Next years draft?

[Rick]

And your idea of great MLBs coming in the 2-3rd rds all the time? Are you kidding me? Please, all the time?

Guess who was drafted in the 2nd round Juice:

Originally Posted By: DrJuice1980

How did you like playing against Sean Lee? Wasn't that just a show he put on?

Originally Posted By: DrJuice1980

Sean Lee not being on the field and Big D getting blown out proves my point about how important a good MLB is.

Yip, Sean Lee was drafted later in the 2nd round (see below to enjoy your crow)

You asked for it so get ready to eat some crow Juice:

Here are a bunch of qualtiy Linebackers taken in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

And there are a bunch more not even mentioned so you don't have to eat too much crow.

Mike Singletary

Rickey Jackson

Andre Tippett

Ken Norton

Bill Romanowski

Tedy Bruschi

Leonard Little

Jeremiah Trotter

Joey Porter

Will Witherspoon

Lance Briggs

Karlos Dansby

Barrett Ruud

DeMeco Ryans

D'Qwell Jackson

Paul Posluszny

LaMarr Woodley

Curtis Lofton

James Laurinaitis

Daryl Washington

Sean Lee

NaVorro Bowman

Mason Foster

Bobby Wagner

Zach Brown

There goes your credibility Juice?

[DrJuice1980]

Ok Rico suave, you got me there. You did your homework, double spaced your entries to make your post longer and more noticeable. I like your style, I'll eat my crow on that, some of those guys aren't studs though (Mason Foster for one). HOWEVER, I am sure I could list off more solid QBs that were taken in rds 2-3...

He's my stance and it is nothing new. Trade down, amass as many 1-3rd round picks as possible. Biggest NEEDS are MLB, CB, QB, OG. Get it done. No stretching for a "guy" just get transitional talent. Look at how many teams have blown their #1 overall on a desperation heave for a QB and look at where that left then, ex: Ponder.

[Scott K]

But Ponder was a 3rd round pick. Its just the Vikings reached out and took him in the 1st, so they didnt have to worry someone may take him before their 3rd round pick

[creepworm]

I am sure I could list off more solid QBs that were taken in rds 2-3...

Please do

[DrJuice1980]

Save it. Do I really need to? Isn't it quite obvious?

[Big Dave2]

Scott Studwell was drafted in the 9th round, just sayin'.

[Big Dave2]

Creep, I can assure you Juice and I are two completely different people

LOL! I don't blame you, I would separate myself from the Juice in short order also if I were compared to him!

[Rick]

Originally Posted By: DrJuice1980

Save it. Do I really need to? Isn't it quite obvious?

No, it's not really quite obvious...Let's see you name only 2nd and 3rd round QB studs and see if there are more of them then there are LBs in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

What you are saying holds as much water as the supposed facts without back-up you are throwing out there.

Bottom line is we need a stud QB more than we need a stud LB. Stud QBs are much harder to come by than stud LBs... so there IS more of a gamble to get one.

The old Risk-Reward factor almost always comes into play. Everyone thought Rodgers was a so-so talent and GB took him with their 24th pick. Since that time you will rarely if ever see that type of thinking again with respect to QBs.

Juice, you really think the odds of that happening again is good...In my opinion with the way the NFL is with respect to passing the odds are terrible and going your route makes those odds exponentially worse.

[CaptainMusky]

The old Risk-Reward factor almost always comes into play. Everyone thought Rodgers was a so-so talent and GB took him with their 24th pick. Since that time you will rarely if ever see that type of thinking again with respect to QBs.

This wasnt the case at all. Rodgers and Smith were projected to be a coin flip for the first overall pick. Smith got the nod, but then plummeted down the board. You are the first to say he was a "so-so" talent. All the boards I remember had he and Smith neck and neck for the first pick.

[DrJuice1980]

What you are saying holds as much water as the supposed facts without back-up you are throwing out there.

Bottom line is we need a stud QB more than we need a stud LB. Stud QBs are much harder to come by than stud LBs... so there IS more of a gamble to get one.

