Vikings Message Board.Com

I have got to agree that if I had a choice I would have a bigger QB. Thank God the Vikes have a 6-2 230 lb. QB that runs a 4.6 forty and is a good scrambler.

Demi wrote: One ring, and not a single one left in the playoffs.
This isn't the Twilight Zone, RGIII and Russell Wilson are not going to win a super bowl. Ever. Book it Danno!

Obviously they *can* have success...I'd just rather take my chances on a guy who can stand tall in the pocket and manage to see over his linemen without having to find lanes between them! Or a release point a few inches higher!

If I was to ask you right now, would you rather have a 5'11 quarterback, or a 6'4 quarterback which would you choose? Everything else being equal? Quarterbacks are a complete crap shoot regardless of everything involved, if I can increase my odds, no matter how tiny of a difference it makes, I'm going too!

Oh id rather have a stereotypical 6'4 230 QB than a 5'10 QB but thats not what you look into you dont just go hes tall so he must have a chance or hes short so he has no chance. Linemen dont stand stiff as a board they are usually crouched trying to get lower than others so I mean just because a Lineman is 6'6 in reality the Qb could probably still see over him even if the QB is 5'11

Steve Young 6'2

Brett Favre 6'2

Joe Montana 6'2

Drew Brees 6'0

Aaron Rodgers 6'2

Just saying there are plenty good quarterbacks who are shorter I think they all have also won a ring

Demi wrote: One ring, and not a single one left in the playoffs.
This isn't the Twilight Zone, RGIII and Russell Wilson are not going to win a super bowl. Ever. Book it Danno!

Obviously they *can* have success...I'd just rather take my chances on a guy who can stand tall in the pocket and manage to see over his linemen without having to find lanes between them! Or a release point a few inches higher!

I think most NFL teams would too but height can't become THE determining factor in whether a QB should be drafted or not. That's too extreme. Would you really want the Vikes to pass up on the next Brees or Rodgers because they weren't 6' 4"?

If I was to ask you right now, would you rather have a 5'11 quarterback, or a 6'4 quarterback which would you choose? Everything else being equal? Quarterbacks are a complete crap shoot regardless of everything involved, if I can increase my odds, no matter how tiny of a difference it makes, I'm going too!

A team increases their odds of success by drafting the QB with best overall combination of size, skill, productivity, decision-making, demonstrated leadership, athleticism, etc., not by passing on a potentially great QB because he's a little too short. Admittedly, a 5' 11" QB needs to really be able to make up for his far less than ideal height by being strong in other areas but you apply this same logic to 6' 2" QBs and that's where it really gets silly. Once you've admitted that such QBs can have success, height is no longer a legitimate reason to pass on them in the draft.

Mothman wrote:I think most NFL teams would too but height can't become THE determining factor in whether a QB should be drafted or not. That's too extreme. Would you really want the Vikes to pass up on the next Brees or Rodgers because they weren't 6' 4"?

Yes, he would. Demi's team wouldn't have a player under 6' tall (only cornerbacks and kickers would be allowed under 6' 2") and they'd all run 4.4 40s, have bright white teeth and gleaming hair. He could lay out his entire draft board based on combine results and 8x10" photos of the players.

A team increases their odds of success by drafting the QB with best overall combination of size, skill, productivity, decision-making, demonstrated leadership, athleticism, etc., not by passing on a potentially great QB because he's a little too short. Admittedly, a 5' 11" QB needs to really be able to make up for his far less than ideal height by being strong in other areas but you apply this same logic to 6' 2" QBs and that's where it really gets silly. Once you've admitted that such QBs can have success, height is no longer a legitimate reason to pass on them in the draft.

Or you draft them in the middle to late rounds and cross your fingers hoping you've lucked out a little and found a diamond. Like the Seahawks did. Nobody drafts a QB in the third round expecting him to be a franchise quarterback. You take a chance on him, hoping he makes the team and some day becomes productive.

Eli wrote:Or you draft them in the middle to late rounds and cross your fingers hoping you've lucked out a little and found a diamond. Like the Seahawks did. Nobody drafts a QB in the third round expecting him to be a franchise quarterback. You take a chance on him, hoping he makes the team and some day becomes productive.

Well said. In Wilson's case, I think Seattle took a very wise, calculated risk on a player who was available in the third round because of his height. Based on his performance and production as a college player (particularly in his senior season at Wisconsin) Wilson would likely have been a first round pick if he was taller. He might have even been a top 15 pick. He perfectly illustrates why it's a mistake to over-emphasize a single characteristic.

Mothman wrote: Well said. In Wilson's case, I think Seattle took a very wise, calculated risk on a player who was available in the third round because of his height. Based on his performance and production as a college player (particularly in his senior season at Wisconsin) Wilson would likely have been a first round pick if he was taller. He might have even been a top 15 pick. He perfectly illustrates why it's a mistake to over-emphasize a single characteristic.

Exactly. It's always a mistake to underestimate actual on-field experience and performance. I mean, Wilson was nothing less than a stud QB in college and played against some of the best competition in the nation, not to mention he broke a FBS record for passing efficiency.

mansquatch wrote:What exactly does this hindignt is 20/20 discussion have to do with the off-sesaon direction of the Vikings? You don't like the Ponder pick. Well boo-hoo, until somebody invents a wayback machine we are all going to have to deal with the fact that barring injury he'll be the starter in September.

The NT aspect of this thread is of interest. I think getting a solid playmaker at NT and MLB would do much to improve our defense. Are there any FA or Draft prospects that could be the next Vince Wilfork or Pat Williams for this club?

Hey Squatch, I could probably find Sherman and Mr. Peabody and borrow their wayback machine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpgJzlY9y8A

Purple bruise wrote: Hey Squatch, I could probably find Sherman and Mr. Peabody and borrow their wayback machine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpgJzlY9y8A

Would I be correct, Purple bruise, that you are a "man of a certain age"?

PsyDanny wrote: Would I be correct, Purple bruise, that you are a "man of a certain age"?

Well I was not watching the original ones but I watched a lot of old reruns.

Demi wrote:This isn't the Twilight Zone, RGIII and Russell Wilson are not going to win a super bowl. Ever. Book it Danno!

I admire your certainty. But your argument here is uninformed. Ponder, Wilson, and RG III all unexpectedly brought young teams into the playoffs in 2013. Odds are far greater that one of the three wins the show despite your fierce certainty they will not.

CalVike wrote: I admire your certainty. But your argument here is uninformed. Ponder, Wilson, and RG III all unexpectedly brought young teams into the playoffs in 2013. Odds are far greater that one of the three wins the show despite your fierce certainty they will not.

IMO odds are greater two of those teams don't even make the playoffs next year...

Demi wrote: IMO odds are greater two of those teams don't even make the playoffs next year...

More likely a certaintly. I doubt RG3 plays much in 2013 after that injury, WSH is not much without him.

Boon wrote:According to nfl.com jets might be trading revis. Thoughts?

http://vikingsmessageboard.com/viewtopi ... =1&t=25446

Boon wrote: Funny, thats a thread about free agents

Ha! It's late. Whoops.