PDA

View Full Version : Championship Run?



misplacedminnesotan
04-24-2008, 09:01 AM
In the press conference I heard Allen talking of a championship run now.
I have to admit that at first I was a little giddy, but now I am not sure.
Was Allen all we needed for this team to start its run?

The Dropper
04-24-2008, 09:05 AM
Yes, but a lot would have to come together for that to happen. It would assume very few key injuries, for one. Also, we have to hope Tarvaris can look as good as he did in Denver last year for the better part of the season. Plus, more than anything, we have to hope that the unit that goes out on the field functions well as a unit and as a team. It's one thing to have a bunch of big-name players on the field, but quite another to get them to work together to develop a winning chemistry.

marstc09
04-24-2008, 09:06 AM
All I gotta say is if the Bears can do it with Rex Grossman, we can do it with TJ and our defense.

NodakPaul
04-24-2008, 09:07 AM
I think the Vikings are definately a contender.
A lot hinges on our ability to pass the ball, but after that, we have a very, very solid team.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 09:07 AM
As much as i want to say yes, they can be champs this year, I can't see them automatically being tops after struggling at times last year.
Championship teams don't get blown out by their division rival, or lose to the chiefs.
Alot will depend on TJ's progression, but we still have to beat the likes of Green Bay, New York, Tennessee, Tampa Bay, Indy and Jacksonville.
if we can win 4 of those games, then I think we might have a legitimate shot of going deep in the playoffs, but in order for that to happen, I think we need more production in our passing game.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 09:08 AM
"The" wrote:


Yes, but a lot would have to come together for that to happen. It would assume very few key injuries, for one. Also, we have to hope Tarvaris can look as good as he did in Denver last year for the better part of the season. Plus, more than anything, we have to hope that the unit that goes out on the field functions well as a unit and as a team. It's one thing to have a bunch of big-name players on the field, but quite another to get them to work together to develop a winning chemistry.


an excellent example of that:
the 2005 vikings.
We were picked to go to the superbowl with Sharper, Smoot, Nap and company.

misplacedminnesotan
04-24-2008, 09:14 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


As much as i want to say yes, they can be champs this year, I can't see them automatically being tops after struggling at times last year.
Championship teams don't get blown out by their division rival, or lose to the chiefs.
Alot will depend on TJ's progression, but we still have to beat the likes of Green Bay, New York, Tennessee, Tampa Bay, Indy and Jacksonville.
if we can win 4 of those games, then I think we might have a legitimate shot of going deep in the playoffs, but in order for that to happen, I think we need more production in our passing game.


Good points.
I think alot of the losses had to do with sloppy playing, but they still need to be considered.
Indy will be the big test.
I don't think we have to win that game, but if we are in the mix (3-7 points difference) then I think the team has improved a lot.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 09:20 AM
"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


As much as i want to say yes, they can be champs this year, I can't see them automatically being tops after struggling at times last year.
Championship teams don't get blown out by their division rival, or lose to the chiefs.
Alot will depend on TJ's progression, but we still have to beat the likes of Green Bay, New York, Tennessee, Tampa Bay, Indy and Jacksonville.
if we can win 4 of those games, then I think we might have a legitimate shot of going deep in the playoffs, but in order for that to happen, I think we need more production in our passing game.


Good points.
I think alot of the losses had to do with sloppy playing, but they still need to be considered.
Indy will be the big test.
I don't think we have to win that game, but if we are in the mix (3-7 points difference) then I think the team has improved a lot.


That is exactly what makes a great team.
The best teams, don't have sloppy play.
They don't play down to the level of competition, and let poor teams back into the game.
Great teams win the games they should.
In any given year, any team should usually play about 4-8 terrible teams.
If they can win those games, they're already in good position.
Too often, we blow about 2 or 3 of those games, making us have to make wins agains the better teams in the league to stay in contention.

for example, last season we played

Falcons
Lions
Cheifs
Packers
Bears
Cowboys
Eagles
Chargers
Packers
Raiders
Giants
Lions
49ers
Bears
Redskins
broncos

Bolded are the games that we should have won.
If we won all of those games, we would have won 8 games.
When you add the other games against better teams we won (Bears, Giants, Chargers)
That would have given us 11 wins, and put us in the playoffs
IMO, if we're going to be serious contenders next year, we need to win the easy games.

KevinK
04-24-2008, 09:25 AM
I do believe in my heart we will win the Division.
But lets talk about the NFC East.
I do feel the Cowboys and Giants are better teams than us.
I also believe that the Eagles and Skins are about equal with the Vikes (according to roster).
If we are the team to beat at the end of the year in the NFC it would be great.
But I just feel that the NFC East in the end will play in the Superbowl.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 09:29 AM
I have a feeling the Deadskins will collapse this year.
They are entering cap hell, as you might notice they really didn't sign anyone in FA.
Their window for success has passed.
Eagles might be alright, but i think they're still a year or two away from making any real noise.
Once again, the Cowboys and Giants will be the teams to contend with in that division, but as we proved the last two years, The Giants are very beatable, and we came fairly close to the Cowboys, in Dallas.

PurplePeopleEaters
04-24-2008, 09:43 AM
Allen really solidifies the defense. Right now our weakest points on defense are probably Ray Edwards/ Brian Robison at whatever end Allen isn't playing, McCauley at nickelback, and Greenway at LB. We don't really know how Madieu Williams is going to play but we can only hope that he's an improvement on Dwight Smith. I'm hoping Griffin really peaks in his third year as he had some struggles last year. The good news is that the core of our defense is really strong.. EJ is ready to be a pro-bowler, Pat and Kevin are the best DT combo in the league, Allen is a pro Bowler and a pass rush specialist, Leber is solid, Sharper is solid at times, Winfield is solid and great in run support. The players are there, we just don't know if they'll show up come time for the season.

The offense is going to dictate whether we're an OK team or a great team this year. We already know Tarvaris can be either very good or very bad. Obviously Childress sees something in him still and thinks he can compete on this level.. That can be either good or bad news. Berrian, Wade, and Rice are an above average receiving corps. Berrian is another solid player, Rice has shown flashes of greatness, and Wade is perfect in the slot.

McKinnie potentially being suspended could be huge for us. We're definitely going to have to draft an o-lineman at some point in case that happens. In any case, Birk and Hutchinson are two of the best in the business.

Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor.. what more can you say. Best 1-2 punch at RB in the league.

So yes, I think we're poised for that run but we have to get consistent quarterback play and improve that pass defense, the same concerns we had leading into the season last year.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 09:47 AM
"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:


Allen really solidifies the defense. Right now our weakest points on defense are probably Ray Edwards/ Brian Robison at whatever end Allen isn't playing, McCauley at nickelback, and Greenway at LB. We don't really know how Madieu Williams is going to play but we can only hope that he's an improvement on Dwight Smith. I'm hoping Griffin really peaks in his third year as he had some struggles last year. The good news is that the core of our defense is really strong.. EJ is ready to be a pro-bowler, Pat and Kevin are the best DT combo in the league, Allen is a pro Bowler and a pass rush specialist, Leber is solid, Sharper is solid at times, Winfield is solid and great in run support. The players are there, we just don't know if they'll show up come time for the season.

The offense is going to dictate whether we're an OK team or a great team this year. We already know Tarvaris can be either very good or very bad. Obviously Childress sees something in him still and thinks he can compete on this level.. That can be either good or bad news. Berrian, Wade, and Rice are an above average receiving corps. Berrian is another solid player, Rice has shown flashes of greatness, and Wade is perfect in the slot.

McKinnie potentially being suspended could be huge for us. We're definitely going to have to draft an o-lineman at some point in case that happens. In any case, Birk and Hutchinson are two of the best in the business.

Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor.. what more can you say. Best 1-2 punch at RB in the league.

So yes, I think we're poised for that run but we have to get consistent quarterback play and improve that pass defense, the same concerns we had leading into the season last year.


I agree with most of what you say except for Greenway being the weak point on our defense.
This is just my opinion, but I think this might be his year.
He was looking very promising last season, being essentially a rookie still.
He did make some mistakes, but I think he will turn out to be one of our better playmakers out there on Defense.
If he is even 10% better this season, that would be fantastic.
I guess technically he is our weak link in the LInebacking corps, but i'm sure at the end of the season, we'll all be glad we picked him instead of trading up for a QB.

Zeus
04-24-2008, 10:02 AM
"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:


In the press conference I heard Allen talking of a championship run now.
I have to admit that at first I was a little giddy, but now I am not sure.
Was Allen all we needed for this team to start its run?


I don't like your choices.
Especially the first - the Vikings are not a favorite to win the NFC because the NFC is "weak" (didn't the NFC just produce the Super Bowl Champion?).
They are a favorite to win the NFC because the Vikings are strong.

=Z=

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 10:06 AM
I think some better options would be:

Yes, they are all mighty and powerful
yes, the myth of "weak" nfc will allow them to be contenders
Yes, but a lot needs to go right
No, we all let the signing of Allen and Berrian convince us the vikes are the best team in the league
No, We still need some key additions
No, not a chance

Prophet
04-24-2008, 10:06 AM
"Zeus" wrote:


"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:


In the press conference I heard Allen talking of a championship run now.
I have to admit that at first I was a little giddy, but now I am not sure.
Was Allen all we needed for this team to start its run?


I don't like your choices.
Especially the first - the Vikings are not a favorite to win the NFC because the NFC is "weak" (didn't the NFC just produce the Super Bowl Champion?).
They are a favorite to win the NFC because the Vikings are strong.

=Z=


I didn't vote because it was a Schleprock-biased poll.

Mr-holland
04-24-2008, 10:06 AM
Not this year, the schedule is to hard on us, i heard the 4th hardest or something on NFLN ??
Anyway it's unheard of the easy schedule the Patriots have... something should be done about that....

We'll see the playoffs i think but not with such of a big record 10-6

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 10:10 AM
"Mr-holland" wrote:


Not this year, the schedule is to hard on us, i heard the 4th hardest or something on NFLN ??
Anyway it's unheard of the easy schedule the Patriots have... something should be done about that....

We'll see the playoffs i think but not with such of a big record 10-6


I hardly take strenght of schedule into account at all at the beginning of the season.
no one knows who will do well and who won't.
Who would have though the Browns would have been one game out of making the playoffs?
who would have thought the giants would win the superbowl?
who would have thought the Saints and Bears would have been the NFC Championship contenders two years ago? (well, except for me who put $10 on the 200:1 Saints)

Garland Greene
04-24-2008, 10:13 AM
Title talk starts at Winter Park

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/18092834.html

Jared Allen barely had two feet inside Winter Park last week when he first heard that word.

Championship

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 10:17 AM
I like this little tidbit by Spielman


They were convinced, Spielman said, that the draft's top pass rushers would be off the board at their first-round position, the No. 17 overall pick.

Trading up into the top 10 would have cost the Vikings' first-round pick and both of their thirds, Spielman theorized. Even moving up five slots would have required the first-round pick and one of the picks in the third round.

"In essence," Spielman said, "it's like trading up to get Jared Allen in the top 10 of the draft."

When you put it taht way, it seems very very reasonable what we paid for Allen

Potus2028
04-24-2008, 10:19 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:


Allen really solidifies the defense. Right now our weakest points on defense are probably Ray Edwards/ Brian Robison at whatever end Allen isn't playing, McCauley at nickelback, and Greenway at LB. We don't really know how Madieu Williams is going to play but we can only hope that he's an improvement on Dwight Smith. I'm hoping Griffin really peaks in his third year as he had some struggles last year. The good news is that the core of our defense is really strong.. EJ is ready to be a pro-bowler, Pat and Kevin are the best DT combo in the league, Allen is a pro Bowler and a pass rush specialist, Leber is solid, Sharper is solid at times, Winfield is solid and great in run support. The players are there, we just don't know if they'll show up come time for the season.

The offense is going to dictate whether we're an OK team or a great team this year. We already know Tarvaris can be either very good or very bad. Obviously Childress sees something in him still and thinks he can compete on this level.. That can be either good or bad news. Berrian, Wade, and Rice are an above average receiving corps. Berrian is another solid player, Rice has shown flashes of greatness, and Wade is perfect in the slot.

McKinnie potentially being suspended could be huge for us. We're definitely going to have to draft an o-lineman at some point in case that happens. In any case, Birk and Hutchinson are two of the best in the business.

Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor.. what more can you say. Best 1-2 punch at RB in the league.

So yes, I think we're poised for that run but we have to get consistent quarterback play and improve that pass defense, the same concerns we had leading into the season last year.


