Those silly Vikings

[Tony Oday]

Was reading an article about NFC Draft need and got this gem:

In 2005 the Vikings passed on Aaron Rodgers ... twice. Once, to draft wide receiver Troy Williamson at No. 7 and again at No. 18 picking defensive end Erasmus James. Neither lived up to their hype and even more noteworthy both aren't on the roster.

that makes me giggle.

[Tarlam!]

I've said it before and I'll continue saying it: Rogers benefitted greatly from holding a clipboard for 3 seasons. He was terrible in his first pre-season outings and he proved to be brittle early in his career. M3's QB school was instrumental in his development and being allowed to mature helped immensely. He was also given time to mature physically. Remember the over 50 sacks he took in the '09/'10 season? I doubt he could have sustained that punishment early. The pressure cooker environment of replacing a first ballot HOFer was an ideal seasoning environment.

Had he been thrown in á la Alex Smith or been poorly coached á la T-Jack, I doubt he'd have been the instant success he's become. Smith is a great case study on how to burn out a promising QB. Now, obviously some QBs coming in are equipped to do well as we've seen in recent years. Rapistburger, Matt Ryan and Sam Bradford, even Palmer. But look no further than Detroit to see a talented QB not being able to stay upright.

Rogers and the NFL got lucky with the way things panned out. Just my opinion. But, they Vikings are still silly, regardless!! :) ;)

[Pugger]

Why do you call Rodgers brittle?

[Tony Oday]

He broke his ankle...then he drank milk so now he's good.

[Tarlam!]

Why do you call Rodgers brittle?

What I wrote is "was brittle early in his career".

[Zool]

Rodgers was never brittle IMO. Alex Smith is brittle.

[Tarlam!]

Rodgers was never brittle IMO. Alex Smith is brittle.

He has always been tough, Zool. He finished that Patsies game with a broken foot i.e. in great pain. But he broke pretty easily on that play. Didn't he get injured again the following year? No matter, he strengthed greatly during his clipboard years. Something Alex Smith never has had a chance to do, because he's always rehabbing. It'll be interesting to see if Stafford suffers a similar fate in Detroit. I don't watch any other team closely, but he seems brittle. He certainly could have used a season or two of strengthening, I'm sure.

I'm high on Rodgers and I always have been, but IMO, he got lucky (we all did!) in his development process. I think it all came together very nicely.

[Fritz]

Emotionally brittle? I'm not sure if Rodgers was brittle early on or not -maybe the argument about his not being bulked up enough to withstand the pounding is a good point. Or that he would've been sacked more cuz he couldn't read defenses quickly enough. But I don't think he was "naturally" brittle.

But actually I agree for the most part with Tarlam. I believe that in the vast majority of instances, teams ruin their prize young QB's by throwing them out there way too soon. Ryan in Atlanta is an exception, for sure, but for the most part the prize kiddy QB's get ruined by being thrown to the dogs right away.

[Lurker64]

To be fair, the reason the Vikings had a pretty good reason for passing on Rodgers: Daunte Culpepper was coming off a fantastic season in 2004 (4700 yards, 39 passing TDs, 11 INTs). Since they didn't exactly know he would shred his knee in the 2005 season, they didn't exactly see QB as a need. The Vikings deserve scorn for badly whiffing on both of those picks, yes, but not necessarily on passing on Rodgers.

[get louder at lambeau]

To be fair, the reason the Vikings had a pretty good reason for passing on Rodgers: Daunte Culpepper was coming off a fantastic season in 2004 (4700 yards, 39 passing TDs, 11 INTs). Since they didn't exactly know he would shred his knee in the 2005 season, they didn't exactly see QB as a need. The Vikings deserve scorn for badly whiffing on both of those picks, yes, but not necessarily on passing on Rodgers.

That's a good point, but I think you're missing the moral of the story-

The Vikings are stupid. And purple. And they suck.

[Tony Oday]

That's a good point, but I think you're missing the moral of the story-

The Vikings are stupid. And purple. And they suck.


Yup Get Louder Gets it ;)

[HarveyWallbangers]

Rodgers struggled in his first preseason (like most rookie QBs), but by his second preseason I thought he had a good chance at succeeding. After his third preseason and after the Dallas game in the regular season, I thought he had a chance to be pretty damn good. I don't buy that he sucked his first three preseasons. I see it as struggled in his first, made vast improvements in his second, and shined in his third.

