PDA

View Full Version : This is OUR year!



VikesFan787
05-28-2008, 12:40 AM
Well guys, I personally believe this is our year.
Why you ask?
Heres why I think so....

I honestly think that T Jack is going to perform great.
Our defense is overflowing with talent and different ways to attack.
Our offense has signed some big names that can stretch the field.
Adrian Peterson.
Jared Allen, Kevin Williams, Pat Williams, need i say more?

People to have a big year:
AD
Sidney Rice
Bernard Berrian
Aundrea Allison
Tarvaris Jackson
Our whole defense


I think all this focus on T Jack is giving him a kick in the arse to really relize he has got to step up. I visited NFL.com and there are alot of stories on him.

I simply cannot wait much longer.

S
K
O
L

dcboardr41
05-28-2008, 12:48 AM
im glad to see another vikings fan, have faith in tarvaris jackson, we are Super Bowl bound :)

cajunvike
05-28-2008, 12:58 AM
Works for me!

pack93z
05-28-2008, 01:05 AM
You have the chips in place to make a run at it.. two points of interest I will be watching early.. the playcalling and TJ.. both go hand in hand sort of.. but I think the roadblocks very well maybe those two areas.

Oh and I still think plays can be made on your CB's.. but time will tell.

VikesFan787
05-28-2008, 01:08 AM
"pack93z" wrote:


You have the chips in place to make a run at it.. two points of interest I will be watching early.. the playcalling and TJ.. both go hand in hand sort of.. but I think the roadblocks very well maybe those two areas.

Oh and I still think plays can be made on your CB's.. but time will tell.


Your right. lets hope Griffin and M. Williams help out! And we all seem to forgot Michael Boulware!!

dcboardr41
05-28-2008, 01:09 AM
"VikesFan787" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


You have the chips in place to make a run at it.. two points of interest I will be watching early.. the playcalling and TJ.. both go hand in hand sort of.. but I think the roadblocks very well maybe those two areas.

Oh and I still think plays can be made on your CB's.. but time will tell.


Your right. lets hope Griffin and M. Williams help out! And we all seem to forgot Michael Boulware!!


we need charles gordon or MM to emerge as a starter-like player in the league, im a big fan of both, i think at least one can step up

midgensa
05-28-2008, 02:07 AM
"VikesFan787" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


You have the chips in place to make a run at it.. two points of interest I will be watching early.. the playcalling and TJ.. both go hand in hand sort of.. but I think the roadblocks very well maybe those two areas.

Oh and I still think plays can be made on your CB's.. but time will tell.


Your right. lets hope Griffin and M. Williams help out! And we all seem to forgot Michael Boulware!!


DUDE!!!! I am excited too!!! But ... uh ... Michael Boulware sucks and will barely see the field.

PurpleNurple
05-28-2008, 03:10 AM
"midgensa" wrote:


"VikesFan787" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


You have the chips in place to make a run at it.. two points of interest I will be watching early.. the playcalling and TJ.. both go hand in hand sort of.. but I think the roadblocks very well maybe those two areas.

Oh and I still think plays can be made on your CB's.. but time will tell.


Your right. lets hope Griffin and M. Williams help out! And we all seem to forgot Michael Boulware!!


DUDE!!!! I am excited too!!! But ... uh ... Michael Boulware sucks and will barely see the field.


prolly true... he could be a solid special teams contributer though...

digital420
05-28-2008, 05:22 AM
"pack93z" wrote:


You have the chips in place to make a run at it.. two points of interest I will be watching early.. the playcalling and TJ.. both go hand in hand sort of.. but I think the roadblocks very well maybe those two areas.

Oh and I still think plays can be made on your CB's.. but time will tell.


based on expectations of our front 4, the occasional lb blitz.. i don't think qb's will have time to let wr's get past 5 -10 yrd range.. and in that.. i like our CB's.

the bears made it to the show with a stellar D and a piss poor O..

we have a stellar D and a decent O.. could be a winning O if those roadblocks u mentioned get passed.

DiGiTaL

VikesFan787
05-28-2008, 09:04 AM
I really wanna see Kliensaucer get the ball too ;D

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 09:12 AM
"VikesFan787" wrote:


Well guys, I personally believe this is our year.
Why you ask?
Heres why I think so....

I honestly think that T Jack is going to perform great.
Our defense is overflowing with talent and different ways to attack.
Our offense has signed some big names that can stretch the field.
Adrian Peterson.
Jared Allen, Kevin Williams, Pat Williams, need i say more?

People to have a big year:
AD
Sidney Rice
Bernard Berrian
Aundrea Allison
Tarvaris Jackson
Our whole defense


I think all this focus on T Jack is giving him a kick in the arse to really relize he has got to step up. I visited NFL.com and there are alot of stories on him.
I simply cannot wait much longer.

S
K
O
L

Nice post but I wonder about your comment on TJ.
::)

Why do you think he needs a kick in the ass to realize he has to step up?

Seems to me that your comment would make sense if he had a lackadaisical approach to the game and his position when in fact, he has done nothing but demonstrate the desire and drive to get better as evidenced by spending countless hours at Winter Park during the offseason(s) watching tape and working with the coaches.

Again, nice post, just wondering on that comment.
What does he need to do to make you think he is actually putting forth the effort and doesn't need his ass kicked to do it?

PurpleTide
05-28-2008, 09:50 AM
It's time for un-bridaled optimism, Purple Shades On... Super Bowl here we come. ;D

tosstomoss
05-28-2008, 10:16 AM
I just want to have a good year and not blow games we should win !!! That would be a great start for me. 2nd the
play calling early on with the games we have will really be the test. Cheers 8) 8)

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 10:20 AM
"tosstomoss" wrote:


I just want to have a good year and not blow games we should win !!! That would be a great start for me. 2nd the
play calling early on with the games we have will really be the test. Cheers 8) 8)

Haven't seen that avatar for a while.
;D
;D
;D

I don't get to upset if we drop one or two that we shouldn't anymore.

I've come to the realization that every team will lose a few they aren't supposed to and win a few they aren't supposed to.

Freya
05-28-2008, 10:23 AM
Yay for optimism!!!!

tosstomoss
05-28-2008, 10:28 AM
I dont say much anymore always tired of people taking something out of content, but I still love this place.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 10:32 AM
"tosstomoss" wrote:


I dont say much anymore always tired of people taking something out of content, but I still love this place.

Ya gotta have thick skin sometimes thats for sure.
Good to see the avatar (you) posting again though.
;D

SKOL
05-28-2008, 10:33 AM
"tosstomoss" wrote:


I dont say much anymore always tired of people taking something out of content, but I still love this place.


I thought the same thing as Marrdro.
I hear you, although it's normally newbs that rip into long-timers, so you have to take it with a grain of salt.
You have the respect of us who've been around.

C Mac D
05-28-2008, 11:00 AM
I've said it in plenty on this site... we're beating the Colts in the Super Bowl this season.

Prophet
05-28-2008, 11:03 AM
"C" wrote:


I've said it in plenty on this site... we're beating the Colts in the Super Bowl this season.


http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/reality.jpg
http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/reality.jpg

C Mac D
05-28-2008, 11:06 AM
"Prophet" wrote:


"C" wrote:


I've said it in plenty on this site... we're beating the Colts in the Super Bowl this season.


http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/reality.jpg
http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/reality.jpg


Yes... very real

Prophet
05-28-2008, 11:09 AM
"C" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"C" wrote:


I've said it in plenty on this site... we're beating the Colts in the Super Bowl this season.


http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/reality.jpg
http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/reality.jpg


Yes... very real


I would enjoy it more if they beat the Patriots.

jmcdon00
05-28-2008, 11:10 AM
I just want to beat the packers. Win week 1 and everything else will fall into place. Lose and it could be a very long season.

Prophet
05-28-2008, 11:13 AM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


I just want to beat the packers. Win week 1 and everything else will fall into place. Lose and it could be a very long season.


You really think one game in a 16 game season is that crucial?
If they get beat 100-0 it would be painful, but the season wouldn't even be close to over.
I seem to recall the Vikings pounding on the Jints last season like they were a peewee team, then they ended up winning the SB.

C Mac D
05-28-2008, 11:15 AM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


I just want to beat the packers. Win week 1 and everything else will fall into place. Lose and it could be a very long season.


I don't know about that Game, but even if we lose... It's a long season anyways, things can turn around... come on, we're Vikings fans, one of two things are going to happen.


1.) We start off 7-2 with many people choosing us to go to the SB... then we finish 8-8, missing the playoffs.

2.) We start 2-7 with everyone making fun of us... then we finish 9-7 and barely squeeze into the playoffs...


I mean, I know we are beating the Colts in the Super Bowl this year... but the two scenarios above are what the past 10 years have taught me.

jmcdon00
05-28-2008, 11:31 AM
"Prophet" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


I just want to beat the packers. Win week 1 and everything else will fall into place. Lose and it could be a very long season.