I agree with most of what you say except for Greenway being the weak point on our defense.
This is just my opinion, but I think this might be his year.
He was looking very promising last season, being essentially a rookie still.
He did make some mistakes, but I think he will turn out to be one of our better playmakers out there on Defense.
If he is even 10% better this season, that would be fantastic.
I guess technically he is our weak link in the LInebacking corps, but i'm sure at the end of the season, we'll all be glad we picked him instead of trading up for a QB.


what receiving corps are we better than? i am still convinced that our WR's a just average. not even close to above average. Now AD and CT will help open up the passing game (i.e. Denver game, or any number of Play Action passes on the first play of the game, which is my favorite thing to do). BBerr is slightly above average. The rest of the WR's are unproven or slot receivers.

I will say that our defense is going to be killer this year.

Also.. To say that we 'can't come out of nowhere' to be a force in the NFC.. See: New Orleans Saints.

LongtimeVikesfan
04-24-2008, 10:19 AM
I think we can be a contender in the NFC this year! The Vikes two big acquisitions, Allen and Berrian solidified both sides of the ball.

The DE’s now should be able to pressure the QB more often, helping our secondary against the pass.
The WR’s should open the field for our big runners, no more stacking the box to make us one-dimensional as in the past.
Two key points will have to happen for us to be Champions:
1. It all starts up front!! Both lines have to control the line scrimmage,
OL- protect the QB, open running lanes and give the QB time to throw the ball.

DL- stop the run, pressure the QB, protect the red-zone and control field position.

2. Jackson has to be consistent, limit his mistakes and be smart with the ball.


Wilf has built a very good team; we have all the makings to be elite. We may start off a little slow but should be gelling mid season and roll into the play-offs as a powerhouse.

ONE TEAM, ONE GOAL !

C Mac D
04-24-2008, 10:20 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I think some better options would be:

Yes, they are all mighty and powerful
yes, the myth of "weak" nfc will allow them to be contenders
Yes, but a lot needs to go right
No, we all let the signing of Allen and Berrian convince us the vikes are the best team in the league
No, We still need some key additions
No, not a chance


Yes, there is a chance... more than a chance actually. Minnesota is beating Indianapolis this year in the Super Bowl.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 10:22 AM
I'm not saying there is not a chance, just listing it as an option for all you non-vikings fans out there who refuse to look outside your little bubble.

disclaimer:
i'm not generalizing all non-vikings fans as being that, but a good number of bears/packers fans who visit this site seem to fall under that category

C Mac D
04-24-2008, 10:24 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I'm not saying there is not a chance


I must be confused then...

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


No, not a chance

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 10:26 AM
"C" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I'm not saying there is not a chance


I must be confused then...

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


No, not a chance




yes you would be confused.
I wasn't listing my opinion, i was listing all
possible options for the poll.
I personally think that they can be contenders if lots of things go right this year.

Potus2028
04-24-2008, 10:28 AM
"C" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I think some better options would be:

Yes, they are all mighty and powerful
yes, the myth of "weak" nfc will allow them to be contenders
Yes, but a lot needs to go right
No, we all let the signing of Allen and Berrian convince us the vikes are the best team in the league
No, We still need some key additions
No, not a chance


Yes, there is a chance... more than a chance actually. Minnesota is beating Indianapolis this year in the Super Bowl.




That's right!!!! I read Stephen Colbert's book... I actually made a thread about his prediction a few months ago.

skolvikings_MN
04-24-2008, 10:42 AM
"Mr-holland" wrote:


Not this year, the schedule is to hard on us, i heard the 4th hardest or something on NFLN ??
Anyway it's unheard of the easy schedule the Patriots have... something should be done about that....

We'll see the playoffs i think but not with such of a big record 10-6


All that matters is that we make the playoffs.
Our strength of schedule doesn't matter much once we are there.
Just look at the Ginats last year.
They made it into the playoffs with a 10-6 record (i think) and then ran the board.
I think we win the NFC North and fromt here, it's anyones game

vikings4life33
04-24-2008, 10:45 AM
"marstc09" wrote:


All I gotta say is if the Bears can do it with Rex Grossman, we can do it with TJ and our defense.
i totally agree. i just told my friend that.

El Vikingo
04-24-2008, 10:51 AM
"C" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I think some better options would be:

Yes, they are all mighty and powerful
yes, the myth of "weak" nfc will allow them to be contenders
Yes, but a lot needs to go right
No, we all let the signing of Allen and Berrian convince us the vikes are the best team in the league
No, We still need some key additions
No, not a chance


Yes, there is a chance... more than a chance actually. Minnesota is beating Indianapolis this year in the Super Bowl.



I got a new avatar for ya C .

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00411/homer40_280x390_411075a.jpg

misplacedminnesotan
04-24-2008, 11:28 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


As much as i want to say yes, they can be champs this year, I can't see them automatically being tops after struggling at times last year.
Championship teams don't get blown out by their division rival, or lose to the chiefs.
Alot will depend on TJ's progression, but we still have to beat the likes of Green Bay, New York, Tennessee, Tampa Bay, Indy and Jacksonville.
if we can win 4 of those games, then I think we might have a legitimate shot of going deep in the playoffs, but in order for that to happen, I think we need more production in our passing game.


Good points.
I think alot of the losses had to do with sloppy playing, but they still need to be considered.
Indy will be the big test.
I don't think we have to win that game, but if we are in the mix (3-7 points difference) then I think the team has improved a lot.


That is exactly what makes a great team.
The best teams, don't have sloppy play.
They don't play down to the level of competition, and let poor teams back into the game.
Great teams win the games they should.
In any given year, any team should usually play about 4-8 terrible teams.
If they can win those games, they're already in good position.
Too often, we blow about 2 or 3 of those games, making us have to make wins agains the better teams in the league to stay in contention.

for example, last season we played

Falcons
Lions
Cheifs
Packers
Bears
Cowboys
Eagles
Chargers
Packers
Raiders
Giants
Lions
49ers
Bears
Redskins
broncos

Bolded are the games that we should have won.
If we won all of those games, we would have won 8 games.
When you add the other games against better teams we won (Bears, Giants, Chargers)
That would have given us 11 wins, and put us in the playoffs
IMO, if we're going to be serious contenders next year, we need to win the easy games.


