PDA

View Full Version : Are the Vikings a legit threat?



SharperImage
12-06-2007, 11:02 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?page=burningquestions/07week13


good read. i would say this is the most important game of the season

marstc09
12-06-2007, 11:23 AM
If TJ plays every game like Sunday we are a threat to win the Super Bowl and that is no joke.

PurpleTide
12-06-2007, 11:23 AM
Short and sweet, and in a word YES. Lets Go Vikings~Skol crushin' time in 9er land.

NodakPaul
12-06-2007, 11:24 AM
Are the Vikings a legit threat in the NFC?

Sean Salisbury: Yes, the Vikings are definitely a legitimate threat in the NFC. They have a great rushing attack with Chester Taylor and Adrian Peterson, and the defense is playing excellent football. This team is starting to come together at the right time and will be dangerous for any NFC team to play down the stretch.

Eric Allen: The Vikings are one of the better teams in the NFC right now and that's because of the improved maturity of quarterback Tarvaris Jackson. Over the past few games he's shown why this team believed he could get the job done because of his ability to avoid costly mistakes. He's spreading the ball around and utilizing the excellent running backs he has. The game is obviously much easier for a quarterback when he has a dominant rushing attack that a defense has to worry about. Jackson is taking full advantage of that now.

Music to my ears...

Purple D
12-06-2007, 11:26 AM
If we can continue to dominate teams like we have the last 2 weeks.
I think we can put the fear into all teams.
If we go to SF and dominate that game, we will be on our way to making alot of doubters change there minds.

marstc09
12-06-2007, 11:27 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:



Are the Vikings a legit threat in the NFC?

Sean Salisbury: Yes, the Vikings are definitely a legitimate threat in the NFC. They have a great rushing attack with Chester Taylor and Adrian Peterson, and the defense is playing excellent football. This team is starting to come together at the right time and will be dangerous for any NFC team to play down the stretch.

Eric Allen: The Vikings are one of the better teams in the NFC right now and that's because of the improved maturity of quarterback Tarvaris Jackson. Over the past few games he's shown why this team believed he could get the job done because of his ability to avoid costly mistakes. He's spreading the ball around and utilizing the excellent running backs he has. The game is obviously much easier for a quarterback when he has a dominant rushing attack that a defense has to worry about. Jackson is taking full advantage of that now.

Music to my ears...


Where is that Packer fan who said we were a garbage team?

funkyasflea
12-06-2007, 11:27 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:



Are the Vikings a legit threat in the NFC?

Sean Salisbury: Yes, the Vikings are definitely a legitimate threat in the NFC. They have a great rushing attack with Chester Taylor and Adrian Peterson, and the defense is playing excellent football. This team is starting to come together at the right time and will be dangerous for any NFC team to play down the stretch.

Eric Allen: The Vikings are one of the better teams in the NFC right now and that's because of the improved maturity of quarterback Tarvaris Jackson. Over the past few games he's shown why this team believed he could get the job done because of his ability to avoid costly mistakes. He's spreading the ball around and utilizing the excellent running backs he has. The game is obviously much easier for a quarterback when he has a dominant rushing attack that a defense has to worry about. Jackson is taking full advantage of that now.

Music to my ears...


Ditto...it's been a long long time since I have heard Mr. Salisbury speak good words about our Vikings.
Do we finally have him convinced?

pack93z
12-06-2007, 11:31 AM
To win in the playoffs and make a run you need to do the following...

Run the Ball.... Vikings Big Time Check...
Defend the Run well... Vikings Check...

Play solid special teams... Vikings Check...

Play fundamentally solid Pass defense without the big plays... Vikings??
QB has to make plays when needed... Vikings of the past 2 to 3 weeks check... consistent?

Yes the Vikes are a threat... key will be TJ or I should say QB play... with that goes the Vikes.. Sounds like another team I know.. Hmmm. ;)

SharperImage
12-06-2007, 11:33 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:



Are the Vikings a legit threat in the NFC?

Sean Salisbury: Yes, the Vikings are definitely a legitimate threat in the NFC. They have a great rushing attack with Chester Taylor and Adrian Peterson, and the defense is playing excellent football. This team is starting to come together at the right time and will be dangerous for any NFC team to play down the stretch.

Eric Allen: The Vikings are one of the better teams in the NFC right now and that's because of the improved maturity of quarterback Tarvaris Jackson. Over the past few games he's shown why this team believed he could get the job done because of his ability to avoid costly mistakes. He's spreading the ball around and utilizing the excellent running backs he has. The game is obviously much easier for a quarterback when he has a dominant rushing attack that a defense has to worry about. Jackson is taking full advantage of that now.

Music to my ears...



Yep but im scared...everytime we play a hyped game..we lose..im just a lil nervous...and now sean salibury wants to talk good about his former vikings...he better not be a hop on..but to be honest..it was less stress being the underdog..now since we are expected to win...it scares me more..

pack93z
12-06-2007, 11:33 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


Where is that Packer fan who said we were a garbage team?


Probably still bitching about the Cowboy game.... all year all... same story... QB produces even a little you have a great chance to win the game. Maybe Oline Pass Protection.. but in all other portions of the game... you have plenty of talent and are very solid.

SKOL
12-06-2007, 11:40 AM
If consistent the Vikes could be a threat.
Even then, the run would likely end at either Dallas or Green Bay, and if somehow we miraculously survive that we would not get past the Pats.

I'm not trying to be negative, just realistic.
Three weeks ago we were thinking top five pick.

Now, if we blow out the last four teams like we did the Giants and Lions I'll change my tune, to at least say we'd compete against the Pack and Cowboys, but that's a long ways off.

NodakPaul
12-06-2007, 11:40 AM
"pack93z" wrote:


To win in the playoffs and make a run you need to do the following...

Run the Ball.... Vikings Big Time Check...
Defend the Run well... Vikings Check...

Play solid special teams... Vikings Check...

Play fundamentally solid Pass defense without the big plays... Vikings??
QB has to make plays when needed... Vikings of the past 2 to 3 weeks check... consistent?

Yes the Vikes are a threat... key will be TJ or I should say QB play... with that goes the Vikes.. Sounds like another team I know.. Hmmm. ;)



Actually a good analysis of the Vikings.
I honestly think the Vikings have what it takes to make the playoffs, and even win a game or two.
I would be surprised (and elated) if we made the superbowl though.
At least not this year... ;D

marstc09
12-06-2007, 11:41 AM
"pack93z" wrote:


To win in the playoffs and make a run you need to do the following...

Run the Ball.... Vikings Big Time Check...
Defend the Run well... Vikings Check...

Play solid special teams... Vikings Check...

Play fundamentally solid Pass defense without the big plays... Vikings??
QB has to make plays when needed... Vikings of the past 2 to 3 weeks check... consistent?

Yes the Vikes are a threat... key will be TJ or I should say QB play... with that goes the Vikes.. Sounds like another team I know.. Hmmm. ;)



Big time check for the run defense as well. We lead the league in this category.

The pass defense does not concern me and it should not be a concern to make a run to the playoffs. We are 10th in the league in points allowed. Bend but don't break.

You do not know if he is consistent or not until he starts having bad games.

Marrdro
12-06-2007, 01:02 PM
I can see that some of you are now getting visions of the future.
;D

Problem for me is (in priority order of concern):

Can TJ stay healthy?
Can the OL continue to play at the level they are?
Can our DL get consistent pressure on the QB?
Can our Secondary stop the pass if our DL can't get pressure on the QB?
Will the staff (Bryzcheapski) come off the funds to plug the holes that are still there?

Even though I am probably one of the biggest optimists on this page, I still see some holes which could lead to inconsistent play, however, with another good draft, a Stud DE (Suggs) and another WR (Vet) and a better option for QB if TJ goes down, we are still a bit off my friends.

(Key note:
No concerns about the Coaching staff, most of the front office, or ownership)

Frostbite
12-06-2007, 01:08 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


To win in the playoffs and make a run you need to do the following...

Run the Ball.... Vikings Big Time Check...
Defend the Run well... Vikings Check...

Play solid special teams... Vikings Check...

Play fundamentally solid Pass defense without the big plays... Vikings??
QB has to make plays when needed... Vikings of the past 2 to 3 weeks check... consistent?

Yes the Vikes are a threat... key will be TJ or I should say QB play... with that goes the Vikes.. Sounds like another team I know.. Hmmm. ;)





Yes....I agree with those and I will add two more key elements: Top position players must stay healthy (No Injuries) and You must have consistancy in performance from here on out and into the playoffs. These two areas have been issues in the past that hopefully we won't see rear there ugly heads during this playoff run.

Cheers!

COJOMAY
12-06-2007, 02:20 PM
If we got by the first wildcard game, we'd probably play the Packers. After them beating us twice this year they may take us a bit too lightly. And let's face it, we only lost to the Cowboys by 10 point and played a poor game. We can beat them.

pack93z
12-06-2007, 02:24 PM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


If we got by the first wildcard game, we'd probably play the Packers. After them beating us twice this year they may take us a bit too lightly. And let's face it, we only lost to the Cowboys by 10 point and played a poor game. We can beat them.


Well if you go in as the 6th seed, which seems to be trend unless the Giants flop continues... in all possible senerios after that you play the #1 seed.. with them up 2 games on the Pack now... seems logical that they will be the #1 seed.

I think the Cowboys would sweat bullets having to face AP and Taylor again this year.. throw in the Defense and TJ playing as he is... not a team you want to face in the post-season on a dry fast track.

bleedpurple
12-06-2007, 02:44 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


I can see that some of you are now getting visions of the future.

;D

Problem for me is (in priority order of concern):

Can TJ stay healthy?
Can the OL continue to play at the level they are?
Can our DL get consistent pressure on the QB?
Can our Secondary stop the pass if our DL can't get pressure on the QB?
Will the staff (Bryzcheapski) come off the funds to plug the holes that are still there?

Even though I am probably one of the biggest optimists on this page, I still see some holes which could lead to inconsistent play, however, with another good draft, a Stud DE (Suggs) and another WR (Vet) and a better option for QB if TJ goes down, we are still a bit off my friends.

(Key note:
No concerns about the Coaching staff, most of the front office, or ownership)


Marr.. i want to add to this, (since we are relying so heavily on rookies) will our rookies keep from hitting the rookie wall... you know about this time the long season tends to wear on rookies b/c they're not used to playing this many games... so that should also be watched as we head down this stretch run...

