Darren Sharper - HOFer

[Tarlam!]

Can this be serious?

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/19251409.html?page=2&c=y

I can't get my head around it....

[Pack-man]

Can this be serious?

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/19251409.html?page=2&c=y

I can't get my head around it....

I can't justify it either. If you look strictly at the stats then I guess he has to be considered. I think Leroy Butler was a much better safety. Yet his career stats don't reflect those kinds of numbers. So Leroy will never seriously be considered. That is really not fair!

[ahaha]

Completely absurd. The HOF is about dominating your era. Ed Reed, Troy Poalamalo, and Brian Dawkins are all better candidates from this era. Sharper only made the pro bowl last year because Sean Taylor died, and all the good safeties played in the AFC.

[HarveyWallbangers]

If LeRoy Butler is not a sure thing for the Hall of Fame as a safety, then Sharper has little chance. Crazier things have happened though. Packer fans realize Butler was much better, but I wonder what the national thinking is on it.

[DonHutson]

First among active players in INT return yardage, leading to Hall of Fame discussions?

I guess all those 8 yard returns out of the end zone are paying off for him after all.

They can put his name up in the Humpty Dome. I don't feel a need to claim him.

I forget exactly what the numbers were, but I believe Butler has some unique combination of sacks and INT's that nobody else accomplished. Add that to a vital role on a championship team and he should be in the discussion. It's probably unlikely though.

[Scott Campbell]

How funny would it be if he made the NFL HOF but wasn't good enough for the Packer Hall of Fame.

[StPaulPackFan]

Sharper is, and has always been a showboat. That was one of the reasons that I wasn't sad to see him go. The other reason was his age. But even though he is up there in years he still had as many INTs last year as Nick Collins has had over the last 3 years.

Bottom line, Sharper was/is a playmaker. Sure, he gives up some big plays but he has a knack for picking off the ball. A quality that Collins, Roman and Manuel have sorely lacked.

It's easy to dislike him because he is now a Viking. But IMO, it's disingenuous to say his 50+ career INTs don't merit HOF discussion.

[The Leaper]

I would say he is well outside of consideration right now.

If he plays at a high level for another 2+ years, then he'll be someone to consider on par with Butler IMO. I doubt either makes it.

[The Leaper]

But IMO, it's disingenuous to say his 50+ career INTs don't merit HOF discussion.

Perhaps...but he isn't a CB. The safety position has always been more than INTs, and people who vote for the HOF know that. That is why few safeties receive that level of recognition.

Sharper: 4 Pro Bowls, 1 All-Pro, 0 titles
Butler: 4 Pro Bowls, 4 All-Pro, 1 title

HOF voters look far more often at the times a player is All-Pro rather than Pro Bowl, as that represents how often a player is a starting caliber All-Star player...not just a reserve/substitute All-Star player. That is what signifies a truly ELITE player from the many great ones.

Butler was a truly elite player...what hurts him is longevity. The guy fell off a cliff quickly after age 30. Sharper has the longevity, but he never was a truly elite player at any point.

[SkinBasket]

Not to mention Butler changed the way the safety position was played while making the defense he played on better.

Sharper plays the Darren Sharper position, playing where he can "make a play" regardless of where he should be in the defense, more than he plays an effective safety position.

[3irty1]

First among active players in INT return yardage, leading to Hall of Fame discussions?

I guess all those 8 yard returns out of the end zone are paying off for him after all.

They can put his name up in the Humpty Dome. I don't feel a need to claim him.

I forget exactly what the numbers were, but I believe Butler has some unique combination of sacks and INT's that nobody else accomplished. Add that to a vital role on a championship team and he should be in the discussion. It's probably unlikely though.

He was the first safety to be in the "20/20 club" (20 sacks / 20 ints). Everyone else was a LB at the time.

[Deputy Nutz]

I will go and hold up a sign, "4th and 26"

[StPaulPackFan]

Perhaps...but he isn't a CB. The safety position has always been more than INTs, and people who vote for the HOF know that. That is why few safeties receive that level of recognition.

Sharper: 4 Pro Bowls, 1 All-Pro, 0 titles
Butler: 4 Pro Bowls, 4 All-Pro, 1 title

HOF voters look far more often at the times a player is All-Pro rather than Pro Bowl, as that represents how often a player is a starting caliber All-Star player...not just a reserve/substitute All-Star player. That is what signifies a truly ELITE player from the many great ones.

Good call on the INT argument. My first impulse was that 53 INTs seemed like a boatload. But after doing some additional research as a result of your post, I was amazed to see that 53 doesn't even get him in the top 20 all-time. Plus it's still nearly 30 INTs short of the INT record of 81, held by Paul Krause.

