2 Tackles And Half A Sack

[SMACKTALKIE]

Re: Allen

So......yeah that was poorly worded. Let me give you a more comprehensive example of what I am trying to say. I will pose a questios and offer facts to factor into your answers. You tell me:

Are your OT's really as good as advertised or did Favre make them look better?
Fact: Favre got rid of the ball quickly and was rarely sacked.

Are your WR's as good as advertised or did Favre make them look better?
Fact: Favre put the ball where it was needed when it was needed.

Is Ryan Grant a good RB or did Favre make him look better?
Fact: Favre's mere presence on the field kept Defenses guessing and on their heels.

This is what I meant when I said disillusioned. Perhaps a poor word choice.

The point is, how will Favre's absense affect the rest of the Offense?

Clear evidence that you watched maybe 2 Packer games per year and are trying to wax philosophical about it.

1) Yes they are. I'm faster than Favre is now. Granted he gets the ball out quick, but the ridiculously low sacks over the last 5 years cant be all him. It is a team sport after all.

2) Ever see Driver using his high jump skills? I have pretty much 2-3 times per week for the last long time. Granted they are no Turd Ferguson or Troy Williamson, but they're pretty good.

3) See Wynn/Jackson weeks 1-6 for the answer.

So are you saying Favre's absense will not affect the offense at all?

So are you saying Favre's absence will mean the offense won't even take the field?

When did I say that?

When did he say that Favre's absence will not affect the offense at all?

Trollin trollin trollin....keep on forum trollin...rawhide!

Dont feed the Viking troll. He's just being contrarian for the sake of it now.

Is this your attempt at bowing out and saving face? I only spoke up in this thread to correct misled statements.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Our teams are in very similar situations despite our differences in wins and losses last year.

Care to elaborate???

From Palter:

"Much about the futures of the two teams will be determined by who made the better choice, the Packers with Rodgers or the Vikings with Jackson.

It will be interesting to see who is the better prepared to lead his team, Jackson with 14 starts and 200+ attempts or Rodgers with 0 starts and 35 attempts. Rodgers seemed to catch on in his 3rd season, Jackson could too."

Sorry, but my statement that you quote does not support or lead to your subsequent conclusion. Just because both teams have uncertainty at QB doesn't mean the teams are in very similar positions in total. They have similarities at QB, but in the remaining roster spots the Packers are well on their way to a rebuilt, younger roster; and in my opinion the Vikings are not. They keep bringing in retreads.

Yes, the Packers are old at starting corner, as you mentioned in another post; but GB has a bunch of young corners that look OK, and potentially better than OK. The position isn't as worrisome as it was just two years ago. Are the Packers any worse of in age at DB than the Vikings starting DBs? Yes the Packers are getting a bit old at OT, but they have a bunch of young linemen from which a replacement or two seem very possible. Besides, Tauscher is the same age as Hutchinson, and Clifton the same as Birk. Yes, Driver is getting up there in years, but WR might be the Packers deepest position. Other than those 5 spots, where the Packers seem to be building replacements, the Packers are a very young team with many players who can be expected to improve.

How many starters do the Vikings have that can be considered to be ascending players? (I'm really asking, I don't know.) The Packers have a bunch of starters who are. How many starters do the Vikings have that are in the prime years of their careers? Again, I really am asking, because I don't know. How many backups do the Vikings have who look to be of starting potential? I'm not sure, but I think the Packers are better off in these categories, but I am interested in what you think about the Viking roster top to bottom. I like the Packers' probable roster top to bottom.

Palter, this is what I cme up with to answer your question:

Offense: A. Herrerra, R. Cook, A. Peterson, T.Tapeh, S. Rice, A. Allison, and G. Mills. Backups: J. Booty, J. Sullivan, C. Johnson

Defense: R. Edwards, C. Greenway, C. Griffin, M. McCauley. Backups: C. Gordon, T. Johnson.

Thats the best I can do off the tpo of my head. Although the Vikings had a small draft class they picked up a lot of quality undrafted free agents.

[bobblehead]

Re: Allen

So......yeah that was poorly worded. Let me give you a more comprehensive example of what I am trying to say. I will pose a questios and offer facts to factor into your answers. You tell me:

Are your OT's really as good as advertised or did Favre make them look better?
Fact: Favre got rid of the ball quickly and was rarely sacked.

Are your WR's as good as advertised or did Favre make them look better?
Fact: Favre put the ball where it was needed when it was needed.

Is Ryan Grant a good RB or did Favre make him look better?
Fact: Favre's mere presence on the field kept Defenses guessing and on their heels.

This is what I meant when I said disillusioned. Perhaps a poor word choice.

The point is, how will Favre's absense affect the rest of the Offense?

Without completely dismissing your questions....did favre really throw 29 picks a few seasons ago despite his mythical ability to make everyone around him look like an all-pro.