You really think one game in a 16 game season is that crucial?
If they get beat 100-0 it would be painful, but the season wouldn't even be close to over.
I seem to recall the Vikings pounding on the Jints last season like they were a peewee team, then they ended up winning the SB.

It is very very crucial. Yeah there are 15 other games but the first one sets the tone. If they can go into Lamblow and get a win it will give the team a lot of confidence and a winning attitude.
Not saying it would be impossible to lose and still win a superbowl or win and not make the playoffs but it, for me atleast, will define early on what type of team we have. If they win I would put money on them winning the division. If they lose I think GreenBay will likely win the division.
JMHO.

El Vikingo
05-28-2008, 11:33 AM
"C" wrote:





I mean, I know we are beating the Colts in the Super Bowl this year...

Any clue about our opp. in the NFC playoffs too?

Prophet
05-28-2008, 11:37 AM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


I just want to beat the packers. Win week 1 and everything else will fall into place. Lose and it could be a very long season.


You really think one game in a 16 game season is that crucial?
If they get beat 100-0 it would be painful, but the season wouldn't even be close to over.
I seem to recall the Vikings pounding on the Jints last season like they were a peewee team, then they ended up winning the SB.

It is very very crucial. Yeah there are 15 other games but the first one sets the tone. If they can go into Lamblow and get a win it will give the team a lot of confidence and a winning attitude.

Not saying it would be impossible to lose and still win a superbowl or win and not make the playoffs but it, for me atleast, will define early on what type of team we have. If they win I would put money on them winning the division. If they lose I think GreenBay will likely win the division.
JMHO.


Based on my years as a fan all the teams are in a flux at the beginning of the year because it is rare, especially these days, to have the same team that was on the field as last year.
It takes time for teams to gell in real game-time situations.
Aaron Rodgers will be struggling and will probably come into a groove around midseason and hundreds of other variables play out.
There is no way the first game of the season matters that much.
Ask Meathead, didn't he start out 6-0 and not make the playoffs?
Didn't the Jints look like shit depending on the week last year?
All that matters is that they stay in the playoff hunt and have it together toward the end of the season and go into the playoffs as a unit and ready to pound the opponents into oblivion.
Sure, it would be fun to see them win, or better yet, blow out the Packers in the opener....but, it has little to no bearing on how the season will play out.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 11:48 AM
The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk shit to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk shit to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.

El Vikingo
05-28-2008, 11:56 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:




Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk shit to the PUKER fans.




Add to that the shit-face of Farve in his day,priceless.

pack93z
05-28-2008, 12:01 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk shit to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk shit to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


Ha... I need to mark this one as prophetic as the prophet is.. just take the quote a little out of context I shall..
;D

The first game will be interesting on many levels and may very well be a momentum builder for either team for the first couple weeks.. but by about week 4 or so.. it will be ancient history.. might be relevant come playoff seeding but little else in my opinion.

My only thought is both QB's have to make some plays, they may struggle a little but they both need to make some positive season building plays. If Rodgers lays a complete egg.. it very well might take him a while to recover from it.. the press and pressure will be murder. Same goes with TJ.. I think he needs to start off well, otherwise the questions will become overwelming in nature.. the true weak link type senerio for both.

But beyond that.. it is just another game on the schedule, division game at that.

gagarr
05-28-2008, 12:08 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.

Prophet
05-28-2008, 12:09 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk shit to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk shit to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


Ha... I need to mark this one as prophetic as the prophet is.. just take the quote a little out of context I shall..
;D

The first game will be interesting on many levels and may very well be a momentum builder for either team for the first couple weeks.. but by about week 4 or so.. it will be ancient history.. might be relevant come playoff seeding but little else in my opinion.

My only thought is both QB's have to make some plays, they may struggle a little but they both need to make some positive season building plays. If Rodgers lays a complete egg.. it very well might take him a while to recover from it.. the press and pressure will be murder. Same goes with TJ.. I think he needs to start off well, otherwise the questions will become overwelming in nature.. the true weak link type senerio for both.

But beyond that.. it is just another game on the schedule, division game at that.




The press massacre will leave Rodgers circling the drain more so than it would Tarvaris.
Rodgers is filling the shoes of the man-love child of Wisconsin and people are in denial.
Tarvaris has been getting slammed for over a year now, he's immune to the damages.

Whether the Vikings win or lose I will still have plenty of reasons left in my hat to slam the Packers and many of their challenged fans.
I'm not worried about that.

pack93z
05-28-2008, 12:14 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


Whether the Vikings win or lose I will still have plenty of reasons left in my hat to slam the Packers and many of their challenged fans.
I'm not worried about that.


Top 5 Prophetic slams on the Packers.. this aught' to be good for a chuckle this morning... need a little humor.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 12:18 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


Ha... I need to mark this one as prophetic as the prophet is.. just take the quote a little out of context I shall..
;D

The first game will be interesting on many levels and may very well be a momentum builder for either team for the first couple weeks.. but by about week 4 or so.. it will be ancient history.. might be relevant come playoff seeding but little else in my opinion.

My only thought is both QB's have to make some plays, they may struggle a little but they both need to make some positive season building plays. If Rodgers lays a complete egg.. it very well might take him a while to recover from it.. the press and pressure will be murder. Same goes with TJ.. I think he needs to start off well, otherwise the questions will become overwelming in nature.. the true weak link type senerio for both.

But beyond that.. it is just another game on the schedule, division game at that.



Given the schedules both teams face, a win, regardless of Div or not will be very important, but I don't think (even though I picked them both to finish 10-6) we will have to worry about tie breakers.

As I look deeper into each team, I see disaster pending for the PUKER fans.

;D

a.
QB.
Because Lord Favre took so long to make up his mind, all Vets (and there weren't many) of value that could act as a backup are gone.
If Rodgers gets hurts, it could get ugly in PUKER land.

b.
RB.
Will Grant be happy?
Will he be able to be as productive as he was last year?
If not, what is the backup Plan?

c.
TE.
Will the PUKERS use a front line TE in thier scheme that can not only block but get into space as well.
The signing of Evan Moore might be an idicator of that.
Lets hope your Tackles dont' need help against DE's.
Not alot of depth (exp wise here).
Lee is a 6 year vet,
Humprey is a 3 year guy then the rest are Rooks.
Again, gonna be fun to watch these cats help out.

d.
CB.
What ya gonna do it Harris and Woodson go down.
Not alot of depth/guys that have reps/exp there.
Teams might be able to exploit that if one or both go down this year.

Long story short, gonna be a fun year, but I don't think the first game is gonna be a true indicator of which teams is the better of the two.

;D

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 12:21 PM
"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

pack93z
05-28-2008, 12:21 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


The press massacre will leave Rodgers circling the drain more so than it would Tarvaris.
Rodgers is filling the shoes of the man-love child of Wisconsin and people are in denial.
Tarvaris has been getting slammed for over a year now, he's immune to the damages.


Rodgers is going to be screwed by the press no matter what this year.. there will be some dillweed fans and press that will slam every incomplete pass the kid makes and the "Well shucks' Ol Farve would have made that play" BS will flow endlessly this season. He will have an up and down year in my opinion, I just hope there are more ups than downs.. he grows as the season progresses and by the later part of the season is ready for a playoff run if that is in the cards..

On TJ side of the the coin.. I think this is his "put up or shut up" year in MN.. so I think the press might turn up the heat a little more.. but I agree he has been scalded by the press already and probably is ready for the bath again.

Prophet
05-28-2008, 12:24 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


Whether the Vikings win or lose I will still have plenty of reasons left in my hat to slam the Packers and many of their challenged fans.
I'm not worried about that.


Top 5 Prophetic slams on the Packers.. this aught' to be good for a chuckle this morning... need a little humor.


Found this one, should hold you over until it gets heated during regular season.

Why wasn't Jesus born in Green Bay? Because God couldn't find three wise men.

Jereamiah
05-28-2008, 12:36 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


The press massacre will leave Rodgers circling the drain more so than it would Tarvaris.
Rodgers is filling the shoes of the man-love child of Wisconsin and people are in denial.
Tarvaris has been getting slammed for over a year now, he's immune to the damages.


Rodgers is going to be screwed by the press no matter what this year.. there will be some dillweed fans and press that will slam every incomplete pass the kid makes and the "Well shucks' Ol Farve would have made that play" BS will flow endlessly this season. He will have an up and down year in my opinion, I just hope there are more ups than downs.. he grows as the season progresses and by the later part of the season is ready for a playoff run if that is in the cards..

