RE: The Packers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk



Message

Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 11:11:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I was talking to Craig!


I was trying to add to your comments.  Not challenge your assertions.



John Childress -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 11:32:27 AM)

I was much more worried about the first Packers game Scott.

I am feeling Peterson over 150 yards on the ground this week



marty -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 11:36:19 AM)

Woodson and Harris blanketing WRs ? - Craig. You mean like doing all kinds of things after 5 yards and getting away with it ? 

Well Miami started off well...but then got slaughtered. - TGS

I thought Miami had a chance at an upset, but I was willing the New Orleans defense, I needed them to come up big for fantasy football (I started them over my Vikings' defense), and they DID.  The Saints got 2 TDs, 17 points in our league, enough for a 6 (and a better bench) point win for my Purple team.  I would have LOST had I started the Vikings' defense.

I think the Vikes might need over 200 yards from Peterson to win this one. 



Jake Carlson -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 12:06:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Woodson and Harris blanketing WRs ? - Craig. You mean like doing all kinds of things after 5 yards and getting away with it ? 

Well Miami started off well...but then got slaughtered. - TGS

I thought Miami had a chance at an upset, but I was willing the New Orleans defense, I needed them to come up big for fantasy football (I started them over my Vikings' defense), and they DID.  The Saints got 2 TDs, 17 points in our league, enough for a 6 (and a better bench) point win for my Purple team.  I would have LOST had I started the Vikings' defense.

I think the Vikes might need over 200 yards from Peterson to win this one. 



That return by Sharper was a gift and blown call. It was clear as day that the ball flew out of his hands before he scored and flew out of the endzone. That should have been a touchback.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 12:16:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I was much more worried about the first Packers game Scott.

I am feeling Peterson over 150 yards on the ground this week


Yep...me too.

I think the Packers are going to focus more on not letting BF beat them and will loosen up the run defense and AD will go berserk. 

The only thing I would say is if Kampmann is still a LB, you pass there all day long (when AD isn't running wild that is...). 



marty -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 12:20:38 PM)

Jake
 
That's what some chatters were saying online.

You're probably right, but I REALLY needed for my fantasy team. 

I'm sorry if abused my special powers a tad, but I don't use them that often --- just when desire is turned up a little high.  



marty -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 1:09:38 PM)

As much as I think the league favors parity, I think there is a pretty GOOD chance the Vikes/Packer game will NOT be 'swayed' in favor of the Pack. 

There might the usual calls and non-calls favoring the Pack towards the end of the game at Lamblow, but the Vikes are used to seeing those, and I don't think they'll be of the magnitude of the game a few years back where it made the newspapers and the league admitted to 8 blown calls in the 4th quarter, nor will it meet the magnitude of the game at Pittsburgh last week.

I think IF they ARE 'swaying' games, they are probably not doing more than 1 game a week.  And IF that's the case, then it is likely that Minnesota at Pittsburgh was the 'sway' game last week, it is unlikely Minnesota will be the victim 2 weeks in a row, although you never know. 

Maybe the Vikes will be the BENEFACTOR this next week ?  Doubt it, that would just bring the spotlight on the refs and bring the calls and games into question.  I think BECAUSE of last week, the Vikes getting screwed on the tripping call (and many other calls and non-calls), the next game will be done with the utmost care and consistency, especially in the 4th quarter.      



Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 5:55:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott


I think the Packers are going to focus more on not letting BF beat them and will loosen up the run defense and AD will go berserk. 

The only thing I would say is if Kampmann is still a LB, you pass there all day long (when AD isn't running wild that is...). 


That's what I expected the first time our team's met up on Monday night - but they really seemed more determined to stop AD and let Favre have his way, which he did.

Maybe since that didn't work this time they'll try stopping Favre this time around. Best of luck to them.



Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 5:56:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty


There might the usual calls and non-calls favoring the Pack towards the end of the game at Lamblow, but the Vikes are used to seeing those, and I don't think they'll be of the magnitude of the game a few years back where it made the newspapers and the league admitted to 8 blown calls in the 4th quarter,


Internationally knows as "The Rape at Lambeau."



marty -> RE: The Packers (10/26/2009 7:47:31 PM)

Unfortunately, I would guess that very few people nationally paid any attention, or gave it a second thought.  There are Packer fans that don't know what I'm talking about if I bring that up. 

They probably think it is their God given RIGHT to have calls go their way in the 4th quarter when at Lambo. 



Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/27/2009 10:48:20 AM)

JC - The division does come down to this week.  I do think the Packers can win and they certainly will be pumped up for it.  I just hope ARod doesn't try too hard and force the issue to prove something to the hometown crowd.
 
Marty - Yes, they were blanketing the WRs.  Harris did get called for illegal contact, otherwise there weren't many open WRs all day for the Browns.  So I'll repeat it again, they blanketed the WRs as it was the definition of it last week.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (10/27/2009 10:56:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

JC - The division does come down to this week.  I do think the Packers can win and they certainly will be pumped up for it.  I just hope ARod doesn't try too hard and force the issue to prove something to the hometown crowd.
 
Marty - Yes, they were blanketing the WRs.  Harris did get called for illegal contact, otherwise there weren't many open WRs all day for the Browns.  So I'll repeat it again, they blanketed the WRs as it was the definition of it last week.


Yeah, they blanketed the Browns receivers.  That's the receivers from the Browns...we aren't talking about Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward here.  Or Fitzgerald and Boldin.  We're talking about a pair of rookies Massaquoi and Robiskie.  OOOOOHHH...tough assignment. 

Vikings receivers wont be as easy to cover...trust me.



Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/27/2009 11:10:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

JC - The division does come down to this week.  I do think the Packers can win and they certainly will be pumped up for it.  I just hope ARod doesn't try too hard and force the issue to prove something to the hometown crowd.
 
Marty - Yes, they were blanketing the WRs.  Harris did get called for illegal contact, otherwise there weren't many open WRs all day for the Browns.  So I'll repeat it again, they blanketed the WRs as it was the definition of it last week.


Yeah, they blanketed the Browns receivers.  That's the receivers from the Browns...we aren't talking about Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward here.  Or Fitzgerald and Boldin.  We're talking about a pair of rookies Massaquoi and Robiskie.  OOOOOHHH...tough assignment. 

Vikings receivers wont be as easy to cover...trust me.

Never claimed they were all that great, just made a comment on that game.  Marty just had to throw in his little conspiracy theories and snide comments yet again. [&o] 
 
I would whole-heartedly agree that the Vikes WRs are much better than Clevelands and it's a much tougher task especially with Brett at QB.



John Childress -> RE: The Packers (10/27/2009 11:29:16 AM)

Craig

You need to say ARod II

For a second I was wondering what the Yankees 3rd baseman has to do with this game!

The Packers can exploit the Vikings Safeties if they double team Allen.  If not, AR II is planted into the turf.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (10/27/2009 11:32:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

Craig

You need to say ARod II

For a second I was wondering what the Yankees 3rd baseman has to do with this game!

The Packers can exploit the Vikings Safeties if they double team Allen.  If not, AR II is planted into the turf.


Nah, He can say ARod.  Alex Rodriguez had his nickname changed to ARoid a little over a year ago.



Tim Cady -> RE: The Packers (10/27/2009 1:50:55 PM)

Yeah we don't talk much Yankees on the Packer thread. I will let Craig use ARod, I mean we gotta give him something. It's not like he won't be talking about who the Packers draft in 2010 and trading Kampman right before the draft for extra picks, after Monday.[;)]

It won't be easy being green after this Monday!

My favorite Tshirt my daughter ever bought me(purple with Gold letters): AS BAD as My Life Gets at least I am not a Packer fan![:D]



marty -> RE: The Packers (10/28/2009 12:32:27 AM)

It's no conspiracy Craig.  Al Harris commits PI or holding after 5 yards on nearly EVERY pass play.  Woodson doesn't do it that often and is more discreet.  Woodson is much more of a playmaker while Harris is slow.  