The old Risk-Reward factor almost always comes into play. Everyone thought Rodgers was a so-so talent and GB took him with their 24th pick. Since that time you will rarely if ever see that type of thinking again with respect to QBs.

Juice, you really think the odds of that happening again is good...In my opinion with the way the NFL is with respect to passing the odds are terrible and going your route makes those odds exponentially worse.

Really Rick, my thinking makes those odds exponentially worse? Really Rick, you will rarely if ever see that type of thinking again in this pass happy league? Really?

Now here is putting you in a box Uncle Rico:

Rarely if ever again? As of now just to protect (very weak attempt at it by the way) your idea or can I go back since Rodgers took over the helm at GB? I'll go back 2-3yrs and list off a few for you think about while I put you in a BOX.

Andy Dalton

(double spaced for effect)

Colin Kaepernick

Russel Wilson

Nick Foles

Mike Glennon (I didn't want to put him but since you thought you were all GENIUS with listing a couple LBs just because they are starter to fill up your list why cant I?)

That's more than a couple for you Rico. You idea is shot, in fact since Ponders draft you will find that it is actually the opposite of your thinking, not many teams are going to "REACH" for a guy with a high pick at QB just because they want to fill the position. It will get you burned a lot of the time, which is why you need to make the safe bet rather than gamble. Since the Ponder draft, 4 QBs taken in the top 15 with only 1 legit guy, only 3 QBs have been taken in top 15 picks. Last year nobody was taken and there were at least 5 teams that could've used a QB. Why didnt they take one? Simple-too high of a risk/gamble with a pick that high. MAJOR BOX!!!!!

Here are a few more notables throughout time for you to enjoy in your BOX: (double spacing of course, just for more effect)

Brett Farve

Cordell Stewart

Jake Plummer

Charlie Batch

Drew Brees

Matt Schaub

And the ones listed above these. I could have even listed more but didn't want to totally dive down to your level of talent just for effect.

How's the interior decorating going in that BOX of your Rico? I hope you're not claustrophobic.....

BOX!!!!!

[rundrave]

Here are a few more notables throughout

Cordell Stewart

Jake Plummer

Charlie Batch

You cant be serious? Notables? Really?

Cordell Stewart career QBR = 70.7

Jake Plummer career QBR = 74.6

Charlie Batch career QBR = 77.2

And to finish it off:

Christian Ponder career QBR = 76.6

[Hester]

Drjuice, pretty sure you triple spaced those not double spaced.

[Rick]

LOL Juice...

I think you just proved my point.

You have very few stud QBs there even if a couple of the young ones actually become studs.

Fact remains, no matter how much you fight it, stud LBs are much easier to come by than stud QBs.

I think you should stick with your opinion which I can see a few following you on and quit trying to state non-existent facts.

You're credibility just keeps going further down the tubes each time you try to paint the facts as something other than what they are dude.

[thatoneguy]

Quote:

Andy Dalton

(double spaced for effect)

Colin Kaepernick

Russel Wilson

Nick Foles

Of those, only Russell Wilson is (perhaps) a true franchise QB. Andy Dalton is an inconsistent 2nd-tier guy; Kaepernick has regressed massively as the league learned to defend the read-option; Foles has been incredible this year, but come next fall defenses will have had plenty of time to learn how to attack Kelly's offense.

Brett Farve

Cordell Stewart

Jake Plummer

Charlie Batch

Drew Brees

Matt Schaub {/quote]

Favre is a legend and a future HOFer. Ditto for Brees. The rest are/were garbage, and it's telling that you don't know enough about football that you would even include those pieces of junk in the same sentence as two all-time greats.

Yes, we get that it's a crapshoot drafting a QB in the 1st round - at least it is if you suck at player evaluation, or if you massively reach (as the Vikings did with Ponder and T-Jack).

That's why I say (and barely tongue-in-cheek)that MN should draft a QB with each of its first three picks next spring, and hope one of them pans out.

