Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37
  1. #21
    DarrinNelsonguy's Avatar
    DarrinNelsonguy is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,118

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    WTF is this guy thinking we had a great offseason and the only real defensive departure that hurts is Williams but he was vastly overpaid by Jax.
    "Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn t work hard."

  2. #22
    boognish's Avatar
    boognish is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    701

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    "singersp" wrote:
    "boognish" wrote:
    Cowart is old...really, really old; there was no way he could play in pass coverage well enough to succeed in our new Cover 2 defense. The addition of Leber and Greenway should more than make up for the loss of Newman and Cowart.
    You consider 31 really, really old? Sam is only 3 years older than Leber & you make it sound like Leber's really young?

    Greenway was great in college, but the pro's is a whole different league. He hasn't proven himself on the pro field yet.
    Okay, maybe I was exaggerating a little bit :grin: , but I do think that Cowart was slowing down and he never had the skills that would make him successful in the Cover 2. I agree that Greenway is still a question mark for us, but I don't think we got worse at LB in the offseason...I just think we replaced last years LB's with faster players who will be more likely to succeed in the Cover 2; LB is still a big question mark for us. Of course, we're all speculating and won't know till we see it on the field.
    I am a dipshit!!!

  3. #23
    Braddock's Avatar
    Braddock is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Clermont, FL
    Posts
    1,630

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    "GoVikes11" wrote:

    1. He has had good defenses- His SB defense in Tampa was great and last year the D stepped it up when Daunte got hurt because they knew we wouldn't score as many points. Daunte haters don't bring up stats from last year because I will give you many reasons why he didn't play well the biggest being Loney a bad Defense and not enough games to judge him. The D also came together because Cotrell knew just how screwed he was so he did all he could to save his jiggly butt but it was too little too late.

    2. He does not take risks- Sounds like a dumb argument against a QB but he rarely throws passes more than 15 yards and he will pretty much only throw to the wide open man. This is good for the WCO but what I am trying to say is that he doesn't throw any risky passes so he doesn't hurt us all that much by turning it over. Some people see this as a smart old school QB but I see it as the reason we didn't play too well on offense with him. When the D plays very well we don't need 4 TD's like Daunte was trying to get every game so all Brad has to do is let the other players help him put together a couple of solid drives and we will win. He doesn't hurt us but he also doesn't help us with his passive style and with all the players around him stepping it up it wasn't hard for him to get wins just by doing this. Compared to Daunte trying to do it all on his own with his long time O Coordinator gone and a defense that took too long to gel and rarely played well for him.
    1. Why can't they do the same this year? Just b/c we had Daunte, you're saying the D slacked off, but as soon as he got hurt, the D decided to show up? NO. As the season went on, people like Erasmus grew in confidence and ability.

    2. IF BJ doesn't hurt us, then that's exactly what we need. In his last 3.5 seasons, Daunte had 57 INTs. Yes, he had yards and TD's, but those INT's can be, and were, costly and momentum killers. Plain and simple, D.C. never won a Superbowl (has he only gotten to the second round?) while B.J. has. Even though he had a great D in Tampa, but why can't that work here? Trent Dilfer, Ravens.....need I say more?
    Trying to bring rationale to an irrational site

  4. #24
    Braddock's Avatar
    Braddock is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Clermont, FL
    Posts
    1,630

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    One more thing, I continue to stand by an earlier post of mine, that no matter what we do, reporters will still love to rip us apart and will never give us any sort of appraise. I will be known as the paranoid conspiracy theorist of PP.O, b/c they're all out to get us and destroy the purple!!! Viva la Pourpre!!!
    Trying to bring rationale to an irrational site

  5. #25
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,207

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    "boognish" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "boognish" wrote:
    Cowart is old...really, really old; there was no way he could play in pass coverage well enough to succeed in our new Cover 2 defense. The addition of Leber and Greenway should more than make up for the loss of Newman and Cowart.
    You consider 31 really, really old? Sam is only 3 years older than Leber & you make it sound like Leber's really young?

    Greenway was great in college, but the pro's is a whole different league. He hasn't proven himself on the pro field yet.
    Okay, maybe I was exaggerating a little bit :grin: , but I do think that Cowart was slowing down and he never had the skills that would make him successful in the Cover 2. I agree that Greenway is still a question mark for us, but I don't think we got worse at LB in the offseason...I just think we replaced last years LB's with faster players who will be more likely to succeed in the Cover 2; LB is still a big question mark for us. Of course, we're all speculating and won't know till we see it on the field.
    The thing about Cowart is his ability to read a defense & get the defense set to where they are supposed to be. Which is the job of the MLB. That experience & knowledge was an asset to our LB corp.

