Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 92
  1. #31
    Infidel is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,947

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    jargomcfargo wrote:
    Infidel wrote:
    You're good at pulling up history.

    However, history is just that--history.

    History ain't gonna put any points on the board.
    I see you have 666 posts. I'll take that as a sign!

    Seriously, I agree. Everyone wants to see this Vikings team as the same as last years team; it's far from it.

    I have a difficult time getting giddy over barely pulling out a win, at home, against a 1-4 team.

    This team will need some lucky breaks to win, despite all of Green Bays injuries. I don't see a lot of lucky breaks at Lamblow.

    Welcome to the site Infidel.
    Thanks.

    We got more than our share of lucky breaks early last year and then got more bad breaks toward the end of the year, especially with New Orleans, it seemed.

    The ball could bounce our way in GB.....but it better bounce our way in a big way.
    It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
    --John Wooden

  2. #32
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    Marrdro wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro can say what he wants about the CBs but truth is they did not get tested against the Cowboys. They had something like 3 passes over 15 yards. You better believe Rodgers is going to test them. I am not sure our O can keep up with him.
    Couldn't some of the reason they weren't tested be that the D-backs were covering well enough for the pressure from the D-line to get to Romo enough for him to dump the ball off?

    Hmmmmmmmm?

    =Z=
    Excellent post my friend.

    Hard to see what is actually happening down field on TV, but I thought the checkdowns were a prime example of good coverage downfield by somebody.
    Yet you don't blame our WRs for not getting open and it is all Favre.

    HHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
    Show me were I said that.

    I was actually a bit suprised when you told me our WR's, especially Moss, weren't getting open but I didn't doubt it.
    It might have to do with Moss running basic routes. It will get better.

  3. #33
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro can say what he wants about the CBs but truth is they did not get tested against the Cowboys. They had something like 3 passes over 15 yards. You better believe Rodgers is going to test them. I am not sure our O can keep up with him.
    Couldn't some of the reason they weren't tested be that the D-backs were covering well enough for the pressure from the D-line to get to Romo enough for him to dump the ball off?

    Hmmmmmmmm?

    =Z=
    Excellent post my friend.

    Hard to see what is actually happening down field on TV, but I thought the checkdowns were a prime example of good coverage downfield by somebody.
    Yet you don't blame our WRs for not getting open and it is all Favre.

    HHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
    Show me were I said that.

    I was actually a bit suprised when you told me our WR's, especially Moss, weren't getting open but I didn't doubt it.
    It might have to do with Moss running basic routes. It will get better.
    I agree, but don't change the subject. When did I make this claim.

    Yet you don't blame our WRs for not getting open and it is all Favre
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  4. #34
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    Marrdro wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro can say what he wants about the CBs but truth is they did not get tested against the Cowboys. They had something like 3 passes over 15 yards. You better believe Rodgers is going to test them. I am not sure our O can keep up with him.
    Couldn't some of the reason they weren't tested be that the D-backs were covering well enough for the pressure from the D-line to get to Romo enough for him to dump the ball off?

    Hmmmmmmmm?

    =Z=
    Excellent post my friend.

    Hard to see what is actually happening down field on TV, but I thought the checkdowns were a prime example of good coverage downfield by somebody.
    Yet you don't blame our WRs for not getting open and it is all Favre.

    HHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
    Show me were I said that.

    I was actually a bit suprised when you told me our WR's, especially Moss, weren't getting open but I didn't doubt it.
    It might have to do with Moss running basic routes. It will get better.
    I agree, but don't change the subject. When did I make this claim.

    Yet you don't blame our WRs for not getting open and it is all Favre
    Maybe you did not but I could have sworn you were on me when I suggested that.

  5. #35
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    marstc09 wrote:
    Marrdro can say what he wants about the CBs but truth is they did not get tested against the Cowboys. They had something like 3 passes over 15 yards. You better believe Rodgers is going to test them. I am not sure our O can keep up with him.
    Couldn't some of the reason they weren't tested be that the D-backs were covering well enough for the pressure from the D-line to get to Romo enough for him to dump the ball off?

    Hmmmmmmmm?

    =Z=
    Excellent post my friend.

    Hard to see what is actually happening down field on TV, but I thought the checkdowns were a prime example of good coverage downfield by somebody.
    Yet you don't blame our WRs for not getting open and it is all Favre.

    HHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
    Show me were I said that.

    I was actually a bit suprised when you told me our WR's, especially Moss, weren't getting open but I didn't doubt it.
    It might have to do with Moss running basic routes. It will get better.
    I agree, but don't change the subject. When did I make this claim.

    Yet you don't blame our WRs for not getting open and it is all Favre
    Maybe you did not but I could have sworn you were on me when I suggested that.
    My fault that everything bad said about the Noodle gets attributed to me or that people make stuff up in thier brain that I say about him.