On TJ side of the the coin.. I think this is his "put up or shut up" year in MN.. so I think the press might turn up the heat a little more.. but I agree he has been scalded by the press already and probably is ready for the bath again.
I'm not so sure Pack93z, Alot of the press I've seen has been pretty positive about the guy. IMO all out of proportion to what he has actually done. Some reports (no link, sorry) i've seen awhile back had the guy as the best qb in the division, based on that game against dallas. It's like he is getting the benefit of the doubt. Maybe I'm just seeing what I want to see, just seemed like that to me. He has a built in excuse, "well who can fill Favre's shoes?" if he fails and if he does well, "Playing behind Favre payed off!" As the thread states pack93z, I agree. It is the 'Vikes year. You may agree that the outlook and optimism for the 'Vikes does overshadow what the pack has going for it? GB fans are just hoping Rodgers doesnt f-up too bad, while 'Vikes fans have a very realistic shot at seeing the team go deep in the play-offs. Just go ahead and agree with me, okay? ;D

pack93z
05-28-2008, 12:39 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:



Given the schedules both teams face, a win, regardless of Div or not will be very important, but I don't think (even though I picked them both to finish 10-6) we will have to worry about tie breakers.

As I look deeper into each team, I see disaster pending for the PUKER fans.

;D

a.
QB.
Because Lord Favre took so long to make up his mind, all Vets (and there weren't many) of value that could act as a backup are gone.
If Rodgers gets hurts, it could get ugly in PUKER land.

b.
RB.
Will Grant be happy?
Will he be able to be as productive as he was last year?
If not, what is the backup Plan?

c.
TE.
Will the PUKERS use a front line TE in thier scheme that can not only block but get into space as well.
The signing of Evan Moore might be an idicator of that.
Lets hope your Tackles dont' need help against DE's.
Not alot of depth (exp wise here).
Lee is a 6 year vet,
Humprey is a 3 year guy then the rest are Rooks.
Again, gonna be fun to watch these cats help out.

d.
CB.
What ya gonna do it Harris and Woodson go down.
Not alot of depth/guys that have reps/exp there.
Teams might be able to exploit that if one or both go down this year.

Long story short, gonna be a fun year, but I don't think the first game is gonna be a true indicator of which teams is the better of the two.

;D


A. I don't think the Packers were players in the veteran QB market of any real threat to Rodgers.. IMO, they have loaded up the whole teams chances on Ted's very first pick in the Green & Gold.. make it or break it.. that has seemed to be the plan from the start. Durablilty is my concern with young Rodgers.. but he has waited and it is now his chance to shine or be buried.. GB has been married to this kid from the 05 draft on..

B. They are making progress on the Grant contract.. I think it is a mistake on Grants part because if he is as good as he has shown last year.. he will be signing a under valued contract at this point. My opinion.. play out part of the season, show that performance again and then start the process.. as far as injury goes.. there is always a thing called insurance which would offset the risk.

Backup plan.. Jackson has been the eye opener this offseason.. so I think he might be 2nd in line... but the dark horse back is talented but under motivated.. it will be interesting to see if he is fired up to play.. Wynn that is.. plus there will be backs comming available this season.. it was a talented rookie class.. so the waiver wire will have some players on it for sure.

C. I think you are undervaluing Lee.. much improved in the run blocking last year and is a nice little reciever.. but the kid to watch this season is Finley.. I think MM will find ways to minimize the blocking liability he is and he will have a couple of eye poppers in the passing game.. I personally think he will have the most impact of any rookie this season and has a chance to be a special player.

D. CB.. I agree with you on this one.. we have little in terms of consistent proven players behind these two.. Tramon Williams will take another step in development this season.. but he is a different style player.. more in the true cover corner than a physical bump and run type player.. Blackmon can't stay on the field and Bush is inconsistent as TJ passing the rock. Lee will make mistakes this season.. so that very well might be the achilles heal of the Packers in 08'.. Ty Law anyone?

E. We are a very deep and young team.. a couple of players will step up and surprise and for the most part most of the players are only comming into there own.. we have holes for sure.. but tell me a team that doesn't.. I think the biggest threat to the Packers struggling is if either Tackles goes down for any significant time.. we keep drafting Olineman but none have stepped up and really have said they can play week in and out in this league.. not a single one of them youngin's have yet.

pack93z
05-28-2008, 12:45 PM
"Jereamiah" wrote:


I'm not so sure Pack93z, Alot of the press I've seen has been pretty positive about the guy. IMO all out of proportion to what he has actually done. Some reports (no link, sorry) i've seen awhile back had the guy as the best qb in the division, based on that game against dallas. It's like he is getting the benefit of the doubt. Maybe I'm just seeing what I want to see, just seemed like that to me. He has a built in excuse, "well who can fill Favre's shoes?" if he fails and if he does well, "Playing behind Favre payed off!" As the thread states pack93z, I agree. It is the 'Vikes year. You may agree that the outlook and optimism for the 'Vikes does overshadow what the pack has going for it? GB fans are just hoping Rodgers doesnt f-up too bad, while 'Vikes fans have a very realistic shot at seeing the team go deep in the play-offs. Just go ahead and agree with me, okay? ;D


Oh he is the feel good story to this point and as long as he doesn't have a "bad" game probably will be.. but the first egg he lays or the first game we lose because of one of his plays... that will all be canned... their are a couple of writers in the GB area that are clueless and will pen something up that doesn't take a lot of effort.. just playing to Favre lovers to speak.

As for this year.. I am anixious to see how it plays out.. IMO... this will be Ted's "put up or shut up" year so to speak.. was he and MM the reason we recovered to a 13-3 mark in year 3 or was it the legend that was Brett Favre a major reason.. either way it will make for interesting TV and sports reading..

jmcdon00
05-28-2008, 12:46 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk shit to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk shit to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.

A loss does mean a lot. It takes an 8-8
and makes them 7-9. It takes a 12-4 team to 11-5. It could be the difference between home field advantage or not. Making the playoffs. You can argue that it is no more important than any other week but it is a division game so that makes it more important than 10 of the games on the schedule(the goal is to win the division right?).
And from a confidence stand point. I think the vikings players are going into the with high expectations and a loss would hurt that confidence and make them wonder if they are really as good as they think they are.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2007 9 of them won in week one. The other 3 all lost to teams that also made the playoffs, 2 of them were wildcards. Of the 8 division winners 7 won in week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs.56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs.18.75%
I would say that amounts to squat. ;)

pack93z
05-28-2008, 12:50 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


Found this one, should hold you over until it gets heated during regular season.

Why wasn't Jesus born in Green Bay? Because God couldn't find three wise men.



Did you hear Brett is looking at houses in White Bear Lake? He searched all along the United States and found the Twin Cities is the most isolated portion of the country from real NFL football.. thought maybe Pop Warner wouldn't be too taxing..

/ Cheesey jokes off.

gagarr
05-28-2008, 01:06 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 01:45 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.

A loss does mean a lot. It takes an 8-8
and makes them 7-9. It takes a 12-4 team to 11-5. It could be the difference between home field advantage or not. Making the playoffs. You can argue that it is no more important than any other week but it is a division game so that makes it more important than 10 of the games on the schedule(the goal is to win the division right?).
And from a confidence stand point. I think the vikings players are going into the with high expectations and a loss would hurt that confidence and make them wonder if they are really as good as they think they are.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2007 9 of them won in week one. The other 3 all lost to teams that also made the playoffs, 2 of them were wildcards. Of the 8 division winners 7 won in week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs.56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs.18.75%
I would say that amounts to squat. ;)

How do your percentages work out if you do them over a 5 year period?

Again, as I stated previously, I doubt we have to worry about tie breakers when it comes to who makes the playoffs when it comes to the PUKERS and us but good stuff none-the-less.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 01:47 PM
"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.

Nectur
05-28-2008, 01:48 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


A. I don't think the Packers were players in the veteran QB market of any real threat to Rodgers.. IMO, they have loaded up the whole teams chances on Ted's very first pick in the Green & Gold.. make it or break it.. that has seemed to be the plan from the start. Durablilty is my concern with young Rodgers.. but he has waited and it is now his chance to shine or be buried.. GB has been married to this kid from the 05 draft on..


Well then all I have to say is you better be hoping and praying that your 05 draft class turns out better then ours.
:P

But in all reality this game can define the media's / nation's perspective of the power of the NFC North for the season.
For weeks people will be drawing back similarities to this game.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 01:52 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:



Given the schedules both teams face, a win, regardless of Div or not will be very important, but I don't think (even though I picked them both to finish 10-6) we will have to worry about tie breakers.

As I look deeper into each team, I see disaster pending for the PUKER fans.

;D

a.
QB.
Because Lord Favre took so long to make up his mind, all Vets (and there weren't many) of value that could act as a backup are gone.
If Rodgers gets hurts, it could get ugly in PUKER land.

b.
RB.
Will Grant be happy?
Will he be able to be as productive as he was last year?
If not, what is the backup Plan?

c.
TE.
Will the PUKERS use a front line TE in thier scheme that can not only block but get into space as well.
The signing of Evan Moore might be an idicator of that.
Lets hope your Tackles dont' need help against DE's.
Not alot of depth (exp wise here).
Lee is a 6 year vet,
Humprey is a 3 year guy then the rest are Rooks.
Again, gonna be fun to watch these cats help out.

d.
CB.
What ya gonna do it Harris and Woodson go down.
Not alot of depth/guys that have reps/exp there.
Teams might be able to exploit that if one or both go down this year.

