<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Antoine Winfield May Have to Sit, Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thevikingage.com/2010/01/01/antoine-winfield-may-have-to-sit-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thevikingage.com/2010/01/01/antoine-winfield-may-have-to-sit-again/</link>
	<description>A Minnesota Vikings Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and more.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 18:02:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://thevikingage.com/2010/01/01/antoine-winfield-may-have-to-sit-again/comment-page-1/#comment-5346</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jan 2010 00:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thevikingage.com/?p=3228#comment-5346</guid>
		<description>It is certainly not disrespectful to Favre to say that AD means as much to the team.  I will keep saying both are important and couldn’t give a crap if you jump in.

Moreover, your logic makes no sense:

1.  I don’t have to know the extent that other teams are failing to disguise plays to say the Vikings are failing to disguise plays.

2. Of course, the Vikings can only use AD for runs and not be tipping the defense off whether they will run or pass.   Play action involves lining up in an obvious run formation and the QB either hands off to the RB or throws to one of the WRs.  

Your statement “Play action isn’t effective when everyone knows that back doesn’t have hands to be part of the running play” makes no sense.  Of course, AD is part of the running play???

Your whole analysis is foolish – enough is enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is certainly not disrespectful to Favre to say that AD means as much to the team.  I will keep saying both are important and couldn’t give a crap if you jump in.</p>
<p>Moreover, your logic makes no sense:</p>
<p>1.  I don’t have to know the extent that other teams are failing to disguise plays to say the Vikings are failing to disguise plays.</p>
<p>2. Of course, the Vikings can only use AD for runs and not be tipping the defense off whether they will run or pass.   Play action involves lining up in an obvious run formation and the QB either hands off to the RB or throws to one of the WRs.  </p>
<p>Your statement “Play action isn’t effective when everyone knows that back doesn’t have hands to be part of the running play” makes no sense.  Of course, AD is part of the running play???</p>
<p>Your whole analysis is foolish – enough is enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joe</title>
		<link>http://thevikingage.com/2010/01/01/antoine-winfield-may-have-to-sit-again/comment-page-1/#comment-5344</link>
		<dc:creator>joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2010 21:16:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thevikingage.com/?p=3228#comment-5344</guid>
		<description>This is getting to be a tiresome line - I keep feeding it because I think a disrespect for what Favre has done for this team underlies your posts (and many others here).

Whether intentional or not, my objective is to call BS on that - BRETT is the difference between this year&#039;s team that could be a superbowl champ and last year&#039;s team that backed into NFC central title and was quickly dismissed in the playoffs.

You will never get this - too much AD worship, even though he has accomplished little in NFL other than rack up a lot of yards, many in garbage time.

I will just say this one more time, hope it is clearer and then leave this thread alone.  If you post any more of this disrespectful crap towards Favre that denies he means more to this team than AD, I will jump in again.

1.  You can&#039;t proclaim in one breadth &quot;I have no idea, and doubt you do either, whether “the vikings are not doing any more than any other team in terms of showing pass or run.” and then in the next state unequivocally that you know for a fact that they just need to disguise what they are doing.

Maybe homers that constantly intentionally/unintentionally disrespect Favre will ever see this, but the contradiction bewteen &quot;I have no idea&quot; and then later knowing it all is pretty obvious.

2.  You cannot POSSIBLY only use AD for runs and not be tipping the defense off.  This is a huge flaw in his game.  You can talk about disguising all you want - talk is cheap - we are talking the NFL and play action isn&#039;t effective when everyone knows that back doesn&#039;t have hands to be part of the running play.

Enough - I am done until I read more BS that tries to argue that somehow a back with bad hands that has never been part of a team that has accomplished anything is somehow more important to the vikings than future HOF, 3-time MVP, all-time record leader (in virtually EVERY QB category) and Super Bowl champ Brett Farve.

This &quot;disguise&quot; stuff means just more chilly ball and disrespects the contributions of the team&#039;s biggest playmaker.

