Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,906

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    We all agree he wasn't a complete back this year. Like I said modify the scheme.
    I assume you would realize that we shouldn't call a passing play out of a formation that has no full back back there to block. Most teams have hundreds of plays but most a variants out of different formations. is there any reason we cannot utilize a HB.
    Is it my job to come up with a way to utilize last years most explosive weapon in the passing game?
    You can't seriously agree that putting him on the
    sideline for passing plays and bringing him in for obvious running plays was a great idea. That was a high school football moment. Are we really so poor a team that we can run a passing play with a running back running a slide route?
    WHAT.

    Are you trying to convince me that teams don't use RB's to block only FB's.
    Now you are really loosing me.

    Is it my job to come up with a way to utilize last years most explosive weapon in the passing game?
    Good lord no or he probably wouldn't have won ROY, lead the NFC in rushing and came in second to one of the best backs in the whole NFL even after missing a few games.

    It would be a high school moment to think anything other than that.

    Face it my friend, the kid had limitations last year that all rookie RB's had.
    It is a good thing that we had CT in there who when put in ran pretty gol 'darnit effectively in running situations and caught the ball/blocked pretty gol 'darnit good in passing situations.

    Gotta have a FB in on all passing plays.........

    LOL.
    Your just trying to crack me up.

    ;D
    Sorry you misunderstood me.
    I'm not saying that we should have a full back in all passing plays.
    I am saying that taking AD out on passing plays is way to predictable.

    If we were to run a few passing plays with AD in it would help make it less obvious. You guys blamed his inability to pass block, so i mentioned we could always have him run a slide and have a fb or second RB block. There were tons of plays when CT was blocking and richardson ran a route. Why not substitute richardson for AD and have him chip release.

    I don't get what's so hard to understand this premise. Use what we had but find a way to use him in the passing game...

    When defenses started selling out to stop him we became 1 dimensional. The Coahing Staff answer to this was to remove Ad from the field so that defensese stop selling out. This only created a tell( like in poker) to our play calling:

    1st and 10 - AD is in = Run
    2nd and 6 = ad is out = pass( possible run)
    3 and short = AD is back in = RUN
    3 and 5 CT is in = Pass( possible run)

    Defenses eat this crap alive. My answer to this was to use AD as a reciver on some of these 3rd and 5. Call the right formation to be able to do so. Use AD and CT at the same time and have Ct block and AD run a slide. I rather have him as a passing option than Shank.


  2. #22
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Sorry you misunderstood me.
    I'm not saying that we should have a full back in all passing plays.
    I am saying that taking AD out on passing plays is way to predictable.

    If we were to run a few passing plays with AD in it would help make it less obvious. You guys blamed his inability to pass block, so i mentioned we could always have him run a slide and have a fb or second RB block. There were tons of plays when CT was blocking and richardson ran a route. Why not substitute richardson for AD and have him chip release.

    I don't get what's so hard to understand this premise. Use what we had but find a way to use him in the passing game...

    When defenses started selling out to stop him we became 1 dimensional. The Coahing Staff answer to this was to remove Ad from the field so that defensese stop selling out. This only created a tell( like in poker) to our play calling:

    1st and 10 - AD is in = Run
    2nd and 6 = ad is out = pass( possible run)
    3 and short = AD is back in = RUN
    3 and 5 CT is in = Pass( possible run)

    Defenses eat this crap alive. My answer to this was to use AD as a reciver on some of these 3rd and 5. Call the right formation to be able to do so. Use AD and CT at the same time and have Ct block and AD run a slide. I rather have him as a passing option than Shank.

    I understand what you are saying, and obviously the plan is to use AD more on passing downs, in any manner of ways.
    But you have to remember that AD was a rookie, and simply didn't have the skill set to block or run routes last year.
    It is a learning process.
    I like the fact that Childress didn't put him in a position to do something that he was not ready to do.
    That is how bad habits start - people compensate for lack of knowledge by taking shortcuts.

    I expect that we will see AD in on passing downs more and more as his experience level goes up.
    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=

  3. #23
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,906

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    We all agree he wasn't a complete back this year. Like I said modify the scheme.
    I assume you would realize that we shouldn't call a passing play out of a formation that has no full back back there to block. Most teams have hundreds of plays but most a variants out of different formations. is there any reason we cannot utilize a HB.
    Is it my job to come up with a way to utilize last years most explosive weapon in the passing game?
    You can't seriously agree that putting him on the
    sideline for passing plays and bringing him in for obvious running plays was a great idea. That was a high school football moment. Are we really so poor a team that we can run a passing play with a running back running a slide route?
    WHAT.