Long story short, gonna be a fun year, but I don't think the first game is gonna be a true indicator of which teams is the better of the two.

;D


A. I don't think the Packers were players in the veteran QB market of any real threat to Rodgers.. IMO, they have loaded up the whole teams chances on Ted's very first pick in the Green & Gold.. make it or break it.. that has seemed to be the plan from the start. Durablilty is my concern with young Rodgers.. but he has waited and it is now his chance to shine or be buried.. GB has been married to this kid from the 05 draft on..

B. They are making progress on the Grant contract.. I think it is a mistake on Grants part because if he is as good as he has shown last year.. he will be signing a under valued contract at this point. My opinion.. play out part of the season, show that performance again and then start the process.. as far as injury goes.. there is always a thing called insurance which would offset the risk.

Backup plan.. Jackson has been the eye opener this offseason.. so I think he might be 2nd in line... but the dark horse back is talented but under motivated.. it will be interesting to see if he is fired up to play.. Wynn that is.. plus there will be backs comming available this season.. it was a talented rookie class.. so the waiver wire will have some players on it for sure.

C. I think you are undervaluing Lee.. much improved in the run blocking last year and is a nice little reciever.. but the kid to watch this season is Finley.. I think MM will find ways to minimize the blocking liability he is and he will have a couple of eye poppers in the passing game.. I personally think he will have the most impact of any rookie this season and has a chance to be a special player.

D. CB.. I agree with you on this one.. we have little in terms of consistent proven players behind these two.. Tramon Williams will take another step in development this season.. but he is a different style player.. more in the true cover corner than a physical bump and run type player.. Blackmon can't stay on the field and Bush is inconsistent as TJ passing the rock. Lee will make mistakes this season.. so that very well might be the achilles heal of the Packers in 08'.. Ty Law anyone?

E. We are a very deep and young team.. a couple of players will step up and surprise and for the most part most of the players are only comming into there own.. we have holes for sure.. but tell me a team that doesn't.. I think the biggest threat to the Packers struggling is if either Tackles goes down for any significant time.. we keep drafting Olineman but none have stepped up and really have said they can play week in and out in this league.. not a single one of them youngin's have yet.

Very nice recap.

Problem is, you are deep with talent, but the talent is very raw and has very little actual NFL experience.


Trust me, after watching the Vikings go through this struggle the last 2 years (teaching them under fire) you will have inconsitency no matter how talented they are and you will struggle.

Again, the first week won't mean squat as the better team won't be realized until about mid season.
Then we will see the cream rise to the top and I suspect it will be the Vikes because of the staffs willingness to let our rooks get reps over the last two years.

Throw in a few Vets to compliment those kids and we have something special going up there in the land of 10,000 lakes.
;D

pack93z
05-28-2008, 02:26 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Very nice recap.

Problem is, you are deep with talent, but the talent is very raw and has very little actual NFL experience.


Trust me, after watching the Vikings go through this struggle the last 2 years (teaching them under fire) you will have inconsitency no matter how talented they are and you will struggle.

Again, the first week won't mean squat as the better team won't be realized until about mid season.
Then we will see the cream rise to the top and I suspect it will be the Vikes because of the staffs willingness to let our rooks get reps over the last two years.

Throw in a few Vets to compliment those kids and we have something special going up there in the land of 10,000 lakes.

;D


One problem with the theory.. we have been the youngest team for the past 2 plus years and have had youngsters starting all over the place.. so this depth I think we have has played a great deal comming into this year..

We started 2 to 3 rookies along the oline the past two years, the linebackers minus Barnett.. yep rookies and young players.. safeties.. yep.. young pups.. WR.. everyone but Driver came into the league the past 3 seasons.. RB.. Check.. we only had one veteran on the team last season.. check..

Point is.. we have lived the very same pain you describe.. where we haven't is CB, QB, and OT as front line starters.. but at CB we have had nothing but rookies and 2nd year players at Nickel and covering when Harris or Woodson couldn't go.... other than that it has been a non stop rotation of young players filling holes..

jmcdon00
05-28-2008, 02:37 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.

A loss does mean a lot. It takes an 8-8
and makes them 7-9. It takes a 12-4 team to 11-5. It could be the difference between home field advantage or not. Making the playoffs. You can argue that it is no more important than any other week but it is a division game so that makes it more important than 10 of the games on the schedule(the goal is to win the division right?).
And from a confidence stand point. I think the vikings players are going into the with high expectations and a loss would hurt that confidence and make them wonder if they are really as good as they think they are.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2007 9 of them won in week one. The other 3 all lost to teams that also made the playoffs, 2 of them were wildcards. Of the 8 division winners 7 won in week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs.56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs.18.75%
I would say that amounts to squat. ;)

How do your percentages work out if you do them over a 5 year period?

Again, as I stated previously, I doubt we have to worry about tie breakers when it comes to who makes the playoffs when it comes to the PUKERS and us but good stuff none-the-less.

5 years is quite a lot of research so I will just go back 1 more year for now.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2006 9 won in week one. Of the 8 division winners all 8 won week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs. 56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs. 18.75%

16 teams have won their division over the last 2 seasons, 15 of them won week one. 93.75%(tampa bay is the exception and they finished 9-7)

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 02:40 PM
"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.

A loss does mean a lot. It takes an 8-8
and makes them 7-9. It takes a 12-4 team to 11-5. It could be the difference between home field advantage or not. Making the playoffs. You can argue that it is no more important than any other week but it is a division game so that makes it more important than 10 of the games on the schedule(the goal is to win the division right?).
And from a confidence stand point. I think the vikings players are going into the with high expectations and a loss would hurt that confidence and make them wonder if they are really as good as they think they are.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2007 9 of them won in week one. The other 3 all lost to teams that also made the playoffs, 2 of them were wildcards. Of the 8 division winners 7 won in week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs.56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs.18.75%
I would say that amounts to squat. ;)

How do your percentages work out if you do them over a 5 year period?

Again, as I stated previously, I doubt we have to worry about tie breakers when it comes to who makes the playoffs when it comes to the PUKERS and us but good stuff none-the-less.

5 years is quite a lot of research so I will just go back 1 more year for now.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2006 9 won in week one. Of the 8 division winners all 8 won week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs. 56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs. 18.75%

16 teams have won their division over the last 2 seasons, 15 of them won week one. 93.75%(tampa bay is the exception and they finished 9-7)

LOL, Just moved ya up a column my friend.
;D

BleedinPandG
05-28-2008, 02:43 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Very nice recap.

Problem is, you are deep with talent, but the talent is very raw and has very little actual NFL experience.


Trust me, after watching the Vikings go through this struggle the last 2 years (teaching them under fire) you will have inconsitency no matter how talented they are and you will struggle.

Again, the first week won't mean squat as the better team won't be realized until about mid season.
Then we will see the cream rise to the top and I suspect it will be the Vikes because of the staffs willingness to let our rooks get reps over the last two years.

Throw in a few Vets to compliment those kids and we have something special going up there in the land of 10,000 lakes.
;D


One problem with the theory.. we have been the youngest team for the past 2 plus years and have had youngsters starting all over the place.. so this depth I think we have has played a great deal comming into this year..

We started 2 to 3 rookies along the oline the past two years, the linebackers minus Barnett.. yep rookies and young players.. safeties.. yep.. young pups.. WR.. everyone but Driver came into the league the past 3 seasons.. RB.. Check.. we only had one veteran on the team last season.. check..

Point is.. we have lived the very same pain you describe.. where we haven't is CB, QB, and OT as front line starters.. but at CB we have had nothing but rookies and 2nd year players at Nickel and covering when Harris or Woodson couldn't go.... other than that it has been a non stop rotation of young players filling holes..


I think you underestimate the positions where your youth has not gained experience.
IMO, take it for what it's worth, there are 2 absolutely critical positions on the football field.
Both positions give up points when they make mistakes, one position is often the key to scoring points.
Those positions are CB and QB, the two positions you had the most experience at last year and the two positions the Vikes have been grooming for the past 2 years.
Safeties and LBs are great, but rarely will a single failure there lead directly to points the way a blown CB coverage will.
Experience on the OLine and DLine are good as well, but with a HOF QB, any line is going to look good.
I just believe the whole youth movement in GB was highly over played due to the age at those 2 key positions.

pack93z
05-28-2008, 02:50 PM
"BleedinPandG" wrote:


I think you underestimate the positions where your youth has not gained experience.
IMO, take it for what it's worth, there are 2 absolutely critical positions on the football field.
Both positions give up points when they make mistakes, one position is often the key to scoring points.
Those positions are CB and QB, the two positions you had the most experience at last year and the two positions the Vikes have been grooming for the past 2 years.
Safeties and LBs are great, but rarely will a single failure there lead directly to points the way a blown CB coverage will.
Experience on the OLine and DLine are good as well, but with a HOF QB, any line is going to look good.
I just believe the whole youth movement in GB was highly over played due to the age at those 2 key positions.


