Jump to content

Cearbhall

Veteran Members
  • Content Count

    2,256
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

943 Pro Bowl

About Cearbhall

Recent Profile Visitors

678 profile views
  1. I don't know that this is the year to spend money on guys that won't be helping the team after this year.
  2. I am open to all ideas on defense so while the LBers you mention don't look all that inspiring to me it may be worth giving is a shot. That is better than sticking with the same things we have already watched fail. I would rather watch something else -- sink or swim.
  3. They have to try something, but where are they going to find 4 LBers for this even playing Ngakoue as one of them? They then have Kendricks and nobody else notable for the third and fourth LB spots.
  4. This should please the tank for Trev crowd. I believe there are more people that think we'll get a high draft pick without tanking. This will make it higher. Then there is the reality that an important player on defense is out injured. I think that stinks, even if it helps our draft pick in a year where we did not look like a playoff team.
  5. Playoffs? Don't talk about playoffs. You kidding me? Playoffs? I just hope we can win a game.
  6. Having Diggs on this team would help a ton. The offense is struggling to maintain drives. Anything that helps maintain drives would help the defense. Diggs would be a huge piece in helping maintain drives. He wouldn't be as huge as a couple good offensive linemen, but the team already had Diggs. They didn't have an offensive lineman worth keeping around. If you think that Diggs would need to play CB, DT, or any other defensive position to help the defense you have lost my attention on that topic. The Vikings looked great on that first drive and then their offense stunk until the game was over. Same story as last week. Adam Thielen is good but he can't be the entire passing offense. No WR is that good. I wish the team got Irv Smith more involved or got more out of Kyle Rudolph. Perhaps Justin Jefferson will be able to step up. He hasn't yet but he also hasn't been given a lot of opportunity to step up. The QB the team chose is somewhat problematic in that he is good enough to win games but he isn't good enough to take over games. It is the Jay Cutler situation, a QB that is good enough to justify keeping around but ultimately he ends up costing the team a decade because he is not good enough to take the team to the promised land. Cousins is good enough to put up stats against soft defenses with down by two scores but he isn't often leading the team to victories while doing that so those stats are ultimately meaningless. This is two weeks in a row that he put up stats of yards while playing from behind but those state were too little too late. It is after the defense is playing soft with a huge lead. To justify that contract, Kurt ought to be putting up those stats when it matters. The disappointment in the Kurt tenure is graded on the curve of being on a team that can't put together a strong offensive line. Even on that curve, I want a new QB. A strong offensive line would be a welcome change too. @Skins212689 is right. He has been right all along. I know a lot of people here gave him a hard time for presenting truth to us. I sincerely hope that I wasn't one of them. I don't think that I was, but I am not sure.
  7. It is way too early for this kind of progression IMO. I wouldn't even bet on that order, let alone the relative positions on the draft board.
  8. I was at Trey Lance's first game. I was at the last game Trey Lance played. His wasn't asked to do a lot at that first game against Butler but he executed what they asked. His progression throughout the year was real. I would love to have him on the Vikings.
  9. I don't think that it means that but it very well could be true. Jones may be active so they have a backup center while Cleveland may be the primary backup guard. That would be my guess, but it is possible that the team would play Jones at guard over Cleveland. We'll know if a guard gets injured. Let's hope that we don't have to find out like that.
  10. I don’t appreciate your personal comments about me. I apologize for that personal comment saying that you love to argue. I am sorry. I could have worded that better. I do not know what you like and dislike. Presuming I do is a personal comment. What I meant to say is something more like this: When you argue something that wasn't said in order to rebut a statement it makes me feel like you love to argue. Again, I apologize.
  11. Actually, that was my roster. I quoted what I wrote from RpMc's reply to me. It shows up with RpMc's name on the quote. Maybe that is a shortcoming of the software, but it was probably intentional since a quote can be altered from what was actually said. Go ahead and click the link to that quote and you'll see that it was me that said it. Why would it be limited to decisions they made on Sunday? There is no such constraint on what I said. Where did that constraint come from? Just something that is convenient so you can try and convince yourself that you are right in arguing against my innocuous statement? The rule wasn't enacted on Sunday. If the rule wasn't what it was they may have wanted to have a more versatile linemen as one of the active seven. That is a very reasonable possibility. They would have made that decision before Sunday. There are many reasonable scenarios where they would have went with someone other than Samia. Activating Jones on Saturday is just one of the reasonable scenarios that could have played out if the rules didn't give them an extra game day player and a second extra game day player if 8 of the players are offensive linemen. Do you think that versatility wouldn't be more valued if they could only have 46 active? Meant or not, when you make up things to discredit what someone writes it is an attack on what they wrote. I never said that Samia would have been inactive. I never said anything about their decisions being limited to Sunday. You make that up to discredit what I wrote. I wrote "Maybe he would have. Maybe he wouldn't have. We don't know.". How can I write it more noncontroversial than that? The vacuity of that statement is in itself hard to beat. It must be hard to argue with something that is as insipid as that so...make something up, I guess? Just so you can try to discredit? That't not an intended attack? Really? What reason is there to disagree with something like that other than to attack? Amen to that. There is nothing that I would love more than to see Samia step up and prove that he belongs on the field.
  12. Here is the first guess I made for the active roster: You seem to finally be understanding that when I said something may have happened it isn't the same as saying it would have happened. That is progress. It is real swell of you to make your example as extreme as possible in an effort to save face. The prediction I quoted there was plausible right up until Jones couldn't be activated anymore. It doesn't involve changing something that happened before the current rules were thought of, like Dru not being born. That is a measure of how gross your argument is. I meant what I said, not what you want to make it sound like I said just so you can disagree and argue. I don't believe for a second that you don't know the difference. I have theories about why you are doing what you are doing, but it isn't worth getting into here. Dru Samia may not have been active on the game day roster if the rules were the same this year as they were last year. That is not a controversial statement at all. It is closer to be borderline ridiculous for how obvious it is. Swell of you to argue something that is borderline ridiculously obvious.
  13. Like I said, I don't know. One thing that I do know is that you also don't know. There is no way the chances of him being active would be 100%. Here is one possible scenario for seven OL up: Reiff, Dozier, Bradbury, Elflein, O'Neill, Jones, Udoh. And if you think that is too far out there or something I am just making up now review the guesses I was making for the active roster before the game last week. I included all seven of those.
  14. Like I said. I don't know. That is my point. You don't know either. If not for the rules that allow eight linemen the team may have went out and signed Kelechi Osemele when he was available. We do not know. There are infinite possibilities of what may have happened in an alternate universe with out the current rules. Not just one, but several of those possibilities would have Samia inactive. The universe of things that may have happened go far beyond guys on the current 53 man roster. It goes beyond guys on the practice squad. Samia may have been in active under the old rules. You might think that you know otherwise but you cannot know. The only way it is possible to know would be if you were the guy that would have been making the decisions.
×
×
  • Create New...