It seemed Marcus didn't get many looks when Boller was quarterbacking the Ravens last season. When Wright took over at QB, Marcus showed flashes of brilliance.
If Moss gets double-teamed a lot, Marcus could put up good numbers with the Vikes because I think Culpepper will find him.
purestrength wrote:It seemed Marcus didn't get many looks when Boller was quarterbacking the Ravens last season. When Wright took over at QB, Marcus showed flashes of brilliance.
If Moss gets double-teamed a lot, Marcus could put up good numbers with the Vikes because I think Culpepper will find him.
I have to agree. I think Robinson could be the #2 the vikes have been needing since Carter left. If Moss wasn't the #1 WR on everyone's cheat sheets, he should be now
this is good ofr them, cause moss is their only WR really. this should take pressure off moss and give pepp another target. nice job by the "vikes who 'arent going to make moves this offseason'"
I have mixed feelings about this. Robinson has talent but he is very injury-prone and hasn't had a good year in 4 years. I really though that Burleson could be a good possesion guy across from Moss. Maybe it will turn out good though, I can't complain that the Vikes spend money. One thing I don't like about this is that it makes it really pointless now to do what I was hopeing, trade up so we have a chance at Fitz...
And Cana' this may put us off the list for D-Jax but we are still almost 20 mil under the cap, we have plenty to spend on D if Red will do it. We actually HAD to sign somebody or we would have been under the minimum cap.
M_Zimm wrote: We actually HAD to sign somebody or we would have been under the minimum cap.
yeah i was reading that earlier. thats the hallarious. many teams are struggling to stay under the cap (raiders included) while the vikes are struggling to get over the minimum. your owner really is a cheap bastard. damn i understand minnesota is a relatively small market but the vikes are an exciting team. do they get much support from their fans? like in terms of revenue? im curious, could anyone post a link to a list? (of team's revenue)
"Well, I currently live near Seattle and up here everyone seems to completely understand if we [root] for teams other than the Seahawks." - GUS
I love this signing. he's big, he's strong and he's fairly quick and with 2 years since his ACl tear he showed last year he's ready to go again. Gives the Vikes a threat on the other side of the field. Burleson will be that much better as a #3.
"When the truth walks away who is gonna stay? Cause the truth about the world is that crime does pay?"
With the Vikings keeping Kleinsasser and having a trio of good running backs (I'd prefer they use O.Smith), I see Minnesota, Indianapolis and St. Louis being the most exciting teams in 2004.
steelyeri wrote:damn i understand minnesota is a relatively small market but the vikes are an exciting team. do they get much support from their fans? like in terms of revenue? im curious, could anyone post a link to a list? (of team's revenue)
Very strange... I typed in NFL team revenue in google and 2 of the top 3 results had to do with the Minnesota Vikings. The Vikings team website is one of the top 10 google sites based on that search also and accounts for 5 of the first 10 entries. That's almost as good as typing in "miserable failure" and pressing the I'm feeling lucky button (go ahead try it. Make sure you put it in quotes). Searching "weapons of mass destruction" with I'm feeling lucky is fun too. Anyway, back on topic.
Minnesota is 30th out of 32 teams in overall team values, but NFL franchises are hardly hurting. The value of the TV contract alone almost covers each team's salary cap (contract is worth about $77m per team).
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by pmix » Mon Mar 08, 2004 7:52 pm 