Very well possible.. but we still have our corners, and even though Harris got roasted in the CG.. he was solid for most of the year bar Dallas and the meltdown.

People talk of Rodgers like is a complete green rook.. he has been in the system for three years.. while I agree he lacks on field experience those three years can't be completely discounted either.. we shall see how Master Thompson's plan turns out.. line em up boys and play.. September yet?

gagarr
05-28-2008, 03:04 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.


"important" does not equal "ruined".... Marrdro's title should be "King of Hyperbole"
Seldom if anything is ever a gray area.

It should be interesting if any player's when the GB game approaches consider it a "important" game or "just another game". My bet is the players, in interviews, will refer to it as "important", as I've heard them refer to GB games in the past.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 03:10 PM
"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:




The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.


"important" does not equal "ruined".... Marrdro's title should be "King of Hyperbole"
Seldom if anything is ever a gray area.

It should be interesting if any player's when the GB game approaches consider it a "important" game or "just another game". My bet is the players, in interviews, will refer to it as "important", as I've heard them refer to GB games in the past.

Of course they will say its important.
Just like they will say the games against Det, Chi, Indy, etc are important.
Its because every game is important.
If I'm not mistake that was what I said in my original post.
;D

Thats not the point I am trying to make. My point is that they are pro's.
If they lose they will move on to the next week.


Fans on the other hand won't.
I can think of at least 20 posters on here who will say the season is over if we lose week 1.

Chazz
05-28-2008, 03:15 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.



And I would contend that if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth their salt they will be motivated and prepared to which they will win against a tough important divisional opponent.


Most important stat: Childress 0
Mcarthy 4

:'(

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 03:20 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:




The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.



And I would contend that if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth their salt they will be motivated and prepared to which they will win against a tough important divisional opponent.


Most important stat: Childress 0
Mcarthy 4

:'(

And what happens if that turns into Childress 0 and Mcarthy 5?

The players and staff will get ready for week two while all us yutz fans will sit out here and cry in our beers and cerial worried that the season is over.

Again, fans will take this way harder than the players will.
Truth of the matter is, we could start out 0-2 this year. What ya gonna think then?

FIRE CHILDRESS......BENCH TJ.......SHITCAN FRAZIER........SHITCAN BEVELL....

That will fix everything.
;D

C Mac D
05-28-2008, 03:22 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


And what happens if that turns into Childress 0 and Mcarthy 5?

The players and staff will get ready for week two while all us yutz fans will sit out here and cry in our beers and cerial worried that the season is over.

Again, fans will take this way harder than the players will.
Truth of the matter is, we could start out 0-2 this year. What ya gonna think then?

FIRE CHILDRESS......BENCH TJ.......SHITCAN FRAZIER........SHITCAN BEVELL....

That will fix everything.
;D


I'll give us till 0-3... but yes, Fire Childress.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 03:28 PM
"C" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


And what happens if that turns into Childress 0 and Mcarthy 5?

The players and staff will get ready for week two while all us yutz fans will sit out here and cry in our beers and cerial worried that the season is over.

Again, fans will take this way harder than the players will.
Truth of the matter is, we could start out 0-2 this year. What ya gonna think then?

FIRE CHILDRESS......BENCH TJ.......SHITCAN FRAZIER........SHITCAN BEVELL....

That will fix everything.

;D


I'll give us till 0-3... but yes, Fire Childress.

LOL, I thought of you as I typed those two little words my friend.

All bullshitting aside, I really don't think we have anything to worry about this year with respect to GB in week one.
A loss is a possibility but I am getting more confindent as I look/watch what the PUKERS are doing this off season.

Chazz
05-28-2008, 03:39 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:






The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.



And I would contend that if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth their salt they will be motivated and prepared to which they will win against a tough important divisional opponent.


Most important stat: Childress 0
Mcarthy 4

:'(

And what happens if that turns into Childress 0 and Mcarthy 5?

The players and staff will get ready for week two while all us yutz fans will sit out here and cry in our beers and cerial worried that the season is over.

Again, fans will take this way harder than the players will.
Truth of the matter is, we could start out 0-2 this year. What ya gonna think then?

FIRE CHILDRESS......BENCH TJ.......SHITCAN FRAZIER........SHITCAN BEVELL....

That will fix everything.

;D



I don't think it will make or break our season. I do however think that winning the division will be dependent upon it.

Until Childress can record victories against Mcarthy, he is inferior. This year Mcarthy has no Favre to fall back upon, which makes this a true test. Which in turn raises the importance.

If Childress goes 0-5 against Mcarthy, the fire Childress bandwagon will be overflowing.

jmcdon00
05-28-2008, 03:44 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:








The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.



And I would contend that if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth their salt they will be motivated and prepared to which they will win against a tough important divisional opponent.


Most important stat: Childress 0
Mcarthy 4

:'(

And what happens if that turns into Childress 0 and Mcarthy 5?

The players and staff will get ready for week two while all us yutz fans will sit out here and cry in our beers and cerial worried that the season is over.

Again, fans will take this way harder than the players will.
Truth of the matter is, we could start out 0-2 this year. What ya gonna think then?

FIRE CHILDRESS......BENCH TJ.......SHITCAN FRAZIER........SHITCAN BEVELL....

That will fix everything.

;D



I don't think it will make or break our season. I do however think that winning the division will be dependent upon it.

Until Childress can record victories against Mcarthy, he is inferior. This year Mcarthy has no Favre to fall back upon, which makes this a true test. Which in turn raises the importance.

If Childress goes 0-5 against Mcarthy, the fire Childress bandwagon will be overflowing.

If they go 0-6 we'll need a new bandwagon, and head coach.

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 03:47 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:








The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.



And I would contend that if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth their salt they will be motivated and prepared to which they will win against a tough important divisional opponent.


Most important stat: Childress 0
Mcarthy 4

:'(

And what happens if that turns into Childress 0 and Mcarthy 5?

The players and staff will get ready for week two while all us yutz fans will sit out here and cry in our beers and cerial worried that the season is over.

Again, fans will take this way harder than the players will.
Truth of the matter is, we could start out 0-2 this year. What ya gonna think then?

FIRE CHILDRESS......BENCH TJ.......SHITCAN FRAZIER........SHITCAN BEVELL....

That will fix everything.

;D



I don't think it will make or break our season. I do however think that winning the division will be dependent upon it.

Until Childress can record victories against Mcarthy, he is inferior. This year Mcarthy has no Favre to fall back upon, which makes this a true test. Which in turn raises the importance.

If Childress goes 0-5 against Mcarthy, the fire Childress bandwagon will be overflowing.

I have an insider tip for ya my friend.....

If we lose the first pre-season game
the fire Childress bandwagon will be overflowing.

We'll here all the same old tired cliche's

a.
Play calling sucks.
b.
Why can't they make adjustments.
c.
The need to use AD more.
d.
Why don't we see screen passes.
e.
Why don't we blitz more.
f.
Why don't we see more 3 and 4 WR sets.
etc etc ad nauseum.

Even though it is a meaningless preseason game that has everything scripted to see the progress the players are making in training camp.
;D

pack93z
05-28-2008, 03:48 PM
Glad to see the futures have been adjusted as this thread as moved along.. from 0-2 to 0-3 to.. ahhh 0-6.. I will check back tomorrow to see if the it has reached 0-16 yet..
;D

Marrdro
05-28-2008, 03:55 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


Glad to see the futures have been adjusted as this thread as moved along.. from 0-2 to 0-3 to.. ahhh 0-6.. I will check back tomorrow to see if the it has reached 0-16 yet..
;D

Take Detroit out of the equation and you guys aren't looking so hot either......

L
1 Sept. 8 (Mon.) Minnesota Vikings 7 p.m.
W 2 Sept. 14 at Detroit Lions 1 p.m.
L
3 Sept. 21 Dallas Cowboys 8:15 p.m.
L
4 Sept. 28 at Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1 p.m.
W 5 Oct. 5 Atlanta Falcons 1 p.m.
L
6 Oct. 12 at Seattle Seahawks 4:15 p.m.
L
7 Oct. 19 Indianapolis Colts 4:15 p.m.


8 Oct. 26 Bye

W 9 Nov. 2 at Tennessee Titans 1 p.m.
L
10 Nov. 9 at Minnesota Vikings 1 p.m.
W 11 Nov. 16 Chicago Bears 1 p.m.
W 12 Nov. 24 (Mon.) at New Orleans Saints 8:30 p.m.
L
13 Nov. 30 Carolina Panthers 1 p.m.
W 14 Dec. 7 Houston Texans 1 p.m.
L
15 Dec. 14 at Jacksonville Jaguars 1 p.m.
L
16 Dec. 22 (Mon.) at Chicago Bears 8:30 p.m.
W 17 Dec. 28 Detroit Lions 1 p.m.

Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.

pack93z
05-28-2008, 04:00 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.


