How many wins this year

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24536
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: How many wins this year

Post by dead_poet » Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:46 pm

Purple bruise wrote: So since in that scrimmage, where he completed 50% of his passes and had 2 picks, determines the outcome of an upcoming season then you are ready to throw in the towel in already :?: Despite the fact that nearly every source, including his teamates say that he looks a 100% improved over last year. :confused: :lol:
I know! Did you see Aaron Rodgers last night? 2-8 for 16 yards and an interception. They'll be lucky to win 2! NFC North Champs here we come!
0 x
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Mothman » Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:50 pm

VikingLord wrote:And here I was thinking Frazier might have learned a few things from his run-first approach last year...

"What do you mean the peg is square? So what? That peg is going in that hole... Mind over matter guys!"

I'm not nearly as willing to cut Frazier slack on this point as Jim is. Run "first" means the run comes first. It's the point of emphasis. If he meant to say the Vikes will emphasize the run, then he should have said that. If he meant they want to remain an effective running team, or a balanced attack, he could have said that. But he didn't - he said run "first". All that tells me is he learned little from his experience last year and is bound to repeat much of it this year. I have no idea how that will play out in terms of final record, but I can tell how that is likely to play out with the fans of the team who will have to sit through another slogging season of run-heavy offensive football.
Somehow, I had a feeling this would bother you, Edward. ;)

Craig wrote "I just heard Dan Wiederer from the Strib say in an interview that Coach Frazier vows this will be a "run first" team" but please keep in mind, that's a second hand quote from a sportswriter, not a direct quote from Leslie Frazier.

I've done some searching since reading Craig's post and I can't find anything recent in which Frazier vows the Vikings offense will be a "run first" unit. However, I did find this, from a few days ago:

http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/V ... b149d421b7
Q: Do you have a sense of what the strengths of this offense might be?
A:
We still want to really center around what we can do running the football and our offensive line seems to be coming together. These games that we’ll have in the preseason will give us a good indication of how we are going to be able to achieve our goals of being able to be a team that can really run the football and get people in the eight-man fronts. With the weapons that we think we are surrounding Christian (Ponder) with, be able to expose people because of that. We have a plan for what we want. Now we have to see it come to fruition by how we come together as an offensive line, that’s going to be a big deal for us. We think we have some capable backs, but we want to gel up front because that will determine if we will be able to do the things that we set out to do.
I think that quote makes it clear that they want to to use their running game to set up the pass for their young QB. That's a sound strategy as long as it doesn't become so predictable that it's rendered ineffective and we won't know if that's the case until we see them play some regular season games.
While some teams that made the playoffs could run, every one of them could pass, and the fact remains that two of the worst-running teams during the regular season met in the Superbowl for, what, like the 10th year-in-a-row?
NE and NY have QBs far more experienced and proven than Ponder, with better pass blocking lines and better weapons in the passing game. It's also worth noting that although the Giants weren't an effective running team during the season, they were committed to the run in the postseason, averaging 28 carries, 4.2 yards per carry and 116+ yards per game on their way to winning the Super Bowl.
That's probably hyperbole but still, the point has been made to anyone with a pair of eyes that running is just not that important in the greater scheme of things. The Packers couldn't run to save their lives last year and they finished with 15 wins and probably should have gone back to the Superbowl. And what did Ted Thompson do this offseason? Did he shore up that obvious weak spot? No, he allowed the one reliable veteran runner the Pack had to walk and they're going into the season relying on a guy who has yet to finish a season healthy with no proven option behind that guy.
Let's see how that works out for them as they attempt to get back to the Super Bowl. :)

Running the ball clearly isn't of paramount importance anymore but it's going too far to say "running is just not that important in the greater scheme of things". It was important to the Giants during their Super Bowl run last postseason. It was also important to two more of the 4 teams who advanced to the conference championships last year. It was significant to the 2009 Saints (6th in rushing), the 2007 Giants (4th in rushing) and the 2005 Steelers (5th in rushing) too and all 3 were SB winners. While it's obviously crucial to have a good QB and a strong passing game if you want to win the Super Bowl, the idea that the running game has been marginalized to the point where it's no longer important in the greater scheme of things just doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Sure, there are teams that have been so strong in other areas that they've been able to win the Super Bowl without much of a running game but those exceptions don't create a new rule. If a team doesn't have a QB like Brady or Rodgers (and the necessary personnel around them) is it realistic at all to believe employing the pass-happy approach their teams use will yield similar results? I sure don't think so. Passing juggernauts have to be built and meanwhile, coaches need to adapt and strategize based on the personnel at hand. I don't think we're so far down the pass-happy road that most NFL coaches would still consider a strong running game to be a young, developing QB's best friend.

