Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    mnguyinames's Avatar
    mnguyinames is offline Waterboy
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    9

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    vikings need to better the passing game and work on stopping the pass. the vikings NEEDS are





    1. QB
    2. TE
    3. S
    4. WR
    5. QB.
    Vikings looked horrible in the passing game this year!
    Except for three games this year, the pass sucked.
    No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
    Vikings NEED a qb. During many stretches this year the wr's and te's couldn't hang on to the ball.
    More their fault than jackson's on multiple, multiple occasions! I watched every game this year and that was the worst aspect of our team.
    with the ability to pass the ball just a little, AP will shatter records, I promise.


  2. #22
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,279

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    "mnguyinames" wrote:
    vikings need to better the passing game and work on stopping the pass. the vikings NEEDS are






    1. QB
    2. TE
    3. S
    4. WR
    5. QB.
    Vikings looked horrible in the passing game this year!
    Except for three games this year, the pass sucked.
    No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
    Vikings NEED a qb. During many stretches this year the wr's and te's couldn't hang on to the ball.
    More their fault than jackson's on multiple, multiple occasions! I watched every game this year and that was the worst aspect of our team.
    with the ability to pass the ball just a little, AP will shatter records, I promise.


    I'm sure this debate has been had a thousand times already but I think Tjack will be and should be the vikings starting qb next year. He showed alot of improvement this year and I think he will only be better next year. If you compare stats he matches up with some players that no one thinks should be benched, like vince young. He is a long term project and we probably wont know exactly how good he can be for several years, but we have invested a full season in him already.

  3. #23
    Schutz's Avatar
    Schutz is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "mnguyinames" wrote:
    vikings need to better the passing game and work on stopping the pass. the vikings NEEDS are





    1. QB
    2. TE
    3. S
    4. WR
    5. QB.
    Vikings looked horrible in the passing game this year!
    Except for three games this year, the pass sucked.
    No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
    Vikings NEED a qb. During many stretches this year the wr's and te's couldn't hang on to the ball.
    More their fault than jackson's on multiple, multiple occasions! I watched every game this year and that was the worst aspect of our team.
    with the ability to pass the ball just a little, AP will shatter records, I promise.

    I'm sure this debate has been had a thousand times already but I think Tjack will be and should be the vikings starting qb next year. He showed alot of improvement this year and I think he will only be better next year. If you compare stats he matches up with some players that no one thinks should be benched, like vince young. He is a long term project and we probably wont know exactly how good he can be for several years, but we have invested a full season in him already.
    I agree at this point.
    T-Jack love him or hate him should get the start next season.
    He's already been given a season and a half, and I think this coming season is the make or break year for him.

  4. #24
    jessejames09's Avatar
    jessejames09 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,233

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    "Schutz" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "mnguyinames" wrote:
    vikings need to better the passing game and work on stopping the pass. the vikings NEEDS are





    1. QB
    2. TE
    3. S
    4. WR
    5. QB.
    Vikings looked horrible in the passing game this year!
    Except for three games this year, the pass sucked.
    No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
    Vikings NEED a qb. During many stretches this year the wr's and te's couldn't hang on to the ball.
    More their fault than jackson's on multiple, multiple occasions! I watched every game this year and that was the worst aspect of our team.
    with the ability to pass the ball just a little, AP will shatter records, I promise.

    I'm sure this debate has been had a thousand times already but I think Tjack will be and should be the vikings starting qb next year. He showed alot of improvement this year and I think he will only be better next year. If you compare stats he matches up with some players that no one thinks should be benched, like vince young. He is a long term project and we probably wont know exactly how good he can be for several years, but we have invested a full season in him already.
    I agree at this point.
    T-Jack love him or hate him should get the start next season.
    He's already been given a season and a half, and I think this coming season is the make or break year for him.
    He shouldn't be handed the starting job. Bring in someone who can also play the position well. Competition breeds excellence, or something like that...

  5. #25
    imvikings28 is offline Waterboy
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    1.WR- TJ needs some weapons to throw to. Wade is not cuttingit
    2.DE- Getting consistent pressure helps pass defense a lot
    3.S- Sharper only has a few years left and he could be a great mentor to young safties that come in.
    4.QB- TJ i believe will be solid next year but he needs a veteran to come in just in case he gets injured. (Bolliger and Holcome are not gonna win games, they are horrible)

  6. #26
    davike's Avatar
    davike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,750

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    WR. We get a decent pass offense and KAO will come to life. Not many QBs could pass very well with our WRs, we need a threat.

