Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 112
  1. #101
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    "Del Rio" wrote:
    I know we will be fine with Brad for this season. Of course I like to win, and could really give a rats jiggly butt about his passing yards and his lack of a rocket arm. If your into fireworks and big numbers maybe some pro Wrastlin will do the trick. Im into football and winning games, Brad Johnson has done that his whole career, I'll take it.
    Amen, brother. Give me 200 yards passing, no picks and 150 time-consuming yards from the running game and I'll be happy with the W.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    915

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    Hey Del, how much longer do you think he can keep that up? Here are Brad's performances last year:

    Carolina: 46% completion rate-162 yards-1TD LOSS (though I concede he was already down thanks to Culpepper)

    Detroit: 68% completion rate-136 yards-2TD-1 lost fumble WIN

    NY: 56% completion rate-144 yards-0TDs WIN (entirely because of D and special teams, I think I could count our first downs on one hand)

    GB: 60% completion rate- 196 yards-0TDs-1INT FUmbles twice, and loses one WIN (Thanks to a D.Edwards return)

    Cleveland: 68% completion rate- 207 yards-3TD-1INT WIN (Played decent, but had help from 3 defensive INTs and 2 fumble recoveries)

    Detroit: 73% completion rate-256 yards-2TDs WIN (Game saving INT by Chavous at the end)

    St. Louis: 64%-146 yards-0TDs WIN (5 INTs and a fumble recovery helped, I think)

    Pittsburgh: 53% completion-149 yards-0TDs-2INTs LOSE (2 INTs at crucial times)

    Baltimore: 69% completion-248 yards-2TDs-1 fumbles lost LOSE (miss out on playoffs)

    Chicago's 2nd stringers: 67% completion rate-247 yards-2TDs WIN

    Wow, he sure made an impact. Let's average it out:

    189.1 ypg-1 TD per game-0.6 Turnovers per game

    Yah that looks a lot like 250 yards and 2 TDs per game :roll:. He had one game with over 250 yards, only three that are close to 250 yards (one against second teamers, 1 our season ending loss, and the other against Detroit, yipee) A lot of those wins had as much to do with Brad as Chicago's success had to do with Kyle Orton.

    When your Brad's age, what you have accomplished in your career has little to do with what you still can accomplish. I have no problem with Brad. I have a problem when his inability to consistently move the chains and still get credit for our winning streak. Brad is no superhero, he is merely a player that can win a game if the rest of the team gets the job done (which doesn't neccesarily happen a lot, and at best, can't be counted on to happen most the the time). Brad doesn't win games, he just avoids losing them, that's all.

    I think we can win a lot of game with Brad as our QB, but I'm under no delusions that he will be the main reason we do. If our defense has an off game, I wouldn't count on Brad to keep pace with the other team. It's typical for you to fall back on the "I don't care if you don't like that he doesn't put up stats, I like to win" fallacy. As if I don't like to win and only care about stats :roll:. Stats are just a reflection of productivity and effectiveness.

    Thank You!!!!
    You republican whore!

  3. #103
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,615

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    "AWZeus" wrote:
    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    "AWZeus" wrote:
    "RK." wrote:
    "AWZeus" wrote:
    Quote Originally Posted by ItalianStallion
    QB, no doubt. There is no guarantee that Brad can still be a full time starter and we are one injury away from a losing season.
    Last year, we were one injury away from a winning season because of Brad.

    =Z=
    huh :?: We went 9-7 last year because of Brad. When you go over 50% that is considered a winning season dood.
    Too much thinking necessary on my comment.

    Vikes - 2-5 with Daunte starting. One injury to him. Brad starts. Winning season.

    Get it now?

    =Z=
    Thanks AW, I didn't realize that the quarterback is the only reason we win or lose games. Most of the games Brad started, we were so woefully ineffective on offense against bad teams, that if we weren't returning kickoffs and INTs for TDs we would have definitely lost. As soon as we had to play somewhat decent teams ie. the Steelers and Ravens we lose and Brad starts making bad decisions.

