ADRIAN PETERSON

Little Falls Fan · Post by **Little Falls Fan** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 11:41 am

This kid is SICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What are everybody's thoughts on Adrian's 296 yard rushing day?

pacman · Post by **pacman** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:23 pm

Simply, Brilliant, see what happends when you give him the ball

tomASS · Post by **tomASS** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:25 pm

pacman wrote:Simply, Brilliant, see what happends when you give him the ball

wasn't too hard for we fans to figure out, why did it take Chilly so long

tomASS · Post by **tomASS** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:29 pm

Little Falls Fan wrote:This kid is SICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What are everybody's thoughts on Adrian's 296 yard rushing day?

385 more yards than I would have gained

dangla. · Post by **dangla.** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:12 pm

crazy. hes already at 1036 yards and 8 rushing td's leading the NFL in both.

can you say offensive rookie of the year!

hockyman08 · Post by **hockyman08** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:20 pm

dangla. wrote:crazy. hes already at 1036 yards and 8 rushing td's leading the NFL in both.

can you say offensive rookie of the year!

If it wasn't for Tom Brady's ridiculous season, we might be saying MVP

pacman · Post by **pacman** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:00 pm

exactly, hockyman, it took childress so long because, chilly is a dumbass of a coach, we need somebody that is a proven head coach, hell get stoops from Oklahoma.

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:20 pm

AP is basically one of the best football players in a really long time. As a rookie he'll probably have a whole bunch of records by the end of the year. Really someone we can build success around. Our passing and pass defense has been better, especially when Tarvaris is not on the field.

Little Falls Fan · Post by **Little Falls Fan** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:39 am

pacman

You are ABSOLOUTLEY right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GRhawky · Post by **GRhawky** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:46 am

AP is the most exciting player in the league for a while.

But how about Brooks bollinger coming in and getting the job done in the air

EREmpireStrikesBack · Post by **EREmpireStrikesBack** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:10 pm

GRhawky wrote:AP is the most exciting player in the league for a while.

But how about Brooks bollinger coming in and getting the job done in the air

As much as I wanted to stay out of this thread because it seems to be for the miscasts, this was too much.

Brooks getting the job done in the air? Are you kidding me? 7 of 10 for 95 yds and a TD... wow he sure got it done. That was only possible because they had 8 or 9 guys in the box to try and slow down AP. Brad Johnson could have done that. Tavaris was 6 of 12 for 68 yds, was he getting it done in the air too?

Ok, I'm done in here now. Go back to playing with yourselves.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:46 pm

Point taken ER but if you can run the ball and play defense, 13/22 for 165 yds and 0 INTs and 1 TD is pretty good.

Teams have won championships that way.

Post by **east hockey** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:49 pm

EREmpireStrikesBack wrote:
GRhawky wrote:AP is the most exciting player in the league for a while.

But how about Brooks bollinger coming in and getting the job done in the air
As much as I wanted to stay out of this thread because it seems to be for the miscasts, this was too much.

Brooks getting the job done in the air? Are you kidding me? 7 of 10 for 95 yds and a TD... wow he sure got it done. That was only possible because they had 8 or 9 guys in the box to try and slow down AP. Brad Johnson could have done that. Tavaris was 6 of 12 for 68 yds, was he getting it done in the air too?

Ok, I'm done in here now. Go back to playing with yourselves.

I think maybe the bar got lowered to defining Brooks "getting it done" meaning he didn't shoot himself in the foot. In that case, I agree, but his performance was only satisfactory when compared to what Rivers did. Rivers looked like Ryan Leaf in that game. Not someone you'd want to be compared to.
'
Lee

Can't Never Tried · Post by **Can't Never Tried** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:50 pm

packerboy wrote:Point taken ER but if you can run the ball and play defense, 13/22 for 165 yds and 0 INTs and 1 TD is pretty good.

Teams have won championships that way.

It was a FLUKE!

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:52 pm

Can't Never Tried wrote: It was a FLUKE!

Lock er up!

Can't Never Tried · Post by **Can't Never Tried** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:55 pm

I meant the passing game!

EREmpireStrikesBack · Post by **EREmpireStrikesBack** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:13 pm

I thought the Vikings QBs did exactly what they needed to do in that game, not turn the ball over and make SD think a little bit about putting everyone in the box. My point was how did Brooks come in and get the job done? Tavaris had nearly the same stats and Brooks didn't blow anyone away with any throws. They were smart and unspectacular. I just don't think Brooks should be getting great accolades for doing his job, especially when he didn't do anything better than anyone else really.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:45 pm

Nobody thinks Bollinger is good ER.

But if he could mold himself into a Trent Dilfer and throw high percentage stuff w/o INTs and the Vikings could play that way on D most games, you could have some playoff aspirations with AP as RB.

Bollinger's throw to #18 while not spectacular was huge. It caught them looking for #28 and made them play honest.

Thats all you have to do.

Bollinger is their best QB right now IMO.

Govs93 · Post by **Govs93** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:53 pm

Don't worry about it... they're signing Koy Detmer.

Everything will be fine.

Goldy Gopher · Post by **Goldy Gopher** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:59 pm

Govs93 wrote:Don't worry about it... they're signing Koy Detmer.

Everything will be fine.

Bring back Aaron Brooks, from 01 to 04 he was a top 5 QB in the league. That's more than anyone in our current game of musical QB's can say.

EDIT
Apparently grammar is not strongly emphasized here at the U.

Can't Never Tried · Post by **Can't Never Tried** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 4:02 pm

Govs93 wrote:Don't worry about it... they're signing Koy Detmer.

Everything will be fine.

I heard on the radio this morning that they were bringing in a QB to visit today, but I can't remember the guys name.

(Edit) Never mind I saw it on the other thread.

Detmer?

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 4:05 pm

The CDH grad Chris Weinke.

Bring in a good Catholic to fix things... is what I always say.

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:26 pm

Nearly the same stats?

Tarvaris was 6/12 with 63 yds and 0 TDs.
That's 50% with 10yds a reception.

Brooks was 7/10 with 93 yds and 1 TD.
That's 70% with 13yds a carry and a touchdown.

So, not only is that alone better, but he looked better. There wasn't a thing Tarvaris did that looked good, while Brooks had a few quite amazing plays and kept us in. Also, a QB isn't only the passes they make. They may not be running the ball, but how they handle the team when they rush is part of it.

In addition, while it may have gotten a first down, the leader of the team needs to make smart decisions about their body, that includes how they fall...

Goldy Gopher · Post by **Goldy Gopher** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:11 pm

HShockeywatcher wrote:Nearly the same stats?

Tarvaris was 6/12 with 63 yds and 0 TDs.
That's 50% with 10yds a reception.

Brooks was 7/10 with 93 yds and 1 TD.
That's 70% with 13yds a carry and a touchdown.

So, not only is that alone better, but he looked better. There wasn't a thing Tarvaris did that looked good, while Brooks had a few quite amazing plays and kept us in. Also, a QB isn't only the passes they make. They may not be running the ball, but how they handle the team when they rush is part of it.

In addition, while it may have gotten a first down, the leader of the team needs to make smart decisions about their body, that includes how they fall...

I'm curious to hear which plays you classify as "quite amazing"

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:18 pm

Goldy Gopher wrote: I'm curious to hear which plays you classify as "quite amazing"

Trust me Goldy, it won't be worth it. You should know better by now.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

ADRIAN PETERSON

ADRIAN PETERSON

Re: ADRIAN PETERSON