Let's wait and see how the 2012 Vikings actually implement their offense in some regular season games before we judge them too harshly.
0 x

User avatar
Just Me
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6095
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:41 pm

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Just Me » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:30 pm

Mothman wrote: Let's see how that works out for them as they attempt to get back to the Super Bowl. :)

Running the ball clearly isn't of paramount importance anymore but it's going too far to say "running is just not that important in the greater scheme of things". It was important to the Giants during their Super Bowl run last postseason. It was also important to two more of the 4 teams who advanced to the conference championships last year. It was significant to the 2009 Saints (6th in rushing), the 2007 Giants (4th in rushing) and the 2005 Steelers (5th in rushing) too and all 3 were SB winners. While it's obviously crucial to have a good QB and a strong passing game if you want to win the Super Bowl, the idea that the running game has been marginalized to the point where it's no longer important in the greater scheme of things just doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Sure, there are teams that have been so strong in other areas that they've been able to win the Super Bowl without much of a running game but those exceptions don't create a new rule. If a team doesn't have a QB like Brady or Rodgers (and the necessary personnel around them) is it realistic at all to believe employing the pass-happy approach their teams use will yield similar results? I sure don't think so. Passing juggernauts have to be built and meanwhile, coaches need to adapt and strategize based on the personnel at hand. I don't think we're so far down the pass-happy road that most NFL coaches would still consider a strong running game to be a young, developing QB's best friend.

Let's wait and see how the 2012 Vikings actually implement their offense in some regular season games before we judge them too harshly.
Just as an observation, we can theorize all we want about whether or not the Packers should have went to the Super Bowl, the unpleasant fact (for them) is they won as many post season games as the Vikings did last year. I'm not saying that the running game is the "end all" to having a successful team, I'm just saying that anytime a team is "one-dimensional" the defensive side of the ball becomes much clearer. Maybe it wasn't such a shocker the Packers didn't go to the Super Bowl. Now I'll admit that if I have to be "one-dimensional" I'd rather have the passing game of the Packers than our running game (as good as it is) as I think the chances for success are greater. But I think a balanced "above-average" offense will cover a "multitude of sins" with good playcalling to elevate that offense to elite (or near elite quality). I'm not sure, but I suspect the passing game of those aforementioned teams that won Super Bowls despite have little of a running game, were more of a product of the fact they didn't have to run at all since the defense couldn't stop the passing game.

It's a subtle but a distinct difference if I don't run because I choose not to vs. I pass because I can't run. In the first instance, the total yards of rushing might be small because I run only enough to keep the defense honest against the pass, but when I do it is effective. If I don't run because I can't, the defenses job just became alot clearer.
0 x
I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!

User avatar
Hunter Morrow
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5631
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:56 am

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Hunter Morrow » Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:31 pm

What is so bad about this team being a run first team? We've got a sophmore quarterback starting his first season as the quarterback and our backfield is Peterson, Gerhardt and occasionally Percy Harvin.

I say....

6-10. I'd be pleasantly surprised with 8-8 considering that the Packers are elite, the Lions are great and the Bears are a sleeper Super Bowl pick for me. Going 8-8 with Ponder in this monster of a NFC North division would thrill me.
0 x

User avatar
Just Me
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6095
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:41 pm

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Just Me » Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:38 pm

Hunter Morrow wrote: the Bears are a sleeper Super Bowl pick for me.

I agree. If the Bears go to the Super Bowl it will be a "sleeper" :P
0 x
I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!

User avatar
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: How many wins this year

Post by losperros » Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:44 pm

Mothman wrote: Somehow, I had a feeling this would bother you, Edward. ;)

Craig wrote "I just heard Dan Wiederer from the Strib say in an interview that Coach Frazier vows this will be a "run first" team" but please keep in mind, that's a second hand quote from a sportswriter, not a direct quote from Leslie Frazier.

