Pro Bowl Rosters

[Pondering Her Percy]

I've also seen Smith blow coverages and miss tackles this year - like I said in an earlier post I don't think he was consistent enough (just my opinion).

I've seen him miss a couple tackles but not enough to say so. Just because he misses a few tackles doesn't mean he isn't consistent enough. Do you think Weddle and Ward miss tackles? Maybe make a mistake in coverage? I can just about guarantee it. He's 3rd in the league in INTs, 3 sacks, 6 stuffs, 89 tackles, etc. Seeing him play every game, it boggles my mind that he wasn't a pro bowler. If anything, he was the most consistent player on this team.

[Ardenn]

I've seen him miss a couple tackles but not enough to say so. Just because he misses a few tackles doesn't mean he isn't consistent enough. Do you think Weddle and Ward miss tackles? Maybe make a mistake in coverage? I can just about guarantee it. He's 3rd in the league in INTs, 3 sacks, 6 stuffs, 89 tackles, etc. Seeing him play every game, it boggles my mind that he wasn't a pro bowler. If anything, he was the most consistent player on this team.

With Adrian Peterson out, Harrison Smith is easily the best player on this team. Bridgewater, Griffen and Rhodes are the only realistic challengers. Smith might be the best FS in the entire league. Even Hall of Famers sometimes miss tackles.
For him to not even be named as an alternate... speechless.

[Purple bruise]

With Adrian Peterson out, Harrison Smith is easily the best player on this team. Bridgewater, Griffen and Rhodes are the only realistic challengers. Smith might be the best FS in the entire league. Even Hall of Famers sometimes miss tackles.
For him to not even be named as an alternate... speechless.

Legitimate challengers as to the best player on the team could/is/will be Anthony Barr, bank on it.

[Ardenn]

Legitimate challengers as to the best player on the team could/is/will be Anthony Barr, bank on it.

I agree, but as of right now, he isn't even in the conversation. His year really fell off prior to (during?) the injury, and he would have had to set the football world on fire to only play 2/3 of a rookie season and still be in that discussion.

[Purple bruise]

I agree, but as of right now, he isn't even in the conversation. His year really fell off prior to (during?) the injury, and he would have had to set the football world on fire to only play 2/3 of a rookie season and still be in that discussion.

HAD HE STAYED HEALTHY HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN BUT I LOOK FOR GREAT THINGS FROM HIM NEXT YEAR. AT ONE POINT HE WAS THE BEST PLAYER ON THIS TEAM imo.

[Purple Reign]

Oh I agree 100%. PR, you're saying not to base everything on totals, yet you're going by game by game statistics and claiming Griffen "disappeared" because he didn't have 5-8 tackles. You have no idea how many hurries and pressures he had, how many times he forced guys inside for an easy tackle, etc. I remember specifically last game, he hit Tannehill multiple times coming off the edge and was creating tons of pressure yet he only had 1 tackle. Sorry but that's a poor way to determine he "disappeared".

No, I didn't say you can't base anything on totals - I was only saying you can't use year-to-date totals as a basis when defining consistency. You were comparing year-to-date stats and just because they were close you were claiming that proved consistency. Consistency is determined by how a player performs game in and game out. But you are correct that stats alone don't reflect a player's influence and I should have qualified my 'disappeared' reference as meaning disappearing from the stats. And I didn't say he disappeared for not having 5-8 tackles (again, you exaggerating), I said it because he had 2 or fewer tackles for 6 games. For fan voting, about the only thing they have to go on is stats as they don't typically watch every game of every team. I agree that Griffen has had a good year and Campbell also had a good year. Just more people (including players and coaches) voted for Campbell than Griffen and I don't have a problem with that.

[Purple Reign]

With Adrian Peterson out, Harrison Smith is easily the best player on this team. Bridgewater, Griffen and Rhodes are the only realistic challengers. Smith might be the best FS in the entire league. Even Hall of Famers sometimes miss tackles.
For him to not even be named as an alternate... speechless.

I agree, not having a single Viking named even as an alternate is quite puzzling.