    Thanks Josdin00 for the sig!

  7. #27
    bleedpurple is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,951

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "bleedpurple" wrote:
    I guess so... bc, i think we can sign Tank back.. he can be a serviceable back up until/if/when smith comes back... and then draft a Safety.. perhaps with a first rounder..

    but if we sign hamlin, who is another starting caliber safety.. i then don't think we need to go safety with our first pick..bc we'd have more pressing needs and essentially 4 starting caliber safety's on our team... that's an unnecessary log jam at a position that is not one of our weaknesses..

    and to your other point... i think we need atleast 2 more receivers.. one FA and a draft pick.. depending on who get, say hackett, then we can get one in the 3rd (2nd pick) or 4th rd... but if it's another wade then we'll need one with the 1st / 2nd pick..

    I only say tight end bc, a tight-ends adjustment to the NFL is easier than is for say a WR... alot of first year tight ends make an impact before a receiver does... that's why drafting say a davis would serve us better, 1. bc we don't really have a good one..(assuming what yu see is what u get from shank) and 2. he may be able to start immediately and provide a viable option for TJ in the passing game..

    also, if we were to pick up hackett, if we drafted davis, our offense would be sick...

    imagine TJ Rice / Davis / Hackett / Fergie in the slot... Ap in the backfield... w

    WHO WANTS SOME!!!!

    and just to be thorough.. TE's that did well in their first years...

    Shockey
    Bubba Franks
    Gonzalez
    gates
    Heath Miller
    Winslow would have been had he not gotten hurt
    Crumpler
    Randy McMicheal
    Dallas Clark
    Jason Witten
    Ben watson - hurt rookie year

    remember, a TE's stats aren't gonna be what a receivers are.. however, they can provide a substantial outlet and open up a lot of the passing game.. if you get a good one...
    Man I love football talk.
    Even though you are wrong.
    ;D (lots of smileys) ;D

    So your are saying that you want them to spend FA money on Tank and I am saying I don't think they will.
    You are also making your S decisions based on the fact that you think they won't cut Smith.
    Not sure who is correct here but I am sure that he will at least miss some games, probably at least 4.

    Depends on what stance you take whether you consider that a log jam.
    I call it a void and thus the reason I think it is the most pressing need.

    WR thoughts.
    Ok, we get a VET and then we draft another rookie who do you drop off the roster cause you are now carrying 1 more WR than this staff wants plus your adding a TE later in your post.

    My solution is you go out and get a VET and develop the youth you have on the team.
    Why draft more youth unless you aren't happy with Rice, Allison.

    Again, you can't just keep adding guys to the roster without deleted/dropping someone.
    If you do that then you wind up loosing talent (Tyeler Thigpen/Chandler Williams) when you try to hide them on the practice squad.
    ;D

    Your WR set is four wide.
    I take it your a pass happy sort of guy.
    ;D

    I would rather stick with a 3 WR set with 1 TE and a RB and have the following WR lineup:

    a.
    Rice (Wideout)
    b.
    VET (Wideout)
    c.
    B-wade (Slot)
    d.
    Shank (Of course I can tell you don't like him cause you want to draft another guy)
    e.
    CT/AD

    As with the WR, who you gonna drop to add the TE you drafted?

    a.
    Can't do Shank.
    Just signed a contract.
    b.
    Can't lose Sauce, he is to important to the run and very versatile if you asked me.
    c.
    Dugan could go but I think he will anyways to make room for Mills.
    d.
    Can't get rid of Mills cause he is the youth you are looking to draft for.

    Long story short, it is easy to say draft this guy, draft that guy, add this guy etc but you also have to consider who leaves.

    I for one like all of our guys with the following exceptions:

    a.
    Erasmus James. Huge potential but he is just that.
    Potential.
    Drop him like a sack of wet potatoes and get another Vet who can stay healthy.
    b.
    T-will.
    Makes room for the Vet WR.

