Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36
  1. #31
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Wilf: Childress’ job security doesn’t depend on 2008 playoffs

    "Overlord" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "vikingivan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Overlord" wrote:
    [quote author=V link=topic=43752.msg752636#msg752636 date=1207193236]
    It's all to silence the media. Either way though I wish he wouldn't say it. It's like admitting that he would be ok with mediocrity.
    I disagree with all of these statements.

    I don't think it's all to silence the media.
    If he wanted to silence the media, he would just say, "Childress will be back in 2009."
    Instead, he said that he doesn't evaluate based on benchmarks such as making the playoffs.
    Makes sense to me, and I believe Wilf when he says it.

    I don't think him saying really matters, although I like the philosophy behind it.
    In my opinion, Childress should be judged on his performance, not on chance and circumstance.
    Making the playoffs involves a lot of factors.
    Only one of those is the performance of the coaching staff.
    That factor is probably less important than talent and blind luck.
    Heck, the Browns were 10-6 this year and didn't make the playoffs.
    Even if your coaching staff and team does well, things might work against you.

    And I don't think it means that he's okay with mediocrity.
    I think it just means that he has a long term view of the thing.
    In any given year anything can happen, but not making the playoffs one year doesn't mean your franchise is mediocre.
    It's my opinion that you win more in the long run with stability.
    I think that's Wilf's opinion too.
    I also think that he believes Childress is a pretty good coach.
    It sounds like there's not going to be a change then until that opinion changes or Childress leaves of his own accord.
    It will take 2 seasons of crappy play calling t ge this guy fired. That 5 game wining streak at the end of last year, moved him out of the kitchen. He has a long way to go before he's fired. We love being average. 8 and 8 is he goal each season. He we may even go 9 and 7!!! Awesome
    Do you mean 2 more seasons of crappy play calling?
    I have to disagree.
    Childress has already had 2 years of poor play calling.
    If the Vikings do not make the playoffs this year.
    He should be gone.
    I wonder how many losses it will take to have someone start a Bill Cowher thread again.
    See, it is posts like this that make me laugh a little.
    Childress didn't call the plays last year.
    Bevel did.
    Yes, I know some of you believe that Childress still pulls the strings, and I agree that he probably does, but the playcalling was completely different this year compared to last.

    In 2006 the playcalling was very vanilla.
    I knew that, you knew that, Childress figured it out.
    In 2007, the only criticism I have for the play calling is the lack of screens all season.
    The rest of the offensive problems were entirely execution.

    And no, I don't think that anybody is happy with mediocrity.
    What Wilf said is that the playoffs were not the litmus test of whether or not Childress retains his job.
    That means that if we go 10-6, and just miss the playoffs, he could likely be back.
    It also means that if we go 9-7, make the playoffs, and get destroyed in the first round - he may not be.

    I actually think that a lot of Childress's job hangs on the public impression of the Vikings at the end of the season.
    Remember, 2009 is the year for the big stadium push.
    We need to have excitement surrounding the Vikings when the legislative year starts.
    If that excitement is not there at the end of the season, I think Wilf will do some house cleaning to generate some.
    I've disagreed with the play-calling on numerous occasions, but it did seem to be better this year than last year.
    My main concerns remain: 1) passing the ball too much, especially on 3rd-and-short; and 2) always punting the ball between the 40's on 4th-and-reasonable.
    Childress makes other bad in game mistakes too, such as his inability to throw a red flag at the appropriate time.
    But in-game decisions are only one part of coaching.
    Most of coaching goes on during days other than Sunday.

    Nonetheless, I think Childress is responsible for the play-calling, regardless of who is actually calling the plays.
    He's the one that decides who will call the plays, so if he chooses Bevell, himself, or a talking parrot to do the job, then he's on the hook for their performance.