Yes, having an experiences HOF QB helps matters, but this is still a team game where weaknesses can be exploited, so I would dare say we have a lot of talent on the roster, and we will go as far as ARod can take that talent.

[Patler]

Offense: A. Herrerra, R. Cook, A. Peterson, T.Tapeh, S. Rice, A. Allison, and G. Mills. Backups: J. Booty, J. Sullivan, C. Johnson

Defense: R. Edwards, C. Greenway, C. Griffin, M. McCauley. Backups: C. Gordon, T. Johnson.

Thats the best I can do off the tpo of my head. Although the Vikings had a small draft class they picked up a lot of quality undrafted free agents.

Are all of these players that people truly think are ASCENDING players, or just young ones? For example, the Packers have a couple young fullbacks, who undoubtedly will get better with more experience than they are now, but I wouldn't consider them to be truly ascending players. They aren't building to anything special.

[Guiness]

Thats the best I can do off the tpo of my head. Although the Vikings had a small draft class they picked up a lot of quality undrafted free agents.

That remains to be seen - we all like to think our teams scored well in the later rounds, and in the Undrafted FA market, but no one knows until final cuts at the end of TC are made. After a couple of practices in shorts, it's impossible to determine if you found a Cullen Jenkins or a Justin Beaver.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Offense: A. Herrerra, R. Cook, A. Peterson, T.Tapeh, S. Rice, A. Allison, and G. Mills. Backups: J. Booty, J. Sullivan, C. Johnson

Defense: R. Edwards, C. Greenway, C. Griffin, M. McCauley. Backups: C. Gordon, T. Johnson.

Thats the best I can do off the tpo of my head. Although the Vikings had a small draft class they picked up a lot of quality undrafted free agents.

Are all of these players that people truly think are ASCENDING players, or just young ones? For example, the Packers have a couple young fullbacks, who undoubtedly will get better with more experience than they are now, but I wouldn't consider them to be truly ascending players. They aren't building to anything special.

Well.....I guess I don't think any of them have leveled off. I think guys like Cook and Herrerra (and obviously Jackson) need to play well consistantly. Guys like Greenway, Brian Robison, McCaulley, Allison, Rice, and Peterson are definately ascending.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I like the Packers depth much better than the Vikings. In the end, I think that might end up being what allows them to win the division. I think it mostly comes down to Aaron Rodgers. When healthy, I think he'll do fine. However, we don't have anybody behind him that is ready to win games now. Until Rodgers proves he can stay healthy, I won't get too overconfident about how we'll do this year.

Fortunately, we did have a talented, young QB ready to take over for Favre (and the QB has three years in the offense), so that gives us a reasonable chance at having a good season.

[SMACKTALKIE]

I like the Packers depth much better than the Vikings. In the end, I think that might end up being what allows them to win the division. I think it mostly comes down to Aaron Rodgers. When healthy, I think he'll do fine. However, we don't have anybody behind him that is ready to win games now. Until Rodgers proves he can stay healthy, I won't get too overconfident about how we'll do this year.

Fortunately, we did have a talented, young QB ready to take over for Favre (and the QB has three years in the offense), so that gives us a reasonable chance at having a good season.

"I won't get too overconfident about how we'll do this year."


Well I think that's the key in the NFL, never get comfortable. Injuries, women and wine can change a player into a mere man.

An old co-worker once told me a quote by Lombardi that was something like this; Confidence is that feeling you get right before you realize you don't know anything.

[Guiness]

Well I think that's the key in the NFL, never get comfortable. Injuries, women and wine can change a player into a mere man.

You forgot boats :P

[SMACKTALKIE]

Well I think that's the key in the NFL, never get comfortable. Injuries, women and wine can change a player into a mere man.

You forgot boats :P

Just like I forgot to mention after prom parties.

[Scott Campbell]

Just like I forgot to mention after prom parties.

.....except that was one loose cannon instead of being a team sanctioned activity.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Just like I forgot to mention after prom parties.

.....except that was one loose cannon instead of being a team sanctioned activity.

It was not a team sanctioned event.

[Tony Oday]

not sanctioned just most of the team was there!

[Rastak]

I like the Packers depth much better than the Vikings. In the end, I think that might end up being what allows them to win the division. I think it mostly comes down to Aaron Rodgers. When healthy, I think he'll do fine. However, we don't have anybody behind him that is ready to win games now. Until Rodgers proves he can stay healthy, I won't get too overconfident about how we'll do this year.

Fortunately, we did have a talented, young QB ready to take over for Favre (and the QB has three years in the offense), so that gives us a reasonable chance at having a good season.

It was very smart the way they brought him along and they've given him every chance to suceed, now he has to do it.

[Scott Campbell]

Just like I forgot to mention after prom parties.

.....except that was one loose cannon instead of being a team sanctioned activity.

It was not a team sanctioned event.

ROFL