    Are you trying to convince me that teams don't use RB's to block only FB's.
    Now you are really loosing me.

    Is it my job to come up with a way to utilize last years most explosive weapon in the passing game?
    Good lord no or he probably wouldn't have won ROY, lead the NFC in rushing and came in second to one of the best backs in the whole NFL even after missing a few games.

    It would be a high school moment to think anything other than that.

    Face it my friend, the kid had limitations last year that all rookie RB's had.
    It is a good thing that we had CT in there who when put in ran pretty gol 'darnit effectively in running situations and caught the ball/blocked pretty gol 'darnit good in passing situations.

    Gotta have a FB in on all passing plays.........

    LOL.
    Your just trying to crack me up.

    ;D
    See I disagree to the point that I don't actually believe FB should be a position.
    I just find them useless and don't like using them.
    Instead of having a FB on the field why not put in a TE who can be more useful.
    Full Backs just make me mad, especially when teams hand off to them in the stupidest situations thinking "they'll never see the FB coming", why not just run the ball with your HB, that's why you freaking have him.
    Maybe it's just in the way you look at the position, but I'd rather have CT and AP out there than Richardson.
    Did I mention how useless I think a FB is?

    As for Peterson I think we should have just thrown him in there, our pass protection was nothing special anyways, and it wasn't like we were going to win the super bowl or anything.
    Might as well give AP some exp with pass blocking, and actually make teams think about whether he is running or not.
    Every time we subbed in AP it was like giving the other team a giant sign that said "hey look, AP is going to get the ball".
    You know, its been awhile since you have moved but I am gonna bump you up a column.
    Excellent post.

    I think that the rest of the NFL thinks the same way and that is why you have very few teams that use (waste a roster spot) a "Full Time" FB on thier roster.

    Truth be told, if one were to closely look at how this staff has manned those positions you see more and more of the FB (that used to be a TE) kindof guy on the roster (ala Dugan, Sauce) and why I am almost totally convinced Mills will be a slotted as a FB next year.

    Excellent post my friend.

    (with one exception......Letting AD learn to block at TJ's expense.
    That just cracks me up.
    I can just hear the chit chat after the game between AD and TJ......... ;D)
    No you run the right protection schemes to all your young game chaning running back to remain on the field. If his pass blocking skills are so bad, allot his responsibilities to someone else.

    Football is about using the same look a million different ways and fooling you opponent with it. Every team has a dive play. So all defenses should see it coming. However, it's all about how you minipulate the defense into not know what is coming and then picking them apart.

    All teams should have a play where a rb is running a slide and go. The great teams impose their will and run what they want to run and the poor teams let the defense take away their weapons. Take alook at ADs stats after the 49ers adpeted their sell out scheme(and everyone else followed). We never adjusted. OOur only adjustment to that was to take Ad our to insure on passing plays that the pass protection was adequte. This only made it easier on our defense and made us predictable.

  4. #24
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,906

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Sorry you misunderstood me.
    I'm not saying that we should have a full back in all passing plays.
    I am saying that taking AD out on passing plays is way to predictable.

    If we were to run a few passing plays with AD in it would help make it less obvious. You guys blamed his inability to pass block, so i mentioned we could always have him run a slide and have a fb or second RB block. There were tons of plays when CT was blocking and richardson ran a route. Why not substitute richardson for AD and have him chip release.

    I don't get what's so hard to understand this premise. Use what we had but find a way to use him in the passing game...

    When defenses started selling out to stop him we became 1 dimensional. The Coahing Staff answer to this was to remove Ad from the field so that defensese stop selling out. This only created a tell( like in poker) to our play calling:

    1st and 10 - AD is in = Run
    2nd and 6 = ad is out = pass( possible run)
    3 and short = AD is back in = RUN
    3 and 5 CT is in = Pass( possible run)

    Defenses eat this crap alive. My answer to this was to use AD as a reciver on some of these 3rd and 5. Call the right formation to be able to do so. Use AD and CT at the same time and have Ct block and AD run a slide. I rather have him as a passing option than Shank.

    I understand what you are saying, and obviously the plan is to use AD more on passing downs, in any manner of ways.
    But you have to remember that AD was a rookie, and simply didn't have the skill set to block or run routes last year.
    It is a learning process.
    I like the fact that Childress didn't put him in a position to do something that he was not ready to do.
    That is how bad habits start - people compensate for lack of knowledge by taking shortcuts.

