Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote: Both. Jefferson replaced Cook. Sherels replaced Jefferson.

Got it. Nice.

dead_poet wrote:
Let's not get carried away. It was only one game. Yes, he didn't do as awful as normal but I have far too many bad memories of Sherels last season. He's pretty awful in coverage. Maybe he's improving. Maybe. Probably just wishful thinking.

Carried away? He looked decent out there, while mostly everyone else managed to look like crap. Something we never would have even had a chance to witness if he had been cut like many wanted.

Rothlisberger with time against a depleted secondary?

If there were ever a time for the Vikings pass rush to get untracked, this will be it. So far it's been spotty, so hopefully they step it up this week or I don't see how the Vikings can overcome this.

On the subject of Cook, the guy cannot be relied upon. Vikes are going to have to look for CB help this offseason.

VikingLord wrote:Rothlisberger with time against a depleted secondary?

If there were ever a time for the Vikings pass rush to get untracked, this will be it. So far it's been spotty, so hopefully they step it up this week or I don't see how the Vikings can overcome this.

On the subject of Cook, the guy cannot be relied upon. Vikes are going to have to look for CB help this offseason.

I agree, although he may be available for a one year contract because I can't imagine anyone will be eager to give an expensive, multi-year deal to a player who spends more time off the field than on it.

Mothman wrote:On the subject of Cook, the guy cannot be relied upon. Vikes are going to have to look for CB help this offseason.

I agree, although he may be available for a one year contract because I can't imagine anyone will be eager to give an expensive, multi-year deal to a player who spends more time off the field than on it.[/quote]
With the Vikings' current penchant for one year contract, Cook may only need to be offered a multi-year contract by anyone else, expensive or not.

Mothman wrote: I agree, although he may be available for a one year contract because I can't imagine anyone will be eager to give an expensive, multi-year deal to a player who spends more time off the field than on it.

With the Vikings' current penchant for one year contracts, Cook may only need to be offered a multi-year contract by anyone else, expensive or not.

Cook won't get paid anywhere. Dude has and will have zero career picks.

Cedric Griffin anyone?

Will be interesting to see if sherels and rhodes can steop up and add some rocks to the foundation. They really don't even need to be super stars, just slightly better than what we've had would do lol.

dead_poet wrote: Let's not get carried away. It was only one game. Yes, he didn't do as awful as normal but I have far too many bad memories of Sherels last season. He's pretty awful in coverage. Maybe he's improving. Maybe. Probably just wishful thinking.

I don't know, DP. I was at the game, and when Sherels came in, I was pretty worried. But he REALLY played well.

Consider this ... almost every time Cleveland came to the LOS after Sherels replaced Cook, Josh Gordon lined up on Sherels' side. I thought Gordon would burn Sherels big-time, but Gordon was mostly silent throughout the second half until the final drive -- when he lined up primarily on Rhodes' side. Basically, Cleveland saw Rhodes as more of a target than Sherels. And when Sherels DID allow completions, he also proved himself to be a very sure tackler.

The Browns tried to make Sherels a target, and he answered the bell. Name another Vikings CB this year who can say the same.

J. Kapp 11 wrote:I don't know, DP. I was at the game, and when Sherels came in, I was pretty worried. But he REALLY played well.

Consider this ... almost every time Cleveland came to the LOS after Sherels replaced Cook, Josh Gordon lined up on Sherels' side. I thought Gordon would burn Sherels big-time, but Gordon was mostly silent throughout the second half until the final drive -- when he lined up primarily on Rhodes' side. Basically, Cleveland saw Rhodes as more of a target than Sherels. And when Sherels DID allow completions, he also proved himself to be a very sure tackler.

The Browns tried to make Sherels a target, and he answered the bell. Name another Vikings CB this year who can say the same.

I can't and what you just described matches what I saw. Sherels really impressed me on Sunday. I have no idea if he can continue to play at that level but he should get the opportunity because he did a very nice job. He also kept the fake put from becoming a TD!

Who made the tackle on the 22 yard run on 3rd and 30? Was it Sherels?

J. Kapp 11 wrote:I don't know, DP. I was at the game, and when Sherels came in, I was pretty worried. But he REALLY played well.

Consider this ... almost every time Cleveland came to the LOS after Sherels replaced Cook, Josh Gordon lined up on Sherels' side. I thought Gordon would burn Sherels big-time, but Gordon was mostly silent throughout the second half until the final drive -- when he lined up primarily on Rhodes' side. Basically, Cleveland saw Rhodes as more of a target than Sherels. And when Sherels DID allow completions, he also proved himself to be a very sure tackler.

The Browns tried to make Sherels a target, and he answered the bell. Name another Vikings CB this year who can say the same.

I'm not trying to take anything away from his solid game. But I have far too much bad taste in my mouth of the guy to expect him to suddenly become a viable starter. One game against a third-string QB throwing to a guy returning to his first game off suspension just doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. He seemed to be a sure tackler, but I'm going to reserve judgement until I see more before being overly impressed and thinking he's going to be a solid defensive back. Like I said, his history still frustrates me.

I will say this: we're desperate for some kind of spark/pleasant surprise. Anywhere.

PurpleMustReign wrote:Who made the tackle on the 22 yard run on 3rd and 30? Was it Sherels?

I can't remember.....someone can look it up.

But I forgot about that play...they were one man away from converting 3rd and 30 on a draw. wow

dead_poet wrote: I'm not trying to take anything away from his solid game. But I have far too much bad taste in my mouth of the guy to expect him to suddenly become a viable starter. One game against a third-string QB throwing to a guy returning to his first game off suspension just doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. He seemed to be a sure tackler, but I'm going to reserve judgement until I see more before being overly impressed and thinking he's going to be a solid defensive back. Like I said, his history still frustrates me.

I will say this: we're desperate for some kind of spark/pleasant surprise. Anywhere.

One thing I'll say ...

Josh Gordon is an impressive receiver. He's big and fast and agile, and he can get separation. He was just warming up, and I was saying, "Oh oh. This guy is really good."

Brian Hoyer may be third-string, but Josh Gordon is anything but. Sherels was matched up with Gordon for most of the second half, and Sherels won the battle more than he lost.

Don't get me wrong. I don't begin to think Marcus Sherels is the second coming of Deion Sanders. But he showed more than any other corner has this season. Too bad that's not saying much.