I'm not going contest on whether we should of won them or not, because you are right.
However; I think the sloppy play went away towards the end of the year.
I think the Monday and Sunday night games were ugly purely because Jackson got scared under the bright lights, because he regressed those games.
Still he showed a lot against Denver.
He lead a team that had given up to two touchdowns.
I'm willing to give him a mulligan on the fumble in overtime.
It sucked, but it happens with any young QB.

All-in-all I think the team has turned a corner when it comes to the sloppy play.
Granted the pre-season will be a good showing of our chemistry, but from the play towards the end of the year I think we will be OK.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 11:31 AM
while i agree with you, the vikings were looking good at the end of the season, but it still doesn't change that we can't afford sloppy play.
If the Vikings can come out strong, minimize the mistakes and win the winnable games, they will be in very a good position.

misplacedminnesotan
04-24-2008, 11:33 AM
"Zeus" wrote:


"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:


In the press conference I heard Allen talking of a championship run now.
I have to admit that at first I was a little giddy, but now I am not sure.
Was Allen all we needed for this team to start its run?


I don't like your choices.
Especially the first - the Vikings are not a favorite to win the NFC because the NFC is "weak" (didn't the NFC just produce the Super Bowl Champion?).
They are a favorite to win the NFC because the Vikings are strong.

=Z=


Who wasn't surprised by the Giants win though?
Right now the NFC is not as strong when you look at the top teams.
This will change with time, just like the AFC was weak for awhile.
Hopefully the Vikings will ride that wave and be the class of the NFC

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 11:37 AM
I don't buy the whole "AFC is strong, NFC is weak" thing.
I think the NFC is more competitive, therefore there are less 12+ win teams.
The AFC is either great, or poor.
very few teams with roughly .500 records.

misplacedminnesotan
04-24-2008, 11:37 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


while i agree with you, the vikings were looking good at the end of the season, but it still doesn't change that we can't afford sloppy play.
If the Vikings can come out strong, minimize the mistakes and win the winnable games, they will be in very a good position.


I think we agree in the overall theme, but just differ on the details.

You have to say; even if the Vikings lose the game against Indy, if they play the game tight and give Indy a run for their money, then you have to be excited about our chances with the rest of the NFC.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 11:41 AM
I agree, but i don't consider the Indy game a game we should win.
It would be great if we do, but as long as we don't get blown out, i won't be too pissed if we lose, sine Indy is one of the top teams in the leage.

misplacedminnesotan
04-24-2008, 11:48 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I agree, but i don't consider the Indy game a game we should win.
It would be great if we do, but as long as we don't get blown out, i won't be too pissed if we lose, sine Indy is one of the top teams in the leage.


Maybe its my Homerism that is kicking up, but I do think we have a chance (even before Allen).
The Defense is very opportunistic and should force a couple of turnovers.
The only guy I'm really scared of (aside from Manning) is Bob Sanders, if he can be accounted for we will be OK.
Plus, the Colts won't have much to scheme off from us, that gives us more of chance.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 11:52 AM
i have to disagree with you.
Against Peyton Manning, if we have no pass rush, we will get eaten alive.
He is very quick with his reads, and very accurate.
The only way to beat him is to pressure him, otherwise our defense will get picked apart.
Had we gone into the season without Allen, I don't think we could hold them to under 25 points.

misplacedminnesotan
04-24-2008, 12:19 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


i have to disagree with you.
Against Peyton Manning, if we have no pass rush, we will get eaten alive.
He is very quick with his reads, and very accurate.
The only way to beat him is to pressure him, otherwise our defense will get picked apart.
Had we gone into the season without Allen, I don't think we could hold them to under 25 points.


I don't know Manning is a great QB, one of the best, but he is not immune to getting rattled.
He doesn't have ice in his veins like Brady, the Chargers game last year was good example of what can happen if he gets into an ugly situation.
So, maybe just looking at what was done during the chargers game would give us a good chance against him.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 12:28 PM
which proves my point.
you have to rattle him.. All the recent gamei can remember he lost (chargers, pats)
is because the other team was pressuring him, causing him to get rid of the ball before he likes to.
Once he gets rattled, its hard for him to find his groove again.

happy camper
04-24-2008, 12:33 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I don't buy the whole "AFC is strong, NFC is weak" thing.
I think the NFC is more competitive, therefore there are less 12+ win teams.
The AFC is either great, or poor.
very few teams with roughly .500 records.


I don't have a stat so I could be wrong, but..

Doesn't the AFC have the much better win/loss record when it comes to AFC vs NFC?

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 12:35 PM
I don't think so.
I though i saw a stat last year, which actually had the NFC winning that category.
I could also be wrong though.

i_bleed_purple
04-24-2008, 12:37 PM
check here, they broke it down on this thread
http://www.baltimoresun2.com/talk/showthread.php?t=128906

last year up to week 15 it was pretty close

Total AFC vs. NFC up to week 15 29-30

happy camper
04-24-2008, 12:48 PM
Nice. I do think the NFC is getting back into it.

I know some previous years the AFC was winning a lot more.

Overlord
04-24-2008, 12:52 PM
"happy" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I don't buy the whole "AFC is strong, NFC is weak" thing.
I think the NFC is more competitive, therefore there are less 12+ win teams.
The AFC is either great, or poor.
very few teams with roughly .500 records.


I don't have a stat so I could be wrong, but..

Doesn't the AFC have the much better win/loss record when it comes to AFC vs NFC?


Actually NFC vs. AFC last year was 32-32.


Here's the breakdown:

-the NFC East was 11-5 against the AFC East
-the NFC North was 12-4 against the AFC West
-the NFC South was 3-13 against the AFC South
-The NFC West was 4-12 against the AFC North

Despite the apparent toughness of the AFC South (who the Vikes play next year), we have to keep in mind that they got to pad their stats against pretty bad divisions in the NFC South and AFC West.

singersp
04-25-2008, 08:46 AM
Offseason has Vikings thinking playoffs (http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=404031)

Posted: April 24, 2008

Dennis Dillon
sportingnews.com


I'm not sure how close the Vikings are to being a playoff team, but they're a heck of a lot closer today than they were four months ago. And we're still 48 hours away from the draft....