I also don't buy that Alex Smith would be succeeding in Green Bay and Aaron Rodgers would be sucking in San Francisco, if the tables had been turned. The cream rises to the top. What he went through was helpful to his development, but I suspect that he would have been pretty damn good no matter what. His skills and mental fortitude are top notch. I doubt Alex Smith would have handled succeeding Favre nearly as well as Rodgers did.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Small sample, but Rodgers QB rating his second and third preseasons was 101.1 and 98.3. He threw 6 TDs and 1 interception in those two preseasons combined.

[RashanGary]

How about this:

A lot of people were very upset with Aaron Rodgers as the first pick. When they saw him struggle in his first preseason game, his quality of play got blown way out of proportion. Reading further into it, there is no knowing just how good Aaron Rodgers would have been had he started early. Chances are he wouldn't have been one of the best QB's in the league from day 1 like he was after sitting, but he has a lot of talent and desire so he very likely would have been good and gotten better every game he played.

Aaron Rodgers is good. No matter where you toss him, he is good. Nobody in the game combines the amazing throwing, top notch decision making and ability outside the pocket of Aaron Rodgers. The only ones in the history of the game who you compare him to are in the HOF. He's fuckin good. Numbers show it. His hardware shows it. His post season dominance like nobody in GB since Bart Starr shows it.

I don't remember how good the guy he replaced was 20 years ago, so I can't compare that. That said, he's better than the guy he replaced (in recent memory years) and apparently that's a pretty big deal too. Some people thought we'd never live down that decision. We got better because of it.

[Guiness]

He has always been tough, Zool. He finished that Patsies game with a broken foot i.e. in great pain. But he broke pretty easily on that play. Didn't he get injured again the following year? No matter, he strengthed greatly during his clipboard years. Something Alex Smith never has had a chance to do, because he's always rehabbing. It'll be interesting to see if Stafford suffers a similar fate in Detroit. I don't watch any other team closely, but he seems brittle. He certainly could have used a season or two of strengthening, I'm sure.

I'm high on Rodgers and I always have been, but IMO, he got lucky (we all did!) in his development process. I think it all came together very nicely.

It might not make sense to some, but I agree with you Tarlam.

It takes a while to fully mature into your body. He was 21 when he was drafted - I know I gained a lot thickness and strength in my early twenties. Rodger's Wikipedia page says he was 5'10" coming out of highschool, so he hadn't even finished growing.

Those couple of years watching from the bench allowed him not just to learn the craft, but also allow his body to fully develop. If he'd had 300lb DT's slamming into him on a regular basis the fall of 2005, I don't know that he'd have been able to physically withstand it, and I really believe he'd be out of the league by now.

[Guiness]

To be fair, the reason the Vikings had a pretty good reason for passing on Rodgers: Daunte Culpepper was coming off a fantastic season in 2004 (4700 yards, 39 passing TDs, 11 INTs). Since they didn't exactly know he would shred his knee in the 2005 season, they didn't exactly see QB as a need. The Vikings deserve scorn for badly whiffing on both of those picks, yes, but not necessarily on passing on Rodgers.

In all fairness, Erasmus James was highly rated, and taken where he should have been. Sure, he'd been injured, but nothing that raised many flags. I really thought he'd be a force for years to come.

Williamson, however...boneheaded pick.

[Tarlam!]

Small sample, but Rodgers QB rating his second and third preseasons was 101.1 and 98.3. He threw 6 TDs and 1 interception in those two preseasons combined.

Thanks Guiness.

Harvey, I see what you're saying - but I disagree. Rogers is often compared to Young. Well, Young was tossed into the deep end and his record at Tampa? 3 - 16. He was deemed a bust! He got the chance to grow by sitting for 3 years and doing spot duty behind a HOFer. I have to wonder if Young would have become cream and floated to the top if he hadn't gone to SFR.

As Guin so aptly pointed out, Rogers was not fully developed physically when he got to GB. He's was a smart, tough, dedicated kid. But, he got his foot broke cause someone stepped on it. Brittle. He was still frequently criticized after his second pre-season. Only after his third pre-season and the Dallas game did people start thinking he had a shot. But, just go back to the Favre wars and you'll realize it was anything but unanimous.

[Tony Oday]

What I am saying is the Vikings suck :)

[mraynrand]

Teams are sure to be kicking themselves for passing on Rodgers, but I'll bet more than a few are kicking themselves for missing Stubby too. The two go hand in hand - the talented QB with a weird style, and the unproven head coach with great ability to teach. Winning!

