Game of the week: NO 27, MIN 23 (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

I plan to post my projections for one game each week. This week will be the Saints-Vikings on Thursday night.

Saints

QB

Drew Brees: 22 of 35 passing for 257 yards, 2 touchdowns, and 1 interception; 1 rush for 3 yards and 0 touchdowns.

RB

Pierre Thomas: 14 rushes for 64 yards and 0.4 touchdowns; 2 receptions for 19 yards and 0.1 touchdowns.

Reggie Bush: 11 rushes for 42 yards and 0.3 touchdowns; 3 receptions for 25 yards and 0.1 touchdowns.

Heath Evans: 1 rush for 2 yards and 0 touchdowns; 1 receptions for 6 yards and 0 touchdowns.

Chris Ivory: 0 rushes for 0 yards and 0 touchdowns; 0 receptions for 0 yards and 0 touchdowns.

WR

Marques Colston: 4 receptions for 59 yards and 0.5 touchdowns.

Robert Meachem: 3 receptions for 39 yards and 0.4 touchdowns.

Devery Henderson: 2 receptions for 37 yards and 0.2 touchdowns.

Lance Moore: 2 receptions for 19 yards and 0.2 touchdowns.

TE

Jeremy Shockey: 4 receptions for 43 yards and 0.3 touchdowns.

David Thomas: 1 reception for 6 yards and 0 touchdowns.

Jimmy Graham: 1 reception for 5 yards and 0 touchdowns.

PK

Garrett Hartley: 2.65 of 2.69 XP, 1.81 of 2.21 FG.

Vikings

QB

Brett Favre: 21 of 36 passing for 241 yards, 1.6 touchdowns, and 1.2 interceptions; 1 rushes for 4 yards and 0 touchdowns.

RB

Adrian Peterson: 17 rushes for 77 yards and 0.5 touchdowns; 3 receptions for 25 yards and 0.1 touchdowns.

Toby Gerhart: 3 rushes for 11 yards and 0.1 touchdowns; 1 receptions for 10 yards and 0 touchdowns.

Al Young: 3 rushes for 10 yards and 0.1 touchdowns; 1 receptions for 11 yards and 0 touchdowns.

Naufahu Tahi: 1 rush for 2 yards and 0 touchdowns; 0 receptions for 0 yards and 0 touchdowns.

WR

Sidney Rice: 0 receptions for 0 yards and 0 touchdowns.

Bernard Berrian: 3 receptions for 51 yards and 0.3 touchdowns.

Percy Harvin: 4 receptions for 48 yards and 0.3 touchdowns.

Greg Lewis: 1 receptions for 17 yards and 0.1 touchdowns.

Greg Camarillo: 3 receptions for 36 yards and 0.2 touchdowns.

TE

Visanthe Shiancoe: 3 receptions for 35 yards and 0.4 touchdowns.

Jim Kleinsasser: 1 receptions for 8 yards and 0.1 touchdowns.

PK

Ryan Longwell: 2.16 of 2.20 XP; 1.47 of 1.80 FG

 

[jurb26]

Nice work.

I think NO is going to run away with this game though. I'm going to say NO 34 - Minn 17.

 

[Steed]

Chris Ivory is likely out with an mcl injury

 

[Steed]

And where are Favre's 2 TDs going. Everyone i see is at zero

 

[whodeywhodey]

And where are Favre's 2 TDs going. Everyone i see is at zero

TJ Houshamazilla?

 

[My Hope Street Alias]

And where are Favre's 2 TDs going. Everyone i see is at zero

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

And where are Favre's 2 TDs going. Everyone i see is at zero

It didn't copy & paste properly the first time. (It was pasting whole numbers.) I edited the first post; it looks all right now.

 

[Das Boot]

And where are Favre's 2 TDs going. Everyone i see is at zero

NO Defense.

 

[live54]

This is probably the worst post I have ever seen, especially from a so-called expert.

Favre with 2TD's, yet nobody is projected to catch those 2 TD's? How can you even post something like this without sniff checking it??

Second whats this crap with .1TD, .3TD.... You have Brees throwing 2TD's which you break into fractions between SIX players, which equals 1.5 TD's if you add them up.

Not sure how or why anything you wrote is even remotely useful for projections or choosing starters/sleepers. Cant you just say Brees with 2 TD's, 1 to Colston, 1 to someone else... at least that might be useful...

