Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 45
  1. #21
    Johnson14's Avatar
    Johnson14 is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,681

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104163
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1104110

    Also, Stephen Burton has been awful at WR, yet he's ahead of Iglacias, Arceneaux and Aromashodu.
    So what does that tell you about Arceneaux and Aromashodu? Do people still feel our current crop of WR's is going to be better without Rice?

    The Bears have had pretty much shit for WR's the past few years & we signed one of their rejects? WTF?
    I havent seen anyone say our WR corps are better without Rice, to be fair.

    Im not that worried about the WR position, think we will do ok with what we got, so long as we keep McNabb upright and protected, which is a whole separate matter!

    Im not over impressed using D'imperio as FB, think we should go with a proper FB rather than a LB come FB, but saying that, he cant be worse than Tahi! lol

  2. #22
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "Johnson14" #1104247
    I havent seen anyone say our WR corps are better without Rice, to be fair.
    Then you need to read more.

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

  3. #23
    Johnson14's Avatar
    Johnson14 is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,681

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104266
    Quote Originally Posted by "Johnson14" #1104247
    I havent seen anyone say our WR corps are better without Rice, to be fair.
    Then you need to read more.
    I make no apologies for not reading every single post on the forum :laugh:

  4. #24
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1104215
    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104165
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1104107
    And people are claiming the Vikings will be 10-6, 11-5, 13-3?

    AYFKM?!
    If you look at our team and the teams we play... 10-6 and 11-5 is very possible. However, I guess its easier to believe the sky is falling.

    We play a Chargers team that always start slow - W
    Saints and Atlanta are probably losses
    Tampa at Home - Win
    Carolina - Win
    Raiders - Win
    Chiefs - W
    Broncos - W
    Skins - W
    Cards - W

    Lions - 2 wins
    Packs - 2 loss ( although i think we can steal one)
    Bears Split - W

    Record 9-7 to 11-5. Who on their really scares you? The Raiders? THe Chiefs? Come on man, quit the crying over nothing.
    No ones crying. Just telling you like it is. Try being realistic for a change. First, we'll probably split with the Lions, not have two gimmies. We aren't talking the Lions of old anymore. We lost to them last year.

    Doubt we'll beat the 13-3 Chargers of last year on their turf opening day.

    Don't think we'll be beating the NFC West Champion Cardinals either.

    The Bronco's game, if led by Orton, could go either way.

    We could drop both games to the NFC North Conferance Champion Bears also.

    That takes your 9-7 team (which was ALREADY LOWER than the 10-6 you said I was crying about & wouldn't reach, yet you agreed with me LOL!) & makes them 7-9 to 5-11. 7-9 is where I figured they'd be at best.

    You're forgetting who we lost, not looking at who we replaced them with, not taking into consideration the short TC, the fact that K-Will probably miss the first 4 games, the fact that our new players, especially our new LT, will take some time getting used to our system & gelling with the rest of the team, not to mention unproven starters at several positions that were backups a year ago.

    Lets also not forget we have no idea how well Griffen will play at CB coming back from his 2nd torn ACL surgery. I think it's safe to assume he won't be better than he was before.

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

  5. #25
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "Johnson14" #1104267
    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104266
    Quote Originally Posted by "Johnson14" #1104247
    I havent seen anyone say our WR corps are better without Rice, to be fair.
    Then you need to read more.
    I make no apologies for not reading every single post on the forum :laugh:
    And you don't have too.

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

  6. #26
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104269
    Quote Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1104215
    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104165
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1104107
    And people are claiming the Vikings will be 10-6, 11-5, 13-3?

    AYFKM?!
    If you look at our team and the teams we play... 10-6 and 11-5 is very possible. However, I guess its easier to believe the sky is falling.

