Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57
  1. #21
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "tastywaves" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.
    But that is wrong to think that way.
    Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

    If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

    Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.
    Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?

    Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.
    Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.
    Exactly

  2. #22
    mountainviking's Avatar
    mountainviking is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,841

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
    How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

    I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


    Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
    Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
    I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
    Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.
    Control the line, control the time, and give your D a chance to shine!!

    "Balance it on end and thats the third side of the coin!!" -wookiefoot

  3. #23
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,917

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "V" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Chazz" wrote:
    "vikings4life33" wrote:
    i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block
    Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.
    You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

    Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.
    We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

    Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

    Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.
    No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

    Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?

  4. #24
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Chazz" wrote:
    "vikings4life33" wrote:
    i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block
    Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.
    You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

    Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.
    We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

    Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

    Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.
    No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

    Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?
    Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. Bullshit. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, bullshit we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


    Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  5. #25
    Chazz is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    782

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "mountainviking" wrote:
    Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
    How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

    I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


    Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
    Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
    I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
    Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.

    You need to go back and take a good look at our game in Detroit. Childress wants to pass first, run second. He just hasn't had the talent to do it.

  6. #26
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "mountainviking" wrote:
    Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
    How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

    I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


    Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
    Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
    I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
    Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.
    I don't really agree with that. Westbrook and Buckhalter have been the backbone of their offense. The addition of TO put them almost over the top one year and having Stallworth helped but they sent those guys down the road. Who are their best 3 WR's?

    I would think if anything after having a limited talent pool to work with at Philly sans TO, that Chilly would go hard after WR;s to bolster the team. He doesn't have DM to put the team on his shoulders here.

    Yet

  7. #27
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,917

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "V" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Chazz" wrote:
    [quote author=vikings4life33 link=topic=44889.msg778144#msg778144 date=1210642867]
    i think with 8 or 9 in the box are TE's have to stay in and block
    Or...just run more 4 WR sets, then the most you can have in the box is 7.
    You are wasting your time. They belive that packing the box with extra blocks and few routes are the answer. Clearly the defense will quake in their boots at the extra blocks and retreat.

    Winslow would give our offense more flexability. He blocks extremely well. Better thank Shank who is average. We tried that last year...and our run game and pass game was destoryed.
    We didn't suck in the passing game because we ran conservative formations. We sucked because we had an inconsistent QB, and no legitimate options at WR. Wade is a slot guy. Rice was jsut coming into his own. Williamson sucked. We were forced to use conservative formations because Childress didn't want to take his best talent off of the field. Why sub out Richardson for Williamson, when he can catch better and block much better? Same goes for Shank. This year, we are hoping that the growth of Rice and TJ, and the addition of Berrian, is enough to propel our passing game. That's when you will see 3 WR sets. Adding a pass catching TE who is asked to be a block-first guy is pointless. I am not a fan of Shank, but at least he knows his role and plays it well.

    Also, please stop referring to Winslow as if he actually might come here. I only mentioned his name to exemplify a pass-catching TE type that we don't need. As far as giving our offense more flexability, let me just say that I was pissed when Wiggins left. I now realize that the coaches don't intend to use TE as a main receiving threat. You seem to be very player/talent based when analyzing teams. I'm sorry we didn't get the pass-catching TE you wanted, but the draft is over and so is FA for the most part. It's time to start thinking about how the coaches can make the most of the talent that we do have.

    Finally, we have a new WR, a new FB, a stellar RB with a year of experience under his belt, a good WR with a year of experience under his belt, and an average QB with 2 years of experience under his belt. That should be enough to make this offense better. Yet, because we have the same average TE, you ignore all of the upgrades I just mentioned and think that our offense will suck because we don't have Kellen Winslow. Good Riddance.
    No one was reering to Winslow as he miht come here. I was using him in the same context as you. The problem with this board is that people think because we ahve an amazing run game that having a below average passing game is ok. That is not the way the NFl works. If we want to be annual superbowl contenders, we need to have both. Look at all of the teams that are playing in January and you will see a lot of balance and a team that can't be stopped by simply stopping their strenghts. Shank is not a good TE. There is a reason he was not resigned and a new Te was drafted in NY. It wasn't because of salary believe that. However, we the Vikes love scraps on offense. Outside of the signing of Hutch and having AD foolishly fall into our laps, we haven't done squat to fix offense since we lost Moss and Burleson.

    Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys.... all of these teams have great runs games and potent passing games( Seatle not so much last year). We will not be true contenders untill we learn to be balance and improve the talent we have on offense. It' like the chragers saying...We have Lt we don't need Gates. Heck, they traded for a solid WR last year, what does that tell you?
    Ok, this post really pisses me off. You basically call everyone on our offense except for AD and Hutch worthless. kaka del rio. I agree that Shank is no better than average, but we've got guys like Birk, McKinnie, Herrera, Rice, Taylor, and Tapeh that you give absolutely no credit to. I won't stand for that. Also, kaka del rio we haven't done squat to fix the offense since we lost Moss and Burleson. Tony Richardson was brought in as a major upgrade at FB. Chester Taylor was also a new addition who has worked out very well. We brought in tons of QBs, but none have them have been the answer so far. We signed Koren Robinson, who blew it. We drafted Troy Williamson, who blew. We drafted Sidney Rice and TJ, who are showing promise. You think we made all those moves knowing they would be scraps? You think a guy like Moss is that easy to replace? For all you know Eric Johnson could be another Williamson. Please name the "scraps" on our offense. Please.


    Colts, Pats, Chargers, Giants, Seahawks, Cowboys... all of these teams have good to great coaches at their helm. Balance on the Vikigns can be acheived. We can use Wade, who is an above average slot receiver, and AD out of the backfield, we don't neccesarily need a pass-catching TE to make that happen. It is up to the coaches to employ the right schemes, formations, and strategies to make balance happen. I'll keep on mentioning coaching until you adress it. If we can't find a way to beat 8 in the box after all of our offensive upgrades this offseason, I'll place the blame on the coaches, while you whine about Shiancoe.
    [/quote]

    I never said that I said we haven't done anything to upgrade the offense since Moss left. Mac and Birk were here before Moss left I believe. I hope that is clear.

    Scraps of the Offense -
    BB, KH, Shank, Ferge, Hicks, and several of the Eagles off cast (been so many).

    Ibelieve his thread was about TEs not coaches, hence my focusing on them. I have mentioned that our coaching staff simply refuses to adjust in time to affect games. Since you brought up play calling and the fact that we need a Run blocking TE and not a pass catching TE, please enlighten me on how the Chargers are able to succeed with a pass catching TE on the field when teams are stacking the box to stop LT like they do Ad. When you have a player that is not an offensive threat on the field, Defenses start to gang up on your offensive threats. Smart teams realize that they must provide passing weapons and rushing weapons to win games, while we are so smug about our rushing game that we miss that teams we should of beat shut down the run and was happy to let Shank catch/drop a 5 yard pass.

    I'm sorry you are pissed off. I will go along with the " our offense is kick a$$" crew and ignore the fac tthat we lack talent at
    certain areas. We have way too many question marks to belive that our offense cannot be upgraded. I mean our savior at WR is a rookie that had 344 yard and 4 tds :. Think about that for a moment!

  8. #28
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "mountainviking" wrote:
    Don't the additions of Hutch, Tony Richardson, Chester Taylor, Adrian Peterson (when we already had a 1200yd RB), and maybe even the resigning of Ferguson, a blocking WR, speak toward a desire to run the ball?
    How about the lack of signing or drafting that "true No.1 WR" people have been pining for?? ??? ??

    I think there is a real, real good chance that Childress saw Reid's lack of running the ball as the biggest weakness in the Philly WCO, and vowed to change that in his!