I'm not personally saying he deserves to be in. I just felt the 53 INTs were enough to put him in the HOF discussion. After digging into it a little deeper I may have been mistaken. However, I do think that many Packer fans are a bit too harsh on him just because he is now a Viking.

[bobblehead]

they got confused, they meant MFer.

[Packers4Ever]

How funny would it be if he made the NFL HOF but wasn't good enough for the Packer Hall of Fame.

Scott, only you could come up with that !! :wink:
:)

[Deputy Nutz]

Perhaps...but he isn't a CB. The safety position has always been more than INTs, and people who vote for the HOF know that. That is why few safeties receive that level of recognition.

Sharper: 4 Pro Bowls, 1 All-Pro, 0 titles
Butler: 4 Pro Bowls, 4 All-Pro, 1 title

HOF voters look far more often at the times a player is All-Pro rather than Pro Bowl, as that represents how often a player is a starting caliber All-Star player...not just a reserve/substitute All-Star player. That is what signifies a truly ELITE player from the many great ones.

Good call on the INT argument. My first impulse was that 53 INTs seemed like a boatload. But after doing some additional research as a result of your post, I was amazed to see that 53 doesn't even get him in the top 20 all-time. Plus it's still nearly 30 INTs short of the INT record of 81, held by Paul Krause.

I'm not personally saying he deserves to be in. I just felt the 53 INTs were enough to put him in the HOF discussion. After digging into it a little deeper I may have been mistaken. However, I do think that many Packer fans are a bit too harsh on him just because he is now a Viking.

You have to minus about 15-20 of those that he cherry picked at the end of the half or at the end of the game.

[GBRulz]

I will go and hold up a sign, "4th and 26"

Or a pic of Owens catching the game winner in the '99 playoffs.

[Scott Campbell]

I will go and hold up a sign, "4th and 26"



I will hold one up saying:


LOOKS LIKE WILLIAM.
PLAYS LIKE MARY.

[pbmax]

I will go and hold up a sign, "4th and 26"
I am committing to spending any amount of money and time necessary to make this happen. Should the need arise. Hopefully, gas will be below $15.00 a gallon if we need to drive.

[HarveyWallbangers]

However, I do think that many Packer fans are a bit too harsh on him just because he is now a Viking.

No. I can assure you that most around here hated Sharper even before he left for the Vikings. I had some nice arguments with folks.

[Bretsky]

However, I do think that many Packer fans are a bit too harsh on him just because he is now a Viking.

No. I can assure you that most around here hated Sharper even before he left for the Vikings. I had some nice arguments with folks.


I've always been a fan of Sharper being a very solid player when healthy. He had one yr with a lot of missed tackles....but overall he's really good and a ballhawk. He was a bit of a primadonna with us at times....but still good.

Hall of Fame though .............No way :!:

[StPaulPackFan]

However, I do think that many Packer fans are a bit too harsh on him just because he is now a Viking.

No. I can assure you that most around here hated Sharper even before he left for the Vikings. I had some nice arguments with folks.

Really? I don't think I've ever hated a player while he was a Packer. Heck, I even liked Jim McMahon for one year.

[The Leaper]

However, I do think that many Packer fans are a bit too harsh on him just because he is now a Viking.

It isn't simply because he is a Viking, but how he refused to help Green Bay and then badmouthed the organization after he left.

Plus, Packer fans know what Sharper is. He's a very good player, but he's certainly not an elite player...and he's ALWAYS about Darren Sharper first and foremost. That has been true throughout his career, not just when he went to Minnesota.

[StPaulPackFan]

However, I do think that many Packer fans are a bit too harsh on him just because he is now a Viking.

It isn't simply because he is a Viking, but how he refused to help Green Bay and then badmouthed the organization after he left.

Plus, Packer fans know what Sharper is. He's a very good player, but he's certainly not an elite player...and he's ALWAYS about Darren Sharper first and foremost. That has been true throughout his career, not just when he went to Minnesota.

Fair enough. Even though it's not uncommon for anyone, not just football players, to badmouth their former employer after they leave. Especially if they are asked to take a substantial paycut. But I do agree, Darren Sharper loves him some Darren Sharper. :roll:

[Patler]

Packer fans were able to see Darren Sharper and LeRoy Butler on the field together for several years. We saw Butler before Sharper, and Sharper after Butler's unfortunate injury ending his career. Sharper was a good player, Butler a great one. They are not close in their overall performance. When Butler's career ended, the Packers tried to play Sharper in the same role as Butler, and it was a failure.

