LOL. Just for the record.
Average age of Packers DB's 26.5
Average age of Vikings DB's 26.1
But go ahead and keep thinking that way.
Its not the age its the talent
LOL. Just for the record.
Average age of Packers DB's 26.5
Average age of Vikings DB's 26.1
But go ahead and keep thinking that way.
Well, our secondary is also banged up and old, so...LOL. Just for the record.
Average age of Packers DB's 26.5
Average age of Vikings DB's 26.1
But go ahead and keep thinking that way.
Well, our secondary is also banged up and old, so...
Difference is, we still got Woodson, Williams and Collins healthy and playing well... You got... Madieu Williams?
(You did get a young CB with the 1st pick, though I didn't see anything in him that made me like him...)
Harris fits the banged up and old mold.:shock: ummmmmm... RS... where is HARRIS?!! How could you forget HARRIS?! He's still got 4 more years.
Your right, over the last 3 years, the Packers led in every catagory in pass defense except two. Less yards, lower completion percentage, lower passer rating, lower first down percentage, more interceptions. Every catagory except two. And the two the Vikings lead in. Touchdowns given up and touchdowns per attempt.Its not the age its the talent
Your right, over the last 3 years, the Packers led in every catagory in pass defense except two. Less yards, lower completion percentage, lower passer rating, lower first down percentage, more interceptions. Every catagory except two. And the two the Vikings lead in. Touchdowns given up and touchdowns per attempt.
Packers TD's given up. 74. 1 TD given up for every 21.5 attempts
Vikings: TD's given up. 63. 1 TD given up for every 27.2 attempts.
Good thing the Packers DB's are so much better.
Glad you agree with us, that our DBs are better... :happy0005:Your right, over the last 3 years, the Packers led in every catagory in pass defense except two. Less yards, lower completion percentage, lower passer rating, lower first down percentage, more interceptions. Every catagory except two. And the two the Vikings lead in. Touchdowns given up and touchdowns per attempt.
Packers TD's given up. 74. 1 TD given up for every 21.5 attempts
Vikings: TD's given up. 63. 1 TD given up for every 27.2 attempts.
Good thing the Packers DB's are so much better.
That's why I used the combined stats for the past 3 years. Takes that nagging injury thing out. And if you remember, the Vikings have had some injuries in that area as well. Williams was injured on 08, Winfield in 07 and 09. But since you asked for it. I can't do "what if a player wasn't injured", my crystal ball is in the shop being worked on. But for the last 3 years.While I won't argue the facts, there is a variable not taken into consideration- Injuries. We had the misfortune of being injury plagued at one position last season, which happened to be in our secondary. I agree that facts are facts, but it would be interesting to consider the stats had we not lost three of our better cornerbacks for the season.
Why TDs and tds per attempt? Why not ints? Why not QB rating???That's why I used the combined stats for the past 3 years. Takes that nagging injury thing out. And if you remember, the Vikings have had some injuries in that area as well. Williams was injured on 08, Winfield in 07 and 09. But since you asked for it. I can't do "what if a player wasn't injured", my crystal ball is in the shop being worked on. But for the last 3 years.
Packers
07: 23 TD's 1 td per 23.2 attempts, 36 sacks
08: 22 TD's 1 td per 23.5 attempts, 27 sacks
09: 29 TD's 1 td per 18.6 attempts, 37 sacks
Vikings
07: 22 TD's 1 td per 29.4 attempts, 38 sacks
08: 15 TD's 1 td per 35.3 attempts, 45 sacks
09: 26 TD's 1 td per 20.6 attempts, 48 sacks.
I added sacks because I believe the pressure a QB is getting has an impact on the DB and how they do their jobs. I definitely think the injuries hurt the Packers last year. As well I think the injury to Winfield hurt MN. It will be interesting to see how the teams do this year. If I get the time I will try to do a sheet that shows how they did after key players were injured last year. While not an exact science it is interesting to look at.
Sheppard was brought in to be a back up. But I'm sure Woodson will give the Packers 10 more years of fine playing. And of course we all know Collins is head and shoulders better than Williams because, well because he's a Packer. And Griffin, well he just plain sucks in his 5th year, and of course he could not possibly get better because, well because he's a Viking, and we all know Viking players don't learn or get better the more they play.I still think this is gonna be Al Harris and Antoine Winfield's last years in the NFC north, so Both our secondaries need New Blood. Only difference between our DB's is that we have Charles woodson, And Nick collins as the other 2 guys, You have Lito Sheppard and Madieu Williams........So our next Db's are Pro-Bowlers and one is a Defensive MVP guy, you have some joker and a former bengal...
Well how do you measure the success of a QB? By his ability to score or by the yards he throw? If you want to measure the ability strictly on stats that mean nothing great. The one stat that counts in game is those that count scores. What good does 30 Int's do if the team gives up 45 TD's a year. Would it not be better to give up 30 tds and only have 5 ints? It's all relative in how you want to look at it. Are the rest to be ignored? No. but when you talk about a secondary being good what are you talking about. The ability to stop the pass, which the Packers are good at, or the ability to stop the td pass? Which the Vikings seem to do better than the Packers.Why TDs and tds per attempt? Why not ints? Why not QB rating???
Just how do you know they are going to be pro-bowlers? Is the fix in?
That's good stuff Raptorhorn, and I agree with your point: pass rush IS the biggest key in stopping good QB's. That's undeniable.Packers
07: 23 TD's 1 td per 23.2 attempts, 36 sacks
08: 22 TD's 1 td per 23.5 attempts, 27 sacks
09: 29 TD's 1 td per 18.6 attempts, 37 sacks
Vikings
07: 22 TD's 1 td per 29.4 attempts, 38 sacks
08: 15 TD's 1 td per 35.3 attempts, 45 sacks
09: 26 TD's 1 td per 20.6 attempts, 48 sacks.
I added sacks because I believe the pressure a QB is getting has an impact on the DB and how they do their jobs. I definitely think the injuries hurt the Packers last year.
We lost our starting CB (Harris), his backup (Lee), and the backup of his backup (Blackmon). And our starting S Bigby) was hurt most of the season. How isn't that so bad??? We should've had more S depth, but there were 6 guys ahead of Bush in the depth chart, and yet he played (Woodson, Harris, Lee, Blackmon, Underwood, Bell). We had our #7 CB playing...That's good stuff Raptorhorn, and I agree with your point: pass rush IS the biggest key in stopping good QB's. That's undeniable.
Injuriess certainly hurt the Packers last year, but they weren't THAT bad.
We had Woodson and Collins ALL year, and they are our best 2 DB's. A lot of teams had worse than that with their key DB's getting hurt.
The Saints had to bring back Mike McKenzie AND Chris McCallister off the street. Polamalu and Ed Reed both missed many games.
If more pressure isn't put on Favre, he'll carve us up again regardless of who's playing in the secondary. He should be on his back every pass play, and I'll take a few unnecessary roughness penalties as a result. We can't let the SOB beat us again.
Don't worry about pressure on Favre Jblood, i wouldn't want to be in Favre's shoes this season if he does play. Everyone saw how well it worked in the Saints favor when they were tossing Favre around like a rag doll. All other teams will take note of that and concentrate on Brett's biggest weakness. Favre will be on IR by week 4.
:viksux:
Yes he does. His body is built more durable than any other QB ever, for sure.I hate Favre but its going to take something epic to put him on the IR. He deserves alot of credit for being one tough SOB