    I think it has more to do with us not starting games down by 3 touchdowns than it does a 67 year old QB. I'm not looking forward to games where the offense puts up 200 yards of offense, we win, and Brad is still hailed as the saviour.
    You didn't realize that? Then why did you write this:

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    QB, no doubt. There is no guarantee that Brad can still be a full time starter and we are one injury away from a losing season.
    Keeping your starting QB healthy is a big part of winning - if that starter is performing the way he should be - which Daunte certainly was not last year.

    =Z=
    I said that because Mike McMahon loses games. Brad is the type of QB who won't lose a game, thus the rest of the team has to pick it up and win it together (he certainly can't carry the team, though he gets a lot of credit for doing that). Mike is the type of QB who, despite how well the rest of the team plays, usually manages to find a way to lose games. Not saying the rest of the team couldn't occasionally compensate and still win games with Mike McMahon, just not enough for a winning season.

    Teams often win games despite poor QB play, that is why they are not the only ones responsible (though they get treated as such). However consistent bad play from a quarterback will likely not result in a winning SEASON.


    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

  4. #104
    Prophet Guest

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    Hey Del, how much longer do you think he can keep that up? Here are Brad's performances last year:

    Carolina: 46% completion rate-162 yards-1TD LOSS (though I concede he was already down thanks to Culpepper)

    Detroit: 68% completion rate-136 yards-2TD-1 lost fumble WIN

    NY: 56% completion rate-144 yards-0TDs WIN (entirely because of D and special teams, I think I could count our first downs on one hand)

    GB: 60% completion rate- 196 yards-0TDs-1INT FUmbles twice, and loses one WIN (Thanks to a D.Edwards return)

    Cleveland: 68% completion rate- 207 yards-3TD-1INT WIN (Played decent, but had help from 3 defensive INTs and 2 fumble recoveries)

    Detroit: 73% completion rate-256 yards-2TDs WIN (Game saving INT by Chavous at the end)

    St. Louis: 64%-146 yards-0TDs WIN (5 INTs and a fumble recovery helped, I think)

    Pittsburgh: 53% completion-149 yards-0TDs-2INTs LOSE (2 INTs at crucial times)

    Baltimore: 69% completion-248 yards-2TDs-1 fumbles lost LOSE (miss out on playoffs)

    Chicago's 2nd stringers: 67% completion rate-247 yards-2TDs WIN

    Wow, he sure made an impact. Let's average it out:

    189.1 ypg-1 TD per game-0.6 Turnovers per game

    Yah that looks a lot like 250 yards and 2 TDs per game :roll:. He had one game with over 250 yards, only three that are close to 250 yards (one against second teamers, 1 our season ending loss, and the other against Detroit, yipee) A lot of those wins had as much to do with Brad as Chicago's success had to do with Kyle Orton.

    When your Brad's age, what you have accomplished in your career has little to do with what you still can accomplish. I have no problem with Brad. I have a problem when his inability to consistently move the chains and still get credit for our winning streak. Brad is no superhero, he is merely a player that can win a game if the rest of the team gets the job done (which doesn't neccesarily happen a lot, and at best, can't be counted on to happen most the the time). Brad doesn't win games, he just avoids losing them, that's all.

    I think we can win a lot of game with Brad as our QB, but I'm under no delusions that he will be the main reason we do. If our defense has an off game, I wouldn't count on Brad to keep pace with the other team. It's typical for you to fall back on the "I don't care if you don't like that he doesn't put up stats, I like to win" fallacy. As if I don't like to win and only care about stats :roll:. Stats are just a reflection of productivity and effectiveness.
    Del summed it up already,
    "It's too bad a vetran QB who has accomplished more than many QB's in the league was hired as a backup, got MINIMAL reps in the offense, was coached by an ape and still managed to rank out a winning streak more impressive then most QB's in the NFL, and he is the bad guy.

