quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

A thought I had last night - after another game changing fumble: ignoring the savings we got from Cook and where that money went etc, and there's no way of knowing bc maybe he would of fumbled 5 times himself, but I can't help but think we could have a couple more wins this year if we would have kept him. and other than recent run production by Chandler I can't see him making our running game worse than what it was/is

Cook might be done.

He has 160 rushing yards in 10 games. Averaging 3.3 YPC with a long of 10 yards. He has 0 TDs and 1 Fumble.

He also has 10 receptions for 47 yards and no scores.

He's not the bellcow in New York like he was here. had he taken the restructure offer here he would be doing far better...That being said, I don't think it was a bad move to cut him loose. I personally thought Mattison would be much better than this...

Hindsight being what it is, it looks like we both made a good move and a bad one.

If he was still good, he'd play more. But he isn;t doing anything with the snaps he does get.

The guy ahead of him is incredibly mediocre. He's had two really big runs, but he's been terrible in 7 of his 10 games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: odin

Alexander Mattison's 11 runs inside the 10-yard line have netted 0 touchdowns and -5 yards.
— Paul Charchian (@PaulCharchian) November 22, 2023

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

Chandler's #'s are skewed by the fake punt.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

Chandler's #'s are skewed by the fake punt.

It's not a popular opinion but it's my opinion nonetheless. Mattison is just as good as all the other backs yet is superior in pass protection. Chandler and Akers might have run for .1 or .2 more yards per carry but the difference was negligible. Chandler's poor pass protection led to the INT last week. Mattison has only two fumbles for the season and people are down on him for that yet his fumble/carry stat is decent compared to the league.

Mattison isn't awesome, in fact he's average-to-below-average as a back but he's also become the scapegoat now that we don't have the O-line to kick around anymore.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

He's not all that, but for now Chandler should start. Ideally bring in Mattison for short yardage but that's where he really falters.

And we still have the OL to kick around because they are not getting it done with the run blocking.

Cam Akers, career low ypc. Mattison, career low ypc. The OL is the common denominator.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

Chandler's #'s are skewed by the fake punt.

It's not a popular opinion but it's my opinion nonetheless. Mattison is just as good as all the other backs yet is superior in pass protection. Chandler and Akers might have run for .1 or .2 more yards per carry but the difference was negligible. Chandler's poor pass protection led to the INT last week. Mattison has only two fumbles for the season and people are down on him for that yet his fumble/carry stat is decent compared to the league.

Mattison isn't awesome, in fact he's average-to-below-average as a back but he's also become the scapegoat now that we don't have the O-line to kick around anymore.

Chandler and Akers have dramatically more burst that Mattison. Mattison is little tougher runner and a lot better blocker, but struggles catching.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

Chandler's #'s are skewed by the fake punt.

It's not a popular opinion but it's my opinion nonetheless. Mattison is just as good as all the other backs yet is superior in pass protection. Chandler and Akers might have run for .1 or .2 more yards per carry but the difference was negligible. Chandler's poor pass protection led to the INT last week. Mattison has only two fumbles for the season and people are down on him for that yet his fumble/carry stat is decent compared to the league.

Mattison isn't awesome, in fact he's average-to-below-average as a back but he's also become the scapegoat now that we don't have the O-line to kick around anymore.

Chandler and Akers have dramatically more burst that Mattison. Mattison is little tougher runner and a lot better blocker, but struggles catching.

Right. Yes Chandler had a bad rep that directly contributed to the INT … I also saw him stonewall a couple of dudes in the same game. I’d like to see him get regular carries before I say he’s good or bad at anything. As it is, hes faster and has a more natural feel than Mattison, who is more physical but limited … what use is a sturdy aggressive physical rb if he’s clueless in short yardage / goalline situations! Mediocre!

I have no idea what Chandler brings to the passing game. Hopefully we’ll find out soon. He must not look good in practice to be held back the way he has been. If he’s not an easy step up from Mattison who is a change of pace back and nothing more, we should still be auditioning backs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

Chandler's #'s are skewed by the fake punt.

It's not a popular opinion but it's my opinion nonetheless. Mattison is just as good as all the other backs yet is superior in pass protection. Chandler and Akers might have run for .1 or .2 more yards per carry but the difference was negligible. Chandler's poor pass protection led to the INT last week. Mattison has only two fumbles for the season and people are down on him for that yet his fumble/carry stat is decent compared to the league.

Mattison isn't awesome, in fact he's average-to-below-average as a back but he's also become the scapegoat now that we don't have the O-line to kick around anymore.

Chandler and Akers have dramatically more burst that Mattison. Mattison is little tougher runner and a lot better blocker, but struggles catching.

Right. Yes Chandler had a bad rep that directly contributed to the INT … I also saw him stonewall a couple of dudes in the same game. I’d like to see him get regular carries before I say he’s good or bad at anything. As it is, hes faster and has a more natural feel than Mattison, who is more physical but limited … what use is a sturdy aggressive physical rb if he’s clueless in short yardage / goalline situations! Mediocre!

I have no idea what Chandler brings to the passing game. Hopefully we’ll find out soon. He must not look good in practice to be held back the way he has been. If he’s not an easy step up from Mattison who is a change of pace back and nothing more, we should still be auditioning backs.

On KFAN today, they said Chandler's main issue is he's struggled learning the playbook (including blocking responsibilities) and its complexity compared to his college team.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

Chandler's #'s are skewed by the fake punt.