I hope you update this post, if not I wouldn't bother posting your weekly projections..

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Chris Ivory is likely out with an mcl injury

Thanks. I missed that one.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Second whats this crap with .1TD, .3TD.... You have Brees throwing 2TD's which you break into fractions between SIX players, which equals 1.5 TD's if you add them up.

It equals 1.8 if you add them up. The discrepancy is because I rounded to the nearest 0.1 TDs. Without rounding, TD passes and TD receptions are both equal to 1.96.

 

[Norseman]

Naufahu Tahi: 0 rushes for 2 yards and 0 touchdowns; 0 receptions for 0 yards and 0 touchdowns.

How exactly is this possible?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Edited to reflect Chris Ivory being out.

 

[Judge Smails]

This is probably the worst post I have ever seen, especially from a so-called expert. Favre with 2TD's, yet nobody is projected to catch those 2 TD's? How can you even post something like this without sniff checking it?? Second whats this crap with .1TD, .3TD.... You have Brees throwing 2TD's which you break into fractions between SIX players, which equals 1.5 TD's if you add them up.Not sure how or why anything you wrote is even remotely useful for projections or choosing starters/sleepers. Cant you just say Brees with 2 TD's, 1 to Colston, 1 to someone else... at least that might be useful...I hope you update this post, if not I wouldn't bother posting your weekly projections..

Lighten up, Francis. It's called probability. Almost all predictions that are made include fractions.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Naufahu Tahi: 0 rushes for 2 yards and 0 touchdowns; 0 receptions for 0 yards and 0 touchdowns.

How exactly is this possible?

Rounding again. I tried to make all the 0 rushes for positive yards into 1 rush (by hand), but I missed that one. Fixed now.

 

[Das Boot]

Interesting stuff Maurile, thanks.

Only 2 receptions for Lance Moore seems very low.

.2 chance of Camarillo scoring a TD seems high.

 

[gethugefast1]

ADP

Rushes 16.7

Rush Yds 84

Rush TD 0.73

Catches 2.44

Rec Yds 20

Rec TD 0.08

FPTS 14.36

Favre

Comp-Att Yards TD INT RushYds RushTD FPTS

19.9-33.3 221 1.37 1.17 0 0 13.62

Brees

Comp-Att Yards TD INT RushYds RushTD FPTS

23.4-33.7 282 2.15 0.6 1 0.02 22.06

Thomas

Rushes RushYds RushTD Catches RecYds RecTD FPTS

12.9 52 0.38 2.97 25 0.22 10.32

Bush

Rushes RushYds RushTD Catches RecYds RecTD FPTS

8.1 32 0.28 2.79 21 0.18 7.32

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

ADPRushes 16.7 Rush Yds 84 Rush TD 0.73 Catches 2.44 Rec Yds 20 Rec TD 0.08 FPTS 14.36FavreComp-Att Yards TD INT RushYds RushTD FPTS 19.9-33.3 221 1.37 1.17 0 0 13.62

Thanks. Is that from another site? (If so, where?)

 

[gethugefast1]

ADPRushes 16.7 Rush Yds 84 Rush TD 0.73 Catches 2.44 Rec Yds 20 Rec TD 0.08 FPTS 14.36FavreComp-Att Yards TD INT RushYds RushTD FPTS 19.9-33.3 221 1.37 1.17 0 0 13.62

Thanks. Is that from another site? (If so, where?)

From cbssports.com MT.

 

[sportsphysio]

This is probably the worst post I have ever seen, especially from a so-called expert. Favre with 2TD's, yet nobody is projected to catch those 2 TD's? How can you even post something like this without sniff checking it?? Second whats this crap with .1TD, .3TD.... You have Brees throwing 2TD's which you break into fractions between SIX players, which equals 1.5 TD's if you add them up.Not sure how or why anything you wrote is even remotely useful for projections or choosing starters/sleepers. Cant you just say Brees with 2 TD's, 1 to Colston, 1 to someone else... at least that might be useful...I hope you update this post, if not I wouldn't bother posting your weekly projections..

Lighten up, Francis. It's called probability. Almost all predictions that are made include fractions.

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?Sorry if this is a stupid question....

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?

