Announcement

**PackerPro42** · 01-20-2007, 03:55 PM

Wow, that's not the greatest mock I've seen. Why would the Vikings take Peterson?

**Lurker64** · 01-20-2007, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by PackerPro42

Wow, that's not the greatest mock I've seen. Why would the Vikings take Peterson?

Because Childress is committed to being a running team and they need more than just Chester Taylor to make the offense work? It's not a ridiculous pick, Mn's biggest need is at WR but it's a deep draft at that position, and there's often a run on RBs much earlier in the draft than anticipated by draftniks. I would not be at all surprised if Lynch wasn't even there when the Packers were picking.

**BallHawk** · 01-20-2007, 05:12 PM

Originally posted by PackerPro42

Wow, that's not the greatest mock I've seen. Why would the Vikings take Peterson?

Because Chester Taylor doesn't have what it takes to be a feature back in this league.

**Joemailman** · 01-20-2007, 05:45 PM

Originally posted by PackerPro42

Wow, that's not the greatest mock I've seen. Why would the Vikings take Peterson?

The draft is more than 3 months away. Who knows what a great mock is? I discuss these things not because I think I know what will happen, but because I like talking football. I agree with those who think Minnesota might take Peterson. Chester Taylor is nothing special.

**Charles Woodson** · 01-20-2007, 05:46 PM

well this is different

**Charles Woodson** · 01-20-2007, 05:46 PM

Im happy with landry

**Rastak** · 01-20-2007, 05:57 PM

Originally posted by BallHawk

Originally posted by PackerPro42

Wow, that's not the greatest mock I've seen. Why would the Vikings take Peterson?

Because Chester Taylor doesn't have what it takes to be a feature back in this league.

And what exactly brings you to that conclusion? He rushed for 1200 yards in 15 games including 1 or 2 when he was playing hurt. Shit, he was about the only bright spot on the offense the whole damn year. He ranked 5th in the NFC in rushing which means there were twelve backs WORSE this year.

And that pick does make sense to me because the Vikings DO need some dynamic playmakers and I think he'd be that.

**BallHawk** · 01-20-2007, 06:02 PM

Wow, looking at Taylor's stats I didn't realize how good his numbers was. Nothing eye-popping, but definitely above average. I withdraw my "head-up-my-ass" comment.

**Charles Woodson** · 01-20-2007, 06:11 PM

I dont know, with much other pressing needs for the queens, i pass on AP... Taylor isnt bad, i think finding a duo of Taylor and_____ would improve his stats much more but he on 304 carries fushed for 1214 with a 4 yard average and 6 touchdowns, 42 receptions with 288 yards... He didnt play against Detroit which would have boosted his stats... Idk i dont watch the queens very much but i dont think hes that bad

**Rastak** · 01-20-2007, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by BallHawk

Wow, looking at Taylor's stats I didn't realize how good his numbers was. Nothing eye-popping, but definitely above average. I withdraw my "head-up-my-ass" comment.

He's not the greatest but he's pretty solid. Your comment wasn't that bad, I just think he's absolutely a legitimate feature back. He's not top 5 in the league or anything but he gets the job done.

**Lurker64** · 01-20-2007, 06:22 PM

Originally posted by Rastak

And what exactly brings you to that conclusion? He rushed for 1200 yards in 15 games including 1 or 2 when he was playing hurt. Shit, he was about the only bright spot on the offense the whole damn year. He ranked 5th in the NFC in rushing which means there were twelve backs WORSE this year.

And that pick does make sense to me because the Vikings DO need some dynamic playmakers and I think he'd be that.

Taylor was quite good last year, but he really seemed to slow down a lot towards the end of the season due to how tired and banged up he got due to all the touches he had. The pick makes a lot of sense not because "Chester Taylor doesn't have the stuff to be a featured back in this league" but because "A solid 1-2 punch would do a lot for Secret Squirrel's 'kickass offense'. Moreover the #2 RB position has become very important position in the NFL these days as teams have been very effective with solid tandems a la Barber/Jacobs, Taylor/Jones-Drew, McCallister/Bush, Dillon/Maroney, etc. To see what happens when a team relies too much on one elite RB to power the offense, see for example Seattle midseason and Washington's offense." At Oklahoma Peterson, I believe, was known for being able to run the ball "all day" and that seems like exactly what Chilli would want.

If Peterson's there at #7, I would say Minnesota would be silly to pass him up. It's a deep enough draft at WR that Mn doesn't necessarily need to take on in the first, and neither Gaines nor Adams is really impressive enough to convince the Vikings to give up on Udeze and James, both of whom were first round picks. If Tomlin is still the coordinator and he thinks that James can generate pressure, Udeze is probably sufficient because he plays the run pretty well. Trying to pressure the QB with only one good defensive end is like trying to box with one arm, so I'm not surprised Udeze struggled this year.

**Rastak** · 01-20-2007, 06:26 PM

Originally posted by Lurker64

Originally posted by Rastak

And what exactly brings you to that conclusion? He rushed for 1200 yards in 15 games including 1 or 2 when he was playing hurt. Shit, he was about the only bright spot on the offense the whole damn year. He ranked 5th in the NFC in rushing which means there were twelve backs WORSE this year.

And that pick does make sense to me because the Vikings DO need some dynamic playmakers and I think he'd be that.

but because "A solid 1-2 punch would do a lot for Secret Squirrel's 'kickass offense'.

Please Lurker, you make me laugh and then cry all at once with that.....

I agree with ya, but you're killing me!

**Lurker64** · 01-20-2007, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by Rastak

Please Lurker, you make me laugh and then cry all at once with that.....

I agree with ya, but you're killing me!

'

As a soundbite it's not quite up there with "They were who we thought they were" and the rest of Denny's rant, but it's pretty quotable nonetheless.

But seriously, the Vikes are in a good position in the first, since there's always more "guys graded to go in the top five" than there are "top five picks." So really, they get to just wait and see who drops into their lap.

**red** · 01-21-2007, 01:03 PM

theres another guy i wouldn't be upset at all at the packers taking.

at #16 we can go a ton of different ways. we will have the ability to pick for need, AND get one for the best players available and someone who can step in and help right away

i am starting to like the idea of drafting lynch or another rb, and resign green and do the 2 headed rb approach. you keep both guys fresh, you prolong greens career by cutting down on the beatings he takes, and you help keep the young guy from getting beat up early on in his career by not making him carry 400 times a season

Announcement

Great Blue North Mock Draft

Great Blue North Mock Draft

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment