|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 30, 2009 1:22:43 GMT -5
It's not really Favre's fault, it's that pathetic offensive line and a defense that can't tackle.
But the Pack did pretty well in that trade. They were able to plug in Rodger's and used the draft pick to grab Matthews.
I think they need someone a little more explosive than Grant at RB (he's solid, but I'd like an upgrade) and they need to groom some new DBs. Harris is getting creaky, he was horrible on that final drive against Pitt - hell they could have called a penalty on him on just about every play. Which was a pain, because I couldn't yell at the stupid refs this time. I love Atari Bigby but he's not been the same since the injury.
They also need to cut down on the penalties and the sacks! So a few tweeks here and there. I think the team is on the right path.
|
|
|
Post by bobjohnson on Dec 30, 2009 7:16:50 GMT -5
It's not really Favre's fault, it's that pathetic offensive line and a defense that can't tackle. But the Pack did pretty well in that trade. They were able to plug in Rodger's and used the draft pick to grab Matthews. I think they need someone a little more explosive than Grant at RB (he's solid, but I'd like an upgrade) and they need to groom some new DBs. Harris is getting creaky, he was horrible on that final drive against Pitt - hell they could have called a penalty on him on just about every play. Which was a pain, because I couldn't yell at the stupid refs this time. I love Atari Bigby but he's not been the same since the injury. They also need to cut down on the penalties and the sacks! So a few tweeks here and there. I think the team is on the right path. Al Harris never played in that game, he got a torn ACL in the 49ers game weeks back. I agree with Grant, solid but if Adrian Peterson came here I wouldn't complain. The Vikings O-line is one of the best out there, I think it was built more for Peterson and not Favre. My issue with the Vikings is this: When Favre came, everyone was like "we are going to a Super Bowl!" The question is "who has more experience in that area? Favre is the one with the most playoff experience, but this doesn't mean he can carry that team all the way. He really is just a novelty act, a thing to sell more tickets and merchandise. Rodgers is in the Probowl and that is fine with me.
|
|
|
Post by quinnmartin on Dec 30, 2009 10:06:34 GMT -5
The Vikings O-line is one of the best out there, I think it was built more for Peterson and not Favre. The Vikes O-line isn't actually that good. Much like the Cowboys' line, it seems to be highly overrated by the national media. Outside of the defense's recent struggles, it's been their #1 issue this year - and last year as well. They've struggled all year to open up running lanes for Peterson, which is huge given that making something out of nothing is not his strong suit. And the Vikes normally have to keep backs and tightends in to block on passing downs, and Farve still gets a lot of pressure. McKinney is OK, but inconsistent. Hutch seemingly has been playing hurt all year, and hasn't been nearly the player he was a year or two ago in terms of blowing people off the line in run blocking. They really miss Birk in the middle as well. The right side is OK, but Herrerra is just a solid workman-like player at best, and Loadholt is still a rookie - though a very talented one. The line that blew people off the ball and consistently opened up holes for Peterson in his rookie year has not been there all season. Farve didn't play well in the past couple of games, but he was great Monday night. Even with the defense getting torched all night, he was a missed extra point from pulling that game out. That bodes well for the Vikes going forward, since in the past few years he hasn't been able to perform at that level this late in the season. The loss of Harvin recently was HUGE for their offense. Winfield's a big key for their defense, and he's not right. That, plus the loss of Henderson in the middle, has really hurt the effectiveness of their defense. If Winfield and Harvin aren't ready go at at close to 100% by the playoffs, they could easily be one-and-done.
|
|
|
Post by quinnmartin on Dec 30, 2009 10:26:40 GMT -5
And not to play excuse maker for the Vikes, but they have 5 stud Pro-Bowl caliber players on defense. Two of them were out Monday night - Henderson and Pat Williams - and one of them - Winfield - is playing hurt and was a shell of his normal self.
In other words, as much as I dislike him, Farve's play is WELL down the list of reasons why the Vikes are imploding right now.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 31, 2009 0:17:20 GMT -5
On Harris - Then who was that idiot playing like crap in that final drive vs Pitt. Was it Woodson? Whoever, it was embarrasing.
My bros a huge Vike fan so I've been watching the games with him (hey he's my bro, gotta have his back) so I've been getting a Vikings edju-macation - and Brett deserves a LOT of credit for elevating the play of that team. He's had to carry a lot of that offense because Peterson hasn't been consistent. In Balt when they needed him to run and run and run and kill that clock at the end, he couldn't do it. And then the defense forgot how to tackle... and there was Brett and his receivers, to save the day.
The O line has been very shaky all season. It looks worse of late.
Winfield is much needed, man when that guy hits you, you stay tackled.
Harvin needs to be healthy and headache free
It might be the O-Lines fault, but Peterson isn't intimidating or dominating defensies like he used to. But I do like that other back. He seems to be able to find any tiny hole, create space and make something happen.
|
|
|
Post by quinnmartin on Dec 31, 2009 6:01:29 GMT -5
It might be the O-Lines fault, but Peterson isn't intimidating or dominating defensies like he used to. But I do like that other back. He seems to be able to find any tiny hole, create space and make something happen. Peterson seems to be more dependent on getting at least decent blocking than Chester Taylor. Peterson's strengths - his explosive acceleration through a hole, his power, and his flat out raw speed - are not much use without good run blocking in front of him.