It's the "expected number of TDs" — i.e., if the game were played 100 times, he'd be expected to get 30 TDs total.For practical purposes, you can think of 0.3 TDs as being a 30% chance of scoring a TD; but technically it represents a slightly less than 30% chance since he has some possibility of scoring 2 TDs. (To go back to the illustration with 100 games, if he scores 30 TDs total, but he scores 2 TDs in two of the games and 3 TDs in one game, there would be 74 games when he scored zero TDs. So there would really be a 26% chance of scoring a TD in a given game, not a 30% chance.)

 

[ScottNorwood]

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?

It's the "expected number of TDs" — i.e., if the game were played 100 times, he'd be expected to get 30 TDs total.For practical purposes, you can think of 0.3 TDs as being a 30% chance of scoring a TD; but technically it represents a slightly less than 30% chance since he has some possibility of scoring 2 TDs. (To go back to the illustration with 100 games, if he scores 30 TDs total, but he scores 2 TDs in two of the games and 3 TDs in one game, there would be 74 games when he scored zero TDs. So there would really be a 26% chance of scoring a TD in a given game, not a 30% chance.)

If they played 100 games, wouldn't the player in question probably get injured at some point?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?

It's the "expected number of TDs" — i.e., if the game were played 100 times, he'd be expected to get 30 TDs total.For practical purposes, you can think of 0.3 TDs as being a 30% chance of scoring a TD; but technically it represents a slightly less than 30% chance since he has some possibility of scoring 2 TDs. (To go back to the illustration with 100 games, if he scores 30 TDs total, but he scores 2 TDs in two of the games and 3 TDs in one game, there would be 74 games when he scored zero TDs. So there would really be a 26% chance of scoring a TD in a given game, not a 30% chance.)

If they played 100 games, wouldn't the player in question probably get injured at some point?

He may get injured several times; but he'd be magically healed again before the start of the next game.So if he's injured in the third quarter of game #34, he'd miss the rest of that game, but he'd be fine again by the start of game #35.That's the rule.(Also, players do not age between games.)

 

[ScottNorwood]

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?

It's the "expected number of TDs" i.e., if the game were played 100 times, he'd be expected to get 30 TDs total.For practical purposes, you can think of 0.3 TDs as being a 30% chance of scoring a TD; but technically it represents a slightly less than 30% chance since he has some possibility of scoring 2 TDs. (To go back to the illustration with 100 games, if he scores 30 TDs total, but he scores 2 TDs in two of the games and 3 TDs in one game, there would be 74 games when he scored zero TDs. So there would really be a 26% chance of scoring a TD in a given game, not a 30% chance.)

If they played 100 games, wouldn't the player in question probably get injured at some point?

He may get injured several times; but he'd be magically healed again before the start of the next game.So if he's injured in the third quarter of game #34, he'd miss the rest of that game, but he'd be fine again by the start of game #35.That's the rule.

Tell me more about this magical healing

 

[benm3218]

this is all pretty strange...

 

[Otis]

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?

It's the "expected number of TDs" — i.e., if the game were played 100 times, he'd be expected to get 30 TDs total.For practical purposes, you can think of 0.3 TDs as being a 30% chance of scoring a TD; but technically it represents a slightly less than 30% chance since he has some possibility of scoring 2 TDs. (To go back to the illustration with 100 games, if he scores 30 TDs total, but he scores 2 TDs in two of the games and 3 TDs in one game, there would be 74 games when he scored zero TDs. So there would really be a 26% chance of scoring a TD in a given game, not a 30% chance.)

If they played 100 games, wouldn't the player in question probably get injured at some point?

He may get injured several times; but he'd be magically healed again before the start of the next game.So if he's injured in the third quarter of game #34, he'd miss the rest of that game, but he'd be fine again by the start of game #35.That's the rule.

Tell me more about this magical healing

 

[timschochet]

Maurile, I am curious about something:

When you determine a WR's probability of receiving a TD, do you look at their probability of catching TDs last year? Or do you look at their percentage of targets in general, and the TD probability matches that percentage? And how do you calculate guys like Lance Moore who were injured last year?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Maurile, I am curious about something:

When you determine a WR's probability of receiving a TD, do you look at their probability of catching TDs last year? Or do you look at their percentage of targets in general, and the TD probability matches that percentage? And how do you calculate guys like Lance Moore who were injured last year?

I look at his career TDs-per-reception and receptions-per-target to get an estimate of his current attributes in those areas. (When I say "look at," I mean that I do the Bayesian thing I described a bit here.) Then I multiply his projected targets by his receptions-per-target to get his projected receptions (after adjusting for the QB's completion percentage), and multiply his touchdowns-per-reception by his projected receptions to get his projected TDs (after adjusting for the QB's TD-per-attempt). Then I adjust for the opposing defense.

