Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16
  1. #1
    Gr8YtHntr is offline Waterboy
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7

    O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    According to Star Tribune the O-line is still an issue. I realize its still early, but....why haven't we gone out to address this more? The issues from the past may still haunt us. How about going after Max Starks and dumping some of the pudding we have now! There are getting to be a limited number of quality lineman left.

    Do I really need to sight a source for this? There are too many!

    "Donovan McNabb is getting more comfortable with the offense, but it might not matter because his pass protection is an issue." Star Tribune
    http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/127492968.html

  2. #2
    MulletMullitia's Avatar
    MulletMullitia is offline PP.O Ambassador
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    943
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    Yes please! He is a beast. Big Ben is great friends with him. He was upset that the Steelers cut him. He even wore Max's jersey in practice as a tribute.

    [img size=400x400]http://l.yimg.com/a/p/sp/editorial_image/83/834ebfb8b9a8fce72f44f48ce9685dcf/roethlisberger_wears_in_practice_to_honor_released _teammate.jpg[/img]

    Sorry Rick! Keep up the good work.

  3. #3
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    Quote Originally Posted by "Gr8YtHntr" #1104041
    Do I really need to sight a source for this? There are too many!
    For me you don't. Just ask a question if you want to discuss something. For others on here, however, you must quote a source or they don't take it as "Reputable".

    To your question......I think my biggest issue with the staff so far is the "Clueless" way they've approached a couple of positions, most notably, the OL.

    Perception is reality and my perception is that they can't figure out what blocking scheme they want to run because they can't settle on players. I would have thought they would have addressed their positions of concern either through the draft or atleast have targeted a couple of options in FA and I don't mean Charlie Johnson.

    That move seems to be a after thought. Max seems to be a good fit for the "Scheme" (whichever one they are going to run today) but the problem for me is that he is really a RT kindof guy who did fill in at LT when the starter went down.

    Maybe he can be had on the cheap and would work but I would rather see them try to get someone else but there probably isn't much left to choose from at this point.

    Might have to wait until a team makes some cuts and by then it might be to late if it isn't already.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  4. #4
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    I am in a wait and see approach. There have been some high draft picks spent on OL in the past few years and at some point you would think they would push out a quality vet that we could sign for a bargain. Hopefully that does happen but time will tell. I don't think Ryan Cook being re signed was the answer to the problems.

  5. #5
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1104066
    I am in a wait and see approach. There have been some high draft picks spent on OL in the past few years and at some point you would think they would push out a quality vet that we could sign for a bargain. Hopefully that does happen but time will tell. I don't think Ryan Cook being re signed was the answer to the problems.
    Not at LT at least. Not unless they are going to put him at RT and move Load as the last resort.

    Again, seems like someone doesn't have a very good plan. Maybe they asked the players and are doing what the players want.

    ......snicker.....
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #6
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    I wanted the Vikes to go after Starks as well but from my understanding he reported to camp over-weight. But yes I think he would be a huge upgrade over what we have. Even if he comes in and plays LT so we can move Johnson to RG. This would add much needed depth to the OL and I'm prettyu sure he can come in cheap.

    IMO the Vikes only need 5 WRs and they really wanted to they could go with 4 because of Joe Webb's talents. This year they get to dress a 46th player and don't have to worry about the 3rd QB rule. Why not carry an extra OL to keep them fresh since that seems to be the most major concern right now.

  7. #7
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,778
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    Remember, Starks is coming of Neck surgery, and has reported to camp up near the McKinnie range. it'll take alot to get him back in game shape, and if he does, will he be the same? Neck injuries are pretty serious, there have been a lot of players who have never quite been the same after.

  8. #8
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    Quote Originally Posted by "ejmat" #1104084
    I wanted the Vikes to go after Starks as well but from my understanding he reported to camp over-weight. But yes I think he would be a huge upgrade over what we have. Even if he comes in and plays LT so we can move Johnson to RG. This would add much needed depth to the OL and I'm prettyu sure he can come in cheap.

    IMO the Vikes only need 5 WRs and they really wanted to they could go with 4 because of Joe Webb's talents. This year they get to dress a 46th player and don't have to worry about the 3rd QB rule. Why not carry an extra OL to keep them fresh since that seems to be the most major concern right now.
    Interesting about 4 WR's.