[Pugger]

He has always been tough, Zool. He finished that Patsies game with a broken foot i.e. in great pain. But he broke pretty easily on that play. Didn't he get injured again the following year? No matter, he strengthed greatly during his clipboard years. Something Alex Smith never has had a chance to do, because he's always rehabbing. It'll be interesting to see if Stafford suffers a similar fate in Detroit. I don't watch any other team closely, but he seems brittle. He certainly could have used a season or two of strengthening, I'm sure.

I'm high on Rodgers and I always have been, but IMO, he got lucky (we all did!) in his development process. I think it all came together very nicely.

Didn't he tweak his hammy or knee the following year but it wasn't a big deal cuz he wasn't the starter? I thought I read somewhere at the time that had he been the starter he would've played the next game. :cnf:

[Pugger]

Rodgers struggled in his first preseason (like most rookie QBs), but by his second preseason I thought he had a good chance at succeeding. After his third preseason and after the Dallas game in the regular season, I thought he had a chance to be pretty damn good. I don't buy that he sucked his first three preseasons. I see it as struggled in his first, made vast improvements in his second, and shined in his third.

I also don't buy that Alex Smith would be succeeding in Green Bay and Aaron Rodgers would be sucking in San Francisco, if the tables had been turned. The cream rises to the top. What he went through was helpful to his development, but I suspect that he would have been pretty damn good no matter what. His skills and mental fortitude are top notch. I doubt Alex Smith would have handled succeeding Favre nearly as well as Rodgers did.

I too doubt Smith would have handled the Farp situation nearly as well as Rodgers did but I wonder if he would have benefited from MM's QB school like Rodgers and Flynn have?

[Tarlam!]

I too doubt Smith would have handled the Farp situation nearly as well as Rodgers did but I wonder if he would have benefited from MM's QB school like Rodgers and Flynn have?

I hesitate to nominate anybody that would have handled the situation as well as Rodgers did. That said, any QB coming in would know of Bert's status with the team and fans. The question is would Smith et al have been able to stay on the high road when the provebial do-do hit the fan. To this day, Rodgers hasn't gloated or bad-mouthed the guy he replaced. Smart kid. I wouldn't have been able to contain my schadenfreude, of that I'm sure! :)

[Tarlam!]

What I am saying is the Vikings suck :)

Yeah, but we got lucky when they hired Chilly from under TT's nose. IIRC, Chilly was favoured to replace Shermie, but didn't make it out of Minnie. And, I love their fans that post here. I wish Rastak would frequent our little cyber-home more often.

It'll be interesting to see how they develop.

[Iron Mike]

What I am saying is the Vikings suck :)

Did they even get their pick in in time this year, or were they late??

[RashanGary]

I too doubt Smith would have handled the Farp situation nearly as well as Rodgers did but I wonder if he would have benefited from MM's QB school like Rodgers and Flynn have?

Or would he have flamed out like Brohm?

Good players are good players. Rodgers is great. Flynn is really good. Good coaching beats bad coaching, but almost all NFL offensive coaches are good enough. It comes down, mostly, to the player.

[Pugger]

Or would he have flamed out like Brohm?

Good players are good players. Rodgers is great. Flynn is really good. Good coaching beats bad coaching, but almost all NFL offensive coaches are good enough. It comes down, mostly, to the player.

If what you are saying is true how in the heck did Smith go #1? And he isn't the first kid taken that has struggled big time. There are a boat load of QBs taken in the draft in various rounds over the years that just didn't have what it takes to be successful in the NFL. Sometimes these young QBs are thrown to the wolves on crappy teams but Brohm is proof that a lot of these kids just don't have "it".

[HarveyWallbangers]

If what you are saying is true how in the heck did Smith go #1? And he isn't the first kid taken that has struggled big time. There are a boat load of QBs taken in the draft in various rounds over the years that just didn't have what it takes to be successful in the NFL. Sometimes these young QBs are thrown to the wolves on crappy teams but Brohm is proof that a lot of these kids just don't have "it".

I think scouts are enamored with arm strength and athletic ability. Don't get me wrong, Rodgers has both. However, it's harder to measure accuracy (impossible to do based just off college numbers and throwing at the combine) and football intelligence. I think those end up being bigger factors. Almost every good QB has a good enough arm, accuracy, some mobility, football intelligence, toughness, and ice water in his veins. Many of those are hard to scout.

