Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 89
  1. #61
    LuckyVike's Avatar
    LuckyVike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,785

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    "jsa803" wrote:
    "mr.woo" wrote:
    "LuckyVike" wrote:
    You boys can type as long of post as you want but I really don't give a gol 'darnit.
    I follow two college football teams very closely, the UK Wildcats and the Irish.
    I'm telling you right now Quinn isn't the answer here.
    quinn has a pwerful arm and thats not what we need. in the westcoast offense you need accuracy more than anything. im not sure quinn has that. also its good to have a qb that can offer at least some running ability and i dont think quinn has that.
    You obviously dont know what you are talking about, Quinn's best attribute is his accuracy.
    I watched all the Notre Dame games this year as I saw someone mentioned and htat person says he is not the answer.
    HOW THE HELL ISNT HE?????
    He is poised under pressure dont forget he had a very soft O line.
    He lost his best target in Maurice Stovall after his Junior year.
    and still had great numbers his senior year.
    Let me show you some stats to show how he doesnt turn the ball over as well.


    YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
    2005 292 450 3919 64.9 8.71
    80
    32
    7

    20

    158.40
    2006 289 467 3426 61.9 7.34
    62
    37
    7

    31

    146.65

    HE WENT FROM 32 TD's and only 7 pics to 37 TDS and & pics.

    Now all of you haters go sit ina
    corner and ask yourself why you hate all the time?
    Is it because your mad at your own life or something?
    Against Michigan in a 21-47 loss, Quinn was 24-48 for 234 yards 3 td's and 3 int's.
    That's an average of 4.9 yards per pass.
    Seven of his 24 completions were dump offs to Darius, God that's impressive.
    Those 3 int's couldn't have helped much either.

    Against USC in a 24-44 loss, he went 22/45 (not even 50%) for 274 yards and 3 td's.
    Yea, pretty solid when you look at the td's but that completion percentage is dreadful (you did say he had great accuracy didn't you? yea you did).

    Against LSU in a 14-41 loss, he went 15/35 (another weak completion percentage) for 148 yards 2 td's and 2 int's.


    So I walked over to the corner of my room and put my nose against the wall.
    I asked myself, "Matt, why is it that you hate sooooooooooooo much?"
    Then it hit me... I only hate idiots.
    The best part of my day is when I get down on my knees, with my head in my hands, and thank GOD for everything he has given me.

  2. #62
    LuckyVike's Avatar
    LuckyVike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,785

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    "Hawkeye23" wrote:
    No one is saying we will draft Quinn but i strongly agree we should. anyone who says otherwise without a GREAT reason is incompetent.
    If I'm incompetent because I don't agree with you, perhaps you're a homosexual because you don't agree with me.

    How do you like that logic?
    Pretty dumb isn't it?
    The best part of my day is when I get down on my knees, with my head in my hands, and thank GOD for everything he has given me.

  3. #63
    nephilimstorm's Avatar
    nephilimstorm is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,184

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    People say dont draft Quinn cause they question the big games he was in. Sometimes your the only star on a team without any help.

    And the personal attacks had better stop!

  4. #64
    Hawkeye23's Avatar
    Hawkeye23 is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    186

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    so your saying that it would be a dumb idea to draft probably one of the best qb's in the draft? while were relying on a guy who wasnt even close to as good as Quinn

  5. #65
    nephilimstorm's Avatar
    nephilimstorm is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,184

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    I am saying draft Quinn, if its at all possible...YES I AM A ND FAN AND I WATCHED QUINN OVER FOUR YEARS! Now if we can trade out of seven and get QUinn, thats even better

  6. #66
    LuckyVike's Avatar
    LuckyVike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,785

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    "Nephilim" wrote:
    I am saying draft Quinn, if its at all possible...YES I AM A ND FAN AND I WATCHED QUINN OVER FOUR YEARS! Now if we can trade out of seven and get QUinn, thats even better
    As I stated before, I watch the Irish nearly every game too and I don't want him.

    The best part of my day is when I get down on my knees, with my head in my hands, and thank GOD for everything he has given me.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    999

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    "PacMan21" wrote:
    "Purplexing" wrote:
    'Vikings will not draft a WR in the top 10' = smoke screen.

    What about drafting CJohnson at #5 by moving up two slots?

    Trading down to 14 means TWO more good WRs will be gone... some teams will take them where they are positioned, or one other team will move up to 11 or 12.

    ...the LOSS IN DRAFT VALUE of the remaining WRs aren't worth the extra pick gained by trading down to 14.

    Too much of a drop off in talent from #7 position, where the Vikings can have the 2nd best WR vs. #14 where they get the 4th or 5th best WR.
    Way too much of a drop off.



    In the top 10, you pick BPA. And non of those WR's will be the best player available, unless Jarrett/Meachem/Bowe/Ginn run a 4.00 40 and has great hands and has an 11 ft vertical with a 30 ft broad jump, that's the only way I think Childress considers any of those WR's in the top 10. Why draft a player like Quinn when we can trade down and get more picks? Honeslty, saying that all those guys will be gone, is like saying that someone is going to trade to #3 Cleveland to take Drew Stanton (after Quinn & Russell are both gone).
    Sure it could happen, but it's HIGHLY unlikely.
    Has CJohnson run a 4.0 40 yd dash?
    If not, why is he being considered as a top 10 draft pick?