    With him gone, I don't know if we have that same capability at MLB.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  6. #26
    boognish's Avatar
    boognish is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    701

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    "singersp" wrote:
    "boognish" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "boognish" wrote:
    Cowart is old...really, really old; there was no way he could play in pass coverage well enough to succeed in our new Cover 2 defense. The addition of Leber and Greenway should more than make up for the loss of Newman and Cowart.
    You consider 31 really, really old? Sam is only 3 years older than Leber & you make it sound like Leber's really young?

    Greenway was great in college, but the pro's is a whole different league. He hasn't proven himself on the pro field yet.
    Okay, maybe I was exaggerating a little bit :grin: , but I do think that Cowart was slowing down and he never had the skills that would make him successful in the Cover 2. I agree that Greenway is still a question mark for us, but I don't think we got worse at LB in the offseason...I just think we replaced last years LB's with faster players who will be more likely to succeed in the Cover 2; LB is still a big question mark for us. Of course, we're all speculating and won't know till we see it on the field.
    The thing about Cowart is his ability to read a defense & get the defense set to where they are supposed to be. Which is the job of the MLB. That experience & knowledge was an asset to our LB corp.

    With him gone, I don't know if we have that same capability at MLB.
    Agreed; we'll miss that veteran leadership. Hopefully, Harris or Henderson will be able to step up and fill that role.
    I am a dipshit!!!

  7. #27
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    Even if we do deserve a grade of a D for the players we lost on D, compared to who we added, the addition of Tomlin and subtraction of Cottrell easily should bump that D up to a B. That addition and subtraction is BY FAR the most important move we made this offseason for our D.

  8. #28
    Aberration's Avatar
    Aberration is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    85

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    I don't know what he has against us but he gave lots of teams like the Texans an A- who didn't do anything of note other than pass on Bush, and pick up Moulds, Cowart and Flanagan...

    As for his take on us I find it funny that he doesn't mention that we simply let almost all of those guys go because they thought they were expendable...

    The only parts I agree with is letting Williams go in that I think we should have left the transition tag on him to get a draft pick for him. Chavous was overrated but we didn't come close to getting the safety we wanted as people should remmember we tried to bring in the top safeties but they canceled because they signed at the stops right before us, so Tank really might not be much of an upgrade unless he performs a lot better than last year.

    Personally I think the D will be about as good as last year carried by our D-line and hopefully the LB's can be functional as its about time all these young players we have with "potential" show their stuff.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    93

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    "singersp" wrote:
    "boognish" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "boognish" wrote:
    Cowart is old...really, really old; there was no way he could play in pass coverage well enough to succeed in our new Cover 2 defense. The addition of Leber and Greenway should more than make up for the loss of Newman and Cowart.
    You consider 31 really, really old? Sam is only 3 years older than Leber & you make it sound like Leber's really young?

    Greenway was great in college, but the pro's is a whole different league. He hasn't proven himself on the pro field yet.
    Okay, maybe I was exaggerating a little bit :grin: , but I do think that Cowart was slowing down and he never had the skills that would make him successful in the Cover 2. I agree that Greenway is still a question mark for us, but I don't think we got worse at LB in the offseason...I just think we replaced last years LB's with faster players who will be more likely to succeed in the Cover 2; LB is still a big question mark for us. Of course, we're all speculating and won't know till we see it on the field.
    The thing about Cowart is his ability to read a defense & get the defense set to where they are supposed to be. Which is the job of the MLB. That experience & knowledge was an asset to our LB corp.

    With him gone, I don't know if we have that same capability at MLB.
    Cowart was mentally a really good player that made a ton of tackles because of his ability to read plays. But he is just flat out to slow to run the tampa 2. I hated to see him go but at the same time he would have had a horrible season with our change in D.

    I heard E.J. is going to be our MLB. Can anyone verify this? Hopefully he pulls his head out and starts to play like he did in college.

  10. #30
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Sporting news gives offseason D for "breakup of Defense"

    I honestly believe that Newman, Johnstone, Chavous, and Williams will be missed. They were solid players on a defense that gelled late. There is no way that we improved by getting Leber, Tank Williams, and Whitaker. Who is supposed to make up for all those sacks Johnstone got?

    The D will be better because of better coaching and a better defensive system, but I feel the actual players have a lot to prove. Veterans like Johnstone, Chavous, and Williams are experienced enough to be able to adjust to a new system, so I didn't see any reason to get rid of those guys.

    Also, this writer obviously did not watch our offense play. Loading up on offense was the right thing to do. I don't understand why the media always tries to point out the bad when it comes to the Vikes.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Sporting News Insights '08
    By StillPurple in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-08-2008, 12:11 AM
  2. how dumb is "the sporting news"?
    By Alharrissuks91 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-02-2006, 01:33 AM
  3. how dumb is "the sporting news"?
    By Alharrissuks91 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-30-2006, 01:29 AM
  4. Sporting News Says 6-10
    By wordsofwisejcb in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-23-2006, 02:09 AM
  5. Sporting News Analysis
    By PacNWVike in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-07-2003, 10:12 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
  •