Sharper has a knack for interceptions, I'll give him credit for that, especially on "Hail Mary" tosses. But, if you look beyond his interceptions, there is nothing significant or special about his play. Safeties should be more than just interceptions. Sharper has not been a good tackler, is OK, but not "good" in run support (especially for his size), has been an ineffective blitzer, and makes the occasional mistake or misread in coverage a little too often for his experience level. Butler was very, very good in all of those things; much, much better than Sharper.

As a team mate, again no comparison at all. Butler several times reworked his contract to help the team, and is one of the few who took an actual cut in pay, not just reallocating pay, to help the team retain free agents. When it came Sharper's turn to do the same, nothing could be worked out. The key to being able to retain Wahle or Rivera would have been reworking Sharper's contract. He had the largest one that could be (Favre's was said to be not eligible at the time). Sharper would not budge.

If Sharper were to get in, and Butler not, it would be wrong, just plain wrong. Hearing Sharper mentioned as a HOF candidate, when Butler has had trouble getting support, seems like an injustice to many Packer fans.

[pbmax]

Sharper has not been a good tackler, is OK, but not "good" in run support (especially for his size), has been an ineffective blitzer, and makes the occasional mistake or misread in coverage a little too often for his experience level. Butler was very, very good in all of those things, much, much better than Sharper.

I agree with Patler on many of his points but let me emphasize two, neither of which has to do with reworking his contract, the Terrell Owens catch or 4th and 26th.

One, he routinely took bad angles to the play in front of him in either run support or moving to cover a zone (or man) that had been thrown to. There were games he missed more tackles than he made. This was obvious nearly every game in his early career. An by early I mean first 5 years or so.

As Patler relates, it was clear he couldn't play the Butler role and so eventually he was placed deeper or occasionally in slot or TE coverage. His coverage skills were somewhere near average for a safety, but were weak compared to his physical gifts.

And two, as a centerfielder at safety, you can't let people get behind you and you can't afford to jump a route or ball and make a mistake. But he was regularly beaten deep. And he regularly jumped routes, failed to get the ball then had the same bad angle problem and was lost to the play.

There are many safeties worse than Sharper. We saw three play immediately after he left. But for his gifts and role in the defense, he should have dominated. Indeed, he had a gift for finding the ball. But when none of his other skills developed past average, opponents ignored him.

He had enough skill that its possible in some scheme he might have fit perfectly. But with Fritz, Rhodes and Slowik it was a tire fire. Donatell and Bates got the closest to finding his niche. But a niche safety doesn't belong in the HOF and he didn't deserve $7 mil a year in 2004.

[Patler]

There are many safeties worse than Sharper. We saw three play immediately after he left. But for his gifts and role in the defense, he should have dominated. Indeed, he had a gift for finding the ball. But when none of his other skills developed past average, opponents ignored him.


I couldn't agree more. He has great size, speed and athleticism. He is very intelligent. But has never seemed to maximize those gifts. Other than a feel for finding the ball in the air (when in position for it), and good hands, he doesn't display keen insight or feel for the game as a whole. I never disliked the guy, but expected more from him. I thought he could dominate in many areas, as Butler had. From that point he was a disappointment.

I would have been happy to have him stay as a Packer. But if I ever was forced to chose between Sharper and Butler, I wouldn't hesitate a second in picking Butler. Considering Butler's situation, the HOF talk for Sharper is ludicrous, in my opinion.

[Pugger]

Before we get all excited, remember the article was written by someone in MN...plus the Heidi Hairs don't have loads of guys right now that could even be considered for the HOF. :roll: Sharper is/was never as good as Butler. Its no comparison in my eyes. :no:

[3irty1]

He'll get into the hall of fame the same day as Terrell Buckley.

[PackFan#1]

As a team mate, again no comparison at all. Butler several times reworked his contract to help the team, and is one of the few who took an actual cut in pay, not just reallocating pay, to help the team retain free agents. When it came Sharper's turn to do the same, nothing could be worked out. The key to being able to retain Wahle or Rivera would have been reworking Sharper's contract. He had the largest one that could be (Favre's was said to be not eligible at the time). Sharper would not budge.


Actually, Sharper reworked his contract a few times to help the Pack sign guys like Clifton, KGB and Diggs, among others.

Thompson wanted Sharper to take a pay cut. There’s a big difference between taking a pay cut and restructuring a contract.

Can’t blame Sharper for bolting. If your boss asks you to take a pay cut, and at the same time, another organization is willing to hire you for more than what your employer wants to pay you, odds are you would have bolted too.