    Now that he gets to start the season as the main guy, now that he gets to actually practice with the starters and get into rythym with the first stringers he should improve. Of course you can't see that, I mean obviously you assume he should have just stepped right in and thrown for 400+ yards and 5 TD's with guys he never practices with."
    His summary was simply reiterating that BJ came off the bench and had to perform without having the benefit of going through training camp and the first seven games as the starter. He did his job and did it well. No, he wouldn't have been a good starter in fantasy football. This isn't fantasy football. The team needed a quality backup quarterback with veteran leadership when Daunte went down and BJ did his job and did it well.

    I don't get how people get the impression that many think BJ is the saviour. He is the interim solution to the QB problem in MN until a young QB (i.e., Tarvaris Jackson) is ready to take the reigns. All BJ has to do is perform in a Dilferesque manner and not get maimed. The O-line is beefed up, the RB corps is deep, the TEs are in place, the WRs are ready to roll, The FBs are in place and a coaching staff that has brains is in place.

    There is no doubt that QB depth is an issue at this point. I challenge you to find a team in the salary-cap era of the NFL that isn't an injury away from destruction. There are positions that are set on every team and there are positions that are faulty on every team. For example, look at the QBs for the two teams from last year's SB:

    Steelers
    QB: Toothless Roethlisberger backed up by Charlie Batch, Omar Jacobs and Rod Rutherford. Toothless cracked his skull open and their plans have changed dramatically.

    Seahawks
    Matt Hasselbeck. He goes down and you have Seneca Wallace followed by David Greene and Gibran Hamdan. I think the panic button is hit hard if Hasselbeck goes down with an injury.

    The Vikings are dealing with their QB going psycho and leaving for the penninsula. Like RK. inferred, the coaching staff is making the long-term plans for the team, based on their analysis and experience, a comprehensive analysis of the team. They invested where they saw the gaping holes and are making plans in the short- and long-term.

  5. #105
    FuadFan's Avatar
    FuadFan is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,746

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    "PurpleRide" wrote:
    johnson beat bad teams, if we played sub 500 teams all year, i would not be worried at all about our starting QB. Thats not the case, johnson lost to quality teams, thats why i am worried about this. The facts are out there, he lost the big games for us last year. No one has proven any light to why i should have no worries about the QB situation. I hope the best for this year, I guess its just a wait and see approach, if he proves me wrong, i'll admit to it, if he sucks it up, i would hope the same
    Just to get it out of the way your beat bad teams argument is complete crap the entire offense lost to good teams not just Brad. Also if we were to use that, Daunte never beat a playoff team in the regular season for the past two years he would also have only beat bad teams so I guess we went with the one we are paying a lot less to do the same thing. This year Brad has a far superior O-line to help protect him, a RB that I think is far superior to Bennett and Moore, and the intelligence to know how to use every weapon at his disposal which will allow our favorite team to be able to compete with any of the teams we have to beat to make the playoffs.
    Minnesota Vikings : Simply the best

  6. #106
    Kdub4MVP is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    68

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    Quarterback is very uncertain . Stallion said it perfectly. I still cant belive we didnt atleast get Cutler to ease the loss of a mvp type QB. Give us a guy to develop for the near future as in next year. So whats our plan next year? ride out brad johnson for another season;actually believe tarvaris jackson can be anything more than a serviceable backup in this league at best, sign a 2nd rate free-agent, thats basically accepting mediocrity. It takes years for most teams to find and develop a player like duante and unless we trade up to get brady quinn next year in the draft were no less than 6 years from sniffing the super bowl. Brad johnson winning those games last year was actually the worst thing that could have happened it just gave people reason to believe he can still get it done as a starter which i honestly dont think he can especially in december and possibly january. Sadly im beginning to think things are gonna get ugly quick this season and we dont have a solid backup plan, let alone a starting plan.

  7. #107
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    actually believe tarvaris jackson can be anything more than a serviceable backup in this league at best

    Why yes, I do actually believe that TJ will be more that just a serviceable backup.