    I've asked for it with the stance I've taken on him.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #36
    Infidel is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,947

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    My friend.....you're clearly a victim in your own mind!!

    It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
    --John Wooden

  7. #37
    Infidel is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,947

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    Myself, I've never doubted that you love Favre.

    That's why you call him Noodle, right?

    A sign of great respect?

    It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
    --John Wooden

  8. #38
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    Marrdro wrote:
    I've asked for it with the stance I've taken on him.
    That's the most insightful thing you've posted since Favre signed.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  9. #39
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,869

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    Marrdro wrote:
    BloodyHorns82 wrote:
    Marrdro wrote:
    BloodyHorns82 wrote:
    jmcdon00 wrote:
    Infidel wrote:
    Cowboys missed TD chances by repeatedly running on third downs.

    They got them, but if they'd have passed to our weakness they'd have won the game.

    Green Bay is looking at the films right now.

    Green Bay will exploit Shepherd and Allen.

    Our pass rush better be spectacular or better.
    Meh, our pass defense is doing just fine. Currently ranked 6th in yards per game allowed. Number one in yards per pass attempt.
    If the packers want to give up on the run early I am just fine with that.
    Crazier yet, 3 of our 5 teams we've played are top 10 in the league for passing yards per game:

    4. Cowboys
    5. Saints
    6. Lions
    13. Dolphins
    25. Jets

    Packers are #10.
    Forget it BH. All of sudden, stats aren't allowed on here, especially if used to support a discussion point.
    I tend to to be in the crowd that agrees that stats are mostly useless except for entertainment sake. For just about every stat you can use to discuss a point, there is usually another one that can be used to argue the exact opposite.

    (Obviously there are exceptions to the rule)

    There is a reason we play the game and not just watch it on paper.

    They are fun for discussion and analyzing, but shouldn't be taken too serious or used to "prove" any point.
    Well said, but as you said, they can be used to support both sides of the discussion which has some meritt especially if they are mixed in with a bit of game knowledge.

    The chucklehead that uses them exclusively, is just that, a chucklehead.
    The seemingly impressive pass defense rankings may be attributed mostly to our lackluster performance to date on the offensive side of the ball.

    The Vikings have been playing from behind much of this season. This leads to opposing teams using a higher percentage of run plays against the Vikings than they have in the last few years. Our defense is giving up less yards to passing but more to running.

    Does this equate to our pass defense being better? Stat sheets say yes, my brain says no. Does this make our run defense worse than the last few years? Total running yards given up say yes, YPC say our run defense is the same as it has been.

    If the Vikings start taking early leads in games, I think you will see our pass defense moving steadily down the rankings.

    As BH points out, stats are the most misleading aspect of football and can be used to support almost any argument, especially when taken in a limited context.

  10. #40
    dfosterf's Avatar
    dfosterf is offline Coach
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    987

    Re: Minnesota Vikings Vs Green Bay Packers

    I have no idea who is going to win this week. I think it's going to be the Vikings, but then again, maybe Clay will be able resurrect our pass rush. The Pack could also really use Mike Neal back in the lineup.

    Brandon Jackson is essentialy a bust as a 2nd round pick, imo

    Chad Clifton is a turnstile. He is going to get Aaron Rodgers killed. I think it has gotten to the point that Rodgers is excessively jumpy back there.

    Colledge still sucks. You can almost count on his holding penalty on any play of significance by the Pack.

    Our friggin' punter (Matshay) has shown he is capable of losing games for us. Dude cranks 'em 50+ CONSTANTLY when in competition for his job, wins the job--now booms 'em at least 30 consistently, although that 12 yarder still has me a little peeved.

    Charles Woodson has gone insane. We think he is trying to "make up" for his girly-man play from last year's AZ game--- You don't really need to complete the ball to the man he is covering, just throw it in that direction, the refs will throw the flag for you, unless he (Woodson) falls down...Either scenario is about 50/50, with a statistically insignificant possibility that he will actually make the play.

    Mason Crosby could make a 70 yard field goal.

    In the 1st quarter.

    4th quarter, he couldn't hit a bulls ass with a banjo.

    Sometimes our wide receivers can catch the football, so watch out for that.

    OK---

    Here is one fact:

    Whichever team wins---- The fanbase of that team is going to be in one hell of a better mood than they were going into the game.

Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Minnesota Valkyrie 28, Green Bay Chill 25
    By Zeus in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-02-2011, 01:54 PM
  2. Packers eye up Trent Green as backup QB
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-08-2008, 07:50 AM
  3. Packers | Green reaches milestone
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-27-2006, 09:08 AM
  4. I love my Green Bay Packers!
    By enlvikeman in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-03-2006, 05:06 AM
  5. RB Green will be back with Packers
    By LuckyVike in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-10-2006, 08:17 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
  •