Sharper is a good player. Is he good enough for the HOF? From my perspective, YES.

[Tarlam!]

Welcome to the forum, PackFan#1!!

[PackFan#1]

Welcome to the forum, PackFan#1!!

Thanks, Tarlam. Been a long time lurker. Just haven't register until recently.

[Patler]

Actually, Sharper reworked his contract a few times to help the Pack sign guys like Clifton, KGB and Diggs, among others.

Thompson wanted Sharper to take a pay cut. There’s a big difference between taking a pay cut and restructuring a contract.

Can’t blame Sharper for bolting. If your boss asks you to take a pay cut, and at the same time, another organization is willing to hire you for more than what your employer wants to pay you, odds are you would have bolted too.

Sharper is a good player. Is he good enough for the HOF? From my perspective, YES.

I do not believe Sharper ever "reworked" his contract. The Packers simply guaranteed his roster bonus one year, allowing them to prorate the bonus over the remaining life of the contract. It makes not one cent of difference to the player, and I believe does not even require the player's consent.

A reworked contract changes when and how payments are made, changes the timing, not just the characterization of the payment. That is exactly what Butler did, even taking a pay cut saying at the time it was necessary to keep the team together. I remember his comment that he had made good money, and it was time to allow others the opportunity.

Many people take pay cuts when necessary to help their employer. Not all bolt for the door just because more money is available elsewhere. Some regular people and even some athletes have loyalties.

Sharper's loyalty extended no farther than his own bank account. He expressed no willingness to help his team at all at that time. That, after they had made him one of the, if not the highest paid safety in the game in 2001. He had a $30 million contract, and got $7 million of it in a signing bonus. In the four years he had already received about $20 million of the contract value, and had only two years left, but was unwilling to work with the Packers.

What makes him a HOF'er in your opinion. I concede he will end with a reasonably high total of interceptions, but not an amazingly high total. What else in your opinion qualifies him for the HOF?

[PackFan#1]

And changing a roster bonus to a signing bonus does not help a team? I guess Steve McNair was a selfish player too, for allowing Tennessee to change the “characterization” of his contract during the years the Titans were contending for the Super Bowl. In fact, McNair was so selfish, the Titans were forced to eventually cut him (sarcastically speaking).

Sure “many people take pay cut” out of “loyalties.” But many more would bolt for more money faster than you can say “pay cut.”

Sharper has the stat of a hall of famer.

[the_idle_threat]

Welcome to the forum, Packfan#1. I think you're fulla shit on this one, but thanks for playing. :taunt:

[GrnBay007]

Welcome to PR Packfan#1. Interesting avatar.

[Patler]

Sharper has the stat of a hall of famer.

Which stat, and what is the "qualify" amount for the HOF?

[SMACKTALKIE]

Hi, new guy here and I am a lifelong Vikings fan. I've been reading packerats since my pack fan buddy showed this site.


Anyway I just thought it should be pointed out that the "4th and 26" play was the direct result of then rookie Nick Barnett not being where he should have been. I can't remember if it was PA or not, but Barnett was too concerned with the RB and did not get the drop he should have. Not Sharper's fault.

[Zool]

I'm not sure I'd call a WR 26 yards deep a LB's responsibility in nickel coverage. I'd have to watch the play again however.

Need I remind everyone who had deep coverage on Owens against SF in the 1998 playoffs? Nice try to hit someone hard Darren. Maybe you should just play the ball like normal?

[SMACKTALKIE]

I'm not sure I'd call a WR 26 yards deep a LB's responsibility in nickel coverage. I'd have to watch the play again however.

Need I remind everyone who had deep coverage on Owens against SF in the 1998 playoffs? Nice try to hit someone hard Darren. Maybe you should just play the ball like normal?



I looked for some video footage of the play and was unable to find it.

I remember the play being broken down on ESPN. It was pointed out how out of position Barnett was and how it directly resulted in the play being a first down.

[Iron Mike]

Hi, new guy here and I am a lifelong Vikings fan. I've been reading packerats since my pack fan buddy showed this site.


Anyway I just thought it should be pointed out that the "4th and 26" play was the direct result of then rookie Nick Barnett not being where he should have been. I can't remember if it was PA or not, but Barnett was too concerned with the RB and did not get the drop he should have. Not Sharper's fault.

Hmmm........caps lock issues, grammatical and spelling errors. :roll:

Did Mad ban a Bear troll that found a new IP address???

[hoosier]

Hi, new guy here and I am a lifelong Vikings fan. I've been reading packerats since my pack fan buddy showed this site.