    We play a Chargers team that always start slow - W
    Saints and Atlanta are probably losses
    Tampa at Home - Win
    Carolina - Win
    Raiders - Win
    Chiefs - W
    Broncos - W
    Skins - W
    Cards - W

    Lions - 2 wins
    Packs - 2 loss ( although i think we can steal one)
    Bears Split - W

    Record 9-7 to 11-5. Who on their really scares you? The Raiders? THe Chiefs? Come on man, quit the crying over nothing.
    No ones crying. Just telling you like it is. Try being realistic for a change. First, we'll probably split with the Lions, not have two gimmies. We aren't talking the Lions of old anymore. We lost to them last year.

    Doubt we'll beat the 13-3 Chargers of last year on their turf opening day.

    Don't think we'll be beating the NFC West Champion Cardinals either.

    The Bronco's game, if led by Orton, could go either way.

    We could drop both games to the NFC North Conferance Champion Bears also.

    That takes your 9-7 team (which was ALREADY LOWER than the 10-6 you said I was crying about & wouldn't reach, yet you agreed with me LOL!) & makes them 7-9 to 5-11. 7-9 is where I figured they'd be at best.

    You're forgetting who we lost, not looking at who we replaced them with, not taking into consideration the short TC, the fact that K-Will probably miss the first 4 games, the fact that our new players, especially our new LT, will take some time getting used to our system & gelling with the rest of the team, not to mention unproven starters at several positions that were backups a year ago.

    Lets also not forget we have no idea how well Griffen will play at CB coming back from his 2nd torn ACL surgery. I think it's safe to assume he won't be better than he was before.
    All good except the Cards finished last in the division and the Chargers were 8-8 I believe.

    other than that, bang on. People need to take off the purple shades for a minute. If people beleive our players are really taht good, then that means that the teams that are better than us will be even better; and there's going to be alot of them.

  7. #27
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "MindCrimes67" #1104236
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1104198
    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104163
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1104110

    Also, Stephen Burton has been awful at WR, yet he's ahead of Iglacias, Arceneaux and Aromashodu.
    So what does that tell you about Arceneaux and Aromashodu? Do people still feel our current crop of WR's is going to be better without Rice?

    The Bears have had pretty much shit for WR's the past few years & we signed one of their rejects? WTF?
    anyone who believes we are better without Rice needs their head examined.

    I seem to recall the same thought process happening when we traded Moss

    "We'll be better without him since now we can spread the ball around more".

    bullshit.

    I can not believe how you all think Sidney was the greatest thing since sliced bread! Had one good year that is it, that was because of Favre. Mark my words Sidney Rice will be a non-factor through rest of career. Rest all of a receivers glories upon one year.. Whatever. Complain about our receivers, i see much more of glaring hole in other positions surely not at receiver. Sorry just get a little heated when people think Rice was soooo great, they seem to forget thr other 3 yrs he did nothing!!!!!!
    1. No one said he was the greatest thing since sliced bread! We said we have a worse receiving corp without him.

    2. The reason he didn't have a good year last year was because he missed 10 games! Hello!

    With that said, in just the 6 games he did play in, he still had more receptions, more yards, more catches, more TD's & 7.5 more yards per catch than Berrian had all year.

    It's quite simple really. Answer the following questions;

    1. Rice > Berrian. Agree or Disagree?

    2. Rice > Michael Jenkins. Agree or Disagree?

    3. Rice > Jaymar Johnson. Agree or Disagree?

    4. Rice > Emmanuel Arceneaux. Agree or Disagree?

    5. Rice > Devin Aromashodu. Agree or Disagree?

    6. Rice > Andre Holmes. Agree or Disagree?

    7. Rice > Greg Camarillo. Agree or Disagree?

    8. Rice > Stephen Burton. Agree or Disagree?

    9. Rice > Juaquin Iglesias. Agree or Disagree?

    10. Rice > Dominique Johnson. Agree or Disagree?

    11. Of the Vikings on that list who weren't with the team last year, how many have you heard of before? How many have names most NFL fans have heard of before?

