Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul

On the Ball

The Ugliest First Place Team in Town

Share

With the help of at least two terrible calls from the officials, the Vikings eked out a 12-10 home victory against a winless team playing an obviously overwhelmed backup quarterback this afternoon. If you just read the stats, you'll be pleased by Gus Frerotte's 300-yard game, Bernard Berrian's second straight 100 yards receiving, Adrian Peterson's 100 yards on the ground and Kevin Williams registering four sacks. So why are the Vikings fans who actually saw this game so despondent or livid over a turn of events that, with the Bears losing to the Falcons on a last-minute field goal, has the Vikes sharing first place in the NFC Central with those Monsters of the Midriff and the GB Packers?

Because it is more of the same underachievement that has typified the offense in the Brad Childress era. The gaudy numbers for both Frerotte and Berrian were highly inflated by a blatantly missed tackle on a slant pass to Berrian over the middle that resulted in a 86-yard TD. Otherwise, the offense needed a dubious 42-yard pass interference call to put themselves in position for Ryan Longwell's clinching 26-yard field goal in the final minute. Got that? Childress's much-mocked "Kick Ass Offense" needed a classic Lions bungle and help from the refs to come up with 10 points against a defense that had yielded 149 in its previous four losses. The two-point difference came on a first period safety (more on that in a minute).

Back to the interference call. With less than three minutes to play, the Vikes were down 10-9 and facing 2nd and 20 from their own 32 yard line. Frerotte's pass to Andre Allison was slightly long and both Allison and the defender stumbled trying to catch up to it, with the defender falling on Allison. But from all the replays, it looked as if the contact was very minimal--certainly much less than a 3rd quarter play where a Lion's receiver was bumped inside the 20 yard line by the Vikings' defender. So instead of 3rd and 20 from their own 32 with just over two minutes to play, the Vikes had the ball first and ten at the Lions' 26. The only thing left to do was run AP into the line a few times to wind down the clock and allow Longwell the relative chip shot to cinch the contest.

How bad was the pass interference call? Well, the two announcers mentioned numerous times that they disagreed with it, that it was a bad call, not even debateable. Personally, I thought it was an absurd call to swing a ballgame over--the contact was incidental. And the Associated Press report led off the game recap with "Detroit Lions cornerback Leigh Bodden [the guy flagged for interference] wants an apology."

That call will get the most scrutiny because of its timing and impact on the game. But it pales in comparison to the totally bogus ruling that Lions' receiver Calvin Johnson fumbled the ball after a long reception took him into Vikings territory. The Lions challenged the ruling. The replays clearly showed Johnson with his knee down (his whole body down actually--he was shaken up) and the ball still in his grasp by his hip. Only then did linebacker Ben Leber come in and rip the ball upward from Johnson, causing the "fumble." I mean, to say it wasn't close doesn't even adequately describe how horrible the call was--and the refs even had time to review the replays all of us saw on the tube. How anyone could justify the Vikings being gifted a turnover on that play-- rather than the Lions being in field goal range with a 10-9 in the 4th quarter--is beyond me.

The second line in that Associated Press story was "Minnesota Vikings fans want a new coach." Apparently there were numerous "Fire Childress!" chants at the Dome today. (I never heard them on the television.) I understand the fans' frustration. Everyone can see that the Vikings are loaded with talent. Peterson is a stud. The left side of the line--Birk, Hutch and McKinney--are all being paid like studs. Ditto Berrian. Yet the offense has totaled just 8 touchdowns in 6 games. Among the 16 NFC teams, only the winless Lions and the 1-4 Rams have scored fewer points. Only Adrian Peterson has scored more points than cornerback Antoine Winfield among non-kickers on the roster.

The Lions were a team that could have easily been rolled. Their quarterback, undrafted 4th year backup Dan Orlovsky, came into the game having thrown 45 passes in his entire career, compiling a QB rating of 39.7. He makes Tarvaris Jackson look like Gus Frerotte by comparison. And he was absolutely terrorized by the Vikes' D-line, especially K Williams. He ran out of the end zone for a safety in the first period--Minnesota's ultimate winning margin. On at least two other occasions, somewhat flushed out of the pocket but still with time to look downfield and get off a throw if he'd kept his cool, he essentially fell down rather than get hammered. Yes, the Lions exploited Henderson's absence and a couple of injuries to backup David Herron (plus the overpursuit of the Williams boys) to run effectively up the gut. But the Vikings' D still yielded a mere net-8 points, and created enough opportunities for the offense to exploit good field position and/or mount a momentum-sustaining drive--and what the D didn't provide, the zebras did.