    Improved play and more comfort in the system for Rice and AA combined with Berrian's upgrade over TWill should allow us to see more 3 or even 4 WR sets...to help us back off some of those defenders.
    Why even cover TWill when AP is so much more dangerous?
    I have to agree, last year, we didn't have the talent to make it realistic.
    Tony Richardson, Shank, Kleiny, and even Dugan seem like they'd offer more help than old stone hands.
    You are a wise man for a mountain dweller.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #29
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "tastywaves" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    I look at us like an altered Atlanta. Very run heavy and Vicks primary safety valve was Crumpler. In almost every situation when a developing QB is struggling the team goes out and gets him a TE available for him to check down to. I think we maybe doing Jackson a disservice. In fact Vince was /is struggling so what did Ten do? They went out and go thim said TE.
    But that is wrong to think that way.
    Heck just by watching this team play you should now we don't operate like that.

    If TJ can't get his first and second read he will/should check down to the back in the flats not a TE especially if there isn't a TE in the route because he is in blocking.

    Again, we aren't like a typical WCO that everyone seems to want to try to fit us into.
    Then why did we spend so much on Shank just to have another blocking TE on the roster?

    Unlike this free-agent season, last year the Vikings made very few free-agent signings. Of those, Shiancoe was supposed to be the crown jewel. The Vikings gave Shiancoe a big contract and promised that he would be much more of an offensive threat than he was in his four years with the Giants, where he primarily served as a blocking end opposite Pro Bowler Jeremy Shockey. By any most measures, Shiancoe did not live up to the billing, catching just 27 passes for 323 yards and one touchdown, with almost 25 percent of his season total for yardage coming on one catch.
    Maybe we are primarily a run oriented team, because that is where our strengthand talent lies and not because that's the way Childress' intended for his KAO to operate when he came to Minny.
    That is a very good point Tasty, however, I actually think we are more run oriented right now because in the NFL it is easier to fix the run than the pass, especially when you have a young QB, poor WR's and are installing a new blocking scheme with alot of new OL getting to know each other.

    Long story short, we will be a better passing team but we will run the ball first, second and third in most cases.

    Hell, I am even sure you pass happy lovers will get all pissed when you see 3 and 4 WR sets and we still run the ball out of them.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  10. #30
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends

    "mountainviking" wrote:
    All those checkdowns to Wiggins didn't seem to help Brad Johnson much.
    Most were short of the first down.

    I'm not sure why everyone thinks Shank's contract is so big.
    18.2 million over 5 years ($3.64/year) is nothing compared to what we give Berrian or Williams, much less Allen.
    I'll bet that in comparison with the rest of the league, its pretty close to average and quite a bit below what TonyG and AntonioG are making.
    With the way the player salaries keep going up, it likely won't be long before its considered a deal.

    With the exception of a 79-yard completion to Shiancoe on one play, of the remaining 963 offensive plays run by the Vikings in 2007, only 37 of them (3.8 percent) went to tight ends. Those 37 receptions accounted for just 344 yards of offense – 6.5 percent of the Vikings’ total yards gained. That is one of the lowest totals in terms of tight end production in the league and was not intended to be so.
    That is play calling, not TE talent or production.
    Jimmy can catch just fine, and is one hell of a blocker...so what if he doesn't run a 4.4 forty.
    Although he dropped some (as all players do) Shank caught some nice ones too.
    His last year with the Gmen, I watched a late season game of theirs where the backups were getting most of the action.
    He made several nice catches on good routes that reminded me of how smooth Jerry Rice was on the field.
    IMHO there is plenty of potential at TE on our roster.
    But before we can see it, we'll need better blocking from the OL and better decisions from the QB...and maybe, more TE freindly play calling too.
    I think I need to add another column "Above Top Shelf" for you my friend.
    This is the second solid post by you in this thread.

    Ohhhhhh Mountain Man.....Speaker of the Truth.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Projecting the Vikings' 53-Man Roster: Tight Ends
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-03-2008, 10:09 AM
  2. Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 05-14-2008, 11:04 AM
  3. Vikings Positional Analysis: Running Backs
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-11-2008, 07:42 AM
  4. Missing tight ends on Vikings' radar
    By cogitans in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-21-2007, 05:14 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
  •