Anyway I just thought it should be pointed out that the "4th and 26" play was the direct result of then rookie Nick Barnett not being where he should have been. I can't remember if it was PA or not, but Barnett was too concerned with the RB and did not get the drop he should have. Not Sharper's fault.

Yeah, the Eagles running a draw play on 4th and forever must have been high on Barnett's list of worrries. :lol: You're right that 4th and 26 wasn't purely Sharper's fault. Barnett was supposed to get deeper and he apparently kind of blew the coverage on Mitchell. But Sharper f'up up too by dropping too deep, presumably playing for the interception instead of just breaking up the pass.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Hi, new guy here and I am a lifelong Vikings fan. I've been reading packerats since my pack fan buddy showed this site.


Anyway I just thought it should be pointed out that the "4th and 26" play was the direct result of then rookie Nick Barnett not being where he should have been. I can't remember if it was PA or not, but Barnett was too concerned with the RB and did not get the drop he should have. Not Sharper's fault.

Hmmm........caps lock issues, grammatical and spelling errors. :roll:

Did Mad ban a Bear troll that found a new IP address???


Sorry about the grammatical and spelling errors. :oops:

Caps lock was intentional.

HATE THE BEARS!! :evil:

[hoosier]

I'm not sure I'd call a WR 26 yards deep a LB's responsibility in nickel coverage. I'd have to watch the play again however.

Need I remind everyone who had deep coverage on Owens against SF in the 1998 playoffs? Nice try to hit someone hard Darren. Maybe you should just play the ball like normal?



I looked for some video footage of the play and was unable to find it.

I remember the play being broken down on ESPN. It was pointed out how out of position Barnett was and how it directly resulted in the play being a first down.

This is something no Packers fan wants to have to see again. But it shows clearly that Sharper was playing center field, five or so yards behind the first down line, and is only able to hit Mitchell after he has controlled the ball. If Sharper had been more aware of down and distance, and playing a little closer, he could have simply broken the pass up.

http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/multimedia/index.asp?mm_file_id=305&play_clip=y

[Iron Mike]

Hi, new guy here and I am a lifelong Vikings fan. I've been reading packerats since my pack fan buddy showed this site.


Anyway I just thought it should be pointed out that the "4th and 26" play was the direct result of then rookie Nick Barnett not being where he should have been. I can't remember if it was PA or not, but Barnett was too concerned with the RB and did not get the drop he should have. Not Sharper's fault.

Hmmm........caps lock issues, grammatical and spelling errors. :roll:

Did Mad ban a Bear troll that found a new IP address???


Sorry about the grammatical and spelling errors. :oops:

Caps lock was intentional.

HATE THE BEARS!! :evil:


Hester is scary with the ball in his hands no matter how it gets there. He did'nt show much at WR last year but I would imagine every opposing D coordinator notices him when he takes the field.

I'll reserve judgement on that. :wink:

[SMACKTALKIE]

Hi, new guy here and I am a lifelong Vikings fan. I've been reading packerats since my pack fan buddy showed this site.


Anyway I just thought it should be pointed out that the "4th and 26" play was the direct result of then rookie Nick Barnett not being where he should have been. I can't remember if it was PA or not, but Barnett was too concerned with the RB and did not get the drop he should have. Not Sharper's fault.

Hmmm........caps lock issues, grammatical and spelling errors. :roll:

Did Mad ban a Bear troll that found a new IP address???


Sorry about the grammatical and spelling errors. :oops:

Caps lock was intentional.

HATE THE BEARS!! :evil:


Hester is scary with the ball in his hands no matter how it gets there. He did'nt show much at WR last year but I would imagine every opposing D coordinator notices him when he takes the field.

I'll reserve judgement on that. :wink:


Well I can see your point.......I guess I'll have to be more obvious in my allegiance. So here we go:

The Vikings will win the NFC north this year.
The pack won't make the playoffs.
A-Rog has not proven himself enough to be considered any better than T-Jack.

I realize this is completely off the subject but I want to convey to you that I am not a bears fan. I also did not want to say the above statemants until I felt I was better established in packerrats.com so as not to come off too cocky or arrogant. It is how I feel because I am a Vikings fan.

[Zool]

Well I can see your point.......I guess I'll have to be more obvious in my allegiance. So here we go:

The Vikings will win the NFC north this year.
The pack won't make the playoffs.
A-Rog has not proven himself enough to be considered any better than T-Jack.

I realize this is completely off the subject but I want to convey to you that I am not a bears fan. I also did not want to say the above statemants until I felt I was better established in packerrats.com so as not to come off too cocky or arrogant. It is how I feel because I am a Vikings fan.