It has become apparent that while Frerotte is a big improvement over T-Jack (which damns him with faint praise), the offense in general is being sabotaged by bad play-calling, a career-backup as the signal-caller and an overrated offensive line. Ryan Cook is a horrible right tackle, guilty of at least one holding call and an offsides that immediately preceded the pass interference blunder, putting the Vikes in an untenable 2nd and 20 on a crucial possession. Birk is fading. McKinney and Hutcherson are hardly dominant. Let it be said that while Mike Tice was not the greatest head coach around, Minnesota sorely misses his abilities as a line coach.

Peterson lost a pair of fumbles today--once right near the endzone--and should probably also come in for his share of abuse. But not by me. I can't believe how talented he is, and today's butterfingers were something of an aberration--he had lost only one fumble in the previous five games and wasn't a notorious fumbler in his rookie season. Another thing: After a steady diet of AP around end and in the end-tackle holes, the Vikes have increasingly been running him up the gut recently, between the guard and tackle or center and guard. And after impressing with his game-breaking speed previously, Peterson had one of his most productive days as a punishing, Earl Campbell-like back. He rang the bell of the Lions' Alexander so badly in that post-pass interference series that the Lions had to be charged a timeout while Alexander regained consciousness or remembered his first name while lying prostrate on the ground. There were also plenty of occasions where Peterson dragged a defender a few yards, or simply lowered his head and moved the pile three yards. Considering that this same guy can get you six in a split second with a sliver of daylight, and a rare two-fumble day, is not putting him in my doghouse.

It does need to be said, however, that ever since Childress took over, the team has has problems scoring in the red zone--the place where play-calling becomes especially important. Nor can we blame this problem on T-Jack any longer (which is a moot point anyway, because T-Jack was the prime example of Childress misjudging his talent).

The third sentence of the Associated Press story, after saying that the Lions' cornerback wants an apology and Vikes' fans want a new coach, is, "Neither party is likely to be satisfied anytime soon." This is true, and as it should be. Regardless of what you think of Childress, you don't replace an NFL head coach in the middle of the season unless you want to throw in the towel and/or you are a crazy old fool like the Raiders' Al Davis. Whatever you want to say about Childress, the guy has a pretty effective counter: "My team is in first place." Yes, if today's effort versus the Lions is any indication, that's a hollow state of affairs that will soon disintegrate. But the NFC North is there for the taking, and on a day when the Vikings played their worst game of the season, they moved forward.

Quick hits: The Red Sox ought to seriously consider shutting down Josh Beckett. Anyone who has seen his past two starts, especially after the two or three fairly dominant outings he made after coming off the DL in late summer, knows he's not right. Announcers Ron Darling and Buck Martinez tried to chalk it up to Beckett being rusty. "He's used to making 33 starts, having a routine where he pitches every fifth day," said Darling. Uh, no he isn't. This is a guy continually beseiged by blisters that cause him to take a week or two off on a regular basis.

What makes Beckett's last two starts especially concerning is that he wasn't exactly facing teams wielding hot bats. Yes, the Angels and the Rays have battered him for an amazing 18 hits and 12 runs combined in his 9 and a third total innings against them. But BoSox relievers allowed just 2 runs and 10 hits in 13 and a third innings in those same two contests. I know Tim Wakefield has been knocked around in both the postseason and by this Rays ballclub. But it may be time to throw the knuckleballer out there and see if he can give you a few innings before turning it over to a bullpen committee.

As for the Timberwolves, I'm not going to write too much about games I don't see. But the loss to Denver with Love and Jefferson in the same frontcourt is hardly a surprise. Even if the ballclub was weary, as coach Randy Wittman said, the Nugs sat Melo and don't have Camby and still put up 60 points in the paint while outscoring Minnesota 31-10 in fast break points--and this with a dual point backcourt of Bassy and Foye.

