The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
Moderator: Moderators
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
I'm wondering now, why Percy was so desperate to leave the Vikes. I see him running the exact plays in Seattle that he ran in Minny. Catching a bubble screen from Ponder or Wilson.....what difference does it make. I thought he was upset with his role in the offense and the quality of the QB. Maybe he lost confidence in the front office,.. but he kind of directed it at Ponder. I guess Ponder was an easy scapegoat for him to get traded.
The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds,the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps.
Elenore Roosevelt. 1945
Elenore Roosevelt. 1945
- Texas Vike
- Hall of Fame Inductee
- Posts: 4672
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am
- x 405
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
Seriously? In his shoes, I'd want to be on a contender with a promising QB too. Things are looking up for the Vikes now, but it wasn't long ago that there were plenty reasons for a player (especially an entitled one) to get frustrated.dkoby wrote:I'm wondering now, why Percy was so desperate to leave the Vikes. I see him running the exact plays in Seattle that he ran in Minny. Catching a bubble screen from Ponder or Wilson.....what difference does it make. I thought he was upset with his role in the offense and the quality of the QB. Maybe he lost confidence in the front office,.. but he kind of directed it at Ponder. I guess Ponder was an easy scapegoat for him to get traded.
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
If I'm not mistaken, Harvin never publicly made a negative comment about Ponder prior to being traded. I don't think he even said anything overtly negative about him after the trade, did he?dkoby wrote:I'm wondering now, why Percy was so desperate to leave the Vikes. I see him running the exact plays in Seattle that he ran in Minny. Catching a bubble screen from Ponder or Wilson.....what difference does it make. I thought he was upset with his role in the offense and the quality of the QB. Maybe he lost confidence in the front office,.. but he kind of directed it at Ponder. I guess Ponder was an easy scapegoat for him to get traded.
I'm not sure if we've ever been given a concrete reason why Harvin wanted out of Minnesota and it may be that the Vikings wanted him out as much or more than Harvin did. If they didn't, would the trade have even happened?
This piece by Kevin Siefert is worth reading (or re-reading):
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_ ... more-right
Ditto for this one by Tom Pelissero:
http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Why_ ... says032013
I don't think Harvin had a choice about where he ended up, did he? I don't remember him having any sort of approval over a trade, although I suppose he could have held out, if he hadn't liked where he ended up. I think he was fortunate to be traded to a contender.Texas Vike wrote:Seriously? In his shoes, I'd want to be on a contender with a promising QB too. Things are looking up for the Vikes now, but it wasn't long ago that there were plenty reasons for a player (especially an entitled one) to get frustrated.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:55 pm
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
It was a blessing that he left. The Vikes got Rhodes and probably would not have drafted CP had Harvin stayed. It was a win win for both teams IMO.Mothman wrote: If I'm not mistaken, Harvin never publicly made a negative comment about Ponder prior to being traded. I don't think he even said anything overtly negative about him after the trade, did he?
I'm not sure if we've ever been given a concrete reason why Harvin wanted out of Minnesota and it may be that the Vikings wanted him out as much or more than Harvin did. If they didn't, would the trade have even happened?
This piece by Kevin Siefert is worth reading (or re-reading):
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_ ... more-right
Ditto for this one by Tom Pelissero:
http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Why_ ... says032013
I don't think Harvin had a choice about where he ended up, did he? I don't remember him having any sort of approval over a trade, although I suppose he could have held out, if he hadn't liked where he ended up. I think he was fortunate to be traded to a contender.
Do not mistake KINDNESS for WEAKNESS!
Best to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool rather than open it and remove all doubt.
Best to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool rather than open it and remove all doubt.
-
- Commissioner
- Posts: 24788
- Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
- Location: Des Moines, Iowa
- x 108
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
Huh. I thought that's exactly the same thing he was doing in the game.fiestavike wrote:I do remember him stumbling in the past, but this was different. In the past he would kind of lean so far forward that he was hardly able to stay upright, and accelerate as he stumbled forward. He wasn't able to do that at all in this game.
I think that's because he caught the ball with his momentum going in reverse. I thought because of that it was a smart decision.He also stayed in the endzone on one kickoff,
Again, this was something I noticed on Vikings kickoffs as well as he was waiting for his blocks.and slowed down anticipating contact on another kickoff return.
Interesting. I don't see any difference whatsoever.I don't know if its injury or age or hesitancy , but he's already not what he once was.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
He looks just as explosive and dangerous as always, to me.
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5692
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:56 am
- x 16
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
Why are we trash talking a guy who got 100 yards and then 60 return yards against the Pukers?
So they beat the Packers with...
