our line to.
    Our line has a ways to go.
    It's easy to see the difference between 8-8 and 16-0 in just the line play alone.
    Brady is great. But except for the superbowl, he usually has a large pocket, and all day to survey the field.
    We have an excellent run blocking line. But I agree completely with you. They need to improve their pass blocking.
    I'm still predicting a loss for every game Hicks starts and plays at tackle!
    I also believe Tarvaris is still the biggest concern. But his line needs to help him out a little more on pass protection.
    “What takes a quarterback to the next level is not arm strength or mobility or any of that stuff. It’s the ability to play on critical downs. Manage third downs, or red zones or four-minute or two-minute situations"
    Dilfer

  4. #24
    olson_10's Avatar
    olson_10 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,215

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    the line needs to step up this year, but theyre nowhere near being as much of a concern as jackson
    People who see life as anything more than pure entertainment are missing the point.

  5. #25
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    It has been for 2 seasons. Going into this season is no different
    A huge overstatement. To be more worried about the OL than Jackson is ludicrous.

    I will admit depth is lacking but still not very worried.
    What is actually ludicrous is to continually contend that there is nothing wrong with an OL that had had Johnson,
    Holcolm, Bollinger, and Jackson all under center and has consistently produced the same results. Pressure from the ends by underwhelming pass blocking at the OT position that creates an environment where the QB has no time to get set, make reads or get in any sort of a comfort zone. I am sure when Bollinger came in that game and got sacked 3 consecutive times and never got a chance to set his feet, that the problem was his and the line did nothing wrong. I disagree.

    That is 100% on the OL.

    You will also notice that the time you state in another post that the line started doing well and put us on a winning streak was also the time we went to a 2 TE formation much more often where we kept the TE's in to bail out the OT's and buy the QB a little more time. When the line can pass block without keeping in extra blockers to help out those who cannot do their job by themselves we will have a much better passing game whether the QB is Jackson, Frerrotte, Booty, Farve, mcNabb or whoever the flavor of the day is.

    If the line cannot block without extra help, it doesn't matter who is under center, just like it hasn't so far, because nobody will be successful.
    If Johnson, Bollinger, Holcomb, and Jackson were actually good quarterbacks, but the OL was holding them back, I could understand your point. It simply wasn't the case. Just as much as the OL suffered, our QBs looked completely lost back there. We've argued about this many times this offseason and we both know where we stand.

    I can understand concerns about the OL, but am I more worried about them than TJ? Hell No. Get a QB who can beat the blitz (gasp!) or call an audible when he sees one, or scramble to evade a collapsing pocket instead of jumping straight up in the air. Those are some of the things that make good QBs good, and none of our past four QBs had those qualities.

    Sure we saw a lot of our Tackles getting beat by edge rushers. We also saw a lot of coverage sacks, and a lot of confusion by our quarterbacks. I'm not going to ignore one because the other exists.

    For the record, I have admitted that our OL play isn't perfect, but I simply believe those problems won't be an issue if we see improved play from Jackson and WRs who can make plays.
    Isn't that pretty much expected when you basically have a first year starter in TJ, A never has been in Holcomb, and a Wisconsin QB who got by because of the running game in college.

  6. #26
    Chazz is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    782

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "Mr" wrote:
    "JPPT1974" wrote:
    The OL needs to better protect Jackson as Birk can't be there all the time.
    I don't think it's the interior of the line's pass protection abilities anyone is concerned about.

    McKinnie, Cook, Chase Johnson.... there's your concern list.
    Exactly...Birk does get pushed around some by the bigger DT(Rogers ate him up), but I'm not concerned about him. Hutch...nuff said. Herrara's play was solid.

  7. #27
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "jargomcfargo" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    It has been for 2 seasons. Going into this season is no different
    A huge overstatement. To be more worried about the OL than Jackson is ludicrous.

    I will admit depth is lacking but still not very worried.
    What is actually ludicrous is to continually contend that there is nothing wrong with an OL that had had Johnson,
    Holcolm, Bollinger, and Jackson all under center and has consistently produced the same results. Pressure from the ends by underwhelming pass blocking at the OT position that creates an environment where the QB has no time to get set, make reads or get in any sort of a comfort zone. I am sure when Bollinger came in that game and got sacked 3 consecutive times and never got a chance to set his feet, that the problem was his and the line did nothing wrong. I disagree.