So you must think the Vike's D is sustantially better than the Packers then. I agree that the Vikings can and will run better than the Packers, but Rice and Berrian are not Driver, Jennings Jones. That leaves the D as the difference maker.

[sharpe1027]

So you must think the Vike's D is sustantially better than the Packers then. I agree that the Vikings can and will run better than the Packers, but Rice and Berrian are not Driver, Jennings Jones. That leaves the D as the difference maker.

Don't forget coaching. Childress is a offensive guru who is better than Holmgren, just ask him. I'm sure Vikings fans agree that his offense (1st down: run - 2nd down: run - 3rd down: short pass to the saftey valve) is the result of a superior offensive mind. :roll:

[SMACKTALKIE]

Well I can see your point.......I guess I'll have to be more obvious in my allegiance. So here we go:

The Vikings will win the NFC north this year.
The pack won't make the playoffs.
A-Rog has not proven himself enough to be considered any better than T-Jack.

I realize this is completely off the subject but I want to convey to you that I am not a bears fan. I also did not want to say the above statemants until I felt I was better established in packerrats.com so as not to come off too cocky or arrogant. It is how I feel because I am a Vikings fan.

So you must think the Vike's D is sustantially better than the Packers then. I agree that the Vikings can and will run better than the Packers, but Rice and Berrian are not Driver, Jennings Jones. That leaves the D as the difference maker.

I think the addition of Jared Allen will help the pass D greatly. I think The addition of Berrian will help Jackson greatly.

I think the subtraction of Favre will hinder Green Bay's O greatly in the running and passing game.

I won't go so far as to say the Viking's D is substantially better than Green Bay's........but better yes.

[SMACKTALKIE]

So you must think the Vike's D is sustantially better than the Packers then. I agree that the Vikings can and will run better than the Packers, but Rice and Berrian are not Driver, Jennings Jones. That leaves the D as the difference maker.

Don't forget coaching. Childress is a offensive guru who is better than Holmgren, just ask him. I'm sure Vikings fans agree that his offense (1st down: run - 2nd down: run - 3rd down: short pass to the saftey valve) is the result of a superior offensive mind. :roll:

I think Childress's play calling is a result of the personnelle he had/has to work with. I think (hope) that will change as T-Jack continues to become more comfortable with the offense, and as the offense continues to become more comfortable with the system.

[Deputy Nutz]

Well I can see your point.......I guess I'll have to be more obvious in my allegiance. So here we go:

The Vikings will win the NFC north this year.
The pack won't make the playoffs.
A-Rog has not proven himself enough to be considered any better than T-Jack.

I realize this is completely off the subject but I want to convey to you that I am not a bears fan. I also did not want to say the above statemants until I felt I was better established in packerrats.com so as not to come off too cocky or arrogant. It is how I feel because I am a Vikings fan.

So you must think the Vike's D is sustantially better than the Packers then. I agree that the Vikings can and will run better than the Packers, but Rice and Berrian are not Driver, Jennings Jones. That leaves the D as the difference maker.

I think the addition of Jared Allen will help the pass D greatly. I think The addition of Berrian will help Jackson greatly.

I think the subtraction of Favre will hinder Green Bay's O greatly in the running and passing game.

I won't go so far as to say the Viking's D is substantially better than Green Bay's........but better yes.

Did they fix their secondary? I hope Jared Allen has a nice drop.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Well I can see your point.......I guess I'll have to be more obvious in my allegiance. So here we go:

The Vikings will win the NFC north this year.
The pack won't make the playoffs.
A-Rog has not proven himself enough to be considered any better than T-Jack.

I realize this is completely off the subject but I want to convey to you that I am not a bears fan. I also did not want to say the above statemants until I felt I was better established in packerrats.com so as not to come off too cocky or arrogant. It is how I feel because I am a Vikings fan.

So you must think the Vike's D is sustantially better than the Packers then. I agree that the Vikings can and will run better than the Packers, but Rice and Berrian are not Driver, Jennings Jones. That leaves the D as the difference maker.

I think the addition of Jared Allen will help the pass D greatly. I think The addition of Berrian will help Jackson greatly.

I think the subtraction of Favre will hinder Green Bay's O greatly in the running and passing game.

I won't go so far as to say the Viking's D is substantially better than Green Bay's........but better yes.

Did they fix their secondary? I hope Jared Allen has a nice drop.

That's the point......a solid pass rush will help the secondary. Fixed? We will see. Addressed? Definately yes.