22 Reader Comments

b (not verified)07:18am
Oct 13
Brit, you've said before that football is not your best sport to analyze and I think this post backs that up. While I look to your T'Wolves takes in a state of awe, as a football wonk who played through college I have to take issue with a some things you say about the Vikings. A couple things: 1) While calls can have a big factor in games and they were by all accounts lucky breaks for the Vikings, they are still factors that teams must overcome and the Lions didn't do it. Every team in every sport has had calls go against them and the good teams overcome them. 2) "Everyone can see that the Vikings are loaded with talent." Sorry, but no. The Vikings are not loaded, at least not on the offensive side of the ball which you referred to after that statement. They have two elite players: Peterson and Hutchinson. They have four good players: Chester Taylor, Bernard Berrian, Matt Birk, Bryant McKinnie. Everyone else is a role player at this point. Sidney Rice might be good but that doesn't matter if he's not on the field. The most glaring void is at the all-important quarterback position where you have aptly taken Childress to task. The fact is that this team is not very good on offense and has a passing game that's just finding some life past the quarter mark of the season, thanks to Bernard Berrian. 3) To distinguish criticism between playcalling and execution, you better know what play is being called, what front shown by the defense, and then see if the players did their assignments or not. To do this without reviewing game tape is ludicrous. Professional football people need to watch tape to see what happened so anytime I hear anyone criticize playcalling immediately after a game without going into fine detail I have high suspicion. 4) To me, the bigger problem is execution, especially by the offensive line who have to work more closely than any other unit on the field. If the offensive line doesn't block correctly it doesn't matter what play you call or who is at the skill positions, the plays won't work. Also in this mix are bad passes, dropped passes, and impatient running. 5) Peterson's fumble in the red zone was huge this game. While he is one of the most talented running backs in the league, that was a very costly mistake. Following it up with another fumble was huge as well. Let's not forget Gus' interception, either. Football games are won and lost on big plays and turnovers. The Vikings were behind in the turnover column and still won. 6) Don't make excuses when the Vikings have a big play. Berrian's play was a great throw and catch and calling it a missed tackle is silly. Every play is a missed tackle, then. Jerry Rice's whole career was just missed tackles, then. 7) Frerotte is not a huge improvement over T-Jack, but is a small one. If some of the receivers make a few catches for T-Jack that they made later for Frerotte (I'm thinking specifically of Shiancoe and Berrian) T-Jack is probably still the starter. Frerotte is a bit better but not much. 8) The defense is very good and calls or no calls they did more than their share again this week. Lastly, they won. Even good teams win ugly sometimes and the Vikes aren't a good team. To expect them to "roll" anyone is silly. Unless they make big improvements in their execution, this is what we're going to get for the rest of the season. Don't believe the hype: Vikes should not be predicted as anything but mediocre and led by defense until offense is consistently dynamic in the passing game. It's as simple as that enjoy the win. Extended arguments for always enjoying a win at: http://mnrebuildsforever.blogspot.com/2008/10/wait-minute-didnt-vikings-win.html
Britt Robson07:58am
Oct 13
b-- I'll grant you that my football knowledge is only slightly above my passion for the sport, and that's not very high. But I'm game for a discussion and will rebut or agree point by point. 1. The timing of calls that go against you are a huge factor. Yeah, all teams must overcome bad calls, but when you award a ballclub instant field goal position instead of 3rd and 20 with a quarterback you yourself regard as mediocre, that's a very big gift. There was very little to suggest the Vikes would have scored 3 points if that pass interference whistle wasn't blown. But the best team in football would have yielded that game-losing FG to Longwell under similar circumstances after that pass interference call. Do you honestly think otherwise? 2. Yes, saying the Vikes are loaded on offense is an overstatement. 3+4 Your delination about play-calling and execution isn't as stark and as mysterious (you need game tape and prior knowledge of offense and defense sets) as you say. To go too far in the other direction, I'd simply say that part of coaching is knowing what plays will generate the most successful execution by the personnel you are guiding. Or, put another way, if good teams reduce the toxic impact of bad calls more often than bad teams, good coaches reduce the toxic impact of bad execution more often than bad coaches. Don't let the play-calling off the hook. 5. Conventional wisdom--yes, turnovers are a big factor in any football game. But even if AP had put that ball in the end zone instead of fumbling it, the Vikings winning 19-10 at home against the Lions is hardly a prime time effort. 