Jimmymeboy
04-25-2008, 08:55 AM
I voted yes, but I don't feel it's because the NFC is weak.
So many things have to fall into place and I think Ziggy is really trying to do his best to give his team a chance.
Making Hutchinson the highest paid O-lineman at the time and doing the same for Allen are two glaring examples right there.
Again, injuries aside we have as many of the pieces in place right now that it is very much a possibility that our Vikings could make it to the Superbowl and WIN!
Man am I feeling euphoric this morning :-* ;D

aaeyers
04-25-2008, 09:38 AM
As long as we can stay relatively healthy and Jackson minimizes his mistakes we will be serious Super Bowl contenders. We have the best defensive lines in football, we have one of the most under-appreciated set of linebackers in the league, we have a great pair of ball-hawking safeties, and Griffin, McCauley and Gordon should be all show a lot of improvement over last year. If everyone does their part we will have one of the best defense in the league. When add in the leagues best ground game and the addition of Bernard Berrian, I think we will also have a pretty good offense to pair with that defense.

Everyone knows you win championships with defense and running the ball, and thats where we excel. As long as Jackson can be consistent enough to force defenses to respect him and our receivers, we will have an all around great team.

MetalMike-LoudVike
04-25-2008, 10:03 AM
They can make some serious run as long mistakes are limited by T-Jack. They have a Good shot at making some serious noise in the NFC.

Marrdro
04-25-2008, 10:21 AM
"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:


I'm willing to give him a mulligan on the fumble in overtime.
It sucked, but it happens with any young QB.

Especially when you consider the blitzer came free because the RB and RT were both blocking the wrong guy because of a poor presnap line/RB adjustment by the C and QB.
;D

aaeyers
04-25-2008, 10:35 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:


I'm willing to give him a mulligan on the fumble in overtime.
It sucked, but it happens with any young QB.

Especially when you consider the blitzer came free because the RB and RT were both blocking the wrong guy because of a poor presnap line/RB adjustment by the C and QB.

;D


Cook was the reason we lost that game. On that play he literally just stood there and watched as guys on both sides of him ran by and nailed Tarvaris.

midgensa
04-25-2008, 10:46 AM
Sure ... it is realistic to think we have a shot to make a run. I don't know that it is "Super Bowl or Bust" or anything ... but we should find ourselves in the playoff mix in the NFC and I would definitely think should make a run at our division title and a home game come playoff time. I like our chances, but still don't know if I like us better than the Cowboys in the NFC (of course, the Cowboys might just blow it in the playoffs like last year).

i_bleed_purple
04-25-2008, 11:00 AM
as long as we make the playoffs, we have a chance.
Who would have thought the Giants would go all the way as a wild card team?
how about after NE's first superbowl win, they were the #6 team in the AFC playoffs, won every game on the road and won a superbowl as huge underdogs.
Anything can happen in the playoffs.

midgensa
04-25-2008, 11:03 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


as long as we make the playoffs, we have a chance.
Who would have thought the Giants would go all the way as a wild card team?
how about after NE's first superbowl win, they were the #6 team in the AFC playoffs, won every game on the road and won a superbowl as huge underdogs.
Anything can happen in the playoffs.


Just so you know ... That New England team was a No. 2 seed and won in the second round (Divisional Playoff) in the famed Snow Game against the Raiders.
The ONLY six seed to ever advance past the Divisional Round is also the ONLY one to ever win the Super Bowl ... The 2005 Steelers.

i_bleed_purple
04-25-2008, 11:05 AM
"midgensa" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


as long as we make the playoffs, we have a chance.
Who would have thought the Giants would go all the way as a wild card team?
how about after NE's first superbowl win, they were the #6 team in the AFC playoffs, won every game on the road and won a superbowl as huge underdogs.
Anything can happen in the playoffs.


Just so you know ... That New England team was a No. 2 seed and won in the second round (Divisional Playoff) in the famed Snow Game against the Raiders.
The ONLY six seed to ever advance past the Divisional Round is also the ONLY one to ever win the Super Bowl ... The 2005 Steelers.


you would appear to be correct.
My bad, i must have been all mixed up.

midgensa
04-25-2008, 11:08 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


as long as we make the playoffs, we have a chance.
Who would have thought the Giants would go all the way as a wild card team?
how about after NE's first superbowl win, they were the #6 team in the AFC playoffs, won every game on the road and won a superbowl as huge underdogs.
Anything can happen in the playoffs.


Just so you know ... That New England team was a No. 2 seed and won in the second round (Divisional Playoff) in the famed Snow Game against the Raiders.
The ONLY six seed to ever advance past the Divisional Round is also the ONLY one to ever win the Super Bowl ... The 2005 Steelers.


i'm about 99% sure they were a wild card team.
I will look it up.


Hope you don't make bets on your 99 percent sure. I already did ...
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2001/
;D

Do you really not remember the Tuck Rule game in the snow? That was not in Oakland ... I assure you.

i_bleed_purple
04-25-2008, 11:11 AM
check my last post.

midgensa
04-25-2008, 11:12 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


as long as we make the playoffs, we have a chance.
Who would have thought the Giants would go all the way as a wild card team?
how about after NE's first superbowl win, they were the #6 team in the AFC playoffs, won every game on the road and won a superbowl as huge underdogs.
Anything can happen in the playoffs.


Just so you know ... That New England team was a No. 2 seed and won in the second round (Divisional Playoff) in the famed Snow Game against the Raiders.
The ONLY six seed to ever advance past the Divisional Round is also the ONLY one to ever win the Super Bowl ... The 2005 Steelers.


you would appear to be correct.
My bad, i must have been all mixed up.


It happens. The Steelers are the only successful No. 6 seed to ever even get through to the Conference Championship game. Getting to the playoffs without a home game makes things VERY difficult (though it has been done twice in the last three years ... I don't think any other Super Bowl winner played all of their playoff games on the road.)

C Mac D
04-25-2008, 11:29 AM
"midgensa" wrote:


It happens. The Steelers are the only successful No. 6 seed to ever even get through to the Conference Championship game. Getting to the playoffs without a home game makes things VERY difficult (though it has been done twice in the last three years ... I don't think any other Super Bowl winner played all of their playoff games on the road.)


That was the worse officiated Super Bowl I had ever seen. If I mess up that badly at my job, I'd get fired.

