Page 58 of 58
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:44 am
by dead_poet
mondry wrote:Jefferson and Cook were hurt / inactive right?
Actually, Jefferson was
active. I'm guessing the reason he didn't see the field was because he's still not 100%, but would be an emergency corner if they needed. Cook was inactive.
My guess is we just didn't have another CB to even bench Robinson for
Felder...if they wouldn't have put him on I.R. (he's healthy now).
... it'll be interesting to see what they do when we have another healthy corner, hopefully it isn't Rhodes snaps that reduce if you know what I mean...
I hear you.
Wow didn't realize Griffen was in that much, anyone know how much of that is rotating in for Allen / Robison compared to playing tackle on 3rd and long?
Don't know yet. I'll post if I see it.
No real complaints about the WR snaps, in fact that's actually about right / how it should be imo. Still a fan of more 3 WR sets, would be interested to see how many snaps Carlson got...
Indeed.
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:23 pm
by dead_poet
Webb might be getting some more snaps if he keeps this up. This is really great cooperation and execution between Webb/Peterson and Musgrave.
Peterson emerges: The numbers would suggest Peterson hadn't played poorly in three games before Sunday -- he had still run for 281 yards in three games -- but the NFL's reigning MVP hadn't looked like himself until heading to London. With fullback Jerome Felton back, Peterson seemed more comfortable, romping for 140 yards in the Vikings' win. His 60-yard run in the first half was actually set up by quarterback-turned-receiver Joe Webb, who sealed off safety Troy Polamalu after seeing something on a previous play. "He came to me on the sideline," Peterson said. "He was telling me, 'Hey, on the 42 Lead, Troy [Polamalu], the safety, is cramming in, and he's shooting right down. So just trust me on being able to pin him in. You can get it outside.' And sure enough, the next time we caught it, it happened exactly the way he was playing."
http://espn.go.com/blog/minnesota-vikin ... um=twitter
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:30 pm
by Eli
dead_poet wrote:Webb might be getting some more snaps if he keeps this up. This is really great cooperation and execution between Webb/Peterson and Musgrave.
Stephen Burton was a great blocking WR. Probably a better receiver than Webb as well. The league doesn't have much use for blocking wide receivers. If you're on the field and only a marginal threat as a receiver, you may as well weigh 275 lbs and be called a tight end.
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:31 pm
by The Breeze
Webb is doing some good things....hope he can keep gettig into the action~
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:40 pm
by HardcoreVikesFan
Lol. I can see it now. Back to the days of wide receivers that block (รก la Billy McMullen, Marcus Robinson, Travis Taylor, Sidney Rice (for a period of time), Stephen Burton). Christ, I really like Joe Webb, but if he is going to get snaps over Cordarrelle Patterson because he can block better I am going to be upset.
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:44 pm
by dead_poet
Eli wrote:
Stephen Burton was a great blocking WR. Probably a better receiver than Webb as well. The league doesn't have much use for blocking wide receivers. If you're on the field and only a marginal threat as a receiver, you may as well weigh 275 lbs and be called a tight end.
Meh. It depends on your scheme. It's one of the main reasons Riley Cooper is a starter for the Eagles.
If Burton was a better receiver than Webb, why was he cut?
I'm not saying Webb is all of a sudden going to be a starter, but coaches notice this stuff and if affects playing time/packages.
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:01 pm
by Captain
Did anybody see Mike Tomlin's presser after the game? HOLY #### WAS THAT DUDE PISSED OFF OR WHAT? you could see it in his eyes that he was out for blood.
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:40 pm
by dead_poet
Captain wrote:Did anybody see Mike Tomlin's presser after the game? HOLY #### WAS THAT DUDE PISSED OFF OR WHAT? you could see it in his eyes that he was out for blood.
Link?
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:48 pm
by dead_poet
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:55 pm
by NextQuestion
Big Ben was classy (weird to type that) and didn't moan about the horse collar in the pocket rule. Said "Refs got it right".
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:26 pm
by PurpleMustReign
Eli wrote:
Stephen Burton was a great blocking WR. Probably a better receiver than Webb as well. The league doesn't have much use for blocking wide receivers. If you're on the field and only a marginal threat as a receiver, you may as well weigh 275 lbs and be called a tight end.
Actually, Aromashadu was our best one last season. I'd still rather have Webb than Burton.
Re: Steelers@Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread--London Edit
Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 6:09 pm
by Texas Vike
808vikingsfan wrote:
Actually, if i'm understanding the rule, you can take down a player using the collar as long as it is in the tackle box. So even if Griffen took Ben down with the collar, it would be a legal tackle.
That's my interpretation too. I posted the rule upthread cited from an NFL site.