Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Brooks Bollinger


UNDakota

Recommended Posts

I noticed the article said he'd be Johnson's backup, but when? Would it be right away on opening week? A lot of new offense to learn.

He has been running a very similar version of the West Coast offense in NY. Also, the Vikings offensive coordinator is an ex-Wisconsin offensive coach. Shouldn't take too much of an adjustment. He's a better back-up than Mike McMahon. And a good insurance policy until Tavaris Jackson is ready to play in a couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has been running a very similar version of the West Coast offense in NY. Also, the Vikings offensive coordinator is an ex-Wisconsin offensive coach. Shouldn't take too much of an adjustment. He's a better back-up than Mike McMahon. And a good insurance policy until Tavaris Jackson is ready to play in a couple of years.

I wasn't sure what O the Jets ran. Thanks for the info.

Wasn't Childress at Wisconsin? If so, was this at the same time as Brooks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't sure what O the Jets ran. Thanks for the info.

Wasn't Childress at Wisconsin? If so, was this at the same time as Brooks?

Yes, Childress was at Wisconsin. I don't know if he was there at the same time as Bollinger.

Well, McMahon was told earlier that he wouldn't be playing tonight and then they acquire Bollinger... Sorry, JFR, but McMahon has already packed his bags. I mean, even JT O'Sullivan got playing time tonight. Judging by that fact alone, the depth chart at QB would have to be Johnson, Bollinger, Jackson, O'Sullivan, McMahon. I doubt they'll keep 5 QBs on staff. They'll surely not send McMahon to NFL Europe. So, O'Sullivan got a really long look at the Vikings and McMahon's career ended this week.

Vikings' backfield is suspect enough, but even Faison, whatshisname, and that really long named guy got more time than Mewelde Moore. Could he also be on the way out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tonight on the Vikings game, they said Childress recruited Brooks at Wisconsin.

I think the Vikes are dumping both McMahon and O'Sullivan. That's why O'Sullivan played so much tonight, to show what he's got to other teams. From what I saw, it's not much.

You'd be correct! :D That's why they brought in Brooks to backup Johnson and give Jackson a little buffer before he'd be thrown in...kind of feel bad for old JT though...could only scrum up 2 points against UND in '01 and he STILL hasn't CUT HIS HAIR ;):love:

WELCOME TO THE VIKES BB!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'd be correct! ;) That's why they brought in Brooks to backup Johnson and give Jackson a little buffer before he'd be thrown in...kind of feel bad for old JT though...could only scrum up 2 points against UND in '01 and he STILL hasn't CUT HIS HAIR ;):love:

WELCOME TO THE VIKES BB!!

Don't be giving him 2 points! That was all UND. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tonight on the Vikings game, they said Childress recruited Brooks at Wisconsin.

I think the Vikes are dumping both McMahon and O'Sullivan. That's why O'Sullivan played so much tonight, to show what he's got to other teams. From what I saw, it's not much.

Childress recruited him at Wisconsin and was the O Coordinator while Brooks was redshirting at Wisconsin as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also Darrell Bevel the new Vikings O Coordinator was Brook's Qb Coach at Wisconsin, and also played there, This is a great move for Brooks..

Just sign a 3 year contract extension, now will quailfy for NFL pension plan if he continues to make the team each year....HUGE

Congrats Brooks...and Most important Give Grandma Lisa and Grandpa Rob a Chance to see their Grandson more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the classless comment about the hair? If you're trying to push my buttons, congratulations. It worked.

C'mon!!! Each to their own, right? Personally, I think it looks cool to see some hair sticking out the back of a football (or hockey) helmet. I get so sick and tired of that old played-out mentality from the "Leave It To Beaver" days that men are supposed to keep their hair short. I thought the Beatles killed that sexist stereotype back in the '60s. I'm sorry if I come across as being grumpy or confrontational, but I really get riled up whenever somebody makes a negative comment about guys with long hair. Long hair, short hair, who gives a rat's ass?

Women with short hair don't have to put up with the derogatory comments about length of hair = gender association, so why should we? Maybe we don't all want to mutilate our locks by having them chopped off all the way right up to our hair line on the back of our necks. Maybe some of us actually like to wear our hair longer than the rest of you conformists. We don't all have to look the same like sheep. You don't see us longhairs taking potshots at people with short hair, so please give us the same courtesy. I really don't think that's too much to ask. Thank you, now I'll get off my soapbox.

None of us will ever be free until long-hair persecution ends!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does sound like Mike McMahon may be done with the Minnesota Vikings,but I think I read somewhere that he has a guaranteed contract. I assume he will still be paid quite a lot of money. He shouldn't be counted out of the NFL just yet--the guy is quite a fighter. Coaching may be an option too and he is friends with Terry Shea (a former Rutgers coach) who is the quarterbacks coach with the Kansas City Chiefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may think it's all fun and games and real funny-cutesy to mock my disgust, but perhaps you wouldn't be laughing if it was something you liked that all the trendy hipster types with the Eminem haircuts were making derogatory comments about. Something to think about.

You're right, I wouldn't laugh at Eminem's haircut now. But 10 years from now, when it's out of style, I will be ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it'll be funny in 10 years, then it is funny now. Too many people are way too concerned with what is and what isn't in style. If you like it, go for it. If it happens to be in style, fine. If not, that's okay too. If you do something because it is in style then you're doing it for the wrong reason.

Just stop and think how silly it would be to have this thought go through your mind... "I don't really dig this look, but I'll go along with it because it's in style". You, the individual, should make up your own mind. Don't let what's in style dictate the way you decide to look. Have a little more self-pride and dignity than that.

There is nothing wrong with setting your own trend, but jeez, get a thicker skin. People are just having fun with you. List of things that a guy deserves to be made fun of:

10) Smoking a cigarette while riding a bike (pedal bike)

9) Wearing smaller size pants than necessary and having your gut just flop over your belt line

8) Driving a Geo Metro

7) Wearing "wife-beater" shirt in public

6) Wearing Zubaz or sweatpants in public

5) Getting a perm (guy)

4) Masking tape to hold glasses together

3) Hairpiece that resembles a dead animal

2) Beard that doesn't fill in right

1) Long hair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...