    Hadn't thought about that, but I don't think they would ever think about going with just 4 WR's and then counting on Webb to be that 5th guy mostly cause he has had very little work against NFL caliber DB's.

    If your going to use a roster spot for a OL you could do it by getting rid of the full back or carrying one less DB (Saftey perhaps) but all come with alot of risk.

    The right answer should have been to address the position the right way. Either through the draft (the guys they burned picks were a waste Love=G we have a glut of cats who can play G/Fusco=C ZBing C at that and we already have 2 of them) or via FA early when there were some talented guys out there.

    I mean seriously, they had to have had a clue Big Mac was gonna come in the way he did.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #9
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,778
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1104088
    Quote Originally Posted by "ejmat" #1104084
    I wanted the Vikes to go after Starks as well but from my understanding he reported to camp over-weight. But yes I think he would be a huge upgrade over what we have. Even if he comes in and plays LT so we can move Johnson to RG. This would add much needed depth to the OL and I'm prettyu sure he can come in cheap.

    IMO the Vikes only need 5 WRs and they really wanted to they could go with 4 because of Joe Webb's talents. This year they get to dress a 46th player and don't have to worry about the 3rd QB rule. Why not carry an extra OL to keep them fresh since that seems to be the most major concern right now.
    Interesting about 4 WR's.

    Hadn't thought about that, but I don't think they would ever think about going with just 4 WR's and then counting on Webb to be that 5th guy mostly cause he has had very little work against NFL caliber DB's.

    If your going to use a roster spot for a OL you could do it by getting rid of the full back or carrying one less DB (Saftey perhaps) but all come with alot of risk.
    As for your FB idea, it's fairly obvious at this point that Tahi is out. D'Imperio is the only guy left at the FB position, but word from camp is he's been doing actually fairly well, and has been with the #1 kick return team as well. Now, my question is can the kid play TE as well? If so, I could see him replacing Dugan on the roster as a guy who can play both positions, freeing up a spot for OL.

    Having said that, I still don't see us going after Starks.
    I mean seriously, they had to have had a clue Big Mac was gonna come in the way he did.
    I had a clue... just read the guy's twitter account, it's obvious that football was the last thing on his mind.

  10. #10
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: O-Line still an issue? Max Starks=Bandaid?

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1104090
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1104088
    Quote Originally Posted by "ejmat" #1104084
    I wanted the Vikes to go after Starks as well but from my understanding he reported to camp over-weight. But yes I think he would be a huge upgrade over what we have. Even if he comes in and plays LT so we can move Johnson to RG. This would add much needed depth to the OL and I'm prettyu sure he can come in cheap.

    IMO the Vikes only need 5 WRs and they really wanted to they could go with 4 because of Joe Webb's talents. This year they get to dress a 46th player and don't have to worry about the 3rd QB rule. Why not carry an extra OL to keep them fresh since that seems to be the most major concern right now.
    Interesting about 4 WR's.

    Hadn't thought about that, but I don't think they would ever think about going with just 4 WR's and then counting on Webb to be that 5th guy mostly cause he has had very little work against NFL caliber DB's.

    If your going to use a roster spot for a OL you could do it by getting rid of the full back or carrying one less DB (Saftey perhaps) but all come with alot of risk.
    As for your FB idea, it's fairly obvious at this point that Tahi is out. D'Imperio is the only guy left at the FB position, but word from camp is he's been doing actually fairly well, and has been with the #1 kick return team as well. Now, my question is can the kid play TE as well? If so, I could see him replacing Dugan on the roster as a guy who can play both positions, freeing up a spot for OL.

    Having said that, I still don't see us going after Starks.
    I mean seriously, they had to have had a clue Big Mac was gonna come in the way he did.
    I had a clue... just read the guy's twitter account, it's obvious that football was the last thing on his mind.
    I've actually seen alot more good things out of Matt Asiata in the camp reports.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 01:41 AM
  2. Max Starks might not even start for the Steelers?
    By cajunvike in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-09-2008, 05:12 PM
  3. Steelers slap transition tag on backup OT Max Starks
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-22-2008, 05:21 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-02-2007, 07:00 AM
  5. AIDS Hot Line Number Rings Up Sex Line
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-01-2007, 07:58 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
  •