I cringe when I hear about GBs 2 outstanding CBs, they have ONE, and that is Woodson.  They also have a safety that is OUTSTANDING in Nick Collins.  I wish the Vikes had a safety like that.  

I really don't have a problem with Harris and Woodson playing that way, they get flagged plenty.  I actually wish the  Vikings' CBs would do MORE, bend the rules once in awhile, get some advantage, get more picks. 

If you are active and do it the whole game, you might get some calls against, but you might also get big plays, and usually the refs won't make calls against you late in the game if you were flagged a bunch earlier, they just let you play (unless the refs are trying to even things out, or have a preferred outcome).



marty -> RE: The Packers (10/28/2009 7:36:32 AM)

Craig
 
I am going to STOP whining about officials.

I believe that the Packers, like the Steelers, when playing at home, have a God given right to all the calls and non-calls from the officials in the 4th quarter .  IF you can't overcome that, you're team isn't Super Bowl worthy.

The Viking team that lost at Lambho' a few years ago and got the league to admit to 8 incorrect calls in the 4th quarter (not even mentioning all the NON-calls that also favored the Packers) was not only not SUPER BOWL worthy, the team wasn't even PLAYOFF worthy.    



Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/28/2009 11:59:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty
I cringe when I hear about GBs 2 outstanding CBs, they have ONE, and that is Woodson. 

Woodson is regarded as a stud corner but to say Harris isn't outstanding is plain delusional. Is it really that hard to give credit where credit is due regardless of what team a player is on?

I don't mind when people say negative stuff about the Packers so long as it has some basis in fact or reality (or is at least humorous). I get that many don't like Harris here because he hurt AP. Fine, hate him for that. But to dismiss his abilities in coverage on the field is silly. Teams around the league consistently say how tough it is to go against BOTH our CBs.



John Childress -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 6:16:25 AM)

I have watched Harris since the start of his career here in Philly.  He is very good against most WRs.  However, a speed WR who he can't bump hard at the line will give him a lot of trouble as his top speed isn't the greatest.  It would be great if Berrian was playing this week.  Rice may be the type that he does well against but I think Rice will more likely draw Woodson and Harris may have to cover Harvin - who is much faster than him.



marty -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 8:46:38 AM)

But Harvin is too small of target, you need speed AND size to fully take advantage of Harris.  I don't think Harris is very good AT ALL.  He cheats, nearly every play.  After 5 yards he is almost always doing SOMETHING, holding, pushing, whatever.

The Vikes are in trouble without Berrian, and Winfield.  This game will be lopsided in favor of GB at halftime.  The Vikes might make it close in the 2nd half, but they'll still lose. 



John Childress -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 9:00:57 AM)

Harvin will smoke Harris if Al plays him one on one.

Harvin is not that small either



Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 9:24:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

Harvin will smoke Harris if Al plays him one on one.

Harvin is not that small either


Isn't he under 6 feet tall?  In the NFL...that's small.

When I hear that teams don't want to draft a QB because he's only 6'1" and that's on the small side...I always get a chuckle out of that.



John Childress -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 9:59:47 AM)

I consider small more people like Kelly Campbell and DeSean Jackson who are slight of build.

Size doesn't matter unless the refs let Harris MUG Harvin because Harris never was fast and at this age he won't be able to stay with Harvin more than 3 seconds - if that long.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 10:03:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I consider small more people like Kelly Campbell and DeSean Jackson who are slight of build.

Size doesn't matter unless the refs let Harris MUG Harvin because Harris never was fast and at this age he won't be able to stay with Harvin more than 3 seconds - if that long.


Harvin will run by him all day long if Harris doesn't mug him...which everyone knows is Harris' MO.  I want an officiating crew that wont let him get away with it.  But we also know we wont get THAT for THIS game.



Page: <<   < prev  66 67 [68] 69 70   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode