Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Born2Fish

Erasmus James to Redskins

23 posts in this topic

Vikings traded James to the Redskins today for a conditional 7th round draft pick. Too bad this guy never worked out for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first word was we released him, then I hear the Redskins gave us a 7th round pick. Its better then nothing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. It was awesome to actually get something for a guy that has 2 reconstructed knees...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, see ya. At least we got a little something for someone that didn't pan out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did release him. Put it on the wire so that other teams would try for a trade. The vikings played the system knowing that he would not actually hit waivers over the long weekend. So by monday night they reached a deal with the skins...too bad we couldn't get a 6th for him like williamson.

By the way, thanks for that draft tice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another in a long line of failed draft picks. Yet there's no turnover in the scouting office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah that whole 2005 draft was a complete bust, man what bad scouting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to say that the Childress drafts have been much better than the Tice drafts!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because Tice was a doofus that worked for peanuts. Red Mccombs would have let me coach the team if i was willing to do it on the cheap.

The 05 draft was brutal but 07 and 08 drafts have had some nice players.

LETS GO VIKES!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tice lobbied hard to draft Merriman but in the end was trumped and Williamson was drafted. It wasnt Tice that failed in the drafts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I should rephrase that....

The Wilf era drafts have been better than the McCombs era drafts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We haven't been able to pick a decent defensive end in the draft since Chris Doleman in 1985. Erasmus James, Kenechi Udeze, Dimitrius Underwood, Derrick Alexander, Duane Clemons and Gerald Robinson sick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AHHAHA - james walleye...do you beleive that?

Thats why Tice lobbied to get him in Jacksonville right? He couldn't get Merriman?

Tice was on T-Will the whole time...just said he'd rather of taken Merriman to save face after Williamson obviously struggled catching the ball...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry pal, this was public knowledge before Williamson even played a down in the NFL, hate to break it to ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had heard that but couldn't confirm it (about Williamson and Merriman).

I did know a guy that was Flip Saunders' right hand man (he was later a staffer for Saunders in Detroit) that worked some basketball camps with me and a buddy of mine that told us later that everyone in the Wolves front office wanted to take Josh Howard but McHale swore by Ndudi Ebi in the '03 draft. I wish front offices kept diaries of who wanted which player when drafting. You would sure find out who can evaluate talent, that's for sure...but that would be a form of accountability, and we don't do that in Minnesota sport journalism or the MN fan base....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its ok Walleye - believe that Tice was a Merriman supporter over a Williamson supporter.

You are probably the same guy that rode T-Jack into the ground all last year and will be wearing his jersey when he has a couple good games!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW.....What a great football mind!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Badger, Badger, Badger, Badger...Mushroom, Mushroom!!!

As soon as the vikings landed that 7th overall pick from the raiders. Tice was looking for his very own Randy-ratio...he was convinced Troy Williamson was the guy (he could stretch the field). Only problem, Williamson couldn't convince anyone he could catch. The best part about the Williamson draft pick is the fact they didn't take Mike Williams...who most Vikings rubes wanted.

Take a look at the first 10 picks in that '05 draft. Talk about brutal!

Land of 15,000 ponds would be a more accurate statement, being that Minnesota has regulations stating that a body of water has to be a certain size for it to be counted as a lake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing to believe. Did you read what i said? It was public knowledge BEFORE and AFTER the draft that Tice was on Merrimans bandwagon. You are the one who is trying to believe something that isnt there.

T-Jack? How long you been on this board? LOL. I've been the one saying over and over that the kid needs a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Badger, Badger, Badger, Badger...Mushroom, Mushroom!!!

As soon as the vikings landed that 7th overall pick from the raiders. Tice was looking for his very own Randy-ratio...he was convinced Troy Williamson was the guy (he could stretch the field). Only problem, Williamson couldn't convince anyone he could catch. The best part about the Williamson draft pick is the fact they didn't take Mike Williams...who most Vikings rubes wanted.

Take a look at the first 10 picks in that '05 draft. Talk about brutal!

Land of 15,000 ponds would be a more accurate statement, being that Minnesota has regulations stating that a body of water has to be a certain size for it to be counted as a lake.

Titsosy11....LOL..Those ponds have produced bigger Largemouth, Smallmouth, Musky, and Walleye than MN "lakes"

You must enjoy being one of the top daily posters even though you don't have much to say in your posts. You did graduate from UW Madison right? At least you had the opportunity to see some quality football & basketball when you were there.

