Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 68 of 68

Thread: Bryant McKinnie

  1. #61
    BloodyHorns82's Avatar
    BloodyHorns82 is offline Jersey Retired Feed The Frog Champion
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    9,691

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:

    I could accept that rationale from you if you were consistent with that premise for the whole team but if that were the case, then we would have been fine at WR. Just because the backups weren't householad names wasn't a reason to go out and overpay to have a name they recognize on the field.

    Same goes for the D-Line. We have more depth on the Dline than we do on the O line and yet you want to not only use our first pick, but also spend FA dollars on one position when we already have someone there who made the team last year. I can see adding one but what your defense of the o-line and your wishes for the d-line are not consistent with each other
    Not sure how you think I am inconsistent with my rationale.

    Do you actually believe that we were set at WR?
    I don't.
    The staff screwed the pooch when they drafted T-will and that position needed to be fixed as he was a starter that wasn't producing.

    I actually was touting them taking a S in the first round because of depth.
    Truth be told I still wouldn't be suprised if they didn't take one but now, becuase of depth issues (and no VET DE signings) I am starting to lean towards a DE.

    Not sure were you get that we are so deep on the DL.
    You do realize we have only one LDE (Mitchell) going into the season.
    Were are all the backups behind Mitchell?

    RDE 91 Ray Edwards DE 23 6-5 268 2 Purdue
    RDE 73 Otis Grigsby DE 27 6-3 260 2 Kentucky
    LDE 92 Jayme Mitchell DE 23 6-6 285 2 Mississippi
    RDE 96 Brian Robison DE 24 6-3 267 R Texas
    [s]95 Kenechi Udeze DE 24 6-3 281 4 USC [/s]

    Also, now that Spencer took the money and ran (as I thought he would) we are a man short at DT.

    90 Fred Evans DT 24 6-4 305 2 Texas State

    [s]97 Spencer Johnson DT 26 6-3 286 4 Auburn [/s]
    93 Kevin Williams DL 27 6-5 311 5 Oklahoma State
    94 Pat Williams DL 35 6-3 317 11 Texas A&M


    When I look at the OL I just don't see alot of holes and if you add Dan Mozes back to that list we are pretty fat with respect to personnel at OL.
    Again, were is the inconsistency you seem to believe I have.

    62 Ryan Cook C 24 6-6 328 2 New Mexico
    46 Cullen Loeffler C 27 6-5 241 4 Texas
    64 Anthony Herrera G 27 6-2 315 4 Tennessee
    75 Chase Johnson OT 24 6-8 330 R Wyoming
    72 Marcus Johnson OT 26 6-6 321 3 Mississippi
    74 Bryant McKinnie OT 28 6-8 335 6 Miami (FL)
    79 Artis Hicks OG 29 6-4 335 6 Memphis
    76 Steve Hutchinson OG 30 6-5 313 7 Michigan

    Fact of the matter is, if you watch all of my arguements for adding players you will see me harp on one thing and that is, "Is there a roster spot open" to add the player.

    Help me out here.
    Point out the error of my ways my friend with respect to inconsistency.


    Until then I will still keep on keeping on (remain consistent), and in this case, I will say that everyone wants to add OL players because they don't have a clue who our OL backups are.
    Nothing more, nothing less.

    I noticed you left Erasmus James off your list, so that's one more DE we have on the roster. Bringing the total to 5 DE already. Cook should be listed as an OT, not a center. Also, Dan Mozes is listed on the roster as a G, not a center. You mentioned him playing cener in another thread.

    So what I see is 8 men on the DL & 9 men on the OL rosters with no back up for Center. If you can add a man to that DL, you can certainly add one to the OL. Especially at center.

    You don't necessarily need to have a void before you fill a roster spot. (I.E.) AD last year. There was no void at RB. FA & the draft are for also bringing better caliber players that will replace those lesser talented players at the bottom of the chain.