 

[wormburner]

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?

It's the "expected number of TDs" — i.e., if the game were played 100 times, he'd be expected to get 30 TDs total.For practical purposes, you can think of 0.3 TDs as being a 30% chance of scoring a TD; but technically it represents a slightly less than 30% chance since he has some possibility of scoring 2 TDs. (To go back to the illustration with 100 games, if he scores 30 TDs total, but he scores 2 TDs in two of the games and 3 TDs in one game, there would be 74 games when he scored zero TDs. So there would really be a 26% chance of scoring a TD in a given game, not a 30% chance.)

Professor Irwin Corey taking up FF Admin?

 

[coachjim]

This has always had me confused as well; if it states .3 TD, does that mean a 30% chance of scoring a TD?

It's the "expected number of TDs" — i.e., if the game were played 100 times, he'd be expected to get 30 TDs total.For practical purposes, you can think of 0.3 TDs as being a 30% chance of scoring a TD; but technically it represents a slightly less than 30% chance since he has some possibility of scoring 2 TDs. (To go back to the illustration with 100 games, if he scores 30 TDs total, but he scores 2 TDs in two of the games and 3 TDs in one game, there would be 74 games when he scored zero TDs. So there would really be a 26% chance of scoring a TD in a given game, not a 30% chance.)

Professor Irwin Corey taking up FF Admin?

Wormburner you are the man for remembering the Professor.

 

[timschochet]

Maurile, I am curious about something:

When you determine a WR's probability of receiving a TD, do you look at their probability of catching TDs last year? Or do you look at their percentage of targets in general, and the TD probability matches that percentage? And how do you calculate guys like Lance Moore who were injured last year?

I look at his career TDs-per-reception and receptions-per-target to get an estimate of his current attributes in those areas. (When I say "look at," I mean that I do the Bayesian thing I described a bit here.) Then I multiply his projected targets by his receptions-per-target to get his projected receptions (after adjusting for the QB's completion percentage), and multiply his touchdowns-per-reception by his projected receptions to get his projected TDs (after adjusting for the QB's TD-per-attempt). Then I adjust for the opposing defense.

Thanks. More questions:1. How have you done in the past in terms of week 1 as opposed to other weeks further on? Seems like the first week is the hardest to project.

2. At what point do you switch over from last year's stats to this years stats in order to make projections? Week 3-4? Later?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Maurile, I am curious about something:

When you determine a WR's probability of receiving a TD, do you look at their probability of catching TDs last year? Or do you look at their percentage of targets in general, and the TD probability matches that percentage? And how do you calculate guys like Lance Moore who were injured last year?

I look at his career TDs-per-reception and receptions-per-target to get an estimate of his current attributes in those areas. (When I say "look at," I mean that I do the Bayesian thing I described a bit here.) Then I multiply his projected targets by his receptions-per-target to get his projected receptions (after adjusting for the QB's completion percentage), and multiply his touchdowns-per-reception by his projected receptions to get his projected TDs (after adjusting for the QB's TD-per-attempt). Then I adjust for the opposing defense.

Thanks. More questions:1. How have you done in the past in terms of week 1 as opposed to other weeks further on? Seems like the first week is the hardest to project.

2. At what point do you switch over from last year's stats to this years stats in order to make projections? Week 3-4? Later?

This is the first time I've done weekly projections. In the past, I'd done only yearly projections. Week one is hard for certain situations (Patriots RBs, Chiefs RBs, Arizona RBs, maybe Chicago RBs, maybe Dallas RBs, etc.), but a lot of other situations seem pretty clear-cut, at least for now. As the season goes along, some things will become clearer and some will get messier. On the whole, I don't think week one should be way harder than most other weeks.There's no reason not to consider new stats immediately, except that I won't have time to make adjustments in each category to every individual player each week. I'll probably make adjustments to rookies and other first-year players each week, starting after the week one games, and wait to make adjustments to more established veterans only if their 2010 performance starts to diverge a fair amount from my prior expectations.

 

[yesitsme]

Nobody thinks the Vikings want revenge from that NFC Championship game?

Everyone is on the Saints but they still will have a hangover and the bookie will make a killing again.