And i might add... that Denny Green teams, used to thrive in December..and i think historically, we fair pretty well down the stretch... so hopefully, they'll stay focused and take it one game at a time.

bleedpurple
12-06-2007, 02:45 PM
plus i wanna add.. since we started off the season sooo poorly, we've pretty much been in playoff mode since the Oakland game... this should only benefit us as we head down the stretch...

Marrdro
12-06-2007, 02:51 PM
"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


I can see that some of you are now getting visions of the future.

;D

Problem for me is (in priority order of concern):

Can TJ stay healthy?
Can the OL continue to play at the level they are?
Can our DL get consistent pressure on the QB?
Can our Secondary stop the pass if our DL can't get pressure on the QB?
Will the staff (Bryzcheapski) come off the funds to plug the holes that are still there?

Even though I am probably one of the biggest optimists on this page, I still see some holes which could lead to inconsistent play, however, with another good draft, a Stud DE (Suggs) and another WR (Vet) and a better option for QB if TJ goes down, we are still a bit off my friends.

(Key note:
No concerns about the Coaching staff, most of the front office, or ownership)


Marr.. i want to add to this, (since we are relying so heavily on rookies) will our rookies keep from hitting the rookie wall... you know about this time the long season tends to wear on rookies b/c they're not used to playing this many games... so that should also be watched as we head down this stretch run...

And i might add... that Denny Green teams, used to thrive in December..and i think historically, we fair pretty well down the stretch... so hopefully, they'll stay focused and take it one game at a time.

Two very good points.

Some won't agree but I do, the "Rookie Wall" is a big factor especially for teams like us.
On a side note,
I brought up the whole "Rookie Wall" thing with AD and limiting his reps earlier this year and got body slammed for it, even though I was right, so you probably won't get alot of support for that rationale around here.


As to the historical viewpoint of the Vikes, I don't give that much credance though.
It looks good on paper and for slamming PUKER fans but this team has nothing to do with the Vikes of old.
I do believe that the coaching staff is good enough to ensure (like Denny's teams) we put forth our best effort.

Nice post my friend.

pack93z
12-06-2007, 02:55 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Two very good points.

Some won't agree but I do, the "Rookie Wall" is a big factor especially for teams like us.
On a side note,
I brought up the whole "Rookie Wall" thing with AD and limiting his reps earlier this year and got body slammed for it, even though I was right, so you probably won't get alot of support for that rationale around here.


As to the historical viewpoint of the Vikes, I don't give that much credance though.
It looks good on paper and for slamming PUKER fans but this team has nothing to do with the Vikes of old.
I do believe that the coaching staff is good enough to ensure (like Denny's teams) we put forth our best effort.

Nice post my friend.


A quick note... IMO, AP getting hurt may very well indeed helped the Vikes long term.. one in resting some to avoid the aforementioned "rookie wall" and that Chilly was forced to utilize Taylor and now is balancing the gameplan around "both" of them.

Second.. I agree that the past has nothing to do with the present... but it is sure fun for us Packer fans to remind you of 40 plus years of no SB rings on the fingers.
;D

On the past thing... remind your fellow Vike fans of that and the whole Moss mooning.. winning in Green Bay thing.
:P

bleedpurple
12-06-2007, 03:02 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


I can see that some of you are now getting visions of the future.

;D

Problem for me is (in priority order of concern):

Can TJ stay healthy?
Can the OL continue to play at the level they are?
Can our DL get consistent pressure on the QB?
Can our Secondary stop the pass if our DL can't get pressure on the QB?
Will the staff (Bryzcheapski) come off the funds to plug the holes that are still there?

Even though I am probably one of the biggest optimists on this page, I still see some holes which could lead to inconsistent play, however, with another good draft, a Stud DE (Suggs) and another WR (Vet) and a better option for QB if TJ goes down, we are still a bit off my friends.

(Key note:
No concerns about the Coaching staff, most of the front office, or ownership)


Marr.. i want to add to this, (since we are relying so heavily on rookies) will our rookies keep from hitting the rookie wall... you know about this time the long season tends to wear on rookies b/c they're not used to playing this many games... so that should also be watched as we head down this stretch run...

And i might add... that Denny Green teams, used to thrive in December..and i think historically, we fair pretty well down the stretch... so hopefully, they'll stay focused and take it one game at a time.

Two very good points.

Some won't agree but I do, the "Rookie Wall" is a big factor especially for teams like us.
On a side note,
I brought up the whole "Rookie Wall" thing with AD and limiting his reps earlier this year and got body slammed for it, even though I was right, so you probably won't get alot of support for that rationale around here.


As to the historical viewpoint of the Vikes, I don't give that much credance though.
It looks good on paper and for slamming PUKER fans but this team has nothing to do with the Vikes of old.
I do believe that the coaching staff is good enough to ensure (like Denny's teams) we put forth our best effort.

Nice post my friend.


I try not to either... but for some odd reason.. history has a tendancy to repeat itself.. So you definately can't ignore it...
Look at Favre in Dallas.. what 0-9??
Superbowl losers, not making the playoffs the following year..
Us against Detroit... you know what i mean.. they'rs always exceptions.. but i think there is something to history...

Bkfldviking
12-06-2007, 03:27 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


I can see that some of you are now getting visions of the future.