    It takes years for most teams to find and develop a player like duante and unless we trade up to get brady quinn next year in the draft were no less than 6 years from sniffing the super bowl.

    Childress is known for his work developing QBs, so I think that is an ace in our hole. Also, six years is a bit extreme. Even if our QB situation is a bad as you say (which I disagree with), we are really only one offseason move away from "sniffing the superbowl".

    Sadly im beginning to think things are gonna get ugly quick this season

    I actually agree with this one. The first part of our season is going to be tough. We have a somewhat difficult schedule and a team that is in the gelling phase on offense, defense, and with coaches. I would not be surprised to see us start 3-3 or worse. However, our season gets easier as it roles on, and we will begin to come together as a team. I seriousy think we will be a ocntender for an NFC wildcard birth, if not the NFC North title...
    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=

  8. #108
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,869

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    The Vikings are dealing with their QB going psycho and leaving for the penninsula. Like RK. inferred, the coaching staff is making the long-term plans for the team, based on their analysis and experience, a comprehensive analysis of the team. They invested where they saw the gaping holes and are making plans in the short- and long-term.

    Agreed. You can only address so many things in one year. The longer term plan is what is important in order to build a super bowl team. The vikes haven't been close in recent years.

    And lets face it, there are only a handful of superstar QB's in the league. One of Brad's real strengths is his understanding of how to run different offensive schemes. He will be a great guy to help MN transition from its vertical offense to the WC style offense and help a young qb like Tarvaris develop over the next 2 years.

    Brad may not be Peyton Manning, but we could do a lot worse. I guarantee you 2/3's of the other NFL team forums are bitching and moaning about their starting QB as well.

    I look at Brad as one variable I don't have to worry about making stupid mistakes next year. Thats not really a compliment I realize, but I foresee a lot of growing pains and would like to have brains/leadership over talent in that position going into 2006. He's a known entity.

    I agree with Stallion as well though that he will not be a guy I expect to lead a comeback and score 3 TD's in a quarter to win you a game, maybe one in the last 2 minutes (maybe). MN needs to win the turnover battle and field position in order to win in '06.

  9. #109
    vike_mike's Avatar
    vike_mike is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    474

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    This is just an idea guys. I was thinking if we had this player loose about 5-10 pounds, we could work him out at MLB and just maybe it would work. It could be worth a shot. I am talking about DeQuincy Scott. He is the same height as Teddy Bruschi but weighs a little more. If he lost 10 pounds, he would be at the same height and weight as Bruschi. Bruschi came out of college being a defensive end. It could work. Scott is not going to be an end for us, so why not try him out there.

  10. #110
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Your opinion of the Vikes "Weakest Link"

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    It takes years for most teams to find and develop a player like duante and unless we trade up to get brady quinn next year in the draft were no less than 6 years from sniffing the super bowl.

    Childress is known for his work developing QBs, so I think that is an ace in our hole. Also, six years is a bit extreme. Even if our QB situation is a bad as you say (which I disagree with), we are really only one offseason move away from "sniffing the superbowl".
    I wish people would stop passing along that myth! Childress has had a hand in developing ONE good QB, Donovan McNabb. And I give most of the credit for McNabb to Andy Reid - and McNabb himself. He was a winner at Syracuse and that means a helluva lot more than having a great throwing motion or being 6'5".

    Don't forget that Childress also had a hand in developing Mike McMahon (who everyone here fears more than ebola), AJ Feeley, Ty Detmer, etc. Any big names there?

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 141
    Last Post: 07-06-2008, 02:53 PM
  2. Weakest Link: Offense
    By V-Unit in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 09-06-2007, 06:52 AM
  3. Weakest Link: Defense
    By V-Unit in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 09-05-2007, 03:10 PM
  4. Another moron's opinion about our Vikes
    By Muggsy in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 09-29-2005, 09:16 PM
  5. who is the weakest link?
    By michaelmazid in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 04-11-2005, 07:53 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
  •