    Where is it written that the Vikings have to follow the consensus of draft publications to guide their selection at #7?
    Are you implying that if the consensus is that Jarrett is the 9th best player that the Vikings CAN'T take him at #7?

    There is a wide variety of opinions of player value.
    Not following the averages is permissible.
    For example, do you HAVE TO listen to the musical artist that sells more CDs than any other artist?
    If not, why do you impose a draft pick heriarchy on the Pentagon of Purple Power based on averages of draft values derived by writers rather than professional coaches and talent scouts who are aware of the Vikings current roster and needs?

    Saying all 5 top WRs will be gone by #14 <> saying the top 3 WRs will be gone by #14.
    Honestly.

    note: '<>' means 'does not equal'.

    Draft Quinn rather than trade down because QBs that can be franchise players are very rare, so you take them whenever you get the opportunity if the QB on your roster is unproven.
    The additional player gained by trading down doesn't allow the team to upgrade at the most important position on the team.
    The draft is not intended to deliver an immediate impact.
    It is more properly used to build a team for a long run in the playoffs over a long period of years.
    When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all !

  8. #68
    Hawkeye23's Avatar
    Hawkeye23 is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    186

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    luckyvike i would like to learn your reasoning for not wanting Quinn

  9. #69
    PacMan21's Avatar
    PacMan21 is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    164

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    "Purplexing" wrote:
    "PacMan21" wrote:
    "Purplexing" wrote:
    'Vikings will not draft a WR in the top 10' = smoke screen.

    What about drafting CJohnson at #5 by moving up two slots?

    Trading down to 14 means TWO more good WRs will be gone... some teams will take them where they are positioned, or one other team will move up to 11 or 12.

    ...the LOSS IN DRAFT VALUE of the remaining WRs aren't worth the extra pick gained by trading down to 14.

    Too much of a drop off in talent from #7 position, where the Vikings can have the 2nd best WR vs. #14 where they get the 4th or 5th best WR.
    Way too much of a drop off.



    In the top 10, you pick BPA. And non of those WR's will be the best player available, unless Jarrett/Meachem/Bowe/Ginn run a 4.00 40 and has great hands and has an 11 ft vertical with a 30 ft broad jump, that's the only way I think Childress considers any of those WR's in the top 10. Why draft a player like Quinn when we can trade down and get more picks? Honeslty, saying that all those guys will be gone, is like saying that someone is going to trade to #3 Cleveland to take Drew Stanton (after Quinn & Russell are both gone).
    Sure it could happen, but it's HIGHLY unlikely.
    Has CJohnson run a 4.0 40 yd dash?
    If not, why is he being considered as a top 10 draft pick?

    Where is it written that the Vikings have to follow the consensus of draft publications to guide their selection at #7?
    Are you implying that if the consensus is that Jarrett is the 9th best player that the Vikings CAN'T take him at #7?

    There is a wide variety of opinions of player value.
    Not following the averages is permissible.
    For example, do you HAVE TO listen to the musical artist that sells more CDs than any other artist?
    If not, whimpoy do you se a draft pick heriarchy on the Pentagon of Purple Power based on averages of draft values derived by writers rather than professional coaches and talent scouts who are aware of the Vikings current roster and needs?

    Saying all 5 top WRs will be gone by #14 <> saying the top 3 WRs will be gone by #14.
    Honestly.

    note: '<>' means 'does not equal'.

    Draft Quinn rather than trade down because QBs that can be franchise players are very rare, so you take them whenever you get the opportunity if the QB on your roster is unproven.
    The additional player gained by trading down doesn't allow the team to upgrade at the most important position on the team.
    The draft is not intended to deliver an immediate impact.
    It is more properly used to build a team for a long run in the playoffs over a long period of years.
    No I'm implying that Brad Childress WON'T take a WR at #7 if his name isn't Calvin Johnson. You act like what Childress says, doesn't mean anything. When in actuality, you and I both know that whatever he wants, he gets. There are different opinions on who's the 2nd best WR in the draft. Bowe has been said to be because he's a short yardage guy who's been compared to Cris Carter. Ginn has been because of his speed. Meachem has been because of his size. & Jarrett has been because of his productivity at one of the best colleges in Football. Whoever you think is the 2nd best is your opinion. I never said that any of them are the 2nd best WR. And I said that "4.00 40 yard dash" to show that unless a guy is unbelievable (like Calvin Johnson is) that we won't even consider taking him @ #7. And I said that because non of those guys will do anything that is unbelievable that will all of a sudden make them a top 10 pick. Sure every team has their own opinion on who's the best available player (Bills in 2006 with Donte Whitner), but when Chilly's already said that he won't do it, I believe him.


    Thanks for the sig PurplePeopleEaters

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    999

    Re: My revised 1st round mock

    'Unbelievable' = Agent hype.
    No one is unbelievable.


    Chilly = good poker player.

    Good poker players make misleading gestures to lead their opponents astray into bad decisions, in order to improve their opportunities to win.
    When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all !

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. NFP Three Round Mock Draft
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-31-2009, 09:28 PM
  2. MY Mock First Round Draft Day TOP 10
    By nephilimstorm in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-25-2007, 04:56 PM
  3. 2 New 7 Round Mock Draft
    By VikesAllTheWay112642 in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-28-2006, 04:21 AM
  4. Check out this 3 round mock
    By iluvbigtds in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-28-2006, 03:37 AM
  5. My 3 Round Mock
    By XxS2TheEvoxX in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-05-2006, 06:41 PM

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
  •