;D

Problem for me is (in priority order of concern):

Can TJ stay healthy?
Can the OL continue to play at the level they are?
Can our DL get consistent pressure on the QB?
Can our Secondary stop the pass if our DL can't get pressure on the QB?
Will the staff (Bryzcheapski) come off the funds to plug the holes that are still there?

I agree that the "Rookie Wall" is a big concern, but one of our rookies has taken it seriously (and hopefully the other rookies are taking note) and taken steps to combat it.

If James can’t go – and even if he can – the starting job might revert to rookie Brian Robison with Jayme Mitchell being asked to see considerably more playing time. Robison, who has seen time at both end positions, said Wednesday he’s ready for the challenge and has been doing everything he can to not hit the “rookie wall” – the standard year-end swoon rookies suffer due to the extended schedule in the NFL compared to college.

“I’ve been told about the rookie wall and have been doing everything I can to make sure I get my rest and stay focused on what I need to do,” Robison said. “It was every bit as hard to break through as the guys said it was. But I got through it and I haven’t been feeling worn down lately, so I think it’s working and I’m past it.

Even though I am probably one of the biggest optimists on this page, I still see some holes which could lead to inconsistent play, however, with another good draft, a Stud DE (Suggs) and another WR (Vet) and a better option for QB if TJ goes down, we are still a bit off my friends.

(Key note:
No concerns about the Coaching staff, most of the front office, or ownership)


Marr.. i want to add to this, (since we are relying so heavily on rookies) will our rookies keep from hitting the rookie wall... you know about this time the long season tends to wear on rookies b/c they're not used to playing this many games... so that should also be watched as we head down this stretch run...

And i might add... that Denny Green teams, used to thrive in December..and i think historically, we fair pretty well down the stretch... so hopefully, they'll stay focused and take it one game at a time.

Two very good points.

Some won't agree but I do, the "Rookie Wall" is a big factor especially for teams like us.
On a side note,
I brought up the whole "Rookie Wall" thing with AD and limiting his reps earlier this year and got body slammed for it, even though I was right, so you probably won't get alot of support for that rationale around here.


As to the historical viewpoint of the Vikes, I don't give that much credance though.
It looks good on paper and for slamming PUKER fans but this team has nothing to do with the Vikes of old.
I do believe that the coaching staff is good enough to ensure (like Denny's teams) we put forth our best effort.

Nice post my friend.

Marrdro
12-06-2007, 03:29 PM
"Bkfldviking" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


I can see that some of you are now getting visions of the future.

;D

Problem for me is (in priority order of concern):

Can TJ stay healthy?
Can the OL continue to play at the level they are?
Can our DL get consistent pressure on the QB?
Can our Secondary stop the pass if our DL can't get pressure on the QB?
Will the staff (Bryzcheapski) come off the funds to plug the holes that are still there?

I agree that the "Rookie Wall" is a big concern, but one of our rookies has taken it seriously (and hopefully the other rookies are taking note) and taken steps to combat it.

Even though I am probably one of the biggest optimists on this page, I still see some holes which could lead to inconsistent play, however, with another good draft, a Stud DE (Suggs) and another WR (Vet) and a better option for QB if TJ goes down, we are still a bit off my friends.

(Key note:
No concerns about the Coaching staff, most of the front office, or ownership)


Marr.. i want to add to this, (since we are relying so heavily on rookies) will our rookies keep from hitting the rookie wall... you know about this time the long season tends to wear on rookies b/c they're not used to playing this many games... so that should also be watched as we head down this stretch run...

And i might add... that Denny Green teams, used to thrive in December..and i think historically, we fair pretty well down the stretch... so hopefully, they'll stay focused and take it one game at a time.

Two very good points.

Some won't agree but I do, the "Rookie Wall" is a big factor especially for teams like us.
On a side note,
I brought up the whole "Rookie Wall" thing with AD and limiting his reps earlier this year and got body slammed for it, even though I was right, so you probably won't get alot of support for that rationale around here.


As to the historical viewpoint of the Vikes, I don't give that much credance though.
It looks good on paper and for slamming PUKER fans but this team has nothing to do with the Vikes of old.
I do believe that the coaching staff is good enough to ensure (like Denny's teams) we put forth our best effort.

Nice post my friend.

If James can’t go – and even if he can – the starting job might revert to rookie Brian Robison with Jayme Mitchell being asked to see considerably more playing time. Robison, who has seen time at both end positions, said Wednesday he’s ready for the challenge and has been doing everything he can to not hit the “rookie wall” – the standard year-end swoon rookies suffer due to the extended schedule in the NFL compared to college.

“I’ve been told about the rookie wall and have been doing everything I can to make sure I get my rest and stay focused on what I need to do,” Robison said. “It was every bit as hard to break through as the guys said it was. But I got through it and I haven’t been feeling worn down lately, so I think it’s working and I’m past it.


Nice post my friend, but watch when you quote people to ensure you don't type in thier post.
Confuses people sometimes.

Slade
12-06-2007, 03:32 PM
Of course we are a threat.....no one would want to play us in the playoffs. We have 4 very winnable games coming up & we can't get ahead of ourselves. I' hoping our boys are pissed this Sunday & want to get some redemption for the ugly loss last year vs. SF.

vikingivan
12-06-2007, 03:34 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"COJOMAY" wrote:


If we got by the first wildcard game, we'd probably play the Packers. After them beating us twice this year they may take us a bit too lightly. And let's face it, we only lost to the Cowboys by 10 point and played a poor game. We can beat them.