The Vikings were easily the best team when they played last year and they will beat the Saints 28-24.

Farve-280 yards and 2 td

Peterson- 120 yards 2 td

Harvin-85 yards 1td

Vishante-35 yards 1td

Berrian 65 yards

Brees-295 yards 3 td

Thomas 74 yards

Bush 45 rushing, 55 receiving 1 td

Colston 80 yards 1 td

Moore 45 1 td

Henderson 55 yards

 

[ThePittbully]

Nobody thinks the Vikings want revenge from that NFC Championship game?

O I'm sure they want it, but they won't be getting it

 

[Heatman]

Nobody thinks the Vikings want revenge from that NFC Championship game?

O I'm sure they want it, but they won't be getting it

Yyaawwnn.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

For what it's worth:

- The Saints lost last year's starting OLB Scott Fujita to free agency. Great player, team leader, hard worker, big playmaker, but Cleveland paid way more than NO would.

- The Saints were going to go with a three-starter (yes) approach: depending on the packagae you would see either Troy Evans, Clint Ingram ( vet from Gregg Williams' defenses in Jax) or Jonathan Casillas (a sleeper talent who Saints fans were expecting to see really bllom as a starter this year). Well Evans got cut, Ingram went on PUP, and Casillas went on IR, all in the span of 2 or so weeks.

- Now the Saints are starting Jo-Lonn Dunbar at WOLB and after that it gets really, really, really thin.

- Jon Vilma, the defensive quarterback, is recovering from a groin injury, whether he plays or plays limited and how much if so, I don't know.

- Darren Sharper, maybe the most important team leader and playmaker last year after Drew Brees and Jon Vilma, is on PUP also. In his stead is 2nd year ex-corner/now-safety Malcolm Jenkins.

The combinations of WOLB and free safety changes are a complete unknown quantity in regular season play. Dunbar has a good rep here in town and Jenkins did well last year after a shakey start, but then again Dunbar was not in the mix to start after the winter and Jenkins is taking a huge step up in responsibility.

The Saints 'defense has some promising new pass rushers though:

- in case you have not heard of him (and you probably haven't if you're not in LA), you just might after Thursday: one Junior Galette. Saints fans and coaches alike are very pumped about the possibilities for this new free agent DE find. There has been talk, from Galette himself, that Williams might put him in at WOLB for purposes of pass rushing.

- The Saints have also added Alex Brown from Chicago on defense @ LDE and the fans and coaches have been very happy about the possibilities there. They have also added Jimmy Wilkerson from Tampa Bay.

- Gone is Bobby McCray, the guy who pursued Kurt Warner into retirement and almost Favre as well.

Finally, as back-text to all this Childress has been engaged in some really foolish talk about 'dirty' play from the Saints' defense in the NFCC game, beyond ridiculous. I don't know if that is meant to perk up teh refs' attention or ramp up his own team's aggressiveness (really hard to imagine the Vikes' excellent, vet D needing that kind of artifice), but I guess it just adds another layer to the defensive element.

And there is also Favre's ankle, which, to me has not looked good in the preseason. Yeah, yeah it's just preseason, but what I have seen is a guy who does not move left or right very well at all. I'm sure old Favre will show up but the busted wheel has to come off some time.

Last year Favre opened with Cleveland and Detroit after coming in at almost the exact same point in the preseason as he has this year.

Vs. Cleveland he opened 14/21/110/1/0. That's 110 yards. Next week vs. Detroit he went 23/27/155/2/0. Again, 155 yards passing.

First game vs. CLE Peterson went nuts with 180, but vs. DET he was much more limited with 92 yards.

2009 Preseason game 3 (HOU) Favre went 13/18/142/1/0, with only a handful of passes besides in 2 other games.

2010 Preseason game 3 Favre went 16/26/187/0/2, 3 total turnovers and 1 sack. He had one other appearance in P/S, vs SF, he went 1/1/13/0/0 for but the team went 3 and out after a quick first down when Favre got driven straight back with no mobility for a sack on the first drive.

Peterson needless to say will be run and given the Saints' history and their weakness at WOLB and lack of depth at LB in general he should do quite well.

The trick with the Saints of course is that they get up early. If the Vikes' defense permits this, Favre's numbers in his warm-up games vs Cleveland and Detroit last year will not suffice.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Update:

"Antoine Winfield worries about cornerback depth against the Saints"

>>>The Vikings have only three healthy cornerbacks.