    I expect that we will see AD in on passing downs more and more as his experience level goes up.
    What do you mean he didn't hae the skill set to run routes?
    You assume Childress didn't do it because he couldn't? Or he took the bon headed way out and did not scheme to all him to use his best weapon?

    What about AD shows you he couldn't urun routes.
    I believe his first TD came off of a juggled slide route!!!

    Say he couldn't pass block but don't talk out your arse and say he couldn't run routes?

  5. #25
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    No you run the right protection schemes to all your young game chaning running back to remain on the field. If his pass blocking skills are so bad, allot his responsibilities to someone else.

    Football is about using the same look a million different ways and fooling you opponent with it. Every team has a dive play. So all defenses should see it coming. However, it's all about how you minipulate the defense into not know what is coming and then picking them apart.

    All teams should have a play where a rb is running a slide and go. The great teams impose their will and run what they want to run and the poor teams let the defense take away their weapons. Take alook at ADs stats after the 49ers adpeted their sell out scheme(and everyone else followed). We never adjusted. OOur only adjustment to that was to take Ad our to insure on passing plays that the pass protection was adequte. This only made it easier on our defense and made us predictable.
    All right, one more try and then I will give up.....

    Our best player is a RB that runs really really really good. He doesn't do anything else but run really really really good.
    He doesn't have alot of experience at catching the ball or running routes, he doesn't have alot of experience blocking.

    What does he do......?
    HE RUNS.

    What more can you do with him other than put him in in obvious running situations?

    If it is a passing situation I want a guy out there that can catch (WR/TE), not one that didn't do alot of it in college and isn't very good at protecting the QB.

    I agree with you on your statement that GREAT teams can impose thier will on someone but my friend, do you really, even with the deepest shade of purple glasses, believe the Vikings were a great team last year?
    Hell for that matter do you think they will be great this year?
    I don't.

    The staff did what they could do with a rookie stud RB that RAN.
    A OL that struggled in pass protection to the point that TE's had to stay in all the time and a QB that even if he had time to get through the progressions would struggle doing it.

    gol 'darnit my friend, what is so hard to understand that this teams composition last year limited the staff from doing things like your famous "Slide and Go" play.



    We all just need to remember what last year was.
    It was a throw away year to get these kids some reps, get it on tape so that the staff could fix the problems (i.e. RB's pass blocking skills) for next year.


    It sure the hell wasn't about a great team imposing thier will on another.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #26
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Sorry you misunderstood me.
    I'm not saying that we should have a full back in all passing plays.
    I am saying that taking AD out on passing plays is way to predictable.

    If we were to run a few passing plays with AD in it would help make it less obvious. You guys blamed his inability to pass block, so i mentioned we could always have him run a slide and have a fb or second RB block. There were tons of plays when CT was blocking and richardson ran a route. Why not substitute richardson for AD and have him chip release.

    I don't get what's so hard to understand this premise. Use what we had but find a way to use him in the passing game...

    When defenses started selling out to stop him we became 1 dimensional. The Coahing Staff answer to this was to remove Ad from the field so that defensese stop selling out. This only created a tell( like in poker) to our play calling:

    1st and 10 - AD is in = Run
    2nd and 6 = ad is out = pass( possible run)
    3 and short = AD is back in = RUN
    3 and 5 CT is in = Pass( possible run)

    Defenses eat this crap alive. My answer to this was to use AD as a reciver on some of these 3rd and 5. Call the right formation to be able to do so. Use AD and CT at the same time and have Ct block and AD run a slide. I rather have him as a passing option than Shank.

    I understand what you are saying, and obviously the plan is to use AD more on passing downs, in any manner of ways.
    But you have to remember that AD was a rookie, and simply didn't have the skill set to block or run routes last year.
    It is a learning process.
    I like the fact that Childress didn't put him in a position to do something that he was not ready to do.
    That is how bad habits start - people compensate for lack of knowledge by taking shortcuts.

    I expect that we will see AD in on passing downs more and more as his experience level goes up.
    What do you mean he didn't hae the skill set to run routes?
    You assume Childress didn't do it because he couldn't? Or he took the bon headed way out and did not scheme to all him to use his best weapon?

    What about AD shows you he couldn't urun routes.
    I believe his first TD came off of a juggled slide route!!!

    Say he couldn't pass block but don't talk out your arse and say he couldn't run routes?
    You have alot of man love for AD my friend.
    ;D

    I like it that you are so passionate about your support but take the blinders off.
    He screwed the pooch on several timing routes, dropped some easy passes and most importantly almost got our QB killed a couple of times by sucking at pass blocking.