[DrJuice1980]

LOL Juice...

I think you just proved my point.

You have very few stud QBs there even if a couple of the young ones actually become studs.

Fact remains, no matter how much you fight it, stud LBs are much easier to come by than stud QBs.

I think you should stick with your opinion which I can see a few following you on and quit trying to state non-existent facts.

You're credibility just keeps going further down the tubes each time you try to paint the facts as something other than what they are dude.

Boy very few studs huh, you mean like:

Zach Brown- one hit wonder

Bobby Wagner- way to put that in there after a game vs the Vikes-pretty cheap there Rico

Mason Foster- yeah somebody has to make the tackles, 4-5 combined tackles per game and I guess youre a "Stud" huh Rick. wow, great job putting your list together, a bit hypocritical don't you think

NaVorro Bowman-another young guy, weird I thought I read your quote kinda criticizing the youth of my entries, ironic

Daryl Washington- 3-5 tackles a game, boy it don't take much to get you excited now does it?

Barrett Ruud- So much of a stud hes not in the league anymore

PLEEEEEEZ Rick, that all you got to come at me with. I could have listed more if I had your judged a "Stud" like you. Your list wreaks of mid level talent. Youre hanging on a cliff here and if I'm the only one that sees it I feel sorry for a lot of people. Maybe I should have searched back to the Singletary days like you did, that's funny. Get a clue man. You know something, more LBs are drafted every year than QBs, it doesn't take a GENIUS like yourself to know that. mmm I wonder why that is, oh what I knw, LBs are typically used more because of special teams. No wonder you found more names to list. Now turning those names into studs? That aint your job. The players I listed actually had a career, go ahead and knock Stewart and Batch, they were in the league for YEARS and had significant value, I think Batch may still be on a team somewhere, baller status for him.

I know my stuff Rick, why don't you and the rest of the flock go back to being told their opinions instead of judging for yourself. Completely pathetic.

Your friend,

Dr Juice

[Rick]

[DrJuice1980]

That's why I say (and barely tongue-in-cheek)that MN should draft a QB with each of its first three picks next spring, and hope one of them pans out.

wow, barely tongue-in-cheek or the fact that something like that would enter your brain proves that you are completely off kilter on the needs of this team and the value of the draft.

and you say I don't understand football..

wow

join the flock, keep up with the attacks, I enjoy it

[LABS4ME]

I hear blah blah blah.... but I'm just someone who is clueless, just one of the flock... wish I was more like you!

[DrJuice1980]

Nice meme, couldn't come up with another hypocritical rebuttal?

The point of everything is this, why draft a QB with a top pick if none have the talent to be a top pick? Cause we need one? That's a LAME excuse and a dismissal of our other very important needs. We need to trade down and get as many 1-3rd round picks as we can. If you think this team is a good QB away from being a playoff contender then you're very mistaken. Guess what, we aint winning with a 1st year guy and nothing else either. Why blow it, its not like theres anything close to a Luck in this draft. Youre looking for a difference maker with a pick that high, I don't see one at the QB spot. Only time will tell.

[thatoneguy]

Quote:

wow, barely tongue-in-cheek or the fact that something like that would enter your brain proves that you are completely off kilter on the needs of this team and the value of the draft.

and you say I don't understand football..

wow

join the flock, keep up with the attacks, I enjoy it

If your bulb was a little brighter, you would see that despite your weak argument, I partially agree with you.

It IS a crapshoot drafting a QB, unless there's a can't-miss talent like Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck available.

That said, in today's NFL you simply cannot win consistently without a top-tier QB. No, I'm not advocating take three QBs in the first three rounds. That was a rhetorical flourish - one that obviously was lost on you - to highlight both the importance of drafting and developing a winning QB, and the Vikings' consistent inability to do so.

Reading comprehension: it's not just for breakfast anymore.

[CaptainMusky]

I hear blah blah blah.... but I'm just someone who is clueless, just one of the flock... wish I was more like you!

juicy is HOTT!