Complete honesty.. I would be happy with anything from about a 7-9 record on up.. some in Packer land seem to think changing QB's from a 1st ballet HOFer is nothing.. Rodgers will have moments this season but will struggle at other times.. IMO.. he is a complete wildcard and nothing would suprise me good or bad as far as his performance goes.. well maybe not a complete laying of the egg.. that would shock me..

For the first time in many moons.. we have to question the level of play of our QB.. and durablility..

Chazz
05-28-2008, 04:02 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:










The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.



And I would contend that if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth their salt they will be motivated and prepared to which they will win against a tough important divisional opponent.


Most important stat: Childress 0
Mcarthy 4

:'(

And what happens if that turns into Childress 0 and Mcarthy 5?

The players and staff will get ready for week two while all us yutz fans will sit out here and cry in our beers and cerial worried that the season is over.

Again, fans will take this way harder than the players will.
Truth of the matter is, we could start out 0-2 this year. What ya gonna think then?

FIRE CHILDRESS......BENCH TJ.......SHITCAN FRAZIER........SHITCAN BEVELL....

That will fix everything.

;D



I don't think it will make or break our season. I do however think that winning the division will be dependent upon it.

Until Childress can record victories against Mcarthy, he is inferior. This year Mcarthy has no Favre to fall back upon, which makes this a true test. Which in turn raises the importance.

If Childress goes 0-5 against Mcarthy, the fire Childress bandwagon will be overflowing.

I have an insider tip for ya my friend.....

If we lose the first pre-season game
the fire Childress bandwagon will be overflowing.

We'll here all the same old tired cliche's

a.
Play calling sucks.
b.
Why can't they make adjustments.
c.
The need to use AD more.
d.
Why don't we see screen passes.
e.
Why don't we blitz more.
f.
Why don't we see more 3 and 4 WR sets.
etc etc ad nauseum.

Even though it is a meaningless preseason game that has everything scripted to see the progress the players are making in training camp.

;D


True Dat. Its the GB losses that hurt the deepest to me and bring the bandwagon in my sights. I had hold of it after the 34-0 beating last year. :-X

C Mac D
05-28-2008, 04:03 PM
"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.


Complete honesty.. I would be happy with anything from about a 7-9 record on up.. some in Packer land seem to think changing QB's from a 1st ballet HOFer is nothing.. Rodgers will have moments this season but will struggle at other times.. IMO.. he is a complete wildcard and nothing would suprise me good or bad as far as his performance goes.. well maybe not a complete laying of the egg.. that would shock me..

For the first time in many moons.. we have to question the level of play of our QB.. and durablility..


I have a bad feeling that Rodgers will play quite well... unfortunately.

Chazz
05-28-2008, 04:08 PM
"C" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.


Complete honesty.. I would be happy with anything from about a 7-9 record on up.. some in Packer land seem to think changing QB's from a 1st ballet HOFer is nothing.. Rodgers will have moments this season but will struggle at other times.. IMO.. he is a complete wildcard and nothing would suprise me good or bad as far as his performance goes.. well maybe not a complete laying of the egg.. that would shock me..

For the first time in many moons.. we have to question the level of play of our QB.. and durablility..


I have a bad feeling that Rodgers will play quite well... unfortunately.



BLASPHEMY!! :-X :-X

gagarr
05-28-2008, 04:10 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:






The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.


"important" does not equal "ruined".... Marrdro's title should be "King of Hyperbole"
Seldom if anything is ever a gray area.

It should be interesting if any player's when the GB game approaches consider it a "important" game or "just another game". My bet is the players, in interviews, will refer to it as "important", as I've heard them refer to GB games in the past.

Of course they will say its important.
Just like they will say the games against Det, Chi, Indy, etc are important.
Its because every game is important.
If I'm not mistake that was what I said in my original post.

;D

Thats not the point I am trying to make. My point is that they are pro's.
If they lose they will move on to the next week.


Fans on the other hand won't.
I can think of at least 20 posters on here who will say the season is over if we lose week 1.



"I can think of at least 20 posters on here who will say the season is over if we lose week 1."
On this we can agree.
The same 20 will then say we're going to the SB after we beat the Colts in week 2.

gagarr
05-28-2008, 04:23 PM
"C" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.


Complete honesty.. I would be happy with anything from about a 7-9 record on up.. some in Packer land seem to think changing QB's from a 1st ballet HOFer is nothing.. Rodgers will have moments this season but will struggle at other times.. IMO.. he is a complete wildcard and nothing would suprise me good or bad as far as his performance goes.. well maybe not a complete laying of the egg.. that would shock me..

For the first time in many moons.. we have to question the level of play of our QB.. and durablility..


I have a bad feeling that Rodgers will play quite well... unfortunately.


I expect him to know the offense quite well, know how to read "D"'s, have good chemistry with his receivers, etc.

Pressure is the only way to get him off his game: media pressure before the game, 1st start pressure, national coverage MNF pressure, replacing a legend pressure, and hopfully a lot of D-line pressure.

Would be great to get some INT's, sacks, take their run game away, or get up by 14 in the 1st half.
All will add more pressure.
I want to see him crumple like a cracker under Rosie O'Donnels fat jiggly butt.

IwearSox21
05-28-2008, 06:09 PM
"gagarr" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.


Complete honesty.. I would be happy with anything from about a 7-9 record on up.. some in Packer land seem to think changing QB's from a 1st ballet HOFer is nothing.. Rodgers will have moments this season but will struggle at other times.. IMO.. he is a complete wildcard and nothing would suprise me good or bad as far as his performance goes.. well maybe not a complete laying of the egg.. that would shock me..

For the first time in many moons.. we have to question the level of play of our QB.. and durablility..


I have a bad feeling that Rodgers will play quite well... unfortunately.


I expect him to know the offense quite well, know how to read "D"'s, have good chemistry with his receivers, etc.

Pressure is the only way to get him off his game: media pressure before the game, 1st start pressure, national coverage MNF pressure, replacing a legend pressure, and hopfully a lot of D-line pressure.

Would be great to get some INT's, sacks, take their run game away, or get up by 14 in the 1st half.
All will add more pressure.
I want to see him crumple like a cracker under Rosie O'Donnels fat jiggly butt.


Sure rogders could play decent but hes not
having a 95.7 rating,
4,155 yards, or 28 tds.

He could also play horrible like fellow 2005 draftees Alex Smith, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, Kyle Orton, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. I see him playing around the same level as Jason Campbell.

Plus Jeff Tedford is known for coaching NFL Busts Trent Dilfer 6th overall 1994 Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Akili Smith 3rd overall 1999 Cincinnati Bengals, Joey Harrington 3rd overall 2002 Detroit Lions, Kyle Boller 19th overall 2003 Baltimore Ravens, and soon to be bust Aaron rodgers 24th overall 2005 Green Bay Packers.

gregair13
05-28-2008, 06:25 PM
"IwearSox21" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.


Complete honesty.. I would be happy with anything from about a 7-9 record on up.. some in Packer land seem to think changing QB's from a 1st ballet HOFer is nothing.. Rodgers will have moments this season but will struggle at other times.. IMO.. he is a complete wildcard and nothing would suprise me good or bad as far as his performance goes.. well maybe not a complete laying of the egg.. that would shock me..

For the first time in many moons.. we have to question the level of play of our QB.. and durablility..


I have a bad feeling that Rodgers will play quite well... unfortunately.


I expect him to know the offense quite well, know how to read "D"'s, have good chemistry with his receivers, etc.

Pressure is the only way to get him off his game: media pressure before the game, 1st start pressure, national coverage MNF pressure, replacing a legend pressure, and hopfully a lot of D-line pressure.

Would be great to get some INT's, sacks, take their run game away, or get up by 14 in the 1st half.
All will add more pressure.
I want to see him crumple like a cracker under Rosie O'Donnels fat jiggly butt.


Sure rogders could play decent but hes not
having a 95.7 rating,
4,155 yards, or 28 tds.

He could also play horrible like fellow 2005 draftees Alex Smith, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, Kyle Orton, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. I see him playing around the same level as Jason Campbell.

Plus Jeff Tedford is known for coaching NFL Busts Trent Dilfer 6th overall 1994 Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Akili Smith 3rd overall 1999 Cincinnati Bengals, Joey Harrington 3rd overall 2002 Detroit Lions, Kyle Boller 19th overall 2003 Baltimore Ravens, and soon to be bust Aaron rodgers 24th overall 2005 Green Bay Packers.




but does that give them a good enough chance to win?

gagarr
05-28-2008, 06:59 PM
"IwearSox21" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"C" wrote:


"pack93z" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


Just a quick swag but 7-9 is every bit as realistic as 10-6.


Complete honesty.. I would be happy with anything from about a 7-9 record on up.. some in Packer land seem to think changing QB's from a 1st ballet HOFer is nothing.. Rodgers will have moments this season but will struggle at other times.. IMO.. he is a complete wildcard and nothing would suprise me good or bad as far as his performance goes.. well maybe not a complete laying of the egg.. that would shock me..