    I also think these guys won't be back.

    a.
    Smith.
    Here is the hard one.
    He is gone at least 4 games.
    We did sign Evans who had problems.
    b.
    Doss, oft injured.
    No production.
    Use draft pick for replacement
    c.
    Williams, oft injured.
    No production. Use CAP to replace him
    d.
    T-rich, but I am hoping they sign him for at least a one year contract.

    Again, great stuff my friend.
    I just look at it a bit different than you.
    Truth be told we will probably both be wrong and Spielman and Company will do something none of us expected.
    ;D
    Well, note that the line-up I had was a 3wide/1TE (Rice Fergy and Hackett) and Davis

    additionally, whose to say we have to carry the exact same ratio of players on the roster.
    yes, we have youth.. but i'm not sold on B-wade so, imo he could be the odd man out or we could trade him during the draft... i don't care we put money into him.. if he's not one of the best guys then we should get rid of him... or keep him and carry an extra wide..

    as for TE's go... just bc shank makes alot of money, if he's a bust then he can be gone too.... but i'd draft a TE.. remember, i said either or... in the draft.. i.e. draft a TE or a WR and get a vet WR..

    but if so, then Mills can be the odd man out or it could be dugan... it's not like he plays much... either of them..

    additionally, we have good corners, why do we have to carry 5 safeties??
    We can keep sharper/smith, sign harper or eugine wilson and then draft one.. we don't need to draft 2... i'd rather draft another corner that can play safety than drafting 2 safeties... imo that's ridiculous..

    i still don't understand why yu wanna cut raz... that's 2 first rounders you wanna get rid of... let him atleast play his contract out to see if he can produce... i'm not really one for cutting guys that have injuries especially if they are very high on potential... i don't think he's injury prone.. some times injuries are just freak occurences... in his case, i don't think his knee was fixed properly.. let's take a wait and see approach on this one...
    he can always be put on pup and then we can carry an extra guy on the roster...




  8. #28
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re: Ranking Purple Positional Needs

    So many issues.
    Not gonna slam you here but I have a question.
    How long have you been following football.
    Again, not a slam just want to find out your background.

    "bleedpurple" wrote:
    Well, note that the line-up I had was a 3wide/1TE (Rice Fergy and Hackett) and Davis
    Who is the slot guy seeings how you just shitcanned your slot receiver.

    i still don't understand why yu wanna cut raz...
    What has he done for us since he was drafted other than suck up a roster spot that could be used to get a guy who can at least play a full season.

    why do we have to carry 5 safeties
    additionally, whose to say we have to carry the exact same ratio of players on the roster.
    Because thats the historical data (that means thats how many the staff carries) I have to go one with what this staff thinks will get us through the season.

    We can keep sharper/smith, sign harper or eugine wilson and then draft one
    Great plan, however, what happens if Smith is suspended 4 games (best case scenario) or shitcanned?

    additionally, whose to say we have to carry the exact same ratio of players on the roster.
    yes, we have youth.. but i'm not sold on B-wade so, imo he could be the odd man out or we could trade him during the draft... i don't care we put money into him.. if he's not one of the best guys then we should get rid of him... or keep him and carry an extra wide..

    as for TE's go... just bc shank makes alot of money, if he's a bust then he can be gone too.... but i'd draft a TE.. remember, i said either or... in the draft.. i.e. draft a TE or a WR and get a vet WR..
    Bolded comments......
    You do realize that there is a thing called "Gauranteed money" and the team would still have to pay them money and then pay the new guys they bring in as well.
    Sorry my friend, although maybe in your world you don't care about cutting players signed to big contracts I am sure the Ownership group and Bryzcheapski does.

    Why do you think Shank and B-wade are busts?
    Because they can't run a deep route really really really fast and catch the ball for a TD.
    :
    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 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Positional Power Rankings: D-lines
    By Zeus in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-31-2009, 05:42 PM
  2. Positional Analysis: Running backs
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-13-2009, 02:34 PM
  3. Pre-Draft Positional Analysis - WR
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-01-2009, 08:05 AM
  4. Positional Analysis: Outside Linebacker
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-19-2008, 11:12 PM
  5. positional breakdown by Viking update
    By whackthepack in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-31-2004, 11:56 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
  •