    12. Now, tell me again how you think we improved our WR corp.

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

  8. #28
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1104271
    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104269
    Quote Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1104215
    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104165
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1104107
    And people are claiming the Vikings will be 10-6, 11-5, 13-3?

    AYFKM?!
    If you look at our team and the teams we play... 10-6 and 11-5 is very possible. However, I guess its easier to believe the sky is falling.

    We play a Chargers team that always start slow - W
    Saints and Atlanta are probably losses
    Tampa at Home - Win
    Carolina - Win
    Raiders - Win
    Chiefs - W
    Broncos - W
    Skins - W
    Cards - W

    Lions - 2 wins
    Packs - 2 loss ( although i think we can steal one)
    Bears Split - W

    Record 9-7 to 11-5. Who on their really scares you? The Raiders? THe Chiefs? Come on man, quit the crying over nothing.
    No ones crying. Just telling you like it is. Try being realistic for a change. First, we'll probably split with the Lions, not have two gimmies. We aren't talking the Lions of old anymore. We lost to them last year.

    Doubt we'll beat the 13-3 Chargers of last year on their turf opening day.

    Don't think we'll be beating the NFC West Champion Cardinals either.

    The Bronco's game, if led by Orton, could go either way.

    We could drop both games to the NFC North Conferance Champion Bears also.

    That takes your 9-7 team (which was ALREADY LOWER than the 10-6 you said I was crying about & wouldn't reach, yet you agreed with me LOL!) & makes them 7-9 to 5-11. 7-9 is where I figured they'd be at best.

    You're forgetting who we lost, not looking at who we replaced them with, not taking into consideration the short TC, the fact that K-Will probably miss the first 4 games, the fact that our new players, especially our new LT, will take some time getting used to our system & gelling with the rest of the team, not to mention unproven starters at several positions that were backups a year ago.

    Lets also not forget we have no idea how well Griffen will play at CB coming back from his 2nd torn ACL surgery. I think it's safe to assume he won't be better than he was before.
    All good except the Cards finished last in the division and the Chargers were 8-8 I believe.

    other than that, bang on. People need to take off the purple shades for a minute. If people beleive our players are really taht good, then that means that the teams that are better than us will be even better; and there's going to be alot of them.
    LOL, I must have looked at 2009 standings, not 2010. Still, the Cards added Kolb & still have Fitzgerald. We barely beat them last year (27-24) winning in OT on a Longwell kick.

    Chargers were 9-7. Although he claimed the Chargers started out slow, they started out 2-2 last year & won their home opener while we were 2-8 on the road.

    Lets also not forget 5 of our 6 wins last year came against the;

    Lions (6-10)
    Cardinals (5-11)
    Cowboys (6-10)
    Redskins (6-10)
    Bills (4-12)

    Now, while adding McNabb does improve our QB over a year ago, putting him behind the same OL with an unproven/new LT & a RB who can't block well, pretty much brings it back down to almost even.

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

  9. #29
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104165
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1104107
    And people are claiming the Vikings will be 10-6, 11-5, 13-3?

    AYFKM?!
    Put me down for 10-6/11-5 and call me optimistic my pesimistic friend.
    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
    43,916

    Re: Vikings unofficial depth chart

    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1104266
    Quote Originally Posted by "Johnson14" #1104247
    I havent seen anyone say our WR corps are better without Rice, to be fair.
    Then you need to read more.
    I haven't seen many that say they are better. I think most say that they will be adequate enough based on the scheme we are going to run.

    The ones who are looking for "3 Deep" still are the ones who seem to think the sky is falling. hmy:
    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 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Best battles brewing on the Vikings' depth chart
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-08-2007, 09:15 PM
  2. Vikings depth chart
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 08-29-2007, 09:37 AM
  3. Vikings RB Depth Chart
    By Prophet in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-30-2006, 08:24 AM
  4. Vikings: Sean Jensen's Depth Chart
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-09-2006, 12:14 PM
  5. Vikings 3rd on depth chart
    By akvikefan89 in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-05-2005, 01:32 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
  •