6. The cornerback had Berrian around the thighs and let him go. He pretty much outran the rest of the team after that. Surely you understand the difference between a thrilling run where a ball-carrier is talented enough to make people miss and a less thrilling run where a key guy screws up and everyone else is out of positon. A solid tackle--nothing fancy, just a simple, solid tackle at the point of first contact--holds that play to a six yard gain. 7. Frerotte is allowed to throw downfield more often than T-Jack was. If you really believe that you need game film and inside info to determine what is play calling and what is execution, how can you be so sure that Frerotte is only marginally better than T-Jack? And if the coaches open up the offense for Frerotte where they wouldn't for T-Jack, whose fault is that, the QB's or the coaches'? 8. Agreed. "Lastly" the people whose livelihood depends on correctly predicting football games--the bookies who set the Vegas line--obviously thought the Vikings would roll Sunday. Thanks for the feedback.
Cheap Seats Erick (not verified)11:48am
Oct 13
As a lifelong Vikings backer, I pride myself on not being one of those stereotypical fans who's always calling for the head coach to be fired and/or for the backup QB to replace the starter. I've tried to give Childress the benefit of the doubt. I really have. But the final straw was his decision Sunday to kick an extra point when down by 2 (10-8) in the third quarter. It's simple math. Down by two, go for two. And, every head coach in the league has a frickin' chart that tells him what to do. The mistake isn't what has me convinced that he needs to be fired as soon as possible. It's the lack of personal accountability, which has become his personal trademark as a head coach. The next two paragraphs are from a blog post by Strib Vikings writer Judd Zulgad: --- Childress was asked about his decision not to go for two during his postgame news conference. “Just because there was time left,” he said. “It was in the third quarter, was it not? There were a couple minutes to go in the third quarter. At that point it was a little bit too early. It is on the chart, ‘it says [to] ‘go for it.’ But not at the end of the third quarter.” Childress was then asked about the downside of going for two points in that situation. ”You just have to decide,” he said. “It’s a coaches’ decision. I’m not sure that was a real game-changer there.” --- This is infuriating. Childress made what could have been a very costly=a mistake and even acknowledges it went against what he is supposed to do. But then he refuses to own up to the error and downplays its significance, just because he happened to get lucky and it didn't cost his team the game. At this point, is anyone still buying this guy's bullshit? Zygi Wilf, apparently.
Collin Trude (not verified)04:06am
Oct 16
Not going for two in such a case is perfectly reasonable. It's quite possibe that going for two and not getting it often can cause an important momentum shift. It psychs the other team up anytime you fail on the last play of a drive, and all of the positive energy from the touchdown can be lost. Not good to lose that energy when your team rarely scores touchdowns. Looking on the bright side of things, the Berrian touchdown was a great play. No one had his arm wrapped around Berrian's thigh. The linebacker covering him was sort of holding onto Berrian while the ball was still in the air but let go before the ball arrived. When Berrian made the catch, the linebacker made a dive and got in the way of another defender, largely a result of how Berrian executed his pattern. Berrian then went on to make a man miss with a good move and impressively re accelerated after losing some forward momentum dodging the player. Berrian then used a group of fellow Vikings ahead to get a great block. The lions didn't play perfectly on the play, and they somehow screwed up their coverage so a linebacker was pretty much one on one with our most dangerous receiver. However, if the defense played perfectly every play, adrian peterson wouldn't have made any of the great plays he made last year. Also, the vikings managed six sacks, a pretty good number of sacks, even against the lions. The fumble call was a bit of a judgement call, they made the wrong judgement, probably. The ball seemed kind of loose to me, but that's probably just because I'm a vikings fan. Maybe the pass interference call looks like a really terrible callbecause we've all seen it in slow motion. When you watch it at full speed, it looks more like Allison is getting shoved forward and down. Still, it's quite the lucky break to get a call like that. The bad call gave the viking's three points. In any case, the offensive line looked horrible this week. They were completely out of sink. It appeared that Ferotte and Birk together did a poor job of reading the defense and picking up the blitz. Ferrotte took too long on plays where the lions appeared to be blitzing 7 or 8 players, and even when they weren't blitzing that many players, cracks were showing all over the line. They allowed five sacks and failed to give Adrian Peterson any room to run. The weakest link, Ryan Cook, got penalized twice at key moments of the game. When he wasn't being penalized, he was being ripped to shreds by his assignment. Of course, it's not all his fault. Other offensive linemen aren't playing up to their abilities.