For the first time in many moons.. we have to question the level of play of our QB.. and durablility..


I have a bad feeling that Rodgers will play quite well... unfortunately.


I expect him to know the offense quite well, know how to read "D"'s, have good chemistry with his receivers, etc.

Pressure is the only way to get him off his game: media pressure before the game, 1st start pressure, national coverage MNF pressure, replacing a legend pressure, and hopfully a lot of D-line pressure.

Would be great to get some INT's, sacks, take their run game away, or get up by 14 in the 1st half.
All will add more pressure.
I want to see him crumple like a cracker under Rosie O'Donnels fat jiggly butt.


Sure rogders could play decent but hes not
having a 95.7 rating,
4,155 yards, or 28 tds.

He could also play horrible like fellow 2005 draftees Alex Smith, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, Kyle Orton, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. I see him playing around the same level as Jason Campbell.

Plus Jeff Tedford is known for coaching NFL Busts Trent Dilfer 6th overall 1994 Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Akili Smith 3rd overall 1999 Cincinnati Bengals, Joey Harrington 3rd overall 2002 Detroit Lions, Kyle Boller 19th overall 2003 Baltimore Ravens, and soon to be bust Aaron rodgers 24th overall 2005 Green Bay Packers.



Tedford is Cal's coach.
They have a very QB friendly system, sortof like Dennis Green had in MN.
I would me more interested in who's the QB coach in GB and what his pedigree is.

Prophet
05-29-2008, 08:33 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"jmcdon00" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.

A loss does mean a lot. It takes an 8-8
and makes them 7-9. It takes a 12-4 team to 11-5. It could be the difference between home field advantage or not. Making the playoffs. You can argue that it is no more important than any other week but it is a division game so that makes it more important than 10 of the games on the schedule(the goal is to win the division right?).
And from a confidence stand point. I think the vikings players are going into the with high expectations and a loss would hurt that confidence and make them wonder if they are really as good as they think they are.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2007 9 of them won in week one. The other 3 all lost to teams that also made the playoffs, 2 of them were wildcards. Of the 8 division winners 7 won in week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs.56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs.18.75%
I would say that amounts to squat. ;)

How do your percentages work out if you do them over a 5 year period?

Again, as I stated previously, I doubt we have to worry about tie breakers when it comes to who makes the playoffs when it comes to the PUKERS and us but good stuff none-the-less.

5 years is quite a lot of research so I will just go back 1 more year for now.
Of the 12 playoff teams from 2006 9 won in week one. Of the 8 division winners all 8 won week one.
16 teams won week one 9 made the playoffs. 56.25%
16 teams lost week one 3 made the playoffs. 18.75%

16 teams have won their division over the last 2 seasons, 15 of them won week one. 93.75%(tampa bay is the exception and they finished 9-7)

LOL, Just moved ya up a column my friend.

;D


Carrots cause cancer.

Marrdro
05-29-2008, 10:00 AM
"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"gagarr" wrote:








The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone.

Win and the Vikings fans will be able to talk pooh to the PUKER fans.

Lose and the Puker Fans will be ablt to talk pooh to the Vikings fans.

Nothing more, nothing less. Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them.


So what your saying is losing to the Pack 0-49 and to the Colts 3-55, will have minimal impact on the Vikes psychee, as they are just 2 games out of 16?
Or winning both games by 20+ points also, will have minimal impact too?

I think winning breeds winning.
Thus, I'm not going to put on the purple optomism shades till I see the Vikes confidently beat a couple good teams, GB and Colts would be nice.
But I do agree with the gelling arguement, so losing them won't make me think the sky is falling, but losing to the Panthers in week 3 will make me look up.
::)


Plus, I would like to see TJ perform well on the BIG stage.
He has never won a game when the pressure was on, in a big game, nationally televised against a top team.
So IMO the GB game will instill confidence in this aspect of his capabilities.
LOL, way to go from one extreme to the other my friend.

Were in there did I say anything about lopsided masacres?

My point is right along with your last sentence.
A win does nothing but install confidence in you.
I am sure the team has plenty of confidence regardless of if they win or lose the first game.

Marrdro,

You said "The only significance of the first game is to the fans and fans alone." and "Its a 16 game season and all of them are important to the team but a loss in week one doesn't mean squat to them."

Thus, my extrapolation that the degree of the win or loss isn't significant either isn't that far off.
I contend that starting off the season is important to the teams psychee, especially with a "?" QB.
To compound the significance is the national stage (MNF), division game, most likely rivals for the NFCN championship.
So it's more important then the Atlanta game, even though it is near the end of the season.


And I contend that if this teams physchee is ruined over a week 1 loss then we are all screwed.

Again, they will shake it off and move on to the next weeks oponent if they are any sort of team and if our coaching staff is worth thier salt they will make sure they move onto the next week.

As I said, most fans take losses a hell of alot worse than the players do my friend.


"important" does not equal "ruined".... Marrdro's title should be "King of Hyperbole"
Seldom if anything is ever a gray area.

It should be interesting if any player's when the GB game approaches consider it a "important" game or "just another game". My bet is the players, in interviews, will refer to it as "important", as I've heard them refer to GB games in the past.

Of course they will say its important.
Just like they will say the games against Det, Chi, Indy, etc are important.
Its because every game is important.
If I'm not mistake that was what I said in my original post.

;D

Thats not the point I am trying to make. My point is that they are pro's.
If they lose they will move on to the next week.


Fans on the other hand won't.
I can think of at least 20 posters on here who will say the season is over if we lose week 1.



"I can think of at least 20 posters on here who will say the season is over if we lose week 1."
On this we can agree.
The same 20 will then say we're going to the SB after we beat the Colts in week 2.
As I think about it, you are probably correct there my friend.
;D

Purple Floyd
05-29-2008, 11:11 AM
If we go 7-9 this year, there will be a half dozen yutz's who will say the team has only had 3 full seasons in the system and that it will take one or 2 more to gel, but then we will be good.

i_bleed_purple
05-29-2008, 11:13 AM
And we should probably cut all our remaining players and sign saints and boy scouts.

Marrdro
05-29-2008, 11:24 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


If we go 7-9 this year, there will be a half dozen yutz's who will say the team has only had 3 full seasons in the system and that it will take one or 2 more to gel, but then we will be good.

I still suspect we will see some inconsistent play from a couple of our 2nd year guys and maybe some of our new backup/Vets, but in all seriousness the time to gel is past.

This team should be like a well oiled machine, fresh out of the box.
Sticker on autopilot and let er roll down the road towards the playoffs.

Maybe, just maybe, a couple of rudder orders to the helm for course adjustments if a few pot holes get in its path though.
;D

Prophet
05-29-2008, 11:26 AM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


If we go 7-9 this year, there will be a half dozen yutz's who will say the team has only had 3 full seasons in the system and that it will take one or 2 more to gel, but then we will be good.

I still suspect we will see some inconsistent play from a couple of our 2nd year guys and maybe some of our new backup/Vets, but in all seriousness the time to gel is past.

This team should be like a well oiled machine, fresh out of the box.
Sticker on autopilot and let er roll down the road towards the playoffs.

Maybe, just maybe, a couple of rudder orders to the helm for course adjustments if a few pot holes get in its path though.

;D


It all depends on how the season plays out.
The majority of the games were lost by a score or less the past couple of years, that is a team that is ready to explode.

Purple Floyd
05-29-2008, 12:12 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


If we go 7-9 this year, there will be a half dozen yutz's who will say the team has only had 3 full seasons in the system and that it will take one or 2 more to gel, but then we will be good.

I still suspect we will see some inconsistent play from a couple of our 2nd year guys and maybe some of our new backup/Vets, but in all seriousness the time to gel is past.

This team should be like a well oiled machine, fresh out of the box.
Sticker on autopilot and let er roll down the road towards the playoffs.

Maybe, just maybe, a couple of rudder orders to the helm for course adjustments if a few pot holes get in its path though.
;D


It all depends on how the season plays out.
The majority of the games were lost by a score or less the past couple of years, that is a team that is ready to explode.