[Zool]

I think you're going to be rudely greeted by Berrians abilities. He's not everything he's cracked up to be, he just happened to be the only fish worth anything available in FA. I think Rice will end up the best Viking receiver, probably by the end of this season.

Rodgers will be better than T-bags at QB IMO starting week 1. And if the Pack can rush for 1800+ this year, the Packers will win the division.

[SMACKTALKIE]

I think you're going to be rudely greeted by Berrians abilities. He's not everything he's cracked up to be, he just happened to be the only fish worth anything available in FA. I think Rice will end up the best Viking receiver, probably by the end of this season.

Rodgers will be better than T-bags at QB IMO starting week 1. And if the Pack can rush for 1800+ this year, the Packers will win the division.

I agree with you about Berrian, he is the one FA we got this year that could be a bust.....but the Vikes badly needed help at WR, and Berrian was the best available option, overpaid is a temporary lable these days.

I love Rice's potential.

I don't doubt A-Rog's ability, I just question the O's ability to adjust to the different looks defenses will be giving them this year. Looks/blitzes they have not seen in years.

If the Pack, or any team rushes for 1800 yards they will be a very solid team.

[Zool]

1800 only puts you right in the middle of the league in RYPG.

2007 Rushing Stats (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jsessionid=0C08B905121EEEAA516BF54B9 923A104?offensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&archive=false&seasonType=REG&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS_PER_GAME_AVG&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Find&tabSeq=2&role=TM&d-447263-p=1)

Look back for a few years. Its always around 15-17th in the league.

[Pugger]

Rushing is great but passing rules in the NFL these days. Only teams with good passers and better than average WRs (and more than just one or two)are the most successful. So unless the Vikes' WRs and Jackson are much better than last year it will not be easy for them to take the division. However, even a team with Wrecks can defy all odds and win. :P I'm optomistic that Rodgers will play very well. He has a heck of a receiving corps to throw to. :)

[SMACKTALKIE]

Rushing is great but passing rules in the NFL these days. Only teams with good passers and better than average WRs (and more than just one or two)are the most successful. So unless the Vikes' WRs and Jackson are much better than last year it will not be easy for them to take the division. However, even a team with Wrecks can defy all odds and win. :P I'm optomistic that Rodgers will play very well. He has a heck of a receiving corps to throw to. :)

Your recievers are good. But can they be as good without Favre? I guess we will find out in time.

[Scott Campbell]

A-Rog has not proven himself enough to be considered any better than T-Jack.


I think T-Jack has proven himself to suck worse than anyone in the league not named Grossman. Rodgers is in a completely different league where guys at least have a chance at being something.

[Rastak]

A-Rog has not proven himself enough to be considered any better than T-Jack.


I think T-Jack has proven himself to suck worse than anyone in the league not named Grossman. Rodgers is in a completely different league where guys at least have a chance at being something.


Not true. He was not dead last in QB rating and was 8-4 as a starter. In addition, he improved quite a bit as the year went on. 65% completion percentage in the last half of the season and a 80 something QB rating.


Is he a great NFL QB? Ummm, probably not, but he looked solid in his last game and much better in overall in the second half of the season. Division 2 to NFL was a stupid move by the Vikings but he's now had enough live fire where he should improve.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Not true. He was not dead last in QB rating and was 8-4 as a starter.

I love this stat. It's like saying Rex Grossman was a starter for an NFC Champion. True, but it was in spite of him. To be fair, he shouldn't get credit for San Diego. He got injured in a tie game, and Bollinger led the team to a commanding victory. Another game he went 9 for 23 with 0 TDs and 1 int and won because Peterson ran all over the Bears. Another one they won because of the implosion by Eli Manning (I think the Vikings scored something like four defensive TDs). His other victories were against a horrible teams (Atlanta, Oakland, Detroit, San Fran, and Chicago).

[Rastak]

Not true. He was not dead last in QB rating and was 8-4 as a starter.

I love this stat. It's like saying Rex Grossman was a starter for an NFC Champion. True, but it was in spite of him. To be fair, he shouldn't get credit for San Diego. He got injured in a tie game, and Bollinger led the team to a commanding victory. Another game he went 9 for 23 with 0 TDs and 1 int and won because Peterson ran all over the Bears. Another one they won because of the implosion by Eli Manning (I think the Vikings scored something like four defensive TDs). His other victories were against a horrible teams (Atlanta, Oakland, Detroit, San Fran, and Chicago).


That wasn't my main point Harv but it still is a fact. I watched the Denver game twice and there is no question he played as well as I've seen.


edit: it wasn't just that game. I am not suggesting he is a top NFL QB but you who think he ranks 32'd may be real disappointed this year.