Lynch (Peterson)
Harvin (Patterson)
Miller (Rudolph)
That game was just how the Vikings will beat the Fudgies at Lame Blow this season.
So they beat the Packers with...
Lynch (Peterson)
Harvin (Patterson)
Miller (Rudolph)
That game was just how the Vikings will beat the Fudgies at Lame Blow this season.
-
- Pro Bowl Elite Player
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:51 pm
- Location: Waiting for hell to freeze over
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
well with their O-line dropping like flies it has become more swiss cheese like with every snap.
at the rate they are going we may very well be playing against practice squad players before we see them
at the rate they are going we may very well be playing against practice squad players before we see them
Purple Pride till the end.
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
Purple Jesus wrote: Yeah.... But I am not too confident yet that our D will hold the Fudge down like the Hawks did. They have arguably one of the best D's ever.
They certainly had the best defense last year, but I think they are a little ways away from the "best ever." The '85 Bears, 69 Vikings, 2000 Ravens, 74 Steelers, and the 2002 Buccaneers are just a few I would count as 'better'. The 2013 Seahawks allowed 14.4 ppg (which is outstanding) but, to contrast, the '69 Vikings gave up 9.5 ppg. If a Super Bowl win is your metric, then you can exclude the 69 Vikings, but the other defenses mentioned all have Super Bowl wins, too.
I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
They have a top 5 defense, we have a bottom 5 defense.Purple Jesus wrote: Yeah.... But I am not too confident yet that our D will hold the Fudge down like the Hawks did. They have arguably one of the best D's ever.
They have a top 10 QB, we have a bottom 10 QB.
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
I could see Seattle going 16-0. Their biggest obstacle will be playing in San Francisco. So glad we're not playing in Seattle again this year.
When you're born, you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front row seat.
- PurpleKoolaid
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8641
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
- x 28
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
And put a huge burden on the state, and taxpayers. Any owner, other then Red, would have gotten a stadium deal. My point was, the Wilfs don't know football. They now have left it up to Rickie. Im assuming he does. Zimmer and Norv are proof of that (but no one knows for sure now). The Wilfs trying to buy a SB, with the cheesehead Favre, backfired big time on us. I dont think I can be any more clear about this.Purple bruise wrote:
Yeah and the idiot Wilf kept the Vikings in Minny and got their new stadium built. So do not "cry" too much.
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
Orion wrote:I could see Seattle going 16-0. Their biggest obstacle will be playing in San Francisco. So glad we're not playing in Seattle again this year.
You don't know that.
Unless you meant we will have home field advantage.
Seriously I thought we had a chance to beat them last year if Cassel was starter instead of the attempted salvager of Ponder's 3 turnovers.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:55 pm
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
Kool-aid said,
"And put a huge burden on the state, and taxpayers. Any owner, other then Red, would have gotten a stadium deal. My point was, the Wilfs don't know football. They now have left it up to Rickie. Im assuming he does. Zimmer and Norv are proof of that (but no one knows for sure now). The Wilfs trying to buy a SB, with the cheesehead Favre, backfired big time on us. I dont think I can be any more clear about this."[/quote]
Any other owner huh would have gotten a stadium built. And how would they have managed that?? Any other owner may have also moved the team. The Wilfs have put up lots and lots of their own money building this stadium haven't they. The Metrodome was built with a larger percentage of tax payer dollars and the return was very substantial.
NEW VIKINGS STADIUM http://www.vikings.com/stadium/new-stad ... mpact.html
Economic Impact:
Not only will a Vikings stadium keep one of Minnesota’s biggest assets in the State, but building a new facility will also support thousands of jobs and generate significant economic activity at a time when the State desperately needs it.
According to Mortenson Construction, 1,600 construction workers will work over 900,000 hours in just the first year of construction. Along with the immediate jobs, an analysis completed by Conventions, Sports & Leisure, International (CSL) and Mortenson Construction in 2009 showed the construction and operation of a new stadium and the Minnesota Vikings franchise would provide the following significant economic benefits.
The construction of a new stadium will support approximately 13,000 jobs, including 7,500 construction and trades workers who will be employed during the three-year building process.
Nearly 4.3 million work hours with almost $300 million in wages for construction workers will be required for this project.
In addition, the fabrication of project materials will create a separate substantial number of jobs and wages.
Upon completion of the stadium, 3,400 full and part-time jobs will be supported by the economic activity generated by a new stadium.
Over 90% of the total materials and labor subcontract value will go to Minnesotans. The Building & Construction Trades Council is experiencing nearly 20% unemployment this project will have a significant impact on putting these construction workers back to work.
According to CSL, the economic activity from a new stadium will generate over $26 million per year in tax revenue and over $145 million in direct spending by Vikings fans inside the State of Minnesota.