b (not verified)05:27pm
Oct 14
Thanks for the discussion, Brit. 1) I can't deny that some calls are bigger than others, often much bigger. That call that Ed Hoculi blew in San Diego, basically giving Denver the game earlier this year is just huge. The Lions got jobbed. No doubt about it. But that isn't either team's "fault". You can credit or debit either team for things they don't control. 2) The lack of a good QB and playmakers in the passing game is a huge problem that will keep the Purple from being a good team. 3+4) The only thing I could agree with if people are going to criticize playcallling is if they say they don't like the offensive philosophy. I think people are frustrated that they don't take shots down the field like the Vikings did in their hayday. But it looks to me more like execution, especially when the quarterback gets pressured and AD is bottled up. But without knowing what was called and how the defense was lined up and how the play played-out, it is really hard to tell who is screwing up and whether we are getting outcoached or not. It is possible but I can't tell and I don't trust many people that claim they can. 5) I really don't care about the score. A win within the division is always big. Yes it was sloppy, yes I am disappointed in the lack of production and mistakes but in every season you have bad performances that you have to chalk-up and move on. Granted, the offense is horrible this year, but wins are hard to come by in the NFL. I think a lot of people lose sight of that. 6) I've watched this play about four times in a row and I honestly don't know what you are talking about: http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80b9931e One player kind of gets a hand on him in a desperate attempt at an arm tackle. I have to say that it ended up being a great playcall because Berrian gets matched up on a linebacker = total speed mismatch. The play is executed beatifully: Frerotte protected, hits Berrian in stride, Berrian catches and runs and somebody gets great downfield block and races to the endzone. There was no luck involved in that play whatsoever. 7) Frerotte misses too many passes and isn't good at escaping a rush. I can see that, at least. He is serviceable and an upgrade over Jackson due to his ability to anticipate, recognize and throw downfield well. He is alright. But Jackson might've seemed alright, too, if his receivers make the catches they make for Frerotte. That much I have seen. "Lastly" until Vikings show consistency on offense, they shouldn't be predicted to roll on anyone because to do so defense and special teams would have to score points and no one can predict that, as far as I know.
midlife crisis (not verified)10:48pm
Oct 14
At least we can agree on one thing, the vikings are not much better than the Lions, who are in the bottom 4 of the league. That's what so much of the post referred to. The NFC central is apparently a conference where teams will start backing into the playoffs starting week 6. And Frerotte sucks eggs. He is a one or two game fill in, and asking him to save the season is as inappropriate as hitching your wagon to TJack for his first 3 years. What happens when Frerotte gets seriously injured due to the porous front 5? Back to TJack??? And finally, whatever happened to "the premier coaching job in the league"? How much changed post childress?
b (not verified)11:32am
Oct 15
Yes, T-Jack is back if Frerotte goes down. My biggest criticism of the Vikings is the manner in which they have went ahead without any quality at the quarterback position. Some of that blame has to fall on Childress but not all of it. Quarterback is the most important single position in football especially with the field tilted in the offense's favor by rules changes. To go forward with the totally unproven commodity of T Jack and the backup-at-best Frerotte is completely negligent.
Mike (not verified)06:51am
Oct 15