[MadtownPacker]

Your recievers are good. But can they be as good without Favre? I guess we will find out in time.Are you from Rastak's clan or did you come on a different boat? :lol: Welcome to the forum.

The WRs catch the ball when it gets to them. That wont change so if Rodgers can get them the ball, in stride like they got it last year then I see no reason they can't be productive and YAC it up like last year. If teams dare ARod to beat them and he stays healthy I can see DD, GJ, and JJ having big numbers early in the season.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Your recievers are good. But can they be as good without Favre? I guess we will find out in time.Are you from Rastak's clan or did you come on a different boat? :lol: Welcome to the forum.

The WRs catch the ball when it gets to them. That wont change so if Rodgers can get them the ball, in stride like they got it last year then I see no reason they can't be productive and YAC it up like last year. If teams dare ARod to beat them and he stays healthy I can see DD, GJ, and JJ having big numbers early in the season.

Thanks for the welcome.

I don't know what clan Rastak is from but we both cheer on the same team.

I don't see A-Rog's health as a potential issue, I think being a back up can make players a bit more prone to injury. However it will be interesting to see how he and the O line handles the pressure of D fronts and blitzes the Packers have not seen in many years. Defenses will certainly plan differently for Rodgers than they did for Favre.

[MJZiggy]

See that's what I'm interested in seeing. I wanna see exactly how differently teams play us because of the changing of the guard. Welcome, by the way...

[pbmax]

I remember this breakdown as well, but it was the TE in motion that occupied Barnett's initial attention and slowed his drop into his zone.

It was pointed out earlier that asking the LB to drop to a zone 26 yards deep is a bit much, and it may be. But the point was that if Barnett had been in better position in his zone (ie. deeper than he was) then McNabb would have had to loft the ball more to drop it in the hole between Barnett and Sharper.

Lofting the ball would have given Sharper more time.


Hi, new guy here and I am a lifelong Vikings fan. I've been reading packerats since my pack fan buddy showed this site.


Anyway I just thought it should be pointed out that the "4th and 26" play was the direct result of then rookie Nick Barnett not being where he should have been. I can't remember if it was PA or not, but Barnett was too concerned with the RB and did not get the drop he should have. Not Sharper's fault.

[Iron Mike]

I think the addition of Jared Allen will help the pass D greatly.
Wrong.

I think The addition of Berrian will help Jackson greatly.
Wrong.

I think the subtraction of Favre will hinder Green Bay's O greatly in the running and passing game.
Wrong.

I won't go so far as to say the Viking's D is substantially better than Green Bay's........but better yes.
Wrong.

:P

[KYPack]

Nice to see that you are keeping track of shit, Ironman.

[mraynrand]

Where was 'day late, dollar short' Sharper last night? I don't recall seeing him.


http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/packer/img/news/jan04/1fred-mh111.jpg

[Cheesehead Craig]

Too busy trying to make a "big play". I've told friends this for years: if it's not an INT or a big hit, Sharper is not interested. All he had to do was fall on that fumble and that would have been huge. Instead he tries to pick it up and run with it to do something "spectacular" and he hurts his team.

Plus, that block by Hall on the long Grant run where he levels Sharper is awesome.

[MadtownPacker]

Damn I ran out of bad thing to say about sharper believe it or not. :lol:

[mraynrand]

Damn I ran out of bad thing to say about sharper believe it or not. :lol:

I can lend you a few if you like.

[Guiness]

Was he one of the two DB's falling over each other on Grant's long run?

Does anyone have a shot of that????

[Pacopete4]

The sad part is.. that clown will most likely be in the HOF due to his play making ability even though as a safety.. he's not that good

[Chevelle2]

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/06EX7lf8wi62Y/610x.jpg

[HarveyWallbangers]

The sad part is.. that clown will most likely be in the HOF due to his play making ability even though as a safety.. he's not that good

Nah, the odds are stacked against him. It's tough for safeties. If LeRoy Butler has a hard time getting in, you know Sharper's chances are small.

[Pacopete4]

Doesn't he have a ton of INT's though compared to Butler?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Doesn't he have a ton of INT's though compared to Butler?

Yeah, but Butler was the first guy to get 30 picks and 20 sacks. He was also named as one of the two safeties on the All-Decade team for the 90s. I think most Hall of Fame writers will see what we all see.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Doesn't he have a ton of INT's though compared to Butler?

Yeah, but Butler was the first guy to get 30 picks and 20 sacks. He was also named as one of the two safeties on the All-Decade team for the 90s. I think most Hall of Fame writers will see what we all see.
+1 Sharper is not a HOF S.