Well if you go in as the 6th seed, which seems to be trend unless the Giants flop continues... in all possible senerios after that you play the #1 seed.. with them up 2 games on the Pack now... seems logical that they will be the #1 seed.

I think the Cowboys would sweat bullets having to face AP and Taylor again this year.. throw in the Defense and TJ playing as he is... not a team you want to face in the post-season on a dry fast track.


Well said 93z.
The Vikings are a team that other teams will not want to face in the playoffs.
Number 1 rushing defense and number 1 rushing offense.
That can be a lethal combination.

MemphisPurple
12-06-2007, 04:57 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


To win in the playoffs and make a run you need to do the following...

Run the Ball.... Vikings Big Time Check...
Defend the Run well... Vikings Check...

Play solid special teams... Vikings Check...

Play fundamentally solid Pass defense without the big plays... Vikings??
QB has to make plays when needed... Vikings of the past 2 to 3 weeks check... consistent?

Yes the Vikes are a threat... key will be TJ or I should say QB play... with that goes the Vikes.. Sounds like another team I know.. Hmmm. ;)



Our special teams defense could be more solid...

bleedpurple
12-06-2007, 04:59 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Two very good points.

Some won't agree but I do, the "Rookie Wall" is a big factor especially for teams like us.
On a side note,
I brought up the whole "Rookie Wall" thing with AD and limiting his reps earlier this year and got body slammed for it, even though I was right, so you probably won't get alot of support for that rationale around here.


As to the historical viewpoint of the Vikes, I don't give that much credance though.
It looks good on paper and for slamming PUKER fans but this team has nothing to do with the Vikes of old.
I do believe that the coaching staff is good enough to ensure (like Denny's teams) we put forth our best effort.

Nice post my friend.


A quick note... IMO, AP getting hurt may very well indeed helped the Vikes long term.. one in resting some to avoid the aforementioned "rookie wall" and that Chilly was forced to utilize Taylor and now is balancing the gameplan around "both" of them.

Second.. I agree that the past has nothing to do with the present... but it is sure fun for us Packer fans to remind you of 40 plus years of no SB rings on the fingers.
;D

On the past thing... remind your fellow Vike fans of that and the whole Moss mooning.. winning in Green Bay thing.
:P


to the first point.. i agree that i may have helped.. but while AP should get the majority.. i think he should be switching it up between the two of them anyway... No way AP should be getting 30+ carries with CT back there....

Unless, he plays like he did against the chargers...lol....

I think it's to our advantage to play both of them, bc Ap is sooo much faster, it provides a change of pace that we need, to gain an advantage during the game...

mblack76
12-06-2007, 05:01 PM
"funkyasflea" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:



Are the Vikings a legit threat in the NFC?

Sean Salisbury: Yes, the Vikings are definitely a legitimate threat in the NFC. They have a great rushing attack with Chester Taylor and Adrian Peterson, and the defense is playing excellent football. This team is starting to come together at the right time and will be dangerous for any NFC team to play down the stretch.

Eric Allen: The Vikings are one of the better teams in the NFC right now and that's because of the improved maturity of quarterback Tarvaris Jackson. Over the past few games he's shown why this team believed he could get the job done because of his ability to avoid costly mistakes. He's spreading the ball around and utilizing the excellent running backs he has. The game is obviously much easier for a quarterback when he has a dominant rushing attack that a defense has to worry about. Jackson is taking full advantage of that now.

Music to my ears...


Ditto...it's been a long long time since I have heard Mr. Salisbury speak good words about our Vikings.
Do we finally have him convinced?

I listen to him most Fridays. He is one of the few that actually liked T-Jack all along

mblack76
12-06-2007, 05:08 PM
I am with Childress on this...
I am not talking Playoffs till we are in. Just a game at a time. I am so concerned about this 49ers game.
>:(

BloodyHorns82
12-06-2007, 05:19 PM
Goggles off:

I can see the Vikings making the playoffs, but we'll be lucky to win two games.
Wildcard we have a shot at winning, but I don't think we're quite ready for the top tier teams just yet.
We're too young and inexperienced at key positions.


I think I said somewhere before the season that I would be happy if we just made the playoffs this year, so I won't be complaining either way.

Next year we're going to give the Packers and the rest of the NFL a run for their money.
No more chokes.

Goggles on:

Superbowl victory this year fo sho!
AD is taking us to the promised land!

BleedinPandG
12-06-2007, 05:50 PM
"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


Goggles off:

I can see the Vikings making the playoffs, but we'll be lucky to win two games.
Wildcard we have a shot at winning, but I don't think we're quite ready for the top tier teams just yet.
We're too young and inexperienced at key positions.


I think I said somewhere before the season that I would be happy if we just made the playoffs this year, so I won't be complaining either way.

Next year we're going to give the Packers and the rest of the NFL a run for their money.
No more chokes.

Goggles on:

Superbowl victory this year fo sho!
AD is taking us to the promised land!


One good thing about rookie's is some times they are too naive to realize just how big of a game they are in, too foolish to be afraid...

I like the team this year but they have to play their A game or either Dallas or GB would absolutely blow them out.
If the Vikings play a good game, they can beat anyone in the NFC... it's that simple.

