DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Hftqdxpm** · 11-01-2005, 11:02 PM

Only one team in the NFL has a higher yards/carry average than the Vikings. The total yards aren't that high. . .but when you have a QB that completes nearly 70% of his passes and throws for over 4,700 yards, you'll throw a little more than you probably should.

Their YPC average is skewed because of Culpepper, he's running on broken down Passing plays a good 80% of the time. Yes it still equates to positive yards, but it does not help their run game. Mewelde Moore is also bumping that average up significantly with his 65carries 5.4ypc, I don't remember seeing him on the field against Green Bay. I had thought he was injured or something but he wasn't. Most of the Carries went to Bennet 3.9YPC and Smith 4.4 YPC decent numbers but nothing special and their run game has taken a serious hit since Kleinsausser and Rosenthal went out. Those were huge losses. Kleinsausser is one of the best blocking tight ends in football. Mo williams also left the game with Injury and his health becomes a question mark as well.

You say "except TO, of course" like it's a minor thing.

Outside of TO, the Eagles' other receivers are. . .well, to put it as politely as I can, they're garbage. Todd Pinkston is scared of his own shadow, to say nothing of actual physical contact.

No I added the TO comment because it is a big thing, if it weren't I wouldn't have bothered to even write it. And they may be Garbage but they got us to 3 consecutive NFC championship games, so it just proves the Eagles do have the talent to win with garbage at WR. Our defense is healthy entering the playoffs for the first time in 3 years, that is the main point i was trying to make

The Packers? One-dimensional? No. You don't get to be a Top 10 rushing offense in the NFL (which the Packers are) by being one-dimensional. And I'd take Ahman Green over every RB on the Eagles' roster.

Yeah ok i shouldn't have added that bit about the packers. they aren't one demensional they ARE however an offense only team. I was trying to make 2 points at once and scrunched it up a bit too much. let me expand

Point #1 the Vikings are one dimensional. Their defense is not good, their special teams are not great, their running game is pedestrian partly due to Improper utilization. Their passing game is Stellar. If Tice (and he's not the sharpest tool in the woodshed, admit it) stays with the formula he's used all year, It plays right into the Eagles strength on defense

Point #2 The Eagles are a more complete team and present more of a challenge than the Packers. As far as Ahman green over westbrook goes, thats apples and oranges, they have two different styles, In most offenses I'd take Green because most offenses are better with a pounding Physical running back, In the Eagles offense Westbrook is 100 times more dangerous because of the different things he can do. 1500 yard from scrimagge is nothing to laugh at (rushing + Receiving) One of the cornerstones to the Eagles offense is moving people around to create mismatches. Green would never be successful doing that.

They BECAME one-dimensional against Minnesota after the Vikes forced a three-and-out on the first drive and a Favre INT on the second drive to put the Pack down 17-0 eight minutes into the game. I'd argue that without TO, the Packer offense is much better than the Eagles offense.

I'm not willing to say it's better, it's certainly better on paper, but the Eagles offense is less mistake prone, spends less time shooting itself in the foot, bad games rarely turn into disasters and as long as Mcnabb is healthy and playing they have consistantly beat teams they should beat, and the Vikings fall into that category.

11-01-2005, 11:02 PM	#20
Hftqdxpm Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 450 Senior Member	Only one team in the NFL has a higher yards/carry average than the Vikings. The total yards aren't that high. . .but when you have a QB that completes nearly 70% of his passes and throws for over 4,700 yards, you'll throw a little more than you probably should. Their YPC average is skewed because of Culpepper, he's running on broken down Passing plays a good 80% of the time. Yes it still equates to positive yards, but it does not help their run game. Mewelde Moore is also bumping that average up significantly with his 65carries 5.4ypc, I don't remember seeing him on the field against Green Bay. I had thought he was injured or something but he wasn't. Most of the Carries went to Bennet 3.9YPC and Smith 4.4 YPC decent numbers but nothing special and their run game has taken a serious hit since Kleinsausser and Rosenthal went out. Those were huge losses. Kleinsausser is one of the best blocking tight ends in football. Mo williams also left the game with Injury and his health becomes a question mark as well. You say "except TO, of course" like it's a minor thing. Outside of TO, the Eagles' other receivers are. . .well, to put it as politely as I can, they're garbage. Todd Pinkston is scared of his own shadow, to say nothing of actual physical contact. No I added the TO comment because it is a big thing, if it weren't I wouldn't have bothered to even write it. And they may be Garbage but they got us to 3 consecutive NFC championship games, so it just proves the Eagles do have the talent to win with garbage at WR. Our defense is healthy entering the playoffs for the first time in 3 years, that is the main point i was trying to make The Packers? One-dimensional? No. You don't get to be a Top 10 rushing offense in the NFL (which the Packers are) by being one-dimensional. And I'd take Ahman Green over every RB on the Eagles' roster. Yeah ok i shouldn't have added that bit about the packers. they aren't one demensional they ARE however an offense only team. I was trying to make 2 points at once and scrunched it up a bit too much. let me expand Point #1 the Vikings are one dimensional. Their defense is not good, their special teams are not great, their running game is pedestrian partly due to Improper utilization. Their passing game is Stellar. If Tice (and he's not the sharpest tool in the woodshed, admit it) stays with the formula he's used all year, It plays right into the Eagles strength on defense Point #2 The Eagles are a more complete team and present more of a challenge than the Packers. As far as Ahman green over westbrook goes, thats apples and oranges, they have two different styles, In most offenses I'd take Green because most offenses are better with a pounding Physical running back, In the Eagles offense Westbrook is 100 times more dangerous because of the different things he can do. 1500 yard from scrimagge is nothing to laugh at (rushing + Receiving) One of the cornerstones to the Eagles offense is moving people around to create mismatches. Green would never be successful doing that. They BECAME one-dimensional against Minnesota after the Vikes forced a three-and-out on the first drive and a Favre INT on the second drive to put the Pack down 17-0 eight minutes into the game. I'd argue that without TO, the Packer offense is much better than the Eagles offense. I'm not willing to say it's better, it's certainly better on paper, but the Eagles offense is less mistake prone, spends less time shooting itself in the foot, bad games rarely turn into disasters and as long as Mcnabb is healthy and playing they have consistantly beat teams they should beat, and the Vikings fall into that category.
	Quote