|
|
|
Post by bobjohnson on Dec 31, 2009 7:06:15 GMT -5
On Harris - Then who was that idiot playing like crap in that final drive vs Pitt. Was it Woodson? Whoever, it was embarrasing. My bros a huge Vike fan so I've been watching the games with him (hey he's my bro, gotta have his back) so I've been getting a Vikings edju-macation - and Brett deserves a LOT of credit for elevating the play of that team. He's had to carry a lot of that offense because Peterson hasn't been consistent. In Balt when they needed him to run and run and run and kill that clock at the end, he couldn't do it. And then the defense forgot how to tackle... and there was Brett and his receivers, to save the day. The O line has been very shaky all season. It looks worse of late. Winfield is much needed, man when that guy hits you, you stay tackled. Harvin needs to be healthy and headache free It might be the O-Lines fault, but Peterson isn't intimidating or dominating defensies like he used to. But I do like that other back. He seems to be able to find any tiny hole, create space and make something happen. Jarrod Bush, who caught a pick but got penalized so it was all for naught. The whole team has penalty but that will change soon hopefully.
|
|
|
Post by GProopdog on Dec 31, 2009 12:28:51 GMT -5
Mmmm, so the Jets are in a *must win* game against the Bengals on Sunday...
....which pretty much gaurentees they'll either get blown out or be winning, then blow it in the last 4 minutes of the 4th quarter.
|
|
|
Post by Crowfan on Jan 3, 2010 15:59:12 GMT -5
While I'm not a Colts fan, I do enjoy watching them play, especially Peyton Manning. The problem I have is with the coaching staff of the Colts deciding to pull the starters against the Jets last week, and not really playing the starters this week against the Bills. Look, I get that you don't want to get anyone hurt, but let's face it, guys get hurt in practice all the time. Now you take away your chance at an undefeated season, but you also lose any momentum that you had. All I can say is that the Colts had better win the Super Bowl or there could be a lot of second guessing in Indy.
|
|
|
Post by bobjohnson on Jan 3, 2010 21:00:41 GMT -5
Packers annihilated Arizona, its a good time to be in Wisconsin!
|
|
|
Post by quinnmartin on Jan 4, 2010 9:09:18 GMT -5
Packers annihilated Arizona, its a good time to be in Wisconsin! And a good time to be a Cowboys fan in Minnesota. ;D It still blows my mind, when you watch the quickness of Romo's delivery and the zip he can put on the ball when he needs to, how he wasn't drafted. Just shows what a fine line there is between a capable NFL quarterback and a guy that can't hack it. And usually it comes down to things that you can't really measure - like how quickly they can make decisions, how well they can see the entire field, and how well they can sense pressure.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Jan 4, 2010 11:08:16 GMT -5
It still blows my mind, when you watch the quickness of Romo's delivery and the zip he can put on the ball when he needs to, how he wasn't drafted. Three words: Eastern. Illinois. University. Not exactly teeming with scouts. I'm not a Cowboys fan, as I'm typically on the backlash bandwagon against nationally overhyped teams (see also Yankees, Red Sox, and Patriots). But I really like Romo. He's got a loose personality, and the talent to match. He seems like a really cool guy.
|
|
|
Post by Mod City on Jan 4, 2010 13:21:06 GMT -5
While I'm not a Colts fan, I do enjoy watching them play, especially Peyton Manning. The problem I have is with the coaching staff of the Colts deciding to pull the starters against the Jets last week, and not really playing the starters this week against the Bills. Look, I get that you don't want to get anyone hurt, but let's face it, guys get hurt in practice all the time. Now you take away your chance at an undefeated season, but you also lose any momentum that you had. All I can say is that the Colts had better win the Super Bowl or there could be a lot of second guessing in Indy. I agree with you. I don't like seeing a perfect season sacrificed for the protection of your top starters. But let's admit it, it's been going on for years and there's nothing in the rules against it. Now it sounds like the NFL is at least interested in offering incentives to teams who don't do what the Colts just did. I wish teams bound for the playoffs wouldn't pull starters that way, but I don't think I want the NFL dictating how coaches manage their teams, either. I mean, there's no guarantee the Colts would have won that game even if Manning had stayed in.
|
|
|
Post by quinnmartin on Jan 4, 2010 13:49:22 GMT -5
[Now it sounds like the NFL is at least interested in offering incentives to teams who don't do what the Colts just did. I wish teams bound for the playoffs wouldn't pull starters that way, but I don't think I want the NFL dictating how coaches manage their teams, either. I've heard that. It seems totally unworkable. First, how do you define who played their "starters" or who didn't? If Manning's DNP with an minor "injury" that he'd have 100% played through if the game mattered, does that get them an extra draft pick? Or if you're up by 15 in the 2nd Qtr and the Saints pull Brees, doesn't get them a draft pick? Or do they have to play him X% of the game. Or if the Saints play Brees to get the draft pick, but handoff every play. You can force a team to play a player, I suppose, but you can't force them to go 100% to win the game that's meaningless. The only way you'll see team's going all out in the last game is if you somehow make it mean something.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Jan 4, 2010 13:57:28 GMT -5
Vikes went into the playoff on a high note, the team played great on all phases and the Brett haters need to at least give him his due...33 TDs, only 7 ints 4202 yards - QB Rating 107.2, that's nothing to sneeze at - Congrats to my bro and good luck in the playoffs... at least until you play the Pack, brotherly love and support only goes so far. Packer's look as good as anyone. But I hate that they have to play the Cards again. Beating a team on back to back weeks is tough. The Steelers are GONE! Yeah chew on that bitches! (sorry Pitt fans, I just really, really loathe them) As for sitting guys I don't see how you can or should stop it. The Colts/Bills game was meaningless, why risk losing a vital cog in the machine for a game that means nothing? (In hindsight, I'm sure the Pats wish they'd have sat at least one guy) Anyway, this was the most football I've watched in years. It was fun for the most part, lets hope the playoffs are just as entertaining.
|
|