Vikings Message Board.Com

Raptorman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:57 am Yeah, remember when people wanted to cut him?

S197 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:53 pm Re: batted balls, I mentioned in the game chat that Kirk has a pretty strong tell in that he pats the ball before he throws it. Pure speculation but my guess is D-coordinators are telling their lineman to look for it and get up in the air when he does it. The sheer number of batted balls so far outside the rest of the league average leads me to believe it's more than just pressure, although that's likely a factor, defenses are seeing something he's doing.

The other thing I forgot to mention is Kendricks has taken a pretty big step back this year. Missed tackles, over pursuing/biting on play action, etc. I'm not really sure what's the issue. Hopefully he isn't playing hurt. I'm sure the stuff going on with his brother isn't making things easier.

On the flip side, it was nice to see Tom Johnson back. He was very disruptive all game and he and Parry did a pretty good job filling in for Linval. Holmes getting his first sack was also nice to see.

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 12:47 pm I'm guessing Detroit thought they should beat the Jets, too.


And ... we'll just stop right there. Yes, you are. You do it every week, and you're doing it again.

At least 90% of your posts consist of busting on every aspect of this team. It gets tiresome.


Why should I?

Every time I refute your opinions with facts, you resort to more opinions. It gets nowhere.


Non-championship season? Strap it on, young'un. I've been through 50 of them now. And I'm nowhere near as pessimistic as you are.

No, the offense wasn't sharp yesterday, especially in the second quarter. But they scored 37 points, a season high, so it wasn't like they were inept. You say "not everything was perfect." Do you honestly believe that's a realistic standard? This isn't a video game. Last I checked, the other team pays its players, too. It's the NFL. Nothing is ever perfect. The Chiefs found that out a week ago, and the Rams will find it out soon enough.

cmoss84 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:51 pm Patrick Peterson is begging to be traded...who knows if they will actually get rid of him, but do we have the $ to do so? Worth it? I'm guessing it will take at least a first round pick and probably more.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:13 pm The same offense that scored 37 points also was 2 of 13 on 3rd down. Points scored isn't the only indicator of offensive performance. That same offense started a drive 5 times needing less than 30 yards to score ( average FG range) and came away with 9 points on those drives out of a possible 35. That's poor offensive efficiency. "But the scored 35 points" is a rudimentary measurement and you should possess a deeper understanding of the nuances of the game than that.

Nothing I've said is untrue. I pointed out before the season that this online will be bad. Guess what.....
I just find it comical that in a post where I listed the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of the win, I'm being told I'm down playing the win. Its ridiculous to continue discussing this with you. I'm happy for the win and I hope that Kirk plays better next week. You seem to think he played great so.... Let's leave it at that. When we win, there is no Bad or Ugly.... Just Good

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:52 pm Offense:

• Thielen: 81.3
• Hill: 70.4
• Murray: 67.0
• O'Neill: 60.1
• Cousins: 60.1

Defense:

• Waynes: 82.1
• Smith: 81.2
• Hunter: 79.3
• Johnson: 77.8
• Parry: 74.5
• Rhodes: 70.3

The hill one surprises me because I remember a few bad plays at least

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:34 pm In stopped listening to PFF online grade a long time ago. They just always seem wrong.

Raptorman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:57 amYeah, remember when people wanted to cut him?

ChicagoViking wrote: ↑Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:57 am "People?" Are we talking about on this board? I thought it was just one poster.

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:03 pm I used to umpire college baseball. "Mechanics," meaning how officials position themselves and do certain things, are a big deal to refs and umps. For example, on plays at first, you watch for the runner's foot to hit the bag and listen for the ball to hit the glove. Here's what I understand about the referee mechanics on this.

The referee watches the clock until it hits zero or the ball is snapped. Only then does he look to see if the ball has been snapped. The idea is that he can't watch both at once, so he watches the clock until it hits zero. That means it's theoretically possible for the clock to run out, and the play still gets run.

However, even taking those mechanics into account, yesterday's play seemed particularly egregious to me. I thought it was a good second after the clock hit zero that the Jets snapped the ball. In my opinion, the ref simply blew the call. I can guarantee you he would not admit to that if asked, but that's what I saw.

I'm just glad the game didn't ride on that play.

PacificNorseWest wrote: ↑Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:41 pm One of the most underrated posts I've ever seen here. This is great insight, Kapp.

It has been pointed out on a few broadcasts of the past that refs watch the playclock until it hits zero, at that point, they look down to the LOS and if the QB has snapped the ball, the play goes...If not, they blow the whistle for delay of game. There is a good .5 seconds, more or less in there of leeway.

Good stuff.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 23, 2018 7:51 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:34 pm In stopped listening to PFF online grade a long time ago. They just always seem wrong.

Yeah I mean most of them on here seem fairly accurate I just dont understand the whole Hill thing.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:09 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 23, 2018 7:51 am

Yeah I mean most of them on here seem fairly accurate I just dont understand the whole Hill thing.

They are always up on someone that I feel should be low. Maybe we are wrong?

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:19 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:09 am

They are always up on someone that I feel should be low. Maybe we are wrong?

NEVER!!!