    That is 100% on the OL.

    You will also notice that the time you state in another post that the line started doing well and put us on a winning streak was also the time we went to a 2 TE formation much more often where we kept the TE's in to bail out the OT's and buy the QB a little more time. When the line can pass block without keeping in extra blockers to help out those who cannot do their job by themselves we will have a much better passing game whether the QB is Jackson, Frerrotte, Booty, Farve, mcNabb or whoever the flavor of the day is.

    If the line cannot block without extra help, it doesn't matter who is under center, just like it hasn't so far, because nobody will be successful.
    I was watching a replay of New England from last season. They set the standard to which I hold our line to.
    Our line has a ways to go.
    It's easy to see the difference between 8-8 and 16-0 in just the line play alone.
    Brady is great. But except for the superbowl, he usually has a large pocket, and all day to survey the field.
    We have an excellent run blocking line. But I agree completely with you. They need to improve their pass blocking.
    I'm still predicting a loss for every game Hicks starts and plays at tackle!
    I also believe Tarvaris is still the biggest concern. But his line needs to help him out a little more on pass protection.
    In that case I hope Chase starts.

  8. #28
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,216

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "V" wrote:

    If Johnson, Bollinger, Holcomb, and Jackson were actually good quarterbacks, but the OL was holding them back, I could understand your point. It simply wasn't the case. Just as much as the OL suffered, our QBs looked completely lost back there. We've argued about this many times this offseason and we both know where we stand.

    I can understand concerns about the OL, but am I more worried about them than TJ? Hell No. Get a QB who can beat the blitz (gasp!) or call an audible when he sees one, or scramble to evade a collapsing pocket instead of jumping straight up in the air. Those are some of the things that make good QBs good, and none of our past four QBs had those qualities.

    Sure we saw a lot of our Tackles getting beat by edge rushers. We also saw a lot of coverage sacks, and a lot of confusion by our quarterbacks. I'm not going to ignore one because the other exists.

    For the record, I have admitted that our OL play isn't perfect, but I simply believe those problems won't be an issue if we see improved play from Jackson and WRs who can make plays.

    Um, he did exactly just that & people whined about it. He ran 54 times when the pocket broke down (minus the designed sneaks) for 260 YDS in 12 games & threw only one jump ball.

    I find it comical how people here tend to dwell on that one jump ball (not you in particular V) & try to make it sound as if it's the norm rather than the exception.

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

  9. #29
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "jargomcfargo" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    It has been for 2 seasons. Going into this season is no different
    A huge overstatement. To be more worried about the OL than Jackson is ludicrous.

    I will admit depth is lacking but still not very worried.
    What is actually ludicrous is to continually contend that there is nothing wrong with an OL that had had Johnson,
    Holcolm, Bollinger, and Jackson all under center and has consistently produced the same results. Pressure from the ends by underwhelming pass blocking at the OT position that creates an environment where the QB has no time to get set, make reads or get in any sort of a comfort zone. I am sure when Bollinger came in that game and got sacked 3 consecutive times and never got a chance to set his feet, that the problem was his and the line did nothing wrong. I disagree.

    That is 100% on the OL.

    You will also notice that the time you state in another post that the line started doing well and put us on a winning streak was also the time we went to a 2 TE formation much more often where we kept the TE's in to bail out the OT's and buy the QB a little more time. When the line can pass block without keeping in extra blockers to help out those who cannot do their job by themselves we will have a much better passing game whether the QB is Jackson, Frerrotte, Booty, Farve, mcNabb or whoever the flavor of the day is.

    If the line cannot block without extra help, it doesn't matter who is under center, just like it hasn't so far, because nobody will be successful.
    I was watching a replay of New England from last season. They set the standard to which I hold our line to.
    Our line has a ways to go.
    It's easy to see the difference between 8-8 and 16-0 in just the line play alone.
    Brady is great. But except for the superbowl, he usually has a large pocket, and all day to survey the field.
    We have an excellent run blocking line. But I agree completely with you. They need to improve their pass blocking.
    I'm still predicting a loss for every game Hicks starts and plays at tackle!
    I also believe Tarvaris is still the biggest concern. But his line needs to help him out a little more on pass protection.
    Exactly.