[RashanGary]

Mike McCarthy calls it, "right now" intelligence and he snaps his fingers as he says it. QB decision making happens very fast. One read college QB's are very hard to scout. College QB's in general are hard to scout. The NFL, the QB has infinitely more on his plate than the college QB.

I would think a huge sign of a good NFL prospect is a college QB who does all of the little things. Knows when to throw it away, knows when to get out of the pocket, high comp %, seems to be in tune and ready to move during crucial situations. . . . After 4 years of college football, most guys can run their one or two read system pretty well. But do they seem in control at all times in the game? Do they seem a step ahead of everyone else in how they're thinking the game. Doe the little things just come to them.

I don't watch a lot of college football, but I would think a good NFL prospect would have the tools, but also have a way of feeling/seeing/playing the game that's a step ahead. If they're bogged down, even the slightest in the college game, they'll be destroyed in the NFL game. You want them to seem in control, ready, prepared, a step ahead at all times, even if their team isn't great, you want the QB to not be caught of guard or surprised by much, if anythiing.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Mike McCarthy calls it, "right now" intelligence and he snaps his fingers as he says it. QB decision making happens very fast. One read college QB's are very hard to scout. College QB's in general are hard to scout. The NFL, the QB has infinitely more on his plate than the college QB.

I would think a huge sign of a good NFL prospect is a college QB who does all of the little things. Knows when to throw it away, knows when to get out of the pocket, high comp %, seems to be in tune and ready to move during crucial situations. . . . After 4 years of college football, most guys can run their one or two read system pretty well. But do they seem in control at all times in the game? Do they seem a step ahead of everyone else in how they're thinking the game. Doe the little things just come to them.

I don't watch a lot of college football, but I would think a good NFL prospect would have the tools, but also have a way of feeling/seeing/playing the game that's a step ahead. If they're bogged down, even the slightest in the college game, they'll be destroyed in the NFL game. You want them to seem in control, ready, prepared, a step ahead at all times, even if their team isn't great, you want the QB to not be caught of guard or surprised by much, if anythiing.

McCarthy has a good way of describing it. I lumped it in with football intelligence and ice water in his veins. Basically, he always knows where to go with the ball and he's not easily rattled.

[RashanGary]

Another thing great NFL QB's do is anticipate coverages, throwing guys open.

If they're doing things like that, the things that make you think they're a step ahead of everyone else mentally, and they have a full toolbox of tools. . . . I would think those would be guys you can project well into the NFL.

[Guiness]

From what all of you are saying, I would think that most 'one read and run' QB's from college are not going to be successful. Tebow essentially did this, didn't he? Cam Newton was more than willing to take off running as well.

Not many guys, outside of Vick and Cunningham have had success with this.

[Smidgeon]

I think scouts are enamored with arm strength and athletic ability. Don't get me wrong, Rodgers has both. However, it's harder to measure accuracy (impossible to do based just off college numbers and throwing at the combine) and football intelligence. I think those end up being bigger factors. Almost every good QB has a good enough arm, accuracy, some mobility, football intelligence, toughness, and ice water in his veins. Many of those are hard to scout.

I thought I read an article a while back that showed the Mendoza line for college QB accuracy translating to the NFL to be at 60%. QBs who threw better than that in college had a much better chance of throwing well in the NFL and consequently becoming a successful NFL QB than those who didn't.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I thought I read an article a while back that showed the Mendoza line for college QB accuracy translating to the NFL to be at 60%. QBs who threw better than that in college had a much better chance of throwing well in the NFL and consequently becoming a successful NFL QB than those who didn't.

With the spread offense in vogue, a large majority of QBs in college that are pro prospects complete 60%, so I'm not sure how much that helps. I have heard that as a barometer though, and I think Locker (or Mallet) was under that threshold.

[Smidgeon]

With the spread offense in vogue, a large majority of QBs in college that are pro prospects complete 60%, so I'm not sure how much that helps. I have heard that as a barometer though, and I think Locker (or Mallet) was under that threshold.

Wouldn't that make it even more shocking if a QB couldn't hit 60% then?

[Lurker64]

From what all of you are saying, I would think that most 'one read and run' QB's from college are not going to be successful. Tebow essentially did this, didn't he? Cam Newton was more than willing to take off running as well.

Not many guys, outside of Vick and Cunningham have had success with this.

I think Vick and Cunningham really predate the modern spread offense, specifically the zone read which is the number one cause of "one look and run" guys you have now. Vick's running at VT was in lieu of a checkdown, not in lieu of a second read like Newton's was.