[Pondering Her Percy]

No, I didn't say you can't base anything on totals - I was only saying you can't use year-to-date totals as a basis when defining consistency. You were comparing year-to-date stats and just because they were close you were claiming that proved consistency. Consistency is determined by how a player performs game in and game out. But you are correct that stats alone don't reflect a player's influence and I should have qualified my 'disappeared' reference as meaning disappearing from the stats. And I didn't say he disappeared for not having 5-8 tackles (again, you exaggerating), I said it because he had 2 or fewer tackles for 6 games. For fan voting, about the only thing they have to go on is stats as they don't typically watch every game of every team. I agree that Griffen has had a good year and Campbell also had a good year. Just more people (including players and coaches) voted for Campbell than Griffen and I don't have a problem with that.

But that's what I don't understand. If you're a fan and you look at Griffens stats compared to Campbells, Griffen wins by a long shot. Which makes me wonder why you think it's reasonable to have Campbell over Griffen. Griffen was more of a game changer. Tackles are tackles and there weren't a huge difference between the two but a huge factor in looking at defensive ends is sacks and Campbell shouldn't have even been in consideration. Griffen has him beat in almost every category which makes me wonder your defense against Campbell but hey....it's your opinion I suppose

[Pondering Her Percy]

No, I didn't say you can't base anything on totals - I was only saying you can't use year-to-date totals as a basis when defining consistency. You were comparing year-to-date stats and just because they were close you were claiming that proved consistency. Consistency is determined by how a player performs game in and game out. But you are correct that stats alone don't reflect a player's influence and I should have qualified my 'disappeared' reference as meaning disappearing from the stats. And I didn't say he disappeared for not having 5-8 tackles (again, you exaggerating), I said it because he had 2 or fewer tackles for 6 games. For fan voting, about the only thing they have to go on is stats as they don't typically watch every game of every team. I agree that Griffen has had a good year and Campbell also had a good year. Just more people (including players and coaches) voted for Campbell than Griffen and I don't have a problem with that.

Guys like JPP, Jurell Casey, and Carlos Dunlap had a lot more tackles than Campbell and were much more consistent each game when it came to tackles yet they didnt make the pro bowl. I mean you continue to talk about tackling yet these guys were more "consistent" and still didnt make the pro bowl. Robert Quinn made the pro bowl and had less tackles AND less sacks than Griffen. Where is the "consistency" there?? Bottom line is, it has nothing to do with consistency or tackles. It has to do with how well you are known and how big your name is and guess what.... Griffen's name has been in the shadows for quite some time now. Smith has never been considered above the safeties that made it (outside of vikings fans and maybe a few others) to be a legitimate pro bowler. With the new way of voting, it has nothing to do with anything other than how well you are known. Period.

[Ardenn]

Guys like JPP, Jurell Casey, and Carlos Dunlap had a lot more tackles than Campbell and were much more consistent each game when it came to tackles yet they didnt make the pro bowl. I mean you continue to talk about tackling yet these guys were more "consistent" and still didnt make the pro bowl. Robert Quinn made the pro bowl and had less tackles AND less sacks than Griffen. Where is the "consistency" there?? Bottom line is, it has nothing to do with consistency or tackles. It has to do with how well you are known and how big your name is and guess what.... Griffen's name has been in the shadows for quite some time now. Smith has never been considered above the safeties that made it (outside of vikings fans and maybe a few others) to be a legitimate pro bowler. With the new way of voting, it has nothing to do with anything other than how well you are known. Period.

Yeah, its exceedingly rare to hear the name Harrison Smith mentioned in national media, even in conversations about DBs. You do, however, hear about Kam Chancellor alllll the time, despite him not even being on the field most of this year. Its all about exposure through either team success or big markets.

[Purple Reign]

Guys like JPP, Jurell Casey, and Carlos Dunlap had a lot more tackles than Campbell and were much more consistent each game when it came to tackles yet they didnt make the pro bowl. I mean you continue to talk about tackling yet these guys were more "consistent" and still didnt make the pro bowl. Robert Quinn made the pro bowl and had less tackles AND less sacks than Griffen. Where is the "consistency" there?? Bottom line is, it has nothing to do with consistency or tackles. It has to do with how well you are known and how big your name is and guess what.... Griffen's name has been in the shadows for quite some time now. Smith has never been considered above the safeties that made it (outside of vikings fans and maybe a few others) to be a legitimate pro bowler. With the new way of voting, it has nothing to do with anything other than how well you are known. Period.