Given the pass-happy nature of the New Orleans offense, that could be a big problem. And Pro Bowl corner Antoine Winfield knows it.

Will the Saints try to spread the Vikings' defense out? "I'm sure they will," Winfield said Monday, per Tom Pelissero of 1500espn.com. "I'm sure they're reading the papers, looking on the Internet, reading that we only have three corners. So, we can expect that."

So, should the Vikings bring in more help at the position? "It would be nice," Winfield said. "But that's not up to me. The coaches make the decisions."<<<

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...nst-the-saints/

>>>Antoine Winfield, Lito Sheppard and Asher Allen are the only healthy corners on the roster. If one of them goes down, the next man in presumably would be Abdullah -- a backup safety being asked to cover the slot against Pro Bowl quarterback Drew Brees and the multitude of weapons the Saints can spread out simultaneously in the passing game.<<<

http://1500espn.com/sportswire/Pelisser...ait_for_CB_help

Well they sure as heck have had time to pursue every WR that pops up on the screen.

 

[az_prof]

As a Viking fan, I hope your prediction is wrong. But, Rice being out, Favre coming back from ankle surgery, and the Vikings depleted Cb corps has me worried. How can you go into that game with only three healthy Cbs? I suspect the score will be more lopsided tbh.

 

[PatsFanCT]

This is probably the worst post I have ever seen, especially from a so-called expert. Favre with 2TD's, yet nobody is projected to catch those 2 TD's? How can you even post something like this without sniff checking it?? Second whats this crap with .1TD, .3TD.... You have Brees throwing 2TD's which you break into fractions between SIX players, which equals 1.5 TD's if you add them up.Not sure how or why anything you wrote is even remotely useful for projections or choosing starters/sleepers. Cant you just say Brees with 2 TD's, 1 to Colston, 1 to someone else... at least that might be useful...I hope you update this post, if not I wouldn't bother posting your weekly projections..

Lighten up, Francis. It's called probability. Almost all predictions that are made include fractions.

Maybe, but it's still worthless. I agree with live54, but in a less Francisy way.

 

[Das Boot]

Interesting stuff Maurile, thanks.Only 2 receptions for Lance Moore seems very low..2 chance of Camarillo scoring a TD seems high.

2 receptions for Moore in NO's first 2 series.

 

[mrip541]

No way Peterson makes it 16 games if they keep pounding him inside like this every play.

 

[Team ROFLCOPTERS]

The Vikes are keeping NO off the field but they are going to need some creativity. Interesting target selection by Brees today. He's playing it smart and picking on the weaker CB's.

 

[Team ROFLCOPTERS]

Yikes. That was a defensive hold but bad read by Favre.

 

[Otis]

Glad I didn't bet the over here.

 

[Team ROFLCOPTERS]

Favre looks terrible. He's got the happy feet and is throwing off his back foot. Almost looks scared.

 

[Go deep]

Im a bit suprised the Vikings arent trying to get the ball in Harvins hands a bit more. With Rice being out, he is their only real offensive weapon except for AD.

 

[Das Boot]

Im a bit suprised the Vikings arent trying to get the ball in Harvins hands a bit more. With Rice being out, he is their only real offensive weapon except for AD.

Too little Camarillo is a surprise...He picks that one nice gainer out of the air and almost came up with the 1st down where Favre led him too much.Camarillo and Shiancoe looked like the 2 best receivers tonight.We should see much more of Cam next week.

 

[Das Boot]

Interesting stuff Maurile, thanks.Only 2 receptions for Lance Moore seems very low..2 chance of Camarillo scoring a TD seems high.

2 receptions for Moore in NO's first 2 series.

Props to Maurile, even with 3 receptions for Moore Maurile was much closer with his prediction that I would have been, I expected 6 or so.

 

[BoltzNBrew]

2010 Brett Favre is not going to win a game the way he played tonight, that was turrible.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

2010 Brett Favre is not going to win a game the way he played tonight, that was turrible.

The Vikings have to rush the ball better than that. How can Adrian Peterson be a non factor in a 2nd half of a game that Minnesota is winning at haltime and never behind more than 7. How many carries did Adp get in the 2nd half?I thought Farve was pressured often and Harvin was not running some routes properly. There's no other real talent besides the TE who is slightly above average. I'm amazed that I won my bet on Minnesota plus the points.