tonyriggins Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=121735 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 So, if I've got this right, they're saying the Vikings have the advantage in every major aspect of this game (including coaching :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: ) but we win 17-14? How in the hell do these people get their jobs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt'n Obvious Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 So, if I've got this right, they're saying the Vikings have the advantage in every major aspect of this game (including coaching :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: ) but we win 17-14?How in the hell do these people get their jobs? I was wondering the very same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 So, if I've got this right, they're saying the Vikings have the advantage in every major aspect of this game (including coaching :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: ) but we win 17-14?How in the hell do these people get their jobs? the mere suggestion that the Vikings have better coaching than the Redskins immediately eliminates any sort of credibility this writer had. That is such a poor statement that I believe this must have been an error. Anyone looking for a job as a sportswriter?? You can get one over at sportingnews.... :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THEface Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 im just gonna go ahead and not buy a sporting news magazine... ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 the mere suggestion that the Vikings have better coaching than the Redskins immediately eliminates any sort of credibility this writer had. That is such a poor statement that I believe this must have been an error. Anyone looking for a job as a sportswriter?? You can get one over at sportingnews.... :doh: Without a doubt. There's no comparison as far as coaching goes, and I don't just mean Gibbs vs. Childress. It looks to me like the check marks in the graphic are reversed, but the score is correct (as they see it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyriggins Posted September 2, 2006 Author Share Posted September 2, 2006 We've got better coaches and starting RB! Nethier QB from ethier team can handle pressure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry wilburn Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 In all seriousness, Childress has lost far fewer games than Gibbs. He is clearly the superior coach. Plus when you look at preseason production, Chester Taylor is clearly a better running back that Portis. I'd say that this is a fair report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Without a doubt. There's no comparison as far as coaching goes, and I don't just mean Gibbs vs. Childress.It looks to me like the check marks in the graphic are reversed, but the score is correct (as they see it). Yes, that definately what happened here. The graphic must have been reversed by accident. It makes no sense, when you read the article that accompanies it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdarugar Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 In all seriousness, Childress has lost far fewer games than Gibbs. He is clearly the superior coach. Plus when you look at preseason production, Chester Taylor is clearly a better running back that Portis. I'd say that this is a fair report. this article is so friggin bad sarcasm can't even help it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzmuda Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 im just gonna go ahead and not buy a sporting news magazine... ever. The Sporting News is the best sports magazine going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Brad Childress makes his debut as Vikings coach. It's a baptism of fire -- on the road against Hall of Fame coach Joe Gibbs ok so thats why the vikings have a coaching advantage??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 The Sporting News is the best sports magazine going. If you don't count LPGA Today, Costa Rican Cricket Monthly, and Competitive Eating Digest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterfan Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 The article isn't as bad as the Vikings fans comments listed down below the article. That one guy says the Redskins secondary have 1 good safety, the other one somebody but nobody knows who, and an average set of corners. These Vikings fans have got a real rude awakening coming on 9/11! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Brad Childess is starting his first NFL game as a Head Coach and that staff gets the nod over Gibbs and Co. who made the postseason last year? This issue of Sporting News isn't worth using for shelf liner or even toilet paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 It used to be a great magazine...but I haven't read it for a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDarb Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 If the game was being played on a boat and the cheerleaders were strippers, I'd give the edge to the Vikings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diver Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 One guy posted below that the Vikings will win 17-15. How many times have you seen a team score 15 points. Yeah, we are going to kick 5 field goals. I wonder he has ever seen a football game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins4481 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Damn this is the dummest **** I have read in a LONG time. There is no way in hell I'd rather have their QBs, RBs, OL or secondary. And its absolutely ridiculous to think that ANY team in the league has a better set of coaches than we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins4481 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 If the game was being played on a boat and the cheerleaders were strippers, I'd give the edge to the Vikings. Some cheerleaders ARE strippers! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 omg, this is HILARIOUS they have a better defensive line? :laugh: a better offensive line? :laugh: a better LB core? wait, wait, this one kills me... THEY HAVE BETTER RBs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 theres also that nice little statistic that gibbs has never lost to the vikings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 theres also that nice little statistic that gibbs has never lost to the vikings. and my favorite, we win our home openers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Sportingnews is a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Everything in this seems backwards. Obviously, we have better coaches. With Springs out, I'd say they actually have a better secondary. LBs and WRs are definitely ours. If Griffin and Daniels are healthy, the DL might be even, but I can see why some writers might be inclined to pick the Vikes. Our guys might not be big names, but they're as stout as anyone against the run. Betts is as good as anyone in their depleted RB core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.