First of all, I think you are focusing entirely too much on one reason (consistency) which is just my personal opinion about why I didn't think Griffen should have gotten the nod over Campbell. And it was pointed out a while back that the Vikings are at a disadvantage because they have a losing record and play in a small market.

As far as how well a player is known as being the only reason for being selected - well that's just not true and another gross exaggeration on your part. Are you saying the reason everyone who made the Pro Bowl had nothing to do with how well they played this year? Yes, there are some who made it who shouldn't have, but it's not just because they are well known, it's usually because of prior year performances. If it was strictly based on how well known a player is, as you are suggesting, Johnny Manziel should have made it.

Actually, the new way of voting is more fair than the old way IMO. Previously, when only fans voted, that led to players in bigger markets having a huge advantage. The way it works now, coaches, players and fans vote with each one accounting for 1/3 of the total. I'm not exactly sure how that works when there are way more fans that vote than coaches and players, I assume that they use percentages rather than actual votes. When players and coaches account for 2/3 of the votes, then that minimizes the name recognition factor. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it is more fair than the previous way voting was done.

[Pondering Her Percy]

First of all, I think you are focusing entirely too much on one reason (consistency) which is just my personal opinion about why I didn't think Griffen should have gotten the nod over Campbell. And it was pointed out a while back that the Vikings are at a disadvantage because they have a losing record and play in a small market.

As far as how well a player is known as being the only reason for being selected - well that's just not true and another gross exaggeration on your part. Are you saying the reason everyone who made the Pro Bowl had nothing to do with how well they played this year? Yes, there are some who made it who shouldn't have, but it's not just because they are well known, it's usually because of prior year performances. If it was strictly based on how well known a player is, as you are suggesting, Johnny Manziel should have made it.

Actually, the new way of voting is more fair than the old way IMO. Previously, when only fans voted, that led to players in bigger markets having a huge advantage. The way it works now, coaches, players and fans vote with each one accounting for 1/3 of the total. I'm not exactly sure how that works when there are way more fans that vote than coaches and players, I assume that they use percentages rather than actual votes. When players and coaches account for 2/3 of the votes, then that minimizes the name recognition factor. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it is more fair than the previous way voting was done.

Gross exaggeration?? I think you're missing my point as well. Players PAST performances should have nothing to do with if the make the pro bowl or not this year. For example, Robert Quinn. No matter what way you look at it, Griffen had a better year then Quinn did. But Quinn made it because he was well known and Griffen wasn't. I never once said I'm just going to dismiss everyone making it because they are well known (your "gross exaggeration"). Obviously there were players that had great years and deserved it but there are a handful of guys like Campbell, Quinn and even Ward, Weddle and Chancellor that had no business beating out Griffen and Smith. You're basing your opinion of consistency on one thing.....tackles which IMO carries little weight when it comes to DEs. You can't sit here and say Quinn, Campbell, Weddle, Chancellor and Ward had a better YEAR than Smith and Griffen because they didn't. It's just that they are much more well known and have already made a name for themselves. Those are guys that Smith and Griffen DESERVED to beat out because they had better years.

[Purple Reign]

Gross exaggeration?? I think you're missing my point as well. Players PAST performances should have nothing to do with if the make the pro bowl or not this year. For example, Robert Quinn. No matter what way you look at it, Griffen had a better year then Quinn did. But Quinn made it because he was well known and Griffen wasn't. I never once said I'm just going to dismiss everyone making it because they are well known (your "gross exaggeration"). Obviously there were players that had great years and deserved it but there are a handful of guys like Campbell, Quinn and even Ward, Weddle and Chancellor that had no business beating out Griffen and Smith. You're basing your opinion of consistency on one thing.....tackles which IMO carries little weight when it comes to DEs. You can't sit here and say Quinn, Campbell, Weddle, Chancellor and Ward had a better YEAR than Smith and Griffen because they didn't. It's just that they are much more well known and have already made a name for themselves. Those are guys that Smith and Griffen DESERVED to beat out because they had better years.

