Thread: (So far) Vikes fail to adress two pressing needs

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

Ok, don't get me wrong, I am very excited about our prospects for 2008 (I have the Vikings at nr. 7 in my NFL power rankings !).

However, I think I would be remiss in my duties if I did not mention that we have not addressed two glaring needs that need to be dealt with: QB and tight end.

All NFL teams need a good QB, and all modern NFL teams need a receiver or tight end to go "underneath"
and create mismatches for the opposing linebackers.

I did not see us adress this so far in the draft. Instead, we draft yet another safety ??? I don't get it. How many safeties does this team need ??
:

Its posts like these that will have me not post in any of the draft threads for a couple of weeks.
No matter who we choose, there will be people bitching and moaning about how we didn't use our top pick on a quarterback.
A quarterback who wouldn't be better that TJ right away anyway.
and TE???
that would be the least of our concerns.
what about OT??
I'll keep to myself for a bit so i don't get a nice green dot , because I truly am sick of all the TJ bashers and ESPECIALLY if anyone mentions we should have traded up for ANY reciever.


[/rant]

Agreed I was tempted to earn myself a green dot in this thread too..

"MinnesotaFury" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

I would love it if Tarvaris proved me wrong...

On the other hand, I don't want to - again - be like 4-5 at mid-season and then people get on here, and write, "Give Tarvaris more time to develop...".

This is the 3rd year for both Tarvaris and Childress. It's pretty clear that if something doesn't work this year, they will both be gone.

According to Wilf, Childress' job isn't hinging on making the playoffs, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

Ok, don't get me wrong, I am very excited about our prospects for 2008 (I have the Vikings at nr. 7 in my NFL power rankings !).

However, I think I would be remiss in my duties if I did not mention that we have not addressed two glaring needs that need to be dealt with: QB and tight end.

All NFL teams need a good QB, and all modern NFL teams need a receiver or tight end to go "underneath"
and create mismatches for the opposing linebackers.

I did not see us adress this so far in the draft. Instead, we draft yet another safety ??? I don't get it. How many safeties does this team need ??
:

Its posts like these that will have me not post in any of the draft threads for a couple of weeks.
No matter who we choose, there will be people bitching and moaning about how we didn't use our top pick on a quarterback.
A quarterback who wouldn't be better that TJ right away anyway.
and TE???
that would be the least of our concerns.
what about OT??
I'll keep to myself for a bit so i don't get a nice green dot , because I truly am sick of all the TJ bashers and ESPECIALLY if anyone mentions we should have traded up for ANY reciever.


[/rant]

Square root of 49 stinks, we should have traded up for a WR, and our whole draft was the worst one in the history of drafts.

"jessejames09" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

I would love it if Tarvaris proved me wrong...

On the other hand, I don't want to - again - be like 4-5 at mid-season and then people get on here, and write, "Give Tarvaris more time to develop...".

Billick was saying on NFLN today how Walsh figured it took about 35 games to figure out if a QB is your guy or not. 35 games, TJ has what 16? You are gonna have to give him time to develop. Or are you gonna be foaming at the mouth wanting a rookie to get some action so we can watch him learn for 3 years?

I agree.
People say things like, "let tj develop", because we do actually need to give him time to develop... *SHOCKER!!!*

36 games is 3 years.

"StillPurple" wrote:

Ok, don't get me wrong, I am very excited about our prospects for 2008 (I have the Vikings at nr. 7 in my NFL power rankings !).

However, I think I would be remiss in my duties if I did not mention that we have not addressed two glaring needs that need to be dealt with: QB and tight end.

All NFL teams need a good QB, and all modern NFL teams need a receiver or tight end to go "underneath"
and create mismatches for the opposing linebackers.

I did not see us adress this so far in the draft. Instead, we draft yet another safety ??? I don't get it. How many safeties does this team need ??
:

First, Chilly said Tyrell was #17 on their board. BPA. '

Second, I don't consider QB and TE pressing needs. They are potential needs, but I don't believe them to be pressing (especially TE). I think LT is a more pressing need and I was surprised we didn't take one but there were a ton of them off the board already.

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

"MinnesotaFury" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

I would love it if Tarvaris proved me wrong...

On the other hand, I don't want to - again - be like 4-5 at mid-season and then people get on here, and write, "Give Tarvaris more time to develop...".

This is the 3rd year for both Tarvaris and Childress. It's pretty clear that if something doesn't work this year, they will both be gone.

According to Wilf, Childress' job isn't hinging on making the playoffs, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I don't believe a word an owner says relating to who's safe and who's not.
How many times has an owner told the press that a coach/players is safe and isn't going anywhere and turn right around and get rid of them.
I'm not saying Wilf won't stick to his words but things change really quickly if things don't go as well as expected.

"Schutz" wrote:

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

Ok, don't get me wrong, I am very excited about our prospects for 2008 (I have the Vikings at nr. 7 in my NFL power rankings !).

However, I think I would be remiss in my duties if I did not mention that we have not addressed two glaring needs that need to be dealt with: QB and tight end.

All NFL teams need a good QB, and all modern NFL teams need a receiver or tight end to go "underneath"
and create mismatches for the opposing linebackers.

I did not see us adress this so far in the draft. Instead, we draft yet another safety ??? I don't get it. How many safeties does this team need ??
:

Its posts like these that will have me not post in any of the draft threads for a couple of weeks.
No matter who we choose, there will be people bitching and moaning about how we didn't use our top pick on a quarterback.
A quarterback who wouldn't be better that TJ right away anyway.
and TE???
that would be the least of our concerns.
what about OT??
I'll keep to myself for a bit so i don't get a nice green dot , because I truly am sick of all the TJ bashers and ESPECIALLY if anyone mentions we should have traded up for ANY reciever.


[/rant]

Square root of 49 stinks, we should have traded up for a WR, and our whole draft was the worst one in the history of drafts.

lol.
luckily i know your being sarcastic, but there are some here i'm sure who think exacly that.

"jessejames09" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

I would love it if Tarvaris proved me wrong...

On the other hand, I don't want to - again - be like 4-5 at mid-season and then people get on here, and write, "Give Tarvaris more time to develop...".

Billick was saying on NFLN today how Walsh figured it took about 35 games to figure out if a QB is your guy or not. 35 games, TJ has what 16? You are gonna have to give him time to develop. Or are you gonna be foaming at the mouth wanting a rookie to get some action so we can watch him learn for 3 years?

And then bitch when the new rookie does not put up Brady numbers, is what they'll do.

It used to bother me, I just don't give a crap what the sky is falling crowd is bitching about anymore.
;D

StillPurple you crack me up more than anyone on this site

"Schutz" wrote:

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

"MinnesotaFury" wrote:

"StillPurple" wrote:

I would love it if Tarvaris proved me wrong...

On the other hand, I don't want to - again - be like 4-5 at mid-season and then people get on here, and write, "Give Tarvaris more time to develop...".

This is the 3rd year for both Tarvaris and Childress. It's pretty clear that if something doesn't work this year, they will both be gone.

According to Wilf, Childress' job isn't hinging on making the playoffs, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I don't believe a word an owner says relating to who's safe and who's not.
How many times has an owner told the press that a coach/players is safe and isn't going anywhere and turn right around and get rid of them.
I'm not saying Wilf won't stick to his words but things change really quickly if things don't go as well as expected.

You can believe what you want, but it's all we have to go by.
As far as I know Wilf hasn't gone against his word in his tenure here so far.