Compare that when the Metrodome was built.* The Metrodome was built for $55 million, including $33 million in
public dollars. Since its opening in 1982, the facility has generated
nearly $360 million in taxes, over $340 million of which has gone back
to the State’s General Fund. The remainder has gone back to local
governments.
You might note that bringing in Favre got them one play away from a Super Bowl under Childress and I believe that he hired Zimmer and Turner (we will all have to wait and see how that turns out), but so far so good.
By the way how much money comes out of your pocket in tax money to fund the stadium?
Can I be any more clear?
"And put a huge burden on the state, and taxpayers. Any owner, other then Red, would have gotten a stadium deal. My point was, the Wilfs don't know football. They now have left it up to Rickie. Im assuming he does. Zimmer and Norv are proof of that (but no one knows for sure now). The Wilfs trying to buy a SB, with the cheesehead Favre, backfired big time on us. I dont think I can be any more clear about this."[/quote]
Any other owner huh would have gotten a stadium built. And how would they have managed that?? Any other owner may have also moved the team. The Wilfs have put up lots and lots of their own money building this stadium haven't they. The Metrodome was built with a larger percentage of tax payer dollars and the return was very substantial.
NEW VIKINGS STADIUM http://www.vikings.com/stadium/new-stad ... mpact.html
Economic Impact:
Not only will a Vikings stadium keep one of Minnesota’s biggest assets in the State, but building a new facility will also support thousands of jobs and generate significant economic activity at a time when the State desperately needs it.
According to Mortenson Construction, 1,600 construction workers will work over 900,000 hours in just the first year of construction. Along with the immediate jobs, an analysis completed by Conventions, Sports & Leisure, International (CSL) and Mortenson Construction in 2009 showed the construction and operation of a new stadium and the Minnesota Vikings franchise would provide the following significant economic benefits.
The construction of a new stadium will support approximately 13,000 jobs, including 7,500 construction and trades workers who will be employed during the three-year building process.
Nearly 4.3 million work hours with almost $300 million in wages for construction workers will be required for this project.
In addition, the fabrication of project materials will create a separate substantial number of jobs and wages.
Upon completion of the stadium, 3,400 full and part-time jobs will be supported by the economic activity generated by a new stadium.
Over 90% of the total materials and labor subcontract value will go to Minnesotans. The Building & Construction Trades Council is experiencing nearly 20% unemployment this project will have a significant impact on putting these construction workers back to work.
According to CSL, the economic activity from a new stadium will generate over $26 million per year in tax revenue and over $145 million in direct spending by Vikings fans inside the State of Minnesota.
Compare that when the Metrodome was built.* The Metrodome was built for $55 million, including $33 million in
public dollars. Since its opening in 1982, the facility has generated
nearly $360 million in taxes, over $340 million of which has gone back
to the State’s General Fund. The remainder has gone back to local
governments.
You might note that bringing in Favre got them one play away from a Super Bowl under Childress and I believe that he hired Zimmer and Turner (we will all have to wait and see how that turns out), but so far so good.
By the way how much money comes out of your pocket in tax money to fund the stadium?
Can I be any more clear?
Do not mistake KINDNESS for WEAKNESS!
Best to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool rather than open it and remove all doubt.
Best to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool rather than open it and remove all doubt.
-
- Starter
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:11 pm
Re: The "Official" Cheer Against The Packers Thread
As much as I prefer not to wish anyone hurt, I wasn't heartbroken to see 2 O-linemen go out! the 'Hawks got a 2-fer for the rest of us in the NFCN... I for one appreciate any help we can get. Less than a month and we'll be playing them. May they continue to suck.
I didn't mind the trades for either Sidney Rice or Percy Harvin. Neither could stay healthy, which means we're paying full time wages for part time work. The off-chance that they did play wasn't worth it when you consider the chore of planning a game both with and without your 'star' players. Yep, they both got a ring now, but I really think the Hawks would have done it without them. They're a helluva team. I call the MN West. Bugs the crap out of our Hawks fan friend
I didn't mind the trades for either Sidney Rice or Percy Harvin. Neither could stay healthy, which means we're paying full time wages for part time work. The off-chance that they did play wasn't worth it when you consider the chore of planning a game both with and without your 'star' players. Yep, they both got a ring now, but I really think the Hawks would have done it without them. They're a helluva team. I call the MN West. Bugs the crap out of our Hawks fan friend
~Ginny~
A woman is only vulnerable while her nails are wet. Even then, she can pull the trigger if she needs to.
A woman is only vulnerable while her nails are wet. Even then, she can pull the trigger if she needs to.