Vikings Message Board.Com

losperros wrote:


I also don't agree about the Vikings having a substandard group of receivers. I don't think the skill player talent on the team is bad. Could it be better? Sure. In fact, it could probably be better right now with a few changes.

I am on point with you regarding our WRs and the fact that Wright has proven his value. Has to be because he was rewarded with a nice contract. Our WR crew is more than capable.

losperros wrote: If you've been there watching the practices, then tell us what you're seeing and not seeing from Wright. Otherwise, I question whether you really know what Wright is doing at practice. Given what he's done on the field in the past, Wright has capable hands and has made some big plays.

I also don't agree about the Vikings having a substandard group of receivers. I don't think the skill player talent on the team is bad. Could it be better? Sure. In fact, it could probably be better right now with a few changes.

So if Wright is doing his part off the field to get on the field on Sunday, why is he not on the field?

Mothman wrote: So his effort and dedication suddenly became an issue after not being an issue for years? You're putting forth the same "trust the coaching staff's judgment" argument that was used all last season to justify only throwing two passes to Patterson. I just don't buy it, especially about a player like Wright who has proven he can help the team win games.

Happens all the time. There are many examples of guys who got extensions and free agent contracts who tank immediately after they get the guaranteed money from the deal.

If it isn't what I said it was, what do you think explains it? Coaching conspiracy? A coach heard Wright insulting his wife's looks or something and now is taking it out on a guy who can help the team win? Isn't that sort of like stabbing yourself in the eye?

Mothman wrote: That shows a level of faith in the Vikings bumbling offensive coaching staff that I'd argue they don't deserve.

It must suck to be a coach of a pro football team. These guys are paid solely to win football games at almost any cost, and yet fans are inclined to think they'll sit guys who they need to do that over what? Capriciousness? You don't think Zimmer is fully invested in winning? And if he's not winning it's because of his bumbling and not because he's saddled with a player (some players?) who don't put the effort and dedication into doing their jobs at the level necessary to help the team win?

I don't know - in my view players at this level control their own destinies. It is not rational to think a coach would intentionally sabotage his team's chances of winning. If you want to believe they are just incompetent, that's your prerogative, but then why is Patterson finally seeing the field? That dude sat for years despite showing immense physical talent and now he's getting on the field and making the most of it.

VikingLord wrote: So if Wright is doing his part off the field to get on the field on Sunday, why is he not on the field?

I don't understand the lack of PT for Wright.

From what I have seen Diggs, Theilen, CP and Wright are the 4 best wr's on the team and when healthy I'd rank them in that order. Johnson is just not very good and has suspect hands and Treadwell "I" think is a bust but certainly has no business playing up till now, he's undependable, shaky hands, poor route runner and makes no adjusts pre-snap.

And I would add, he's a slower version of Agular in many of these regards. Both over-drafted, both are no good.

This whole on the field off the field thing brings up Diggs rookie year. The only reason that kid saw the field was because of an injury. Then it turns out he is the best wr on the team...far and away. How did they not see that in practice if that's where players are made? If they are so wise?


A guy like Charles Johnson can continually come up short on sunday but as long as he practices like he does he gets the nod? That's the kind of system that causes players to not give a #### because the coaches actually look like idiots, as is reflected in their game plan, where the team ranks on offense, and how they struggle just to move the ball more than 6 yards. Nothing Charles Johnson has done. on the field, has matched what Wright has done. Wallace did absolutely zero, ZERO, for this offense, whether it was his fault or not. The fact that they didn't try someone more conducive to their system, like Theilen for example, is on the coaches...or whoever is making these questionable decisions...week after week after week. The team has won one game against the Texans in which they actually fielded and executed an offensive gameplan. It's worse than Childress...in spite of the injuries...because they have shown little to no ability in adapting to the adversity. Like Bradford for the whole season until the final drive last night in terms of using his legs to extend plays and drives. This offense blows and it goes well beyond execution.

