Vikings Message Board.Com

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Dude you're saying "humiliated" like Mike Zimmer said Anthony Barr craps his pants twice a day and doesn't know how to tie his shoes in front of the media. He said he needed to improve in "all areas". He didn't call him out for anything specific. Just was blunt and said he needs to get better. Plain and simple. How in gods name is that being "humiliated". If that's considered being "humiliated" then you are part of what's wrong with this soft society of ours

Mike Zimmer would say that about any player he coached because he wants the best out of his guys yet now it's considered being "humiliated". What a joke

Zimmer also called Barr out saying he has a tendency to coast. I don't care how you sugar coat it, when a coach specifically calls out players in the press like that they feel that they are being humiliated. It's just a human reaction dude.

Purple Reign wrote: So you don't think Bradford is as good, if not better, than Bridgewater? Your statement also just said that they didn't lose a RB, not a HOF RB. No, Anderson isn't a HOF back, but he was their starting back and it seems to have had a huge impact on their running game after he went down.

Anyway, I'm sure people's expectations were high after starting the season 5-0 despite the injuries. Maybe if they hadn't started out so good people wouldn't be complaining so much about the coaching staff now?

I was referring to all losing all 4 as a group. I know they lost Anderson. But they didn't lose the 4 most important positions on the offense. And are you really going to sit there and tell me if we started off 2-3 or so or worse this board wouldn't be saying the same stuff? Yeah right

Purple Reign wrote: Zimmer also called Barr out saying he has a tendency to coast. I don't care how you sugar coat it, when a coach specifically calls out players in the press like that they feel that they are being humiliated. It's just a human reaction dude.

You say he's "humiliated" but you have no clue. He hasn't said anything about it and I don't think he really played bad this week either. It's all an assumption that you guys are blowing out of proportion.

They showed a graphic on nfln, 2 catches for 18 yards vs rhodes on 3 targets. vs the rest? 7-8 for 135 and 2 td's. They all need to eat #### and i bet newman was the one who called it, just a hunch.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... d-ignorant

Purple Reign wrote: Zimmer also called Barr out saying he has a tendency to coast. I don't care how you sugar coat it, when a coach specifically calls out players in the press like that they feel that they are being humiliated. It's just a human reaction dude.

Coast doesn't mean take plays off, it means do things on his own

Pondering Her Percy wrote: I was referring to all losing all 4 as a group. I know they lost Anderson. But they didn't lose the 4 most important and tell me if we started off 2-3 or so or worse this board wouldn't be saying the same stuff? Yeah right

I was posing that as a question. But I think it has some validation. We got off to a 5-0 start so everyone was thinking we could overcome all the injuries. Especially when Zimmer's mantra was 'next man up' and people were buying into it. Then we went into the tank and people start wondering what happened between a 5-0 start and the rest of the year. Yes, people would still be complaining but maybe they would give Zimmer more of a pass due to the injuries if we hadn't started 5-0.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:
How do you know he doesn't handle a lot of this behind closed doors? You don't. But he doesn't "respect his players"? You sound just as soft as the rest of society is nowadays. To say he doesn't "respect" his players shows how ignorant you really are. Also seeing the repercussions of his behavior?? He hasn't called out Rhodes or Newman once. So why would they not respect him? Makes zero sense. You might be better off sticking to paying attention to your Packers because you seem to know nothing regarding the Vikings

Two bad defensive games, more like 1.5 games and he doesn't respect his players? You sound like parents do these days. It's always the coaches fault right? Never the players. These arrogant idiots went and did their own thing thinking they knew more than the coach did and clearly they didn't. But it's never the players fault. Always the coach. Pretty sad if you ask me

You forgot the

This post comes across as so arrogant it has forced me to agree with ghostie for the first and probably last time. But don't let it stop you from telling us all about how soft the rest of society (other than you, I presume?) is these days. Please continue.

Boon wrote:They showed a graphic on nfln, 2 catches for 18 yards vs rhodes on 3 targets. vs the rest? 7-8 for 135 and 2 td's. They all need to eat #### and i bet newman was the one who called it, just a hunch.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... d-ignorant

I don't put a whole lot of value on a stat like that. First of all, I believe those 2 catches for 18 yards were just in the 2nd half when the Packers had a fairly comfortable lead and weren't throwing the ball like they did in the first half. Secondly, are they saying that the 7 catches for 135 in the first half all came against defenders other than Rhodes? I can't believe Rhodes wasn't covering Nelson on any of those catches in the first half.

Purple Martin wrote: You forgot the

This post comes across as so arrogant it has forced me to agree with ghostie for the first and probably last time. But don't let it stop you from telling us all about how soft the rest of society (other than you, I presume?) is these days. Please continue.

I'm not saying I'm the only one that's not "soft". But I see this every day coaching dude. I take after my father. Similar to what Zim does. My father is an old school guy that had tremendous amounts of success. He is now my assistant coach. He specifically said he wouldn't have came out of retirement and coached if it wasn't for me coaching and it's because of how soft these kids have gotten and how psycho parents have gotten. You would quickly realize this if you coached but I'm guessing you don't. But yeah I guess it's arrogant. Just like Zimmer I suppose. But yeah I guess I'll continue. I see it first hand

Purple Reign wrote: I don't put a whole lot of value on a stat like that. First of all, I believe those 2 catches for 18 yards were just in the 2nd half when the Packers had a fairly comfortable lead and weren't throwing the ball like they did in the first half. Secondly, are they saying that the 7 catches for 135 in the first half all came against defenders other than Rhodes? I can't believe Rhodes wasn't covering Nelson on any of those catches in the first half.

Not the big ones I know that. Both tds were vs Newman I believe

Boon wrote: Coast doesn't mean take plays off, it means do things on his own

Umm, yes, coast means to take plays off. Doing things on your own is called insubordination.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Not the big ones I know that. Both tds were vs Newman I believe

Nelson was so wide open on a lot of those plays it was hard to tell who was supposed to be covering him.

Barr was covering Nelson on his 2nd td.

Purple Reign wrote: Nelson was so wide open on a lot of those plays it was hard to tell who was supposed to be covering him.

Barr was covering Nelson on his 2nd td.

We let Rodgers sit in the pocket for a good 10 seconds. You can't expect any LB to cover a WR like Nelson for that long. Or any WR for that matter. If we cut that down by even 2-3 seconds Nelson isn't open

Rumblings on twitter says that Rhodes was not the instigator of the DBs "rebellion", and my guess is that one of the older guys, i.e. Newman or Munnerlyn created this mess.
If you can call it a mess... because the same rumblings on twitter says the "rebellion" was for one series only, then Rhodes were back to covering Nelson.

Either way it's really bad, and even if Rhodes isn't the cause it's bad that he could be convinced to deviate from the coaches gameplan, especially so since Rhodes is considered to be very respectful of authority(i.e. coaches), both of his own account plus several media personalities.

No one has mentioned it, but this could have draft implications for us depending on the outcome of all of this, although I consider it unlikely.
If this is a major issue we could be looking at drafting a DB with a high round pick this year, something we really shouldn't need to do.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:How do you know he doesn't handle a lot of this behind closed doors? You don't. But he doesn't "respect his players"? You sound just as soft as the rest of society is nowadays. To say he doesn't "respect" his players shows how ignorant you really are. Also seeing the repercussions of his behavior?? He hasn't called out Rhodes or Newman once. So why would they not respect him? Makes zero sense. You might be better off sticking to paying attention to your Packers because you seem to know nothing regarding the Vikings

Knock off the personal attacks.