    Of course, you will probably come back with your standard response of "What games were you watching" but its true.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  7. #27
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,906

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    All right, one more try and then I will give up.....

    Our best player is a RB that runs really really really good. He doesn't do anything else but run really really really good.
    He doesn't have alot of experience at catching the ball or running routes, he doesn't have alot of experience blocking.

    What does he do......?
    HE RUNS.

    What more can you do with him other than put him in in obvious running situations?

    If it is a passing situation I want a guy out there that can catch (WR/TE), not one that didn't do alot of it in college and isn't very good at protecting the QB.

    I agree with you on your statement that GREAT teams can impose thier will on someone but my friend, do you really, even with the deepest shade of purple glasses, believe the Vikings were a great team last year?
    Hell for that matter do you think they will be great this year?
    I don't.

    The staff did what they could do with a rookie stud RB that RAN.
    A OL that struggled in pass protection to the point that TE's had to stay in all the time and a QB that even if he had time to get through the progressions would struggle doing it.

    gol 'darnit my friend, what is so hard to understand that this teams composition last year limited the staff from doing things like your famous "Slide and Go" play.



    We all just need to remember what last year was.
    It was a throw away year to get these kids some reps, get it on tape so that the staff could fix the problems (i.e. RB's pass blocking skills) for next year.


    It sure the hell wasn't about a great team imposing thier will on another.
    ;D
    Damn it Marr,
    Why did you have to go an ruin a good thing.
    AD 2007 reciving stats
    Team Catches Yards

    ATL

    1





    60.....I guess he can be a game changer in the passing game?
    DET

    4





    52..... Was last week a fluke( not with a long of 24 :)
    KC

    3





    48..... Whats that average ecluding ATL? Answer 14: a catch
    Chi

    1





    9........What changed? Huge average less looks
    DAl

    1





    12...... Huge average not enough looks
    Phi

    0





    0....... No looks
    SD


    1





    19


    Should I go on.


  8. #28
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    All right, one more try and then I will give up.....

    Our best player is a RB that runs really really really good. He doesn't do anything else but run really really really good.
    He doesn't have alot of experience at catching the ball or running routes, he doesn't have alot of experience blocking.

    What does he do......?
    HE RUNS.

    What more can you do with him other than put him in in obvious running situations?

    If it is a passing situation I want a guy out there that can catch (WR/TE), not one that didn't do alot of it in college and isn't very good at protecting the QB.

    I agree with you on your statement that GREAT teams can impose thier will on someone but my friend, do you really, even with the deepest shade of purple glasses, believe the Vikings were a great team last year?
    Hell for that matter do you think they will be great this year?
    I don't.

    The staff did what they could do with a rookie stud RB that RAN.
    A OL that struggled in pass protection to the point that TE's had to stay in all the time and a QB that even if he had time to get through the progressions would struggle doing it.

    gol 'darnit my friend, what is so hard to understand that this teams composition last year limited the staff from doing things like your famous "Slide and Go" play.



    We all just need to remember what last year was.
    It was a throw away year to get these kids some reps, get it on tape so that the staff could fix the problems (i.e. RB's pass blocking skills) for next year.


    It sure the hell wasn't about a great team imposing thier will on another.
    ;D
    gol 'darnit it Marr,
    Why did you have to go an ruin a good thing.
    AD 2007 reciving stats
    Team Catches Yards


    ATL

    1





    60.....I guess he can be a game changer in the passing game?
    DET

    4





    52..... Was last week a fluke( not with a long of 24 :)
    KC


    3






    48..... Whats that average ecluding ATL? Answer 14: a catch
    Chi


    1





    9........What changed? Huge average less looks
    DAl


    1





    12...... Huge average not enough looks
    Phi


    0






    0....... No looks
    SD


    1





    19


    Should I go on.
    I didn't say he couldn't recieve or catch, I said he had very little experience doing it in college.

    As far as the games do I really need to go down the road of showing you the differences in thier different defensive schemes to show you why a RB would do good (i.e. in the Atlanta game) catching a ball in the flats, were against other teams that wouldn't work?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #29
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Sorry you misunderstood me.
    I'm not saying that we should have a full back in all passing plays.
    I am saying that taking AD out on passing plays is way to predictable.

    If we were to run a few passing plays with AD in it would help make it less obvious. You guys blamed his inability to pass block, so i mentioned we could always have him run a slide and have a fb or second RB block. There were tons of plays when CT was blocking and richardson ran a route. Why not substitute richardson for AD and have him chip release.

    I don't get what's so hard to understand this premise. Use what we had but find a way to use him in the passing game...