I'm glad I had you pegged as never actually playing the game. It explains a lot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw good football. The basketball was pretty mediocre actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • Dave, if this many folks are not understanding the question, than maybe the question is unclear.  So rather then rant about it perhaps try rephrasing it.
    •     I believe you said it was "libertarian" drivel, actually, so you dismissed it out of hand...          
    •   You posted about neither.     But if you would read the article, my commentary and TJ's commentary you would know that's not really what the article is about.     You have to be kidding, right? Just about everyone who has an opinion on politics at all is this sort of person. Do you look at social media at all?
    •     Ok, now getting back to whether Trump will win the War on Drugs, do you think he will take any steps at all to decriminalize drugs, such as reclassifying marijuana, and recognizing state laws and programs designed to move towards the decriminalization of drugs?   Or do you think he will take steps to protect vested interests, such as prisons and the pharmaceutical. industry?   Just going off his rhetoric and his choice for a drug czar, I'm guessing he much prefers the latter, and will end up spending a bunch of taxpayer's money, and actually lose ground by continuing on with the brute force/criminalization approach.        
    • Because at the time, I don't have anything better to do.   I posted about the article, and you wanted to talk about the topic.  I posted about the topic and you want to discuss the article.    Which is it?     I support a particular candidate because their positions, taken as a whole, are preferable to me as compared to the other candidate(s).   In a few years I get to do it over.     I don't think there are really that many ardent "rah rah for my party" type folks out there, in spite of what we see on TV, or the occasional people we meet.     So the article is basically drivel, as I said before, based on a false premise.   
    • Borch I just signed up Ryan, Morgan, and me but I only see my name listed in the summary. Do my kids not show up because they don't have hso usernames?  Or did I not enter it right?     Please let me know how to fix it and I'll do so.  Thanks!
    •   Because I think self reflection is good for all of us from time to time.   If you don't wan't to discuss this article, why do you persist in posting here?           No one is disputing that at all. The premise of the author's article is in regards to the hypocrisy of then justifying everything your chosen candidate or party does blindly while vilifying the other candidates or party. It's the "all in" sports like mentality that is being discussed here.  
    • There is a really excellent book called "The Righteous Mind" that approaches this tribalist mindset from an evolutionary psychology standpoint. The author, Jonathan Haidt, does a remarkable job of unpacking why people persist in truly irrational defense of the indefensible - when it's their team doing the stupid stuff. I highly highly highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in lessening the hyperpartisan idiocy we have today.

      The trouble is that the closed-off mindset that lends itself to reflexive support for Obama/Hillary/Trump/whomever also tends to preclude any serious engagement in self-examination that the book is designed to provoke. Really good read, though.
    •   I get what your saying here but I think what Dave is talking about is the willingness of some to blindly follow, without question, their party or candidate. I saw this first hand during the primary with some of my own relatives, for example. I had a SIL who was a huge Bernie backer. The things she said about Hillary were worse than anything said here. As far as she was concerned, Hillary should be tarred and feathered and ran out on a rail. Then Bernie loses the nomination. She then became Hillary's biggest defender. Everything she said about her during the primary was instantly washed away. Even her own husband called her out. She wasn't simply voting for her because she found Trump worse. That's understandable. She defended or at least tried to deflect the issues with Hillary when just a few months prior, she said things that would make even Cooter or Bill say, "man you're harsh on her."   I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I also don't think it's widespread. Like everything else, access to more and diverse information just makes it possible to hear more about it than before. I think human nature causes people to internalize candidates and/.or elected officials. It's a "if you're critical of my candidate, you're critical of me," kind of thinking.   I don't fault anyone for voting for a candidate that one feels best represents their line of thinking. Or even defending their candidate from detractors. I don't think that is what Dave is talking about here. It's also the flipping of political opinions just because the candidate you voted for or support is supporting certain positions. For example, many conservatives opposed BHO's stimulus, including myself. It didn't work  as promised and we just added more on to the debt. So on the campaign trail, Trump also spoke of a stimulus plan that was even more expensive than BHO's and  those same people not only supported it but are justifying it. In summary, one can vote for a candidate without defending everything that person does        
  • Our Sponsors