I guess I find myself disagreeing with Brit on this post as well. I am of the belief that the Calvin Johnson fumble was too close to call, and that the ref was right to not overturn it. If you watch the replay the ball was in his hand, then not in his hand (although the ball itself didn't appear to move much, it was apparent, to me at least, that the ball was no longer connected to the hand). And to say that Frerotte has distinguished himself as the better QB doesn't make any sense to me at all. The reason we won all three of the games Frerotte won is because the defense scored points, end of story. That didn't happen when Jackson started; what also didn't happen is receivers catching the ball. Along with getting sacked alot more often, Frerotte has just as many errant passes, although they are not viewed in the same light as Jackson's errant passes. Other than that I found the post very interesting, and I am a huge fan of the Timberwolves coverage on this site. I look forward to a new season of NBA posts, as well as a few NFL sprinkled in, just to see the not average Minnesota fan's opinion of the Vikings.
pagingstanleyroberts (not verified)10:01am
Oct 13
Wakefield is scheduled to start Game 4, I think. I agree with the Sox' line of reasoning, though; because they have Wakefield and Paul Byrd as options in a Game 6, they'll probably start Beckett and give him the early hook if it's not working. However, I could see them changing that strategy if they get bad starts from Lester/Wakefield/Dice-K in the next 3 games.
pagingstanleyroberts (not verified)10:18am
Oct 13
Forgot to add a comment about the Wolves. I actually did find it surprising that this was such a blowout, even if Smith didn't play and both McCants and Miller played fewer than 10 minutes. This was a team they almost beat twice in Denver last season, and it was disappointing to see such a lack of offense (besides the mad gunner combo of Blake Ahearn and Corey Brewer) and defense. However, this will probably be the way they'll get blown out this season on the occasions that they are: can't make their shots, foul- and turnover-prone, other team moves the ball well and controls tempo.
RhinoLove (not verified)07:23am
Oct 15
Mea culpa...I hope. Considering this is preseason, and I am strictly going off the box scores...this may be premature, but I cautiously optimistic that I was completely wrong in calling Corey Brewer a bust last year. The guy is filling the box score, shooting a decent percentage, and I'd assume playing his usual tough D. The addition of two more shooters (Love and Miller) should benefit him, and I REALLY, REALLY hope this continues. Three cheers for Corey. Also, dare I say the Wolves bench is looking somewhat stacked with quality (if inexperienced) talent? Seriously, look at the projected reg. season roster...there is not a single dud on the list. Not saying we are going to win a lot of games this season, but these guys are all legit NBA players. We may even need to move Gomes or Smith (please no!)...there aren't enough minutes.
Andy G (not verified)07:57am
Oct 15
Brewer looked really solid last night. He's firing without hesitation--when open, and hitting at a decent clip. He also hounded Deng, drew a couple offensive fouls, and (like last season) looked to run the floor. Basically, if he plays all season like he did last night, he'll be the guy we thought we were getting on draft night. Too bad it's just one pre-season game. Rhino may have trouble fitting into this rotation. The way I see it, we'll probably play 9 guys a good chunk of minutes. If and until someone gets hurt, (which is bound to happen, let's just hope it's not #25) I think this is it: Bassy Foye Shaddy Miller Brewer Gomes Love Jefferson Harrison/Collins (I'm thinking that one of these guys will always be hurt--right now, it's Collins). Gomes showed again last night that he's our best all-around player. Not most valuable, but he just has the widest variety of skills. He's also dropped weight, noticeably, and will probably be trying to play more 3 this season.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)10:21am
Oct 15
I listened to most of the game last night. The first quarter was a disaster, after that you couldn't ask much more from a Miller-less Wolves squad. My question to all: Ollie or Ahearn? I can argue both sides. If the decision is based on who helps the team most on the court as a 3rd point (and back up during Bassy's suspension), its Ollie. Witt threw him the keys last night down the stretch and he helped guide the team to a comfortable win. His experience can be useful to our younger guys as the season goes on as well. I could argue Ahearn as more of a trading chip. His shooting is great of course, but his value might be more as a sweetener for any yet-to-be-determined deals down the road. My call is Ollie. You?
RhinoLove (not verified)10:41am
Oct 15
Seriously. If we even keep one it is only for the first week of the season, then we'll put him on the IR. They are both garbage. I'd actually rather throw Shaddy the back up PG spot for those three games (Foye can play 40+ minutes anyways) and keep the roster spot for somebody else. Neither is a trading chip.
A.K. Agikamik (not verified)09:06am
Oct 16
I say this with no ill will towards Chris Richards: Its a nice sign for the Wolves that Chris Richards' success or failure will have no bearing on this team.
Snyder (not verified)04:33pm
Oct 15