When you say, and I quote (emphasis mine), "With the new way of voting, it has nothing to do with anything other than how well you are known. Period." how else am I supposed to take that? Yes, that is a gross exaggeration - saying that nothing else matters other than how well known a player is to be voted to the Pro Bowl. Nothing else means exactly that - nothing else. Sometimes I don't think you realize what you actually type and how it comes across. If that's not what you meant, then you shouldn't have said that. And don't give me the excuse that I should have known what you really meant - I'm not a mind reader.

No, I'm not missing your point and admitted that there are players who made it that shouldn't have and agree that past performances shouldn't matter for current year's selections.

[Pondering Her Percy]

When you say, and I quote (emphasis mine), "With the new way of voting, it has nothing to do with anything other than how well you are known. Period." how else am I supposed to take that? Yes, that is a gross exaggeration - saying that nothing else matters other than how well known a player is to be voted to the Pro Bowl. Nothing else means exactly that - nothing else. Sometimes I don't think you realize what you actually type and how it comes across. If that's not what you meant, then you shouldn't have said that. And don't give me the excuse that I should have known what you really meant - I'm not a mind reader.

No, I'm not missing your point and admitted that there are players who made it that shouldn't have and agree that past performances shouldn't matter for current year's selections.

First of all that happens more often than not on any message board. Second, you know just as well as anyone else, that if a player has a monstrous season, they are going to make it. I wasn't dismissing that point. However, I could tell you right now that if Peyton Manning had an average year, he would have still made it because he is Peyton Manning. That's exactly what happened with Robert Quinn this year. Although, now you continue to stray even further away from the point. You say that two Vikings players didn't DESERVE to make it because they weren't consistent enough yet you have yet to prove that the other guys that I mentioned were any more consistent than Griffen and Smith were. Sorry but saying Campbell had a few more tackles here and there does not make him more consistent than Griffen. That's a pretty ridiculous way to even look at it. When it comes to Smith you've been pretty quiet.

You're saying Smith and Griffen weren't consistent enough. Ok then how were the other players more consistent?? My guess is, you have no real answer and by looking at numbers and the overall year each guy had, Smith and Griffen deserve to go

[Purple Reign]

First of all that happens more often than not on any message board. Second, you know just as well as anyone else, that if a player has a monstrous season, they are going to make it. I wasn't dismissing that point. However, I could tell you right now that if Peyton Manning had an average year, he would have still made it because he is Peyton Manning. That's exactly what happened with Robert Quinn this year. Although, now you continue to stray even further away from the point. You say that two Vikings players didn't DESERVE to make it because they weren't consistent enough yet you have yet to prove that the other guys that I mentioned were any more consistent than Griffen and Smith were. Sorry but saying Campbell had a few more tackles here and there does not make him more consistent than Griffen. That's a pretty ridiculous way to even look at it. When it comes to Smith you've been pretty quiet.

You're saying Smith and Griffen weren't consistent enough. Ok then how were the other players more consistent?? My guess is, you have no real answer and by looking at numbers and the overall year each guy had, Smith and Griffen deserve to go

Oh, so now you admit that it was a gross exaggeration by saying it happens all the time.

Yes, now you say a player's performance obviously matters, but that's not what you said earlier. I can only go by what you say, especially when you emphatically end your statement they way you did (PERIOD.). I have stated before that I really don't know that much about the other players and my judgement may be a bit clouded from another disappointing losing season. I gave you some statistics about why I thought Campbell was more consistent than Griffen, yet you completely dismiss those stats and say that I have yet to prove my point. I don't know what else you want me to say. Sorry, it's still just my opinion and guess what, my opinion doesn't matter in the least so it doesn't do much good to try and convince me otherwise. I would say if 2/3 of the voting comes from coaches and players, then they know more what's going on that any of us fans.