[th87]

Didn't he tweak his hammy or knee the following year but it wasn't a big deal cuz he wasn't the starter? I thought I read somewhere at the time that had he been the starter he would've played the next game. :cnf:

This could've been a clever way to nip any potential quarterback controversy in the bud, as this was the week after the Dallas game.

[Jimx29]

Once, to draft wide receiver Troy Williamson at No. 7....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PInDbfGP5Ac

[KYPack]

Another thing great NFL QB's do is anticipate coverages, throwing guys open.

If they're doing things like that, the things that make you think they're a step ahead of everyone else mentally, and they have a full toolbox of tools. . . . I would think those would be guys you can project well into the NFL.

Justin, credit where credit is due. You are learning the game. You wouldn't have made the posts that you have made in this thread 5 years ago.

You are there, dude.

(or as there as any of us on the fan level get to.)

[Guiness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PInDbfGP5Ac

Awesome! I love the one where he totally misjudges the ball when diving for it, and it hits him in the facemask!

Didn't he end up having bad vision and getting lasik surgery? Sure looks like he can't freakin see!

[cheesner]

Yeah, but we got lucky when they hired Chilly from under TT's nose. IIRC, Chilly was favoured to replace Shermie, but didn't make it out of Minnie. And, I love their fans that post here. I wish Rastak would frequent our little cyber-home more often.

It'll be interesting to see how they develop.Chilly was the popular fan/pundit pick to be the next Packer coach. But when does TT do what the pundits and fans think? Based upon MM's personality and the type of coach that he is, I highly doubt that TT would have hired Chilly. MM is strong, passionate and proactive. Chilly is calm, permissive, and passive - not what TT apparently looks for.

[LP]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/18/report-vikings-interested-in-donovan-mcnabb/

A move they should have made last year. It would be very interesting to see what they would give in a trade.

[Guiness]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/18/report-vikings-interested-in-donovan-mcnabb/

A move they should have made last year. It would be very interesting to see what they would give in a trade.

He's going to have to be released. No one is going to pay the silly contract Snyder signed him to, which includes a $10million bonus, I believe on opening day.

[get louder at lambeau]

He's going to have to be released. No one is going to pay the silly contract Snyder signed him to, which includes a $10million bonus, I believe on opening day.

He'd still be cheaper than the old bastard they had at QB last year. And he's "only" 34.

[Tarlam!]

I think McNabb is a good fit for the Purple, I really do. Their new OC, Bill Musgrave, is an ex-QB, has mainly coached QBs, has gathered experience as OC at other clubs. His last gig was with the 13-3 Falcons.

I think together, McNabb and Musgrave could become a force. I'd still recommend they take a QB in the 2nd, if one of the top 6 make it that far.

[Tony Oday]

I think McNabb is a good fit for the Purple, I really do. Their new OC, Bill Musgrave, is an ex-QB, has mainly coached QBs, has gathered experience as OC at other clubs. His last gig was with the 13-3 Falcons.

I think together, McNabb and Musgrave could become a force. I'd still recommend they take a QB in the 2nd, if one of the top 6 make it that far.

I would be HIGHLY surprised if he goes Purple just because of the fact that they have no passing game to speak of and that Line is TERRIBLE

[get louder at lambeau]

I would be HIGHLY surprised if he goes Purple just because of the fact that they have no passing game to speak of and that Line is TERRIBLE

They had a passing game until Sydney Rice got hurt. Do you think McNabb will have better options than the Vikes?

[Tarlam!]

They had a passing game until Sydney Rice got hurt. Do you think McNabb will have better options than the Vikes?

He'd couldn't get a better gig than in SFR, IMO, but would they want him? All the other moving parts are there.

[Tarlam!]

But, I STILL think he goes purple... ;)

[Tony Oday]

They had a passing game until Sydney Rice got hurt. Do you think McNabb will have better options than the Vikes?

Rice is gone isnt he? Harvin is a walking IR report. Shianco isnt terrible but the rest are.

[get louder at lambeau]

Rice is gone isnt he? Harvin is a walking IR report. Shianco isnt terrible but the rest are.

Rice is a free agent. The Vikings have said they want to keep him, so we'll see.

[Tony Oday]

Rice is a free agent. The Vikings have said they want to keep him, so we'll see.

Rumor up here is he is gone because he was franchised and felt disrespected...and the team sucks donkeys across the border for signing bonuses