    Any position is really open to be filled if you can fill that spot with a better player. Hicks & M. Johnson might easily be two candidates in need of replacement. We also have no idea if C. Johnson can be a good LT or not as well. Sure he made the roster, but all that means was he was the best LT we had for a back up plan. Perhaps the only other true LT on the roster. I know Hicks filled in for McKinnie, but he's a G, not a LT.

    The right side of our line is still porous IMO, & with AD's lackluster blocking skills, we need to make sure that right side is solid.
    As to your point on James.
    Until someone shows me an article that he is gonna be healthy (actually seen two that said he had another procedure and might not be 100% again at the start of training camp) I am counting him as out.

    As to Cook, you are correct, I should have correct ESPNs guffaw.
    As to Mozes, he was actually projected as a C (gave the link in other thread I believe) that could also play backup G.
    Again, as I said in the other thread (actually quite a few), I believe he is the heir apparent to Birk.

    As to the numbers, see my comment above.
    The DL rotates all the time based on down and distance and sometimes you will have DE's playing in DT positions.
    The OL never rotates players based on down and distance, in fact, the only time they do rotate is if someone is hurt and has to come out, thereby trying to match a backup to position just doesn't work.
    It all comes down to the number the staff wants to carry as a group.

    I disagree with respect to not having a void at RB last year.
    In fact I repeatedly took heat from almost everybody on here for wanting to draft a RB with the number 7 pick. Remember the post I then made showing how well all of CT's backups did when he went down?
    Most CT/Memo crotch sniffers were all over me for even speaking such sacriligeous things as drafting a RB.

    ;D

    I still contend (and rightly so) that we needed a RB going into last years draft.
    Most now agree with me.
    ;D

    I think you were wrong about james, he is under contract so you have to count him. Until he is cut he is on the team, I have not heard that he will be out all season. You could also leave off McKinnie from the offensive line if you are going by projected availablity.
    To say that RB was an area of need going into 2007 is just flat wrong. We had Taylor, Williams, Fason, where is the void, we had one of the top running games in 06. They drafted Peterson not because RB was a position of need but because he was clearly the best player available. I think they will do the same thing this year in the first round, take the best player available regardless of what the team needs are.
    I think once you get much passed the 10th overall pick, teams are much less likely to draft BPA, but more so for team need.
    The talent level between the 11th and 32nd picks usually seems to be fairly wide spread.


    Obviously players falling ike Quinn last year, or Leinert the year before would be the exception.

  2. #62
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    "BloodyHorns82" wrote:
    I think once you get much passed the 10th overall pick, teams are much less likely to draft BPA, but more so for team need.
    The talent level between the 11th and 32nd picks usually seems to be fairly wide spread.


    Obviously players falling ike Quinn last year, or Leinert the year before would be the exception.
    10th might even be too late to go BPA.
    I think you have to judge the quality of "not-miss" candidates in the draft and then slot them as BPA - once they're gone, you pick for need.

    Look at 2007 - the first 8 picks were probably all "not-miss" guys (although, I'd trade Gaines Adams in that list for Amobe Okoye, but that's just me) and then the Dolphins went off the reservation to draft for need with Ted Ginn, Jr. at #9.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  3. #63
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    IMO all of this depends on the particular draft and who is coming out. In some years there are a higher number of skill players that are very talented in a draft and they end up getting drafted very high which lets talented Ol and Dl players slip to later in the round.

    IMO this will be a draft where talented Ol and DL players will be available much deeper in the draft than you normally see. There seems to be fewer franchise tyoe skill players, though.

  4. #64
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:

    I could accept that rationale from you if you were consistent with that premise for the whole team but if that were the case, then we would have been fine at WR. Just because the backups weren't householad names wasn't a reason to go out and overpay to have a name they recognize on the field.

    Same goes for the D-Line. We have more depth on the Dline than we do on the O line and yet you want to not only use our first pick, but also spend FA dollars on one position when we already have someone there who made the team last year. I can see adding one but what your defense of the o-line and your wishes for the d-line are not consistent with each other
    Not sure how you think I am inconsistent with my rationale.

    Do you actually believe that we were set at WR?
    I don't.
    The staff screwed the pooch when they drafted T-will and that position needed to be fixed as he was a starter that wasn't producing.