Seahawks should have one... I actually don't like either team, but Steelers were outplayed that game.

scorptile
04-25-2008, 02:55 PM
ok just to let you guys know allen is smokin something not right lol. besides did he say the same thing bout the chiefs last year and the year before? the vikes has a long way to go before they are even considered SB bound. you cant go from being last in pass protection to first in a season. and you cant do it with one WR that would be a #2 on the majority of teams as your #1. it just doesnt workt hat way. and having the 5th hardest schedule and having a team that didnt make the playoffs doesnt make it better. i wouldnt mind seeing hte vikes do something but its just not the right time as of yet.

Schutz
04-25-2008, 03:03 PM
"scorptile" wrote:


ok just to let you guys know allen is smokin something not right lol. besides did he say the same thing bout the chiefs last year and the year before? the vikes has a long way to go before they are even considered SB bound. you cant go from being last in pass protection to first in a season. and you cant do it with one WR that would be a #2 on the majority of teams as your #1. it just doesnt workt hat way. and having the 5th hardest schedule and having a team that didnt make the playoffs doesnt make it better. i wouldnt mind seeing hte vikes do something but its just not the right time as of yet.


You do realize the Giants made it into the SB and won last year right?
They took an average team that played out of their minds and won in a very weak NFC.
The Vikings have a weak division to rack up some wins and get a Wild Card or Division championship.
The playoffs are always crazy, and if AP brought his A game to the playoffs and we get penetration like the Giants did I see no reason why the Vikes can't make a run.
But I guess I should just take the word of some Colts homer.

i_bleed_purple
04-25-2008, 03:03 PM
I assume by pass protection,, you actually mean defending the pass correct?
Noone expects we will be #1 against the pass, but moving up to the top 15 is reasonable.
here's why.

The addition of Allen does a number for our defense and the way other teams play us.
Previously, teams would double team either kevin williams or pat williams each play.
leaving all other linemen with only one guy blocking them.
Unfortunately, none of our ends last year were really good pass rushers, so we didn't generate many sacks, unless wwe blitzed linebackers.

The addition of Allen adds another guy who must be double teamed.
there is no way teams can double team 3 guys, so in order to make sure the qb doesn't get killed, they may keep a TE in to block.
By putting in a TE, they take away a reciever.
Less recievers = less options, which means our secondary has fewer guys to worry about.
If we can get more pressure on the qb, we can rush the qb into making rushed throws, making him throw errant passes.


As far as Berrian is concerned, his role is not to be the go to guy.
In fact his role is to keep defenses honest.
Towards the end of the season, teams were successfully shutting down the vikigns by stacking 8 or 9 in the box, preventing the run and ignoring the pass.
by having Berrian, this will take a guy out of the box and make him cover.
He may not demannd double coverage, but at least it will take pressure off of the run game, opening up more holes for Adrian and Chester.
If that happens and they try to stack against the run again, we just start throwing longer passes to Berrian.

2 players won't singlehandedly win games for us, but the effect of their presence can.

scorptile
04-25-2008, 03:12 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I assume by pass protection,, you actually mean defending the pass correct?

Noone expects we will be #1 against the pass, but moving up to the top 15 is reasonable.
here's why.

The addition of Allen does a number for our defense and the way other teams play us.

Previously, teams would double team either kevin williams or pat williams each play.
leaving all other linemen with only one guy blocking them.
Unfortunately, none of our ends last year were really good pass rushers, so we didn't generate many sacks, unless wwe blitzed linebackers.

The addition of Allen adds another guy who must be double teamed.
there is no way teams can double team 3 guys, so in order to make sure the qb doesn't get killed, they may keep a TE in to block.
By putting in a TE, they take away a reciever.
Less recievers = less options, which means our secondary has fewer guys to worry about.
If we can get more pressure on the qb, we can rush the qb into making rushed throws, making him throw errant passes.


As far as Berrian is concerned, his role is not to be the go to guy.
In fact his role is to keep defenses honest.
Towards the end of the season, teams were successfully shutting down the vikigns by stacking 8 or 9 in the box, preventing the run and ignoring the pass.
by having Berrian, this will take a guy out of the box and make him cover.
He may not demannd double coverage, but at least it will take pressure off of the run game, opening up more holes for Adrian and Chester.
If that happens and they try to stack against the run again, we just start throwing longer passes to Berrian.

2 players won't singlehandedly win games for us, but the effect of their presence can.


yes i agree but the problem with this is the vikes look alot like what the jaguars are doing. or trying to do. but that has failed miserably. teams know how to work around it. and what im saying is the jaguars had stroud and henderson in the middle with spicer on DE and over the past 3 years hasnt amounted nothin that htey accomplished i just dont wanna see the vikes get into this rut. then they have to put up tarps to pretend they have fans in the seats and thats just not right

cajunvike
04-25-2008, 03:26 PM
"Schutz" wrote:


"scorptile" wrote:


ok just to let you guys know allen is smokin something not right lol. besides did he say the same thing bout the chiefs last year and the year before? the vikes has a long way to go before they are even considered SB bound. you cant go from being last in pass protection to first in a season. and you cant do it with one WR that would be a #2 on the majority of teams as your #1. it just doesnt workt hat way. and having the 5th hardest schedule and having a team that didnt make the playoffs doesnt make it better. i wouldnt mind seeing hte vikes do something but its just not the right time as of yet.


You do realize the Giants made it into the SB and won last year right?
They took an average team that played out of their minds and won in a very weak NFC.
The Vikings have a weak division to rack up some wins and get a Wild Card or Division championship.
The playoffs are always crazy, and if AP brought his A game to the playoffs and we get penetration like the Giants did I see no reason why the Vikes can't make a run.
But I guess I should just take the word of some Colts homer.


The Vikes don't HAVE to be first in pass protection...just average would work fine.
They will be a top running team and possibly have a top 5 defense.
If TJack can just have an 80-90 passer rating, that will be enough to make it to the playoffs...and at that point, if he steps it up the second half of the season, going into the playoffs, he could surprise.

Overlord
04-25-2008, 03:43 PM
"scorptile" wrote:


ok just to let you guys know allen is smokin something not right lol. besides did he say the same thing bout the chiefs last year and the year before? the vikes has a long way to go before they are even considered SB bound.

No one is promising victory.
No one is suggesting that we have the most talented roster in the NFL.
But we do have a roster that is talented enough to give us a good chance of victory against any team in the NFL, and is as talented as any team in our division.


That gives us a good chance to make the playoffs, and a legitimate chance to win once we're there.


you cant go from being last in pass protection to first in a season.