    In general, I get back to what NodakPaul said in his third paragraph - the point is that Childress will be judged based on how he does as a coach, and that he could stay or go regardless of whether the team makes the playoffs.
    I happen to think that fan sentiment isn't going to be that big of a factor, because if Wilf believes he has a good coach then he'll believe that the team will come around and the fans with it.
    Of course, fan sentiment is related to the coach's performance, so there would be some saying he was fired because of the fans even if that weren't the case.
    [/quote]
    That is my point exactly.

    If fan support was that big of an issue he would have been gone year one or even year two.

    Again, consistency at key leadership positions is the answer to a long term solution for this team.
    A bunch of yutz fans who want instant gratification every year will not sway the "Ownership Groups" opinion on that.

    This team would really have to tank and completely quit playing for this coaching staff for him to get the boot next year.
    Judging on the progress we've seen over the last two years, I really don't see anything of that nature happening.


    The young kids will continue to learn on the field (which will affect consistency) and we will beat teams we aren't supposed to and lose to team we aren't supposed to because of that, but we won't see a change at the HC position next year my friends.

    At least that is what I believe.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  2. #32
    vikingivan is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,993

    Re: Wilf: Childress’ job security doesn’t depend on 2008 playoffs

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "vikingivan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Overlord" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    It's all to silence the media. Either way though I wish he wouldn't say it. It's like admitting that he would be ok with mediocrity.
    I disagree with all of these statements.

    I don't think it's all to silence the media.
    If he wanted to silence the media, he would just say, "Childress will be back in 2009."
    Instead, he said that he doesn't evaluate based on benchmarks such as making the playoffs.
    Makes sense to me, and I believe Wilf when he says it.

    I don't think him saying really matters, although I like the philosophy behind it.
    In my opinion, Childress should be judged on his performance, not on chance and circumstance.
    Making the playoffs involves a lot of factors.
    Only one of those is the performance of the coaching staff.
    That factor is probably less important than talent and blind luck.
    Heck, the Browns were 10-6 this year and didn't make the playoffs.
    Even if your coaching staff and team does well, things might work against you.

    And I don't think it means that he's okay with mediocrity.
    I think it just means that he has a long term view of the thing.
    In any given year anything can happen, but not making the playoffs one year doesn't mean your franchise is mediocre.
    It's my opinion that you win more in the long run with stability.
    I think that's Wilf's opinion too.
    I also think that he believes Childress is a pretty good coach.
    It sounds like there's not going to be a change then until that opinion changes or Childress leaves of his own accord.
    It will take 2 seasons of crappy play calling t ge this guy fired. That 5 game wining streak at the end of last year, moved him out of the kitchen. He has a long way to go before he's fired. We love being average. 8 and 8 is he goal each season. He we may even go 9 and 7!!! Awesome
    Do you mean 2 more seasons of crappy play calling?
    I have to disagree.
    Childress has already had 2 years of poor play calling.
    If the Vikings do not make the playoffs this year.
    He should be gone.
    I wonder how many losses it will take to have someone start a Bill Cowher thread again.
    See, it is posts like this that make me laugh a little.
    Childress didn't call the plays last year.
    Bevel did.
    Yes, I know some of you believe that Childress still pulls the strings, and I agree that he probably does, but the playcalling was completely different this year compared to last.

    In 2006 the playcalling was very vanilla.
    I knew that, you knew that, Childress figured it out.
    In 2007, the only criticism I have for the play calling is the lack of screens all season.
    The rest of the offensive problems were entirely execution.

    And no, I don't think that anybody is happy with mediocrity.
    What Wilf said is that the playoffs were not the litmus test of whether or not Childress retains his job.
    That means that if we go 10-6, and just miss the playoffs, he could likely be back.
    It also means that if we go 9-7, make the playoffs, and get destroyed in the first round - he may not be.