    I actually was touting them taking a S in the first round because of depth.
    Truth be told I still wouldn't be suprised if they didn't take one but now, becuase of depth issues (and no VET DE signings) I am starting to lean towards a DE.

    Not sure were you get that we are so deep on the DL.
    You do realize we have only one LDE (Mitchell) going into the season.
    Were are all the backups behind Mitchell?

    RDE 91 Ray Edwards DE 23 6-5 268 2 Purdue
    RDE 73 Otis Grigsby DE 27 6-3 260 2 Kentucky
    LDE 92 Jayme Mitchell DE 23 6-6 285 2 Mississippi
    RDE 96 Brian Robison DE 24 6-3 267 R Texas
    [s]95 Kenechi Udeze DE 24 6-3 281 4 USC [/s]

    Also, now that Spencer took the money and ran (as I thought he would) we are a man short at DT.

    90 Fred Evans DT 24 6-4 305 2 Texas State

    [s]97 Spencer Johnson DT 26 6-3 286 4 Auburn [/s]
    93 Kevin Williams DL 27 6-5 311 5 Oklahoma State
    94 Pat Williams DL 35 6-3 317 11 Texas A&M


    When I look at the OL I just don't see alot of holes and if you add Dan Mozes back to that list we are pretty fat with respect to personnel at OL.
    Again, were is the inconsistency you seem to believe I have.

    62 Ryan Cook C 24 6-6 328 2 New Mexico
    46 Cullen Loeffler C 27 6-5 241 4 Texas
    64 Anthony Herrera G 27 6-2 315 4 Tennessee
    75 Chase Johnson OT 24 6-8 330 R Wyoming
    72 Marcus Johnson OT 26 6-6 321 3 Mississippi
    74 Bryant McKinnie OT 28 6-8 335 6 Miami (FL)
    79 Artis Hicks OG 29 6-4 335 6 Memphis
    76 Steve Hutchinson OG 30 6-5 313 7 Michigan

    Fact of the matter is, if you watch all of my arguements for adding players you will see me harp on one thing and that is, "Is there a roster spot open" to add the player.

    Help me out here.
    Point out the error of my ways my friend with respect to inconsistency.


    Until then I will still keep on keeping on (remain consistent), and in this case, I will say that everyone wants to add OL players because they don't have a clue who our OL backups are.
    Nothing more, nothing less.

    I noticed you left Erasmus James off your list, so that's one more DE we have on the roster. Bringing the total to 5 DE already. Cook should be listed as an OT, not a center. Also, Dan Mozes is listed on the roster as a G, not a center. You mentioned him playing cener in another thread.

    So what I see is 8 men on the DL & 9 men on the OL rosters with no back up for Center. If you can add a man to that DL, you can certainly add one to the OL. Especially at center.

    You don't necessarily need to have a void before you fill a roster spot. (I.E.) AD last year. There was no void at RB. FA & the draft are for also bringing better caliber players that will replace those lesser talented players at the bottom of the chain.

    Any position is really open to be filled if you can fill that spot with a better player. Hicks & M. Johnson might easily be two candidates in need of replacement. We also have no idea if C. Johnson can be a good LT or not as well. Sure he made the roster, but all that means was he was the best LT we had for a back up plan. Perhaps the only other true LT on the roster. I know Hicks filled in for McKinnie, but he's a G, not a LT.

    The right side of our line is still porous IMO, & with AD's lackluster blocking skills, we need to make sure that right side is solid.
    As to your point on James.
    Until someone shows me an article that he is gonna be healthy (actually seen two that said he had another procedure and might not be 100% again at the start of training camp) I am counting him as out.

    As to Cook, you are correct, I should have correct ESPNs guffaw.
    As to Mozes, he was actually projected as a C (gave the link in other thread I believe) that could also play backup G.
    Again, as I said in the other thread (actually quite a few), I believe he is the heir apparent to Birk.