I say Ollie also for the same reasons A.K. laid out. I have not seen Ahearn play, but everything I've read about him suggests that he's more of an undersized SG than true PG and that he offers little value on the court if he's not attempting shots. Ollie may not be terribly talented, but he is an experienced PG who is willing to accept being a role player, and the Wolves need that much more than they need a shooter.
matt-rake11:45am
Oct 13
I really wanted that game to finish 3-2. Wow the vikings are boring.
Jackson (not verified)12:43am
Oct 21
What the fuck. Where the hell are my Britt Robson articles? I come back to this damned website every day multiple times and I see those two stupid Vikes bumping asscheeks each time. Can we get some content? Why the hell doesn't Britt have his own website where we can go to read his thoughts? What the hell? Every time he writes something he gets praised all to hell, including nationally. Everyone knows that he is smart but he won't get his shit together. I emailed him months ago and told him to register his domain name. www.brittrobson.com but he didn't do it and now some big domain name person has taken it and put ads on it. What an idiot. he could have his own site for only a few dollars and any college kid can put together a cheap webpage for him where he could index all his writings. He could have ads on it and be supplementing his income but I guess he hates money and being successful. I would say I'm sorry but I'm not. I, and many other people want to read some intelligent writing, goddamnit. And this monkeybrain is fucking it up. Just write some shit and let us read it! Is it really that hard!? Jesus.
Tom Bartel  url03:18pm
Oct 21
brittrobson.com has been fixed. It points right at Britt's blog. It was I who didn't have my shit together, not Britt.
Britt Robson11:25am
Oct 22
Jackson-- I define "being successful" as conducting my life on my own terms as much as possible. That means ignoring even well-meaning advice if I don't agree with it, establishing my own priorities regarding what I cover and for whom I cover it--and letting someone's ill-chosen words stand in the light for awhile. That's just the way my "monkeybrain" works. I'm flattered to know there are a lot of loyal readers out there who want my take on the Timberwolves. But I prefer not to write unless I feel I have something meaningful to say. Writing about the inner-workings of the Wolves thus far this season would be akin to me writing about the college draft--I haven't seen enough to make an informed opinion. Late tonight/early tomorrow morning I will have a take on tonight's exhibition game. I won't be going to tomorrow's exhibition game, so readers will have to use the comments forum to provide their own views, which I have generally found to be collectively as intelligent as most Wolves-related writing anywhere. Before next Wednesday's season opener, I'll provide big-picture thumbnails on how I think the NBA and the Wolves will pan out this year. And once the season starts, you can expect roughly 60-75 Three-Pointers dissecting the team's fortunes and game-by-game performance, plus the odd post when breaking news such as a trade or firing occurs. In other words, if you throw in my replies to reader comments throughout the season, I'll probably have written as much or more about this ballclub as anyone on the planet. If that's not enough of a commitment for you, I'd welcome your competition.
Jackson (not verified)12:45am
Oct 21
uh oh. I didn't think that would post automatically. I thought he would read it and not approve it but get the subtle hint. Sorry man. Might want to take that down.
APB (not verified)09:00am
Oct 21
Jackson, You dope. ;) Britt, you have some rabid fans. WE are all just getting a little excited over the coming Wolves season and your post game analysis. I think the site works just fine here at the Rake. Looking forward to your preseason writeup on the Wolves.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <i> <b> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
By entering in the words in the captcha image, you help us prevent automated spam submissions and keep the site tidy.

Blogs

Sports

Baseball:
Warning Track Power by Alex Halsted
Sports:
On the Ball by Britt Robson

Society

Weather:
Dude Weather by Jimmy Gaines

A&E

Fiction:
Write Now! by Terry Faust

Retired

Hockey:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Style:
Hook & Eye
Misc:
Is This News?
Fiction:
Yo, Ivanhoe by Brad Zellar
Food:
Consider the Egg by Stephanie March
Wine:
Beyond the Cask
Food:
Food Fight!
Media:
To the Slaughter
Misc:
Outrage by Staff
Food:
Chef's Table
Guest Commentary:
Just Passing Through
Humor:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Cars:
Road Rake by Chris Birt
Commentary:
Read Menace by Tom Bartel
Society:
The Adventures of Melinda by Melinda Jacobs
Politics:
Defenestrator by Rich Goldsmith
Food:
Breaking Bread by Jeremy Iggers & Ann Bauer
Books:
Cracking Spines by Max Ross
Music:
Hear, Hear by Staff
Art:
The Vicious Circle by 6 Critics
Secrets:
Secrets of the Day by Kate Iverson
Theater:
Seen in the City by Staff
Film:
Talk About Talkies by Staff