mickgreen58 said:Flo was big, but again, many teams lost very important personell.
And when he was here we still lost to the Raiders and almost made Julian Petersen's prediction come true in San Fran.
While he was out, we went toe-to-toe, with the Giants, Broncos, Seattle etc etc and had a 7-3 Record after Week 11.
It's all about adjustments and coming up with innovative solutions when your good players go down.
Flo was big, but he cannot be the scapegoat for why we didnt make the playoffs.
- Mike G.
mickgreen58 said:Flo was big, but again, many teams lost very important personell.
And when he was here we still lost to the Raiders and almost made Julian Petersen's prediction come true in San Fran.
While he was out, we went toe-to-toe, with the Giants, Broncos, Seattle etc etc and had a 7-3 Record after Week 11.
It's all about adjustments and coming up with innovative solutions when your good players go down.
Flo was big, but he cannot be the scapegoat for why we didnt make the playoffs.
- Mike G.
iceberg said:culpepper went out and the vikes got a lot better.
and vicks backup is highly sought after in the off-season.
mickgreen58 said:Flo was big, but again, many teams lost very important personell.
And when he was here we still lost to the Raiders and almost made Julian Petersen's prediction come true in San Fran.
While he was out, we went toe-to-toe, with the Giants, Broncos, Seattle etc etc and had a 7-3 Record after Week 11.
It's all about adjustments and coming up with innovative solutions when your good players go down.
Flo was big, but he cannot be the scapegoat for why we didnt make the playoffs.
- Mike G.
Zaxor said:Flo is big... just a huge guy...
but he wasn't that great with Bledsoe behind center...
Does anybody have the games that Flo was in...were we rushing the ball better were we pass protecting better.... I really do not have those numbers but it wouldn't surprise me if the differance wasn't that large...
burmafrd said:I have always thought that the injury is no excuse BS is just that. Where would NE be if Brady was out for the season? We all know what happens to Atlanta when Vick is out. Imagine the Colts without Manning. There are other positions on various teams where you have the one player you cannot lose. IF we had had a good backup for the Hotel then we would have been ok- WE DID NOT. We already had one weak tackle; then we had 2. BALL GAME OVER. IF the middle of the line had been performing well we might have scraped by- but it was not. So the whole thing collapsed. And when the O line went, the O went. Outside of Carolina and KC, we did not really have an offense the rest of the season. And with all the injuries in the secondary and the LB corps, our D could not pick up the slack. And there you have it. Injuries ensured we sit at home for the playoffs. That and a lousy kicking game.
joseephuss said:Flozell didn't have to be great to be better than Tucker.
Dallas gave up 0 sacks to the Commanders and Eagles when Flo was playing. That wasn't the case later in the season.
The offensive line was inconsistent all year with or without Flozell. Losing him was a big problem, but it wasn't the only problem.
When Flo went down, our OT's got exposed. We also started playing playoff teams. BP went ultra conservative with the offense. Henry got hurt. That's enough.demdcowboys#1 said:I cant believe we went from 7-3 to 9-7............what the hell went wrong!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Well, Culpepper was playing like complete crap before his injury. I would go so far as to say that his injury helped turn around their season because he needed pulled.iceberg said:culpepper went out and the vikes got a lot better.
Zaxor said:why do you think that is? and did you think it was gonna be a problem before the season?