I don't know that any team has ever gone from last in pass yards against to first.
But your team had a pretty good turn-around in 2002, when they were 2nd in pass yards against after being 27th in 2001.

And big turn-arounds aren't uncommon at all.
Of the past 10 league leaders in pass yards allowed, 5 were ranked 18th or worse the previous year.

Most importantly, we have had a pretty fair pass defense the past couple of years in terms of opponents efficiency against us.
In fact, in 2006 we were ranked 5th in QB rating against despite giving up a huge number of yards.
Yards aren't that important.
TDs and INTs are important.


and you cant do it with one WR that would be a #2 on the majority of teams as your #1. it just doesnt workt hat way.

Our WRs have very little to do with our defense, but in terms of making a championship run we're good enough to get it done at WR.
Plenty of teams have won championships with worse receiving corps.
Not a strength of the team, but Berrian is a pretty good WR and Rice looks very good.
Wade should be a solid contributor again this year as well.


and having the 5th hardest schedule and having a team that didnt make the playoffs doesnt make it better. i wouldnt mind seeing hte vikes do something but its just not the right time as of yet.


It looks hard on paper, but the AFC South got to pad their records last year against the NFC South and AFC West.
We get the NFC South this year, which is nice.
More importantly, we play almost the same schedule as the teams in our division.
So we aren't at any disadvantage in terms of winning the division and making the playoffs, regardless of how tough our schedule is or isn't when the season starts.

scorptile
04-25-2008, 04:28 PM
yup i understand that but you do know that the colts division had the best record? so in fact the colts had a tough schedule last year as well. to say the colts had their record padded is false look at total W-L and u can see that. so who did the vikes play? exactly pretty much the same teams
so to say the colts record was padded is saying the vikes was as well.

i do have to say something though to only sign an all pro DE and a WR from the bears doesnt make you go into a championship run. if that was the case the pats wouldve won it all last year.

i_bleed_purple
04-25-2008, 04:41 PM
the pats were very very close to winning it all last year.
Literally, all of it.
Your argument has no point.

Overlord
04-25-2008, 05:17 PM
"scorptile" wrote:


yup i understand that but you do know that the colts division had the best record? so in fact the colts had a tough schedule last year as well. to say the colts had their record padded is false look at total W-L and u can see that. so who did the vikes play? exactly pretty much the same teams
so to say the colts record was padded is saying the vikes was as well.

The Colts are a good team.
They would have had a good record against just about any set of teams.
But the W-L records of the rest of your division benefited from playing a weak NFC South and mediocre/average AFC West.
They're not bad teams, but they're closer to average than the records may indicate.


i do have to say something though to only sign an all pro DE and a WR from the bears doesnt make you go into a championship run. if that was the case the pats wouldve won it all last year.


The Pats were the best team last year, but they lost in the Super Bowl.
It happens.
The best team doesn't always win any particular game, doesn't always win the Super Bowl, and doesn't even always make the playoffs.
There's a lot of luck involved in winning a Super Bowl.

The Vikes still don't have a roster as talented as the Pats.
But that doesn't mean that the Patriots are going to win the Super Bowl this year or that the Vikes can't.
Besides returning 18 of 22 starters from an 8-8 team last year, the Vikings added one of the top five defensive ends in the league and a good receiver (an amazing upgrade compared to last years WR corp).
The team should be competitive with any team in the league, which gives us a chance to win it all.

midgensa
04-25-2008, 05:28 PM
"Mr-holland" wrote:


Not this year, the schedule is to hard on us, i heard the 4th hardest or something on NFLN ??
Anyway it's unheard of the easy schedule the Patriots have... something should be done about that....

We'll see the playoffs i think but not with such of a big record 10-6


The schedule for every season except for TWO games is set in stone YEARS in advance. So, there is nothing to be done about that. The Patriots schedule is weak because they get the Dolphins, Bills and Jets twice which is going to make their schedule worse, but they still have to play the defending champs of the AFC North, AFC West and AFC South.
Sorry, but complaining about schedules is just a peeve of mine considering that they are set YEARS in advance. In all honesty ... we will be ducking the division champs in the NFC South and NFC West this year ... it just so happens that our rotation of divisions brings us the strong AFC South this year, but it also brings us the weak NFC South (although I think all of the teams in that division may be better this year).

StillPurple
04-25-2008, 05:57 PM
I personally think that having a hard schedule is better than having an easy one.

Mr-holland
04-25-2008, 06:39 PM
"midgensa" wrote:


"Mr-holland" wrote:


Not this year, the schedule is to hard on us, i heard the 4th hardest or something on NFLN ??
Anyway it's unheard of the easy schedule the Patriots have... something should be done about that....

We'll see the playoffs i think but not with such of a big record 10-6


The schedule for every season except for TWO games is set in stone YEARS in advance. So, there is nothing to be done about that. The Patriots schedule is weak because they get the Dolphins, Bills and Jets twice which is going to make their schedule worse, but they still have to play the defending champs of the AFC North, AFC West and AFC South.
Sorry, but complaining about schedules is just a peeve of mine considering that they are set YEARS in advance. In all honesty ... we will be ducking the division champs in the NFC South and NFC West this year ... it just so happens that our rotation of divisions brings us the strong AFC South this year, but it also brings us the weak NFC South (although I think all of the teams in that division may be better this year).

I knew that but to me, it's unfair if you go 16-0 you have such an easy schedule ahead of you
I know that if you want to be a contender you have to win from good teams, and we will but still i'm thinking 10-6

midgensa
04-25-2008, 07:06 PM
"Mr-holland" wrote:


"midgensa" wrote:


"Mr-holland" wrote:


Not this year, the schedule is to hard on us, i heard the 4th hardest or something on NFLN ??
Anyway it's unheard of the easy schedule the Patriots have... something should be done about that....

We'll see the playoffs i think but not with such of a big record 10-6


The schedule for every season except for TWO games is set in stone YEARS in advance. So, there is nothing to be done about that. The Patriots schedule is weak because they get the Dolphins, Bills and Jets twice which is going to make their schedule worse, but they still have to play the defending champs of the AFC North, AFC West and AFC South.
Sorry, but complaining about schedules is just a peeve of mine considering that they are set YEARS in advance. In all honesty ... we will be ducking the division champs in the NFC South and NFC West this year ... it just so happens that our rotation of divisions brings us the strong AFC South this year, but it also brings us the weak NFC South (although I think all of the teams in that division may be better this year).