    If you look at the time that Brady, manning and even Farve have had in recent years, it is easy to see why they had the success they had. When the line gives them time to set up, the WR's time to get open and a clear lane the throw a QB can do great things with the ball. But when protection breaks down and they are forced to throw on the run before the WR's routes can develop, then the production drops off. Look at what Brady did in the SB when the line of the Giants got in and disrupted him. Look at what happened to brett against the Giants the week before. When our line can buy the team enough time to let plays develop then we will be successful.

    That being said, I really think that we need to do a hell of alot more screens to take the pressure off of the line. I think they have been a major part of the problems but not all of it. The best way to counter 8 in the box is with a screen pass that gets behind the defense quickly and makes them pay for the aggression. That and getting the TE more involved in quick hitting plays which will keep the OLB and the DE guessing where the play will go. I really don't understand why we didn't have a significant number of screens down the stretch last year when the defenses were set up to be burned by them.

  10. #30
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Vikings O-line more of a concern than Jackson?

    "marstc09" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    It has been for 2 seasons. Going into this season is no different
    A huge overstatement. To be more worried about the OL than Jackson is ludicrous.

    I will admit depth is lacking but still not very worried.
    What is actually ludicrous is to continually contend that there is nothing wrong with an OL that had had Johnson,
    Holcolm, Bollinger, and Jackson all under center and has consistently produced the same results. Pressure from the ends by underwhelming pass blocking at the OT position that creates an environment where the QB has no time to get set, make reads or get in any sort of a comfort zone. I am sure when Bollinger came in that game and got sacked 3 consecutive times and never got a chance to set his feet, that the problem was his and the line did nothing wrong. I disagree.

    That is 100% on the OL.

    You will also notice that the time you state in another post that the line started doing well and put us on a winning streak was also the time we went to a 2 TE formation much more often where we kept the TE's in to bail out the OT's and buy the QB a little more time. When the line can pass block without keeping in extra blockers to help out those who cannot do their job by themselves we will have a much better passing game whether the QB is Jackson, Frerrotte, Booty, Farve, mcNabb or whoever the flavor of the day is.

    If the line cannot block without extra help, it doesn't matter who is under center, just like it hasn't so far, because nobody will be successful.
    If Johnson, Bollinger, Holcomb, and Jackson were actually good quarterbacks, but the OL was holding them back, I could understand your point. It simply wasn't the case. Just as much as the OL suffered, our QBs looked completely lost back there. We've argued about this many times this offseason and we both know where we stand.

    I can understand concerns about the OL, but am I more worried about them than TJ? Hell No. Get a QB who can beat the blitz (gasp!) or call an audible when he sees one, or scramble to evade a collapsing pocket instead of jumping straight up in the air. Those are some of the things that make good QBs good, and none of our past four QBs had those qualities.

    Sure we saw a lot of our Tackles getting beat by edge rushers. We also saw a lot of coverage sacks, and a lot of confusion by our quarterbacks. I'm not going to ignore one because the other exists.

    For the record, I have admitted that our OL play isn't perfect, but I simply believe those problems won't be an issue if we see improved play from Jackson and WRs who can make plays.
    Isn't that pretty much expected when you basically have a first year starter in TJ, A never has been in Holcomb, and a Wisconsin QB who got by because of the running game in college.
    Exactly. It is expected when you have such bum-like play behind the line. Defenses don't respect our QBs and hence rush the crap out of us. Saying that all four QBs have suffered is true, but they suffered not because they had a crappy OL. They suffered because bad QBs suffer.

    My prime example would be David Carr, who apparently struggled because of his bad OL in Houston. Then he went to Carolina and still struggled. Now he a third stringer.

    If TJ progresses well enough he'll beat the blitzes and make plays despite pressure, much like the Giants and Broncos games. Then all of a sudden we won't have to keep in TEs to pick up extra blitzers.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Jackson a highlight of training camp, but pass defense, health issues a concern
    By singersp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-15-2008, 06:44 AM
  2. Four areas of concern for the Minnesota Vikings
    By COJOMAY in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 01-03-2008, 08:44 PM
  3. Vikings: Depth at linebacker becomes a concern
    By ultravikingfan in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-28-2006, 04:11 AM
  4. Vikings' actions concern Krause
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 05-05-2006, 09:51 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
  •