    As to the numbers, see my comment above.
    The DL rotates all the time based on down and distance and sometimes you will have DE's playing in DT positions.
    The OL never rotates players based on down and distance, in fact, the only time they do rotate is if someone is hurt and has to come out, thereby trying to match a backup to position just doesn't work.
    It all comes down to the number the staff wants to carry as a group.

    I disagree with respect to not having a void at RB last year.
    In fact I repeatedly took heat from almost everybody on here for wanting to draft a RB with the number 7 pick. Remember the post I then made showing how well all of CT's backups did when he went down?
    Most CT/Memo crotch sniffers were all over me for even speaking such sacriligeous things as drafting a RB.

    ;D

    I still contend (and rightly so) that we needed a RB going into last years draft.
    Most now agree with me.
    ;D

    I think you were wrong about james, he is under contract so you have to count him. Until he is cut he is on the team, I have not heard that he will be out all season. You could also leave off McKinnie from the offensive line if you are going by projected availablity.
    To say that RB was an area of need going into 2007 is just flat wrong. We had Taylor, Williams, Fason, where is the void, we had one of the top running games in 06. They drafted Peterson not because RB was a position of need but because he was clearly the best player available. I think they will do the same thing this year in the first round, take the best player available regardless of what the team needs are.
    Oh, I'm not saying he is gonna get cut my friend.
    Sorry if I am confusing you. I am saying I think we have seen two things already that says he might not be 100% again when training camp starts after his latest procedure.

    Truth of the matter when it comes to Big Mac, I have already shift my focus to that area when I look at the draft to who they could take and were.

    Might have to get a LT and then shift someone like Marcus Johnson off the roster to make room for him.

    Let me go search again. That is the same response I got when I suggested they might draft a RB with the number 7 pick.
    The post was mostly centered on the production those very same individuals gave us when CT went down.
    Basically zilch, and you forgot Pinner as well.

    Take a look at this thread and a few more from that time period.
    Again, I was pretty new on the board back then and took the beatings pretty hard for even mentioning that we take a RB with a bumb shoulder over the likes of Ted Ginn JR.
    ;D

    http://www.purplepride.org/forums/in...9360#msg569360
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  5. #65
    ThorSPL's Avatar
    ThorSPL is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    3,422

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    Oh wow.. Marrdro was "that guy"!


    Trust me, I'm a doctor.

    www.twitter.com/ThorSPL

  6. #66
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    "ThorSPL" wrote:
    Oh wow.. Marrdro was "that guy"!

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

  7. #67
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    "Marrdro" wrote:

    As to Cook, you are correct, I should have correct ESPNs guffaw.
    As to Mozes, he was actually projected as a C (gave the link in other thread I believe) that could also play backup G.
    Again, as I said in the other thread (actually quite a few), I believe he is the heir apparent to Birk.

    I'm not so sure. He was listed as Center on Vikings.com when he first came here, but sometime last season they changed him to a Guard. That gives me this funny feeling that I think they are trying to convert him to a Guard from Center like they are doing with Cook from Center to Tackle.

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

  8. #68
    ancoin is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    191

    Re: Bryant McKinnie

    "singersp" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:

    As to Cook, you are correct, I should have correct ESPNs guffaw.
    As to Mozes, he was actually projected as a C (gave the link in other thread I believe) that could also play backup G.
    Again, as I said in the other thread (actually quite a few), I believe he is the heir apparent to Birk.

    I'm not so sure. He was listed as Center on Vikings.com when he first came here, but sometime last season they changed him to a Guard. That gives me this funny feeling that I think they are trying to convert him to a Guard from Center like they are doing with Cook from Center to Tackle.
    Mozes dis not play center until his junior season at WV. Maybe thats why they want him at guard.

    Thank to Lotza

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

Similar Threads

  1. Q&A with Bryant McKinnie
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-11-2009, 06:56 PM
  2. Life without Bryant McKinnie
    By singersp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-24-2008, 08:56 PM
  3. Bryant Mckinnie
    By vikings11_27 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 06-08-2006, 01:59 AM
  4. Bryant McKinnie
    By Webby in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-15-2005, 07:51 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
  •