As for the whole injury thing... few teams win the SB with key injuries... one of the major keys to winning the SB is staying healthy at the key positions.

HornedHat
12-06-2007, 06:03 PM
I would normally agree that we aren't ready for the top tier teams in the playoffs, except, the two top teams in the NFC appear to be the Cowboys and 'Those Whom Shall Remain Nameless'. IF the Vikes newfound confidence and abilities play out, and we do indeed make the playoffs, I am not afraid of those two teams. A strong running game and solid D will beat either team. I don't need goggles to see that. It would come down to our confidence level. What I would fear against these teams is our own coaching. At the level of progress our O has made, it doesn't seem likely that we could beat either team if we were to suddenly start throwing the ball. Abandon the run, and we will likely abandon all hope of victory. That being said, it's time to get the horse back in front of the cart. This team has disappointed me aplenty in games they needed to win against seeming lesser opponents. Let's see another soilid effort against the 9ers on the road, preferably a shellacking, before we go a chicken counting. Let me see T-Jack grow more this week, maybe throw 15 times for 250 yards and 2 TDs. We don't need a GREAT passing attack, but we need the one we have to improve just a bit more.

ejmat
12-07-2007, 09:45 AM
"SKOL" wrote:


If consistent the Vikes could be a threat.
Even then, the run would likely end at either Dallas or Green Bay, and if somehow we miraculously survive that we would not get past the Pats.

I'm not trying to be negative, just realistic.
Three weeks ago we were thinking top five pick.

Now, if we blow out the last four teams like we did the Giants and Lions I'll change my tune, to at least say we'd compete against the Pack and Cowboys, but that's a long ways off.




Let me say this.
The Vikings have played the Pack twice and the Cowboys once.
All 3 games were played when their offense struggled.
Green Bay kicked their butts the last time but the previsou game was played pretty closely.
The Vikings also played Dallas tight till the end.
In fact, if it weren't for a penalty that negated a TD in that game they could have very well won it.

Now I'm not saying 3 weeks of consistent play make you a Superbowl contender.
But I have said all along that this team has competed all year with the best of the best even when the QB play was a shaky.
I think Childress has now learned the stregnths of the offense and has done a better job calling plays when they needed to.
Leslie Frazier has also done a better job over the last 3 games giving his players some room to freelance.
If this team makes the playoffs anything can happen.
Unfortunately, they are a littl too inconsistent at this point to label them for the Superbowl.
However, if they can play like they have for the past 3 weeks I do believe they can beat any NFC team.
I guess we will have to wait and see.

C Mac D
12-07-2007, 09:52 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"SKOL" wrote:


If consistent the Vikes could be a threat.
Even then, the run would likely end at either Dallas or Green Bay, and if somehow we miraculously survive that we would not get past the Pats.

I'm not trying to be negative, just realistic.
Three weeks ago we were thinking top five pick.

Now, if we blow out the last four teams like we did the Giants and Lions I'll change my tune, to at least say we'd compete against the Pack and Cowboys, but that's a long ways off.




Let me say this.
The Vikings have played the Pack twice and the Cowboys once.
All 3 games were played when their offense struggled.
Green Bay kicked their butts the last time but the previsou game was played pretty closely.
The Vikings also played Dallas tight till the end.
In fact, if it weren't for a penalty that negated a TD in that game they could have very well won it.

Now I'm not saying 3 weeks of consistent play make you a Superbowl contender.
But I have said all along that this team has competed all year with the best of the best even when the QB play was a shaky.
I think Childress has now learned the stregnths of the offense and has done a better job calling plays when they needed to.
Leslie Frazier has also done a better job over the last 3 games giving his players some room to freelance.
If this team makes the playoffs anything can happen.
Unfortunately, they are a littl too inconsistent at this point to label them for the Superbowl.
However, if they can play like they have for the past 3 weeks I do believe they can beat any NFC team.
I guess we will have to wait and see.


Not to mention our first 3 losses were all by a TD or less (3,3,7 respectively... if memory serves me right). The first Detroit game should have been ours... without question. And I totally agree with you about the Dallas game, we played hard and almost had it.

NodakPaul
12-07-2007, 09:53 AM
PFT has the Vikings as the #6 in the playoffs.
r3HlA559-rk

ejmat
12-07-2007, 10:37 AM
"C" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"SKOL" wrote:


If consistent the Vikes could be a threat.
Even then, the run would likely end at either Dallas or Green Bay, and if somehow we miraculously survive that we would not get past the Pats.

I'm not trying to be negative, just realistic.
Three weeks ago we were thinking top five pick.

Now, if we blow out the last four teams like we did the Giants and Lions I'll change my tune, to at least say we'd compete against the Pack and Cowboys, but that's a long ways off.




Let me say this.
The Vikings have played the Pack twice and the Cowboys once.
All 3 games were played when their offense struggled.
Green Bay kicked their butts the last time but the previsou game was played pretty closely.
The Vikings also played Dallas tight till the end.
In fact, if it weren't for a penalty that negated a TD in that game they could have very well won it.