[Stcloudangler]

I think looking at the cheeseheads situation alone, is all the evidence one needs to understand what an elite QB does for a team. There is no greater way to increase offensive production, and thus, win games than to find a QB that can understand where the defense will be before the ball is even snapped.

A great MLB will shore up the middle of the field and take the opposition running game down, say, 30%. Maybe even neutralize a great TE. But when the QB is throwing a 25 yd square in over his head because the safety that gets confused by a pick/double move gets burned it doesn't really matter.

[Scott K]

Ya, a stud MLB wont lock down our defense at all. It may fill a hole, but it wont make our defense a good defense. Now a stud QB, would turn our offense into a goof offense. We have good receivers, we have good TE, we have a good RB, a questionable front line, but a good QB would still make our offense a decent team.

[LABS4ME]

Except the Packers bigger worry is not having any sort of a secondary... With the exception of Williams, we may as well not even trot out any other corners or safeties. The combined QB rating against the secondary other than Williams is 150.xx. That is almost a perfect QB rating. Rogers helps mask the poor excuse of a secondary, but he alone would not be able to win every game if thye cannot stop an opposing QB from completing passes. Look no further than their playoff loss to the Cardinals. Rogers passed for a TD everytime out, but so did they...

Their defense is dismal with all the injuries and lack of talent in the secondary. That alone is reason enough for them to lose... with or without Rogers. I know it's much more romantic to lay it all at the QBs feet, but reality is such that it should not be that insurmountable. With a solid defense performance, we should be able to be .500 with a back-up QB. With no D, we are who you thought we were!

Good Luck!

Ken

[Big Dave2]

Except the Packers bigger worry is not having any sort of a secondary... With the exception of Williams, we may as well not even trot out any other corners or safeties. The combined QB rating against the secondary other than Williams is 150.xx. That is almost a perfect QB rating. Rogers helps mask the poor excuse of a secondary, but he alone would not be able to win every game if thye cannot stop an opposing QB from completing passes. Look no further than their playoff loss to the Cardinals. Rogers passed for a TD everytime out, but so did they...

Their defense is dismal with all the injuries and lack of talent in the secondary. That alone is reason enough for them to lose... with or without Rogers. I know it's much more romantic to lay it all at the QBs feet, but reality is such that it should not be that insurmountable. With a solid defense performance, we should be able to be .500 with a back-up QB. With no D, we are who you thought we were!

Good Luck!

Ken

But a couple weeks ago that Packer defense didn't look quite as dismal as it does now. Wonder why?

[LABS4ME]

But a couple weeks ago that Packer defense didn't look quite as dismal as it does now. Wonder why?

really? You must be watching a different team than I. Aside from the Lions and Ravens, who have they stopped? 5 of the first 7 games they played, the D gave up over 30 points a game... They are no more dismal now, than earlier in the season. The three current losses they gave up 27 points a game.

Plain and simple, they were a below average D without injuries, they are bottom of the barrel now. They lacked talent with their first string, they have no talent with their second string.

Good Luck!

Ken

[LABS4ME]

and the Lions did not have Megatron in that game... so the secondary dodged a bullet that day.

[Big Dave2]

really? You must be watching a different team than I. Aside from the Lions and Ravens, who have they stopped? 5 of the first 7 games they played, the D gave up over 30 points a game... They are no more dismal now, than earlier in the season. The three current losses they gave up 27 points a game.

Plain and simple, they were a below average D without injuries, they are bottom of the barrel now. They lacked talent with their first string, they have no talent with their second string.

Good Luck!

Ken

Your defense is never considered dismal when you are 5-2

[LABS4ME]

y'Ok...

giving up over thirty points consistantly makes your defense dismal. Your offense put lipstick on a pig with a win.

But that's OK... I expect you to be contrary.

Tell me again how giving up 30+ points even in a win makes your defense good?

[LMITOUT]

With the announcement that Ponder is starting this weekend it appears that the Vikings are going all-in on moving up the draft board to get that coveted MLB that the entire league desires.