It's not a popular opinion but it's my opinion nonetheless. Mattison is just as good as all the other backs yet is superior in pass protection. Chandler and Akers might have run for .1 or .2 more yards per carry but the difference was negligible. Chandler's poor pass protection led to the INT last week. Mattison has only two fumbles for the season and people are down on him for that yet his fumble/carry stat is decent compared to the league.

Mattison isn't awesome, in fact he's average-to-below-average as a back but he's also become the scapegoat now that we don't have the O-line to kick around anymore.

Chandler and Akers have dramatically more burst that Mattison. Mattison is little tougher runner and a lot better blocker, but struggles catching.

Right. Yes Chandler had a bad rep that directly contributed to the INT … I also saw him stonewall a couple of dudes in the same game. I’d like to see him get regular carries before I say he’s good or bad at anything. As it is, hes faster and has a more natural feel than Mattison, who is more physical but limited … what use is a sturdy aggressive physical rb if he’s clueless in short yardage / goalline situations! Mediocre!

I have no idea what Chandler brings to the passing game. Hopefully we’ll find out soon. He must not look good in practice to be held back the way he has been. If he’s not an easy step up from Mattison who is a change of pace back and nothing more, we should still be auditioning backs.

On KFAN today, they said Chandler's main issue is he's struggled learning the playbook (including blocking responsibilities) and its complexity compared to his college team.

Not sure how KFAN would know that but if true, its certainly a problem.

There have been some very NOT bright but good football players ... even at qb so that's a real ding on a rb (it only took Patterson about 8 years to find his mojo)

Usually I'm sure its just impatience by fans like me ... sometimes it seems like coaches take too long to reach a comfort level with certain young players ... like they should have just plugged them in sooner.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bstinger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We did run against Denver.

Mattison 18/81 4.5
Chandler 10/73 7.3

We fumbled against them, too

Chandler's #'s are skewed by the fake punt.

It's not a popular opinion but it's my opinion nonetheless. Mattison is just as good as all the other backs yet is superior in pass protection. Chandler and Akers might have run for .1 or .2 more yards per carry but the difference was negligible. Chandler's poor pass protection led to the INT last week. Mattison has only two fumbles for the season and people are down on him for that yet his fumble/carry stat is decent compared to the league.

Mattison isn't awesome, in fact he's average-to-below-average as a back but he's also become the scapegoat now that we don't have the O-line to kick around anymore.

Chandler and Akers have dramatically more burst that Mattison. Mattison is little tougher runner and a lot better blocker, but struggles catching.

Right. Yes Chandler had a bad rep that directly contributed to the INT … I also saw him stonewall a couple of dudes in the same game. I’d like to see him get regular carries before I say he’s good or bad at anything. As it is, hes faster and has a more natural feel than Mattison, who is more physical but limited … what use is a sturdy aggressive physical rb if he’s clueless in short yardage / goalline situations! Mediocre!

I have no idea what Chandler brings to the passing game. Hopefully we’ll find out soon. He must not look good in practice to be held back the way he has been. If he’s not an easy step up from Mattison who is a change of pace back and nothing more, we should still be auditioning backs.

On KFAN today, they said Chandler's main issue is he's struggled learning the playbook (including blocking responsibilities) and its complexity compared to his college team.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

Current PFF 2024 QB draft rankings

1. Caleb Williams, overall big board 1, 2023 PFF score 90.3
2. Drake Maye, 3, 90.8
3. Bo Nix, 17, 92.9
4. Jayden Daniels, 23, 94.6
5. Michael Penix, 25, 90.8
6. Shedeur Sanders, 38, 88.7
7. Carson Beck, 45, 91.7
8. JJ McCarthy, 52, 91.0

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

Current PFF 2024 QB draft rankings

1. Caleb Williams, overall big board 1, 2023 PFF score 90.3
2. Drake Maye, 3, 90.8
3. Bo Nix, 17, 92.9
4. Jayden Daniels, 23, 94.6
5. Michael Penix, 25, 90.8
6. Shedeur Sanders, 38, 88.7
7. Carson Beck, 45, 91.7
8. JJ McCarthy, 52, 91.0

Sanders will play another year for his Dad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Allen

Typical Vikings and their conservative play calling and zone defense when they need a stop. Doesn't matter who is coaching this team. We get one first down we win the game. Idiot calls two runs and a stupid WR screen...and then in post game blames the INT's. Fact is they had a chance to win and KOC blew it. And JJ should have been playing. Seven weeks for a hamstring? If the delay came from Jefferson they need to just get rid of him...selfish player. If it came from the Vikings they are just dumb. They can't even get tanking right...they will finish 8-9 or 9-8 and draft the fifth best QB in the draft.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Allen

Typical Vikings and their conservative play calling and zone defense when they need a stop. Doesn't matter who is coaching this team. We get one first down we win the game. Idiot calls two runs and a stupid WR screen...and then in post game blames the INT's. Fact is they had a chance to win and KOC blew it. And JJ should have been playing. Seven weeks for a hamstring? If the delay came from Jefferson they need to just get rid of him...selfish player. If it came from the Vikings they are just dumb. They can't even get tanking right...they will finish 8-9 or 9-8 and draft the fifth best QB in the draft.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Allen

Typical Vikings and their conservative play calling and zone defense when they need a stop. Doesn't matter who is coaching this team. We get one first down we win the game. Idiot calls two runs and a stupid WR screen...and then in post game blames the INT's. Fact is they had a chance to win and KOC blew it. And JJ should have been playing. Seven weeks for a hamstring? If the delay came from Jefferson they need to just get rid of him...selfish player. If it came from the Vikings they are just dumb. They can't even get tanking right...they will finish 8-9 or 9-8 and draft the fifth best QB in the draft.