Now I'm not saying 3 weeks of consistent play make you a Superbowl contender.
But I have said all along that this team has competed all year with the best of the best even when the QB play was a shaky.
I think Childress has now learned the stregnths of the offense and has done a better job calling plays when they needed to.
Leslie Frazier has also done a better job over the last 3 games giving his players some room to freelance.
If this team makes the playoffs anything can happen.
Unfortunately, they are a littl too inconsistent at this point to label them for the Superbowl.
However, if they can play like they have for the past 3 weeks I do believe they can beat any NFC team.
I guess we will have to wait and see.


Not to mention our first 3 losses were all by a TD or less (3,3,7 respectively... if memory serves me right). The first Detroit game should have been ours... without question. And I totally agree with you about the Dallas game, we played hard and almost had it.


Our loss to Detroit was in overtime.
Longwell missed a FG at the end of regulation that would have won the game.
We were dominating KC until that rediculous non TD call that Shiancoe caught and the ref said it hit the ground.
The challenge was inconclusive.
That would have made the score 17-0.
They lost momentum after that.
They also missed a sure TD on an overthrown pass.
Against Green Bay they had another overthrow on a sure TD and we know about the rediculous calls (or non-calls) that game.
Although Green Bay did outplay the Vikes, it's still a game that could have been won.

ejmat
12-07-2007, 10:49 AM
On another note, did anyone watch NFL Access last night?
If I heard right I think Rod Woodson is crazy.
He mentioned he didn't think the Vikings were the team to beat because they have tough games down the stretch.
He mentioned they had to play Green Bay again.
Now, I may be wrong and missed who he really was talking about but I thought he was talking about the Vikings.
I'm not saying anyone one of the teams they play can't beat the Vikes but a tough schedule down the stretch compared to everyone elses schedule?
Plus him saying they have to play Green Bay again.
I think he's a little lost here (if he was talking about the Vikings).
He has a right to his opinion but at least have the facts correct.
Or maybe it's me that has the facts wrong here.

COJOMAY
12-07-2007, 10:53 AM
We DO have to play GB again -- in the Playoffs!
:D

C Mac D
12-07-2007, 10:55 AM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


We DO have to play GB again -- in the Playoffs!
:D


Hell Yeah... I like that attitude. I remember the last time we had a playoff game there...


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/images/0110-05.jpg

kevoncox
12-07-2007, 11:15 AM
I like our chances but I think we may lose by default.

The Cardinals have a very easy schedule left.
Seahawks, Rams, Falcons and Saints.

We however, have
Bears, Skins, 49ers and Denver

We can win all of these games but it's possible to lose 2 or more.
We can't just assume we'll be there.

We have 3 very challenging teams to play and we must be prepared.
The Cardinals are playing a bunch of no- ones. We can only hope that the new stadium
= same old cardinals.

BleedinPandG
12-07-2007, 11:16 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


On another note, did anyone watch NFL Access last night?
If I heard right I think Rod Woodson is crazy.
He mentioned he didn't think the Vikings were the team to beat because they have tough games down the stretch.
He mentioned they had to play Green Bay again.
Now, I may be wrong and missed who he really was talking about but I thought he was talking about the Vikings.
I'm not saying anyone one of the teams they play can't beat the Vikes but a tough schedule down the stretch compared to everyone elses schedule?
Plus him saying they have to play Green Bay again.
I think he's a little lost here (if he was talking about the Vikings).
He has a right to his opinion but at least have the facts correct.
Or maybe it's me that has the facts wrong here.


I'm sure he was talking about the Lions, they have a tough stretch remaining including GB...

BleedinPandG
12-07-2007, 11:19 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


I like our chances but I think we may lose by default.

The Cardinals have a very easy schedule left.
Seahawks, Rams, Falcons and Saints.

We however, have
Bears, Skins, 49ers and Denver

We can win all of these games but it's possible to lose 2 or more.
We can't just assume we'll be there.

We have 3 very challenging teams to play and we must be prepared.
The Cardinals are playing a bunch of no- ones. We can only hope that the new stadium
= same old cardinals.


Actually all those teams are about equivalent to what we're playing.
I believe their combined records have 2 victories more then the teams we play.
They are playing the Seahawks in Seattle this week which should be an AZ loss leaving them at best, 9-7... I believe if the Vikes beat the 49ers (and we finish with a better record then the Lions) we have the tie breaker over AZ meaning we could lose 1 of our last 3 and still be the #6 seed.

The tie breaker system is screwy... The Lions have the tie breaker over us in the division and then AZ has the tie breaker over the Lions... this does not mean that AZ has the tie breaker over us.
I believe if the Vikes and AZ both win and the Lions lose, the Vikes take over the #6 seed because the Vikes hold the tie breaker over the Cardinals... AZ can actually drop out of the last playoff spot even with a win, how screwy is that!

PurplePowerPunch
12-07-2007, 11:19 AM
"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


On another note, did anyone watch NFL Access last night?
If I heard right I think Rod Woodson is crazy.
He mentioned he didn't think the Vikings were the team to beat because they have tough games down the stretch.
He mentioned they had to play Green Bay again.
Now, I may be wrong and missed who he really was talking about but I thought he was talking about the Vikings.
I'm not saying anyone one of the teams they play can't beat the Vikes but a tough schedule down the stretch compared to everyone elses schedule?
Plus him saying they have to play Green Bay again.
I think he's a little lost here (if he was talking about the Vikings).
He has a right to his opinion but at least have the facts correct.
Or maybe it's me that has the facts wrong here.