Bradford had to call these mental midgets out in the press and only said what everyone else can plainly see...so how in the world am I supposed to believe that they even understand how best to us the talent they have....when it's obvious THEY DON'T?

VikingLord wrote:If it isn't what I said it was, what do you think explains it? Coaching conspiracy?

I don't know but based on the past few seasons, it wouldn't surprise me if it was just poor judgment.

It must suck to be a coach of a pro football team. These guys are paid solely to win football games at almost any cost, and yet fans are inclined to think they'll sit guys who they need to do that over what? Capriciousness?

Again, poor judgment. I don't need to ascribe malicious intent or conspiratorial overtones to the situation.

I don't know - in my view players at this level control their own destinies. It is not rational to think a coach would intentionally sabotage his team's chances of winning.

I agree and that's not the position I've taken.

If you want to believe they are just incompetent, that's your prerogative, but then why is Patterson finally seeing the field? That dude sat for years despite showing immense physical talent and now he's getting on the field and making the most of it.

Yes, after sitting for years with immense talent while the offense struggled to score. I think that probably makes my case better than yours.

VikingLord wrote:
I didn't say. What I tried to say was speed isn't the only factor, or in most cases I've seen, even a primary factor, in a WR's ability to get open deep. And I think I substantiated that belief with two examples of players who consistently got open deep (even wide open deep) and yet who didn't have great straight-line speed.

What receivers do the Vikings have that you think can simply beat a CB on a straight run down the field and open up the kind of separation that Treadwell couldn't get on that play? For that matter, what receivers are there in the league that could consistently do that?

Speed is way overrated for deep routes.

I've seen Thielen and Wright do it on numerous occasions. They are faster than Treadwel, which matters a fair bit more than you are willing to admit. Of course speed isn't the only factor. That's so obvious that it's not even worth mentioning.

Tom Powers' take on the game:

http://www.twincities.com/2016/12/02/to ... -uniforms/

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

Is that his real account?

Mothman wrote: Yes, after sitting for years with immense talent while the offense struggled to score. I think that probably makes my case better than yours.

Only if you assume he would have had the success he's had absent any other factors (like a better work ethic and preparation).

And to be fair, it's not like they're pouring on the points because Patterson is now on the field.

Texas Vike wrote: I've seen Thielen and Wright do it on numerous occasions. They are faster than Treadwel, which matters a fair bit more than you are willing to admit. Of course speed isn't the only factor. That's so obvious that it's not even worth mentioning.

At least we agree on that last point, which is odd because it seemed that was key to the argument that Treadwell was the wrong receiver to send deep based on his apparent lack of speed.

Hopefully we can also agree that it wouldn't matter which receiver ran that deep route given the DB was in perfect position to defend it.

Nunin wrote:This whole on the field off the field thing brings up Diggs rookie year. The only reason that kid saw the field was because of an injury. Then it turns out he is the best wr on the team...far and away. How did they not see that in practice if that's where players are made? If they are so wise?

Bradford had to call these mental midgets out in the press and only said what everyone else can plainly see...so how in the world am I supposed to believe that they even understand how best to us the talent they have....when it's obvious THEY DON'T?

I don't know why Patterson or Diggs sat while Johnson got the starts if they were better options, but if coaches can't see that and aren't acting in the best interest of the team (and themselves, for that matter) then I'd agree it is time to try someone else. Childress was a great example of a head coach without a clue in my view, but I always felt Zimmer and his staff were much better and had the team moving in the right direction.

S197 wrote:Is that his real account?

No way, that must be fake, unless Walsh is really really bitter

720pete wrote: No way, that must be fake, unless Walsh is really really bitter

The date/time stamp indicates 8:30 PM on December 1st (The actual day the game was played). Unless Walsh had a crystal ball, the game was still going on (7-3 score in all likelihood at about that time) and Walsh couldn't have known the Vikings would lose at the time this tweet indicates it was made.