I knew that but to me, it's unfair if you go 16-0 you have such an easy schedule ahead of you
I know that if you want to be a contender you have to win from good teams, and we will but still i'm thinking 10-6


That is cool ... I am just pointing out that strength of schedule is a little silly considering it is fixed ... and in particular considering that it is heavily weighed by your division.
I mean if you look at it ... the strength of schedule for ALL of the NFC North is in the top 12 in the league next season because our division was not that weak last year. Conversely, ALL of the AFC East is in the bottom 10 because their division WAS so weak last year. ALL of the AFC North is in the top 9 because of how strong the Browns and Steelers were last year.
So basically ... if your division is good ... your schedule strength will be tougher ... if it is not ... then it will be weaker. (All of the AFC West is in the BOTTOM 7! because it was so weak last year and the entire AFC SOUTH is in the top 7 toughest because of how great the Colts, Jags and Titans were last year).
I think expecting the NFL to adjust for the Patriots division makes little sense. I think everyone would agree that they HAVE to play their own division twice and they should not be switching divisions EVERY year should they?

minvikes01
04-25-2008, 08:51 PM
Right now a championship run will lie solely on the shoulders of our QB and his ability to control the game, and being able to pick up first downs and keep drives going.
AD is great, but he can't carry the offense on his back, hopefully with the addition of Berrian and Jared Allen, our offense will be able to stretch the field and keep teams from stacking the box when AD is in, and the defense will be more effective at getting teams off the field and our offense back on.
We have the players to compete at every position except QB, if Jackson shows improvement in judgment and is able to play turnover free football, we have a fighting chance.
I'm not sure Jackson's the guy, and I think wee need to either bring in a young QB to learn from Ferotte and compete with Jackson.
I think we are still missing a few pieces of the puzzle, I hope Jackson proves me wrong, but as of now, I think we will win the division and the stall out in the early rounds of the playoffs.

NDVikingFan66
04-26-2008, 01:32 AM
I went with the fact that we can now win the NFC, but only because I think the divison is up for grabs.

The Giants get favor status, cause they are defending champs.
We beat tham, but that was before they got on a roll.

The Cowboys I think will be OK, but I am curious what the Pacman will do to them.
Pacman and TO...talk about a distraction.

Green Bay could be solid, no one knows what Rogers will do.
I think they finish behind us in the North.

There is still quite a bit of off season left and of course preseson, so things could change

Mr Anderson
04-26-2008, 08:03 AM
The past few days I've seen this thread and the "With the Allen trade done, Will Jackson be good enough to win the SB?" thread in the top threads...

I've avoided them as long as possible, but finally broke down.

I have not read a single post in this thread, and will not.

All I can say is: Stop talking about the Super Bowl, all it can do is hurt us.

Stop making super bowl predictions, we don't want to look at ourselves as a super bowl contender. If we don't get there you will only be irrationally angry/disappointed.

MaxVike
04-26-2008, 08:23 AM
"minvikes01" wrote:


Right now a championship run will lie solely on the shoulders of our QB and his ability to control the game, and being able to pick up first downs and keep drives going.
AD is great, but he can't carry the offense on his back, hopefully with the addition of Berrian and Jared Allen, our offense will be able to stretch the field and keep teams from stacking the box when AD is in, and the defense will be more effective at getting teams off the field and our offense back on.
We have the players to compete at every position except QB, if Jackson shows improvement in judgment and is able to play turnover free football, we have a fighting chance.
I'm not sure Jackson's the guy, and I think wee need to either bring in a young QB to learn from Ferotte and compete with Jackson.
I think we are still missing a few pieces of the puzzle, I hope Jackson proves me wrong, but as of now, I think we will win the division and the stall out in the early rounds of the playoffs.


Agreed.
The Vikes will need to score more points, turn the ball over less, and, be better against the pass.
With better QB play in '07, we make the playoffs.
We simply need more production from the position.
Completely agree with your Jackson comments, I'm not sure he's the guy, however, I'm not sure yet he's not the guy.
All I know is we need a guy...not particularly happy with the contingency plan at the QB position, however, I am extremely happy with virtually all other positional situations, with the possible exception of OLine.
McKinnie has placed us in a bit of a risky place.


All of that said, I do believe Jackson will improve and the Vikes will win a minimum of 10 games this year.
It remains to be seen if he can lead the team to the promised land.
I agree, however, with Jared Allen's comments..."this team is ready to win now and set up to win for many years."

PackOne
04-26-2008, 01:46 PM
I can't believe I didn't see this thread right away. I would have made my initial post here. That post would have been ...

Puh Leese.

gregair13
04-26-2008, 02:03 PM
all we have to do is beat the cowboys. the nfc is horrible.

DaunteHOF
04-26-2008, 03:55 PM
try to do it ala ravens on their superbowl run with a better running back and hopefully QB

huxx
04-26-2008, 05:19 PM
"gregair13" wrote:


all we have to do is beat the cowboys. the nfc is horrible.


I totally agree

Ltrey33
04-26-2008, 11:00 PM
Nope. I am saying it now....and I hope I am wrong but it's how I feel....we have no shot at a Super Bowl this year.

Our defense and our running game is probably strong enough to get the Vikes over the hump and into the playoffs, but they will be ousted in the first round. Tarvaris just will not play consistently enough (or well enough) to take the Vikings anywhere. Oh, and Childress is still a bad game manager, IMO.

I hope I'm wrong, and I hope they go out there and dominate the league, but I have serious doubts.

misplacedminnesotan
04-27-2008, 06:59 PM
"Ltrey" wrote:


Nope. I am saying it now....and I hope I am wrong but it's how I feel....we have no shot at a Super Bowl this year.

Our defense and our running game is probably strong enough to get the Vikes over the hump and into the playoffs, but they will be ousted in the first round. Tarvaris just will not play consistently enough (or well enough) to take the Vikings anywhere. Oh, and Childress is still a bad game manager, IMO.

I hope I'm wrong, and I hope they go out there and dominate the league, but I have serious doubts.


Agreed, I think we will make to the playoffs and make a run two years from now.
Either with Jackson, or Booty (I wanted him drafted since last year) at the helm.
I don't think Childress as bad a game manager as he was his first year.
There were a lot of good plays that were dialed up that just weren't executed.