    When defenses started selling out to stop him we became 1 dimensional. The Coahing Staff answer to this was to remove Ad from the field so that defensese stop selling out. This only created a tell( like in poker) to our play calling:

    1st and 10 - AD is in = Run
    2nd and 6 = ad is out = pass( possible run)
    3 and short = AD is back in = RUN
    3 and 5 CT is in = Pass( possible run)

    Defenses eat this crap alive. My answer to this was to use AD as a reciver on some of these 3rd and 5. Call the right formation to be able to do so. Use AD and CT at the same time and have Ct block and AD run a slide. I rather have him as a passing option than Shank.

    I understand what you are saying, and obviously the plan is to use AD more on passing downs, in any manner of ways.
    But you have to remember that AD was a rookie, and simply didn't have the skill set to block or run routes last year.
    It is a learning process.
    I like the fact that Childress didn't put him in a position to do something that he was not ready to do.
    That is how bad habits start - people compensate for lack of knowledge by taking shortcuts.

    I expect that we will see AD in on passing downs more and more as his experience level goes up.
    What do you mean he didn't hae the skill set to run routes?
    You assume Childress didn't do it because he couldn't? Or he took the bon headed way out and did not scheme to all him to use his best weapon?

    What about AD shows you he couldn't urun routes.
    I believe his first TD came off of a juggled slide route!!!

    Say he couldn't pass block but don't talk out your arse and say he couldn't run routes?
    Well let's see, we have two possible scenarios.


    1) AD is an amazing route runner (and pass blocker to boot).
    But the collective wisdom on the Vikings sidelines just chose to keep him out on passing situations, despite the fact that everybody - from ESPN to posters on football forums - caught on to the trend.

    or

    2) AD, despite being a very good ball player, still has areas to improve in.
    Every rookie does, and route running and pass protection are two areas that are typically among the more difficult adjustments to make from college to pro.


    Even towards the end of the season last year, there were games in which AD missed his block completely and the QB got sacked.
    The Denver game comes to mind immediately.
    That is one of the reasons he was not called upon to pass protect very often.
    On the same not, we did NOT see him run routes very often, and I think it would make a lot more sense to assume that there was reason for this, not just a whim by the coaching staff.


    His first TD of the year had more to do with teams underestimating him than any ability he had to run a route.
    It was a flat pass to account for a strong side blitz, and the LB committed inside instead of covering the flat.

    I have some serious man love for AD, and I expect him to be the top RB in the league this year.
    I also expect him to shore up his skill set to the point that he will be featured more often in passing situations.
    This should definately help open our offense up quite a bit.
    But my man love does not blind me to the fact that everybody has some skills that are not up to standard in their rookie year.
    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=

  10. #30
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Four Downs: NFC North

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    Well let's see, we have two possible scenarios.


    1) AD is an amazing route runner (and pass blocker to boot).
    But the collective wisdom on the Vikings sidelines just chose to keep him out on passing situations, despite the fact that everybody - from ESPN to posters on football forums - caught on to the trend.

    or

    2) AD, despite being a very good ball player, still has areas to improve in.
    Every rookie does, and route running and pass protection are two areas that are typically among the more difficult adjustments to make from college to pro.


    Even towards the end of the season last year, there were games in which AD missed his block completely and the QB got sacked.
    The Denver game comes to mind immediately.
    That is one of the reasons he was not called upon to pass protect very often.
    On the same not, we did NOT see him run routes very often, and I think it would make a lot more sense to assume that there was reason for this, not just a whim by the coaching staff.


    His first TD of the year had more to do with teams underestimating him than any ability he had to run a route.
    It was a flat pass to account for a strong side blitz, and the LB committed inside instead of covering the flat.

    I have some serious man love for AD, and I expect him to be the top RB in the league this year.
    I also expect him to shore up his skill set to the point that he will be featured more often in passing situations.
    This should definately help open our offense up quite a bit.
    But my man love does not blind me to the fact that everybody has some skills that are not up to standard in their rookie year.
    Marrdro is caught singing to his computer.......

    Did you ever know that your my hero.....
    and eveything I'd like to be....
    I can fly higher than an eagle....

    Excellent post my friend.
    ;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 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Four Downs: NFC North
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-11-2011, 03:36 PM
  2. Four Downs: NFC North
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-01-2010, 02:26 PM
  3. Four Downs: NFC North
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-24-2010, 10:07 AM
  4. Vikings the best at 3rd downs...
    By NodakPaul in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-03-2009, 10:58 PM
  5. Vikings: Ups and Downs
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-29-2007, 12:28 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
  •