Yeah, he was talking about the Kitties!!!

I'm sure he was talking about the Lions, they have a tough stretch remaining including GB...

MetalMike-LoudVike
12-07-2007, 11:24 AM
To quote a wiseman "AWWW HELL YEAH " the Vikes are a threat.

ejmat
12-07-2007, 02:17 PM
"PurplePowerPunch" wrote:


"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


On another note, did anyone watch NFL Access last night?
If I heard right I think Rod Woodson is crazy.
He mentioned he didn't think the Vikings were the team to beat because they have tough games down the stretch.
He mentioned they had to play Green Bay again.
Now, I may be wrong and missed who he really was talking about but I thought he was talking about the Vikings.
I'm not saying anyone one of the teams they play can't beat the Vikes but a tough schedule down the stretch compared to everyone elses schedule?
Plus him saying they have to play Green Bay again.
I think he's a little lost here (if he was talking about the Vikings).
He has a right to his opinion but at least have the facts correct.
Or maybe it's me that has the facts wrong here.


Yeah, he was talking about the Kitties!!!

I'm sure he was talking about the Lions, they have a tough stretch remaining including GB...



Thanks for the clarification.
I didn't hear the transition from talking about the Vikings to the Lions.

Cojomay, good answer.
You are right.
We do have to play them again.
That's if GB makes it that far
;D

As far as schedules are concerned, ARI does not have an easier schedule than the Vikings.
I'm not saying the Vikings will have an easy time with anyone but if you look at records the Vikes have an easier schedule.
ARI still has to play Seattle (8-4), StL (3-9) but have won 3 out of their last 5 and when they are healthy they are better than their record, and the Saints aren't exactly easy either.
Atlanta is another story.

Frostbite
12-07-2007, 03:13 PM
Great posts....enjoyed the read....but can we please just get passed S.F. this week. If the Vikings are a legitimate threat as posted here then they should beat the 49ers in S.F. on Sunday handily. Still this is the NFL...any given Sunday and we have laid our share of eggs out west in recent history. Games like this are tell all about legitimate (The Real Deal) teams. We should be prepared....be up and ready to put the Niners down hard from play one until the final tic. If we can't and somehow manage to lose this game we will have an answer to this thread.

Cheers!

DustinDupont
12-07-2007, 03:54 PM
yes they are a legit threat.... we run the ball better than anyone in the league stop the run
better than anyone in the league.... and if we make it to the playoffs, teams are going to have to be worried about us

Bkfldviking
12-07-2007, 04:15 PM
I agree with Frostbite, yes the Vikings are ligit, but we need to concentrate on SF and make sure we get the W!!! :D
We can't be looking ahead to the "might be"s......However, it doesn't hurt to look back - 2005 Pittsburgh Steelers, 6th seed to SB...maybe history will repeat itself ;D ;D ;D

Schutz
12-07-2007, 04:22 PM
Here is something to think about for the Denver game anyways.
Denver is second to last in the league behind Oakland giving up an average of 4.6 ypc to opponents Running Backs.


And for the playoffs the Vikings plus a couple of AFC teams are the only teams with dominant run stopping ability.
We don't face a single opponent our Running Back tandem couldn't tear apart on any given Sunday.

bleedpurple
12-07-2007, 04:52 PM
how far we go in the playoffs depend on two things...

run defense/offense is a constant.. that's a given..

1. We go as far a TJ takes us... limits mistakes and makes good decisions.
2. get pressure on the QB..

we do those two things and sky is the limit

COJOMAY
12-07-2007, 05:21 PM
SN: The most dangerous Team In The NFC? -- The Vikings!
http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=315656
So who's the squad from the "other" conference that can create the most consternation in January and, if applicable, February? The Cowboys? Packers? Seahawks?

How about the Vikings?

Crazy as it sounds, the team that got "blowed out" (thanks, Emmitt) by the Packers in Week 10 is one of the hottest teams in all of football after a trio of wins against the Raiders, Giants, and Lions.

The first was a no-brainer, given the generally sorry state of the Oakland franchise. The 41-17 shocker in the Meadowlands was viewed by some as an aberration. But the demolition of Detroit raised eyebrows, especially in light of how Minnesota moved the ball with a previously one-dimensional offense.

The offense has been the biggest surprise over the past three games. Quarterback Tarvaris Jackson, a statistical bottom feeder earlier this season, has a passer rating of 69.6. He's almost back to the mythical "Kordoza Line" of 70.7, which is the career mark of former Steelers QB Kordell Stewart. More importantly, Jackson is 6-2 as the starter in his second NFL season...

Schutz
12-07-2007, 05:31 PM
the mythical "Kordoza Line" of 70.7

hahaha

Purple Floyd
12-07-2007, 06:00 PM
Before we crown ourselves we need to see a few more wins. The staff and team is to be commended for the progress they have made in the last month, but this is a new week and a new opponent that will give us a new challenge that needs to be overcome. We need to play hard, stay healthy and overcome the problems we are going to have on the defensive line. Unless we find someone who can give us pressure from the end position we will get passed on all day in the playoffs.

One game at a time

Vikefanman2000
12-07-2007, 06:49 PM
Not sure if this is out there yet.....but thought it might fit the thread...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3HlA559-rk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3HlA559-rk