Your analysis of the bear game is foolish - enough is enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is getting to be a tiresome line &#8211; I keep feeding it because I think a disrespect for what Favre has done for this team underlies your posts (and many others here).</p>
<p>Whether intentional or not, my objective is to call BS on that &#8211; BRETT is the difference between this year&#8217;s team that could be a superbowl champ and last year&#8217;s team that backed into NFC central title and was quickly dismissed in the playoffs.</p>
<p>You will never get this &#8211; too much AD worship, even though he has accomplished little in NFL other than rack up a lot of yards, many in garbage time.</p>
<p>I will just say this one more time, hope it is clearer and then leave this thread alone.  If you post any more of this disrespectful crap towards Favre that denies he means more to this team than AD, I will jump in again.</p>
<p>1.  You can&#8217;t proclaim in one breadth &#8220;I have no idea, and doubt you do either, whether “the vikings are not doing any more than any other team in terms of showing pass or run.” and then in the next state unequivocally that you know for a fact that they just need to disguise what they are doing.</p>
<p>Maybe homers that constantly intentionally/unintentionally disrespect Favre will ever see this, but the contradiction bewteen &#8220;I have no idea&#8221; and then later knowing it all is pretty obvious.</p>
<p>2.  You cannot POSSIBLY only use AD for runs and not be tipping the defense off.  This is a huge flaw in his game.  You can talk about disguising all you want &#8211; talk is cheap &#8211; we are talking the NFL and play action isn&#8217;t effective when everyone knows that back doesn&#8217;t have hands to be part of the running play.</p>
<p>Enough &#8211; I am done until I read more BS that tries to argue that somehow a back with bad hands that has never been part of a team that has accomplished anything is somehow more important to the vikings than future HOF, 3-time MVP, all-time record leader (in virtually EVERY QB category) and Super Bowl champ Brett Farve.</p>
<p>This &#8220;disguise&#8221; stuff means just more chilly ball and disrespects the contributions of the team&#8217;s biggest playmaker.</p>
<p>Your analysis of the bear game is foolish &#8211; enough is enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://thevikingage.com/2010/01/01/antoine-winfield-may-have-to-sit-again/comment-page-1/#comment-5342</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2010 20:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thevikingage.com/?p=3228#comment-5342</guid>
		<description>I don’t see how my first and third paragraphs contradict each other.  Nor do you explain.

Likewise, I don’t see how proclaiming AD should not be part of the pass offense has anything to do with the need to disguise whether it is run or pass.  You certainly can disguise run versus pass, even if Peterson is only used as a runner.  That is what play action is for. 

If an offense allows the situation to dictate run/pass, they become too predictable.  I have properly identified this as the problem for two of the Vikings games against the Cards and Panthers.  

The problem in the Bears game was different because the Vikings don’t appear to have had any tells.  Thus I am flat out right that success had something to do with disguising run from pass.  If they knew Favre would pass on every play or knew which plays he would pass, the defense would have dropped 7 and 8 into coverage while teeing off their front, like the Cards and Panthers did.

Disguising has nothing to do with chilly ball.  Chilly ball is simply running when the defenses are obviously loading the box against the run.

On the contrary, I do admit that it took Favre to turn this team around.  In fact I have been saying that since February.  The Vikings needed a QB that could handle the blitz when defenses loaded the box against Peterson. 

My evidence that the Vikings were tipping plays is the testimony of Tony Boseli that the Vikings were doing just that and McKinnie’s admission that he may have been doing it.

The difference between first half and second halves of Bears game is the Vikings relied too much on the run in the first half while the Bears defense was loading the box.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don’t see how my first and third paragraphs contradict each other.  Nor do you explain.</p>
<p>Likewise, I don’t see how proclaiming AD should not be part of the pass offense has anything to do with the need to disguise whether it is run or pass.  You certainly can disguise run versus pass, even if Peterson is only used as a runner.  That is what play action is for. </p>
<p>If an offense allows the situation to dictate run/pass, they become too predictable.  I have properly identified this as the problem for two of the Vikings games against the Cards and Panthers.  </p>
<p>The problem in the Bears game was different because the Vikings don’t appear to have had any tells.  Thus I am flat out right that success had something to do with disguising run from pass.  If they knew Favre would pass on every play or knew which plays he would pass, the defense would have dropped 7 and 8 into coverage while teeing off their front, like the Cards and Panthers did.</p>
<p>Disguising has nothing to do with chilly ball.  Chilly ball is simply running when the defenses are obviously loading the box against the run.</p>
<p>On the contrary, I do admit that it took Favre to turn this team around.  In fact I have been saying that since February.  The Vikings needed a QB that could handle the blitz when defenses loaded the box against Peterson. </p>
<p>My evidence that the Vikings were tipping plays is the testimony of Tony Boseli that the Vikings were doing just that and McKinnie’s admission that he may have been doing it.</p>
<p>The difference between first half and second halves of Bears game is the Vikings relied too much on the run in the first half while the Bears defense was loading the box.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Database Caching 24/31 queries in 0.051 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 312/340 objects using apc
Content Delivery Network via cdn.fansided.com

 Served from: thevikingage.com @ 2013-05-24 05:17:58 by W3 Total Cache -->