In 2005 we went 8-4 in the last 12 games and lost only one game of the last 9 by more than a TD.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/2005.htm


1
Sun
September 11
L
0-1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
13
24
15
248
215
33
5
12
345
199
146
2
2 Sun September 18 L 0-2 @ Cincinnati Bengals 8 37 21 304 227 77 7 26 504 337 167 1
3 Sun September 25 W 1-2 New Orleans Saints 33 16 21 420 274 146 15 296 182 114 4
4 Sun October 2 L 1-3 @ Atlanta Falcons 10 30 17 261 198 63 3 22 368 83 285
5 Bye Week
6 Sun October 16 L 1-4 @ Chicago Bears 3 28 16 283 203 80 2 16 192 97 95 3
7 Sun October 23 W 2-4 Green Bay Packers 23 20 24 363 255 108 1 19 374 329 45
8 Sun October 30 L 2-5 @ Carolina Panthers 13 38 14 253 171 82 27 449 338 111
9 Sun November 6 W 3-5 Detroit Lions 27 14 19 285 121 164 1 20 289 231 58 3
10 Sun November 13 W 4-5 @ New York Giants 24 21 11 137 125 12 1 25 405 281 124 5
11 Mon November 21 W 5-5 @ Green Bay Packers 20 17 22 331 171 160 2 13 236 215 21 2
12 Sun November 27 W 6-5 Cleveland Browns 24 12 18 281 200 81 2 20 262 184 78 5
13 Sun December 4 W 7-5 @ Detroit Lions 21 16 20 345 242 103 19 223 118 105 1
14 Sun December 11 W 8-5 St. Louis Rams 27 13 16 259 146 113 2 20 337 229 108 6
15 Sun December 18 L 8-6 Pittsburgh Steelers 3 18 11 185 131 54 3 14 275 133 142 1
16 Sun December 25 L 8-7 @ Baltimore Ravens 23 30 18 262 220 42 1 23 367 279 88 2
17 Sun January 1 W 9-7 Chicago Bears 34 10 22 396 247 149 13 251 97 154
Team Stats and Rankings
Glossary · CSV · PRE


The team has been ready to explode for years

gagarr
05-29-2008, 12:37 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


If we go 7-9 this year, there will be a half dozen yutz's who will say the team has only had 3 full seasons in the system and that it will take one or 2 more to gel, but then we will be good.

I still suspect we will see some inconsistent play from a couple of our 2nd year guys and maybe some of our new backup/Vets, but in all seriousness the time to gel is past.

This team should be like a well oiled machine, fresh out of the box.
Sticker on autopilot and let er roll down the road towards the playoffs.

Maybe, just maybe, a couple of rudder orders to the helm for course adjustments if a few pot holes get in its path though.

;D


It all depends on how the season plays out.
The majority of the games were lost by a score or less the past couple of years, that is a team that is ready to explode.



In 2005 we went 8-4 and lost only one game of the last 9 by more than a TD.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/2005.htm


1
Sun
September 11
L
0-1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
13
24
15
248
215
33
5
12
345
199
146
2
2 Sun September 18 L 0-2 @ Cincinnati Bengals 8 37 21 304 227 77 7 26 504 337 167 1
3 Sun September 25 W 1-2 New Orleans Saints 33 16 21 420 274 146 15 296 182 114 4
4 Sun October 2 L 1-3 @ Atlanta Falcons 10 30 17 261 198 63 3 22 368 83 285
5 Bye Week
6 Sun October 16 L 1-4 @ Chicago Bears 3 28 16 283 203 80 2 16 192 97 95 3
7 Sun October 23 W 2-4 Green Bay Packers 23 20 24 363 255 108 1 19 374 329 45
8 Sun October 30 L 2-5 @ Carolina Panthers 13 38 14 253 171 82 27 449 338 111
9 Sun November 6 W 3-5 Detroit Lions 27 14 19 285 121 164 1 20 289 231 58 3
10 Sun November 13 W 4-5 @ New York Giants 24 21 11 137 125 12 1 25 405 281 124 5
11 Mon November 21 W 5-5 @ Green Bay Packers 20 17 22 331 171 160 2 13 236 215 21 2
12 Sun November 27 W 6-5 Cleveland Browns 24 12 18 281 200 81 2 20 262 184 78 5
13 Sun December 4 W 7-5 @ Detroit Lions 21 16 20 345 242 103 19 223 118 105 1
14 Sun December 11 W 8-5 St. Louis Rams 27 13 16 259 146 113 2 20 337 229 108 6
15 Sun December 18 L 8-6 Pittsburgh Steelers 3 18 11 185 131 54 3 14 275 133 142 1
16 Sun December 25 L 8-7 @ Baltimore Ravens 23 30 18 262 220 42 1 23 367 279 88 2
17 Sun January 1 W 9-7 Chicago Bears 34 10 22 396 247 149 13 251 97 154
Team Stats and Rankings
Glossary · CSV · PRE


The team has been ready to explode for years


"In 2005 we went 8-4 and lost only one game of the last 9 by more than a TD."

Huh??

In 2005, Vikes were 9-7, went 7-2 in last 9 games, and only won 4 by greater than a 7 points.

Granted, 2005 was the last winning season, but even the performance that year was weak, lost 6 games by double digits, 4 by over 20 points.

The last 2 years were rebuilding years under Childress, he's replaced 85% of the 2005 squad.

The Vikes look good, with lots of key additions, but until I see them play top competion in GB and Indy.
I'm not going to drink the purple koolaid yet.

Unless Childress decides to start Booty, then the SB is a shoe in
;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
Kidding...

Purple Floyd
05-29-2008, 12:43 PM
"gagarr" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


If we go 7-9 this year, there will be a half dozen yutz's who will say the team has only had 3 full seasons in the system and that it will take one or 2 more to gel, but then we will be good.

I still suspect we will see some inconsistent play from a couple of our 2nd year guys and maybe some of our new backup/Vets, but in all seriousness the time to gel is past.

This team should be like a well oiled machine, fresh out of the box.
Sticker on autopilot and let er roll down the road towards the playoffs.

Maybe, just maybe, a couple of rudder orders to the helm for course adjustments if a few pot holes get in its path though.
;D


It all depends on how the season plays out.
The majority of the games were lost by a score or less the past couple of years, that is a team that is ready to explode.



In 2005 we went 8-4 in the last 12 games and lost only one game of the last 9 by more than a TD.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/2005.htm


1
Sun
September 11
L
0-1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
13
24
15
248
215
33
5
12
345
199
146
2
2 Sun September 18 L 0-2 @ Cincinnati Bengals 8 37 21 304 227 77 7 26 504 337 167 1
3 Sun September 25 W 1-2 New Orleans Saints 33 16 21 420 274 146 15 296 182 114 4
4 Sun October 2 L 1-3 @ Atlanta Falcons 10 30 17 261 198 63 3 22 368 83 285
5 Bye Week
6 Sun October 16 L 1-4 @ Chicago Bears 3 28 16 283 203 80 2 16 192 97 95 3
7 Sun October 23 W 2-4 Green Bay Packers 23 20 24 363 255 108 1 19 374 329 45
8 Sun October 30 L 2-5 @ Carolina Panthers 13 38 14 253 171 82 27 449 338 111
9 Sun November 6 W 3-5 Detroit Lions 27 14 19 285 121 164 1 20 289 231 58 3
10 Sun November 13 W 4-5 @ New York Giants 24 21 11 137 125 12 1 25 405 281 124 5
11 Mon November 21 W 5-5 @ Green Bay Packers 20 17 22 331 171 160 2 13 236 215 21 2
12 Sun November 27 W 6-5 Cleveland Browns 24 12 18 281 200 81 2 20 262 184 78 5
13 Sun December 4 W 7-5 @ Detroit Lions 21 16 20 345 242 103 19 223 118 105 1
14 Sun December 11 W 8-5 St. Louis Rams 27 13 16 259 146 113 2 20 337 229 108 6
15 Sun December 18 L 8-6 Pittsburgh Steelers 3 18 11 185 131 54 3 14 275 133 142 1
16 Sun December 25 L 8-7 @ Baltimore Ravens 23 30 18 262 220 42 1 23 367 279 88 2
17 Sun January 1 W 9-7 Chicago Bears 34 10 22 396 247 149 13 251 97 154
Team Stats and Rankings
Glossary · CSV · PRE


The team has been ready to explode for years


"In 2005 we went 8-4 and lost only one game of the last 9 by more than a TD."

Huh??

In 2005, Vikes were 9-7, went 7-2 in last 9 games, and only won 4 by greater than a 7 points.

Granted, 2005 was the last winning season, but even the performance that year was weak, lost 6 games by double digits, 4 by over 20 points.

The last 2 years were rebuilding years under Childress, he's replaced 85% of the 2005 squad.

The Vikes look good, with lots of key additions, but until I see them play top competion in GB and Indy.
I'm not going to drink the purple koolaid yet.

Unless Childress decides to start Booty, then the SB is a shoe in
;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
Kidding...


i fixed my typo ;)


As to the rest, yes, we look good and I hope we have an outstanding year. but We looked good finishing 2005 and was excited about having and outstanding 2006. Things just don't always play out the way we would like or that we expect. that is why they play the games instead of crowning the champs based on how good they should play going into the season.

Marrdro
05-30-2008, 02:32 PM
9 pages, some decent discussions and yet I never got my original question answered from the originator...... :'(



Why do you think he needs a kick in the jiggly butt to realize he has to step up?

umaguma1979
05-30-2008, 05:43 PM
Not since
that magical "Burnsy" year 1988 to we have a better chance than this year.
Remember......Randle, millard, doleman, Browner, Kramer/Wilson, AC, Nelson, man those were the days........

singersp
05-30-2008, 06:46 PM
This is OUR year!

I've been reading threads of this nature every year since I've been on PP.O.