    I actually think that a lot of Childress's job hangs on the public impression of the Vikings at the end of the season.
    Remember, 2009 is the year for the big stadium push.
    We need to have excitement surrounding the Vikings when the legislative year starts.
    If that excitement is not there at the end of the season, I think Wilf will do some house cleaning to generate some.
    It took Childress almost half the season to come to the conclusion that AD needed more carries.
    They had intended for him to split the carries with Taylor and after the game Taylor would have twice the carries.
    The Chiller would scratch his head, and think how is that possible.
    Finally, they started to keep track of each backs carries, ensuring that AD would get his touches.
    That is poor coaching, plain and simple.

  3. #33
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,599
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Wilf: Childress’ job security doesn’t depend on 2008 playoffs

    "vikingivan" wrote:

    It took Childress almost half the season to come to the conclusion that AD needed more carries.
    They had intended for him to split the carries with Taylor and after the game Taylor would have twice the carries.
    The Chiller would scratch his head, and think how is that possible.
    Finally, they started to keep track of each backs carries, ensuring that AD would get his touches.
    That is poor coaching, plain and simple.
    LMFAO!
    That is how you really think it happened, don't you?

    You know one of the things that separates coaches from fans?
    Fans rely solely on their own perception of what happened to make decisions, while coaches make decisions based on research and real performance.
    Here is the break down of the number of carries per game between AD and Taylor:

    Game AD Taylor
    ATL 19 3
    DET 20 --
    KC 25 --
    GB 12 8
    CHI 20 22
    DAL 12 10
    PHI 20 6
    SD 30 9
    GB 11 3
    OAK -- 22
    NYG -- 31
    DET 15 14
    SF 14 8
    CHI 20 5
    WAS 9 6
    DEN 11 10

    Now go ahead and find me any game where CT had twice the carries over AD.
    If you can, I will buy Vikigns tickets to the game of your choice.
    But you won't be able to, because CT never had twice the carries.
    In fact, there was only one game in which they both played that CT even had more than AD.
    That was week 6 against Chicago (BTW, also the game in which AD broke the Vikings single game rushing record - so I think the way AD was used was just fine...).

    This is a perfect example of a fan watching the games, convinced he could coach the team better, and criticizing Childress without having and idea what the hell they are talking about.
    I believe the proper term is "talking out of your ass."

    Now whose scratching their head looking confused?
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  4. #34
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Wilf: Childress’ job security doesn’t depend on 2008 playoffs

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    LMFAO!
    That is how you really think it happened, don't you?

    You know one of the things that separates coaches from fans?
    Fans rely solely on their own perception of what happened to make decisions, while coaches make decisions based on research and real performance.
    Here is the break down of the number of carries per game between AD and Taylor:

    Game AD Taylor
    ATL 19 3
    DET 20 --
    KC 25 --
    GB 12 8
    CHI 20 22
    DAL 12 10
    PHI 20 6
    SD 30 9
    GB 11 3
    OAK -- 22
    NYG -- 31
    DET 15 14
    SF 14 8
    CHI 20 5
    WAS 9 6
    DEN 11 10

    Now go ahead and find me any game where CT had twice the carries over AD.
    If you can, I will buy Vikigns tickets to the game of your choice.
    But you won't be able to, because CT never had twice the carries.
    In fact, there was only one game in which they both played that CT even had more than AD.
    That was week 6 against Chicago (BTW, also the game in which AD broke the Vikings single game rushing record - so I think the way AD was used was just fine...).

    This is a perfect example of a fan watching the games, convinced he could coach the team better, and criticizing Childress without having and idea what the hell they are talking about.
    I believe the proper term is "talking out of your jiggly butt."

    Now whose scratching their head looking confused?
    Thats what we call some serious snappage.

    I keep telling you guys that it is wise to leave Nodack alone and stay on his good side.
    Dude is way to smart for me.

    (JK
    ;D NP, excellent post my friend)
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  5. #35
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,599
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Wilf: Childress’ job security doesn’t depend on 2008 playoffs

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    LMFAO!
    That is how you really think it happened, don't you?

    You know one of the things that separates coaches from fans?
    Fans rely solely on their own perception of what happened to make decisions, while coaches make decisions based on research and real performance.
    Here is the break down of the number of carries per game between AD and Taylor:

    Game AD Taylor
    ATL 19 3
    DET 20 --
    KC 25 --
    GB 12 8
    CHI 20 22
    DAL 12 10
    PHI 20 6
    SD 30 9
    GB 11 3
    OAK -- 22
    NYG -- 31
    DET 15 14
    SF 14 8
    CHI 20 5
    WAS 9 6
    DEN 11 10

    Now go ahead and find me any game where CT had twice the carries over AD.
    If you can, I will buy Vikigns tickets to the game of your choice.
    But you won't be able to, because CT never had twice the carries.
    In fact, there was only one game in which they both played that CT even had more than AD.
    That was week 6 against Chicago (BTW, also the game in which AD broke the Vikings single game rushing record - so I think the way AD was used was just fine...).

    This is a perfect example of a fan watching the games, convinced he could coach the team better, and criticizing Childress without having and idea what the hell they are talking about.
    I believe the proper term is "talking out of your jiggly butt."

    Now whose scratching their head looking confused?
    Thats what we call some serious snappage.

    I keep telling you guys that it is wise to leave Nodack alone and stay on his good side.
    Dude is way to smart for me.

    (JK
    ;D NP, excellent post my friend)
    Just call them like I see em.


    And don't play dumb with me - a lot of us have met you and know that it is just an act.
    You cant make six figures sitting on your butt in a government job like you do if you aren't pretty damn smart to begin with... ;D
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  6. #36
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Wilf: Childress’ job security doesn’t depend on 2008 playoffs

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    LMFAO!
    That is how you really think it happened, don't you?

    You know one of the things that separates coaches from fans?
    Fans rely solely on their own perception of what happened to make decisions, while coaches make decisions based on research and real performance.
    Here is the break down of the number of carries per game between AD and Taylor:

    Game AD Taylor
    ATL 19 3
    DET 20 --
    KC 25 --
    GB 12 8
    CHI 20 22
    DAL 12 10
    PHI 20 6
    SD 30 9
    GB 11 3
    OAK -- 22
    NYG -- 31
    DET 15 14
    SF 14 8
    CHI 20 5
    WAS 9 6
    DEN 11 10

    Now go ahead and find me any game where CT had twice the carries over AD.
    If you can, I will buy Vikigns tickets to the game of your choice.
    But you won't be able to, because CT never had twice the carries.
    In fact, there was only one game in which they both played that CT even had more than AD.
    That was week 6 against Chicago (BTW, also the game in which AD broke the Vikings single game rushing record - so I think the way AD was used was just fine...).

    This is a perfect example of a fan watching the games, convinced he could coach the team better, and criticizing Childress without having and idea what the hell they are talking about.
    I believe the proper term is "talking out of your jiggly butt."

    Now whose scratching their head looking confused?
    Thats what we call some serious snappage.

    I keep telling you guys that it is wise to leave Nodack alone and stay on his good side.
    Dude is way to smart for me.

    (JK
    ;D NP, excellent post my friend)
    Just call them like I see em.


    And don't play dumb with me - a lot of us have met you and know that it is just an act.
    You cant make six figures sitting on your butt in a government job like you do if you aren't pretty gol 'darnit smart to begin with... ;D
    Dumb luck and the good Lord smiling on a dumb ole hick from northern MN my friend.
    Nothing more, nothing less.
    ;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 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-19-2009, 02:04 PM
  2. Every Play Doesn’t Count: Week 1
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-12-2008, 01:37 PM
  3. Childress' job guaranteed through 2008, Wilf says
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 11-29-2007, 08:31 AM
  4. New security device for your car.
    By Prophet in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-14-2006, 04:27 PM
  5. Sherman's job security
    By cajunvike in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-14-2004, 11:00 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
  •