I've done some searching since reading Craig's post and I can't find anything recent in which Frazier vows the Vikings offense will be a "run first" unit.
Jim, listen to the video part of this page, which is very current (maybe yesterday). This is where I heard Wiederer's quote:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... ml?refer=y

Sorry I didn't get back on this sooner, but I just now looked at the board again.
0 x

CalVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3006
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:37 pm

Re: How many wins this year

Post by CalVike » Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:57 pm

It's really hard to say. The whole D is a big question mark besides Jared Allen. The offense appears to be moving toward heavy reliance on TE. But so much depends on AD's recovery, Ponder's improving big time, and Simpson's breaking out at WR. So I bracket 2012 between 2-14 and 6-10, with much to be learned Weeks 1 and 2.
0 x

radar55
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1160
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:45 am
Location: Minnesota

Re: How many wins this year

Post by radar55 » Fri Aug 10, 2012 11:43 pm

bigskyeric wrote:How many games did we lose by one play last season? All but Saints, Bears (road) and Pack (road)... I'll say 13-3 :rock:
Thanks, I needed a good laugh. If they can go 8-8 this year I would be very pleased with the improvement but realistically I think a 5-6 win season is likely
0 x

User avatar
hibbingviking
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7157
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:53 pm
Location: bakersfield california

Re: How many wins this year

Post by hibbingviking » Sat Aug 11, 2012 12:18 am

6-10
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Mothman » Sat Aug 11, 2012 7:38 am

losperros wrote:Jim, listen to the video part of this page, which is very current (maybe yesterday). This is where I heard Wiederer's quote:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... ml?refer=y

Sorry I didn't get back on this sooner, but I just now looked at the board again.
No problem, Craig. I figured you'd get back to it when you had time.

I didn't see a video at the link, just an article about Zack Bowman.

It doesn't really matter anyway. I was curious about where you heard Wiederer's comment but I never doubted that you heard it. :)
0 x

User avatar
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: How many wins this year

Post by losperros » Sat Aug 11, 2012 10:02 am

Mothman wrote:
No problem, Craig. I figured you'd get back to it when you had time.

I didn't see a video at the link, just an article about Zack Bowman.

It doesn't really matter anyway. I was curious about where you heard Wiederer's comment but I never doubted that you heard it. :)

Well, the #$%& video was there before, but now it's not. I don't know what happened.

Anyway, I'm concerned about the "run first" comments but not worrying about them. We'll see what happens.

I guess I'm still rehabbing from the Chili years. :D
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Mothman » Sat Aug 11, 2012 1:21 pm

losperros wrote:Well, the #$%& video was there before, but now it's not. I don't know what happened.
They removed it to vex you! :)
Anyway, I'm concerned about the "run first" comments but not worrying about them. We'll see what happens.

I guess I'm still rehabbing from the Chili years. :D
Honestly, I think that's it. It's understandable.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Mothman » Sat Aug 11, 2012 4:35 pm

I found this piece at NFL.com dating back to July 9th but it's al labout expectations for the Vikes this year so it pertains to the subject of this thread.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... s-for-2012

Several of the writers/experts/pundits (call them what you like) at NFL.com seem to think the Vikes are a prime candidate to end up with the first pick in the 2013 draft. Sadly, that's far from impossible but it would be disappointing (the poor season, not the pick itself).

I'm still more or less where I was at 3 months ago regarding the Vikes record. I think 8-8 is possible but it would be a very impressive leap forward. 6-10, which would double last season's win total, would be a nice improvement but I'm not sure this is even a 6-10 roster. Frazier has his work cut out for him and even if he does an excellent coaching job, he might have a hard time coaxing 6 wins out of this team. The Vikes will need their best players to stay healthy and deliver some of their best football if they're going to win 6 games or more. I'm beginning to think 4-5 wins is more realistic.
0 x

User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5751
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Great White North

Re: How many wins this year

Post by VikingLord » Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:20 pm

Mothman wrote:I found this piece at NFL.com dating back to July 9th but it's al labout expectations for the Vikes this year so it pertains to the subject of this thread.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... s-for-2012

Several of the writers/experts/pundits (call them what you like) at NFL.com seem to think the Vikes are a prime candidate to end up with the first pick in the 2013 draft. Sadly, that's far from impossible but it would be disappointing (the poor season, not the pick itself).

I'm still more or less where I was at 3 months ago regarding the Vikes record. I think 8-8 is possible but it would be a very impressive leap forward. 6-10, which would double last season's win total, would be a nice improvement but I'm not sure this is even a 6-10 roster. Frazier has his work cut out for him and even if he does an excellent coaching job, he might have a hard time coaxing 6 wins out of this team. The Vikes will need their best players to stay healthy and deliver some of their best football if they're going to win 6 games or more. I'm beginning to think 4-5 wins is more realistic.
I would have expected an improvement of some sort this season, but after watching the starting Viking defense against a solid, but unspectacular, 49er offense, I'd say they'll be lucky to get 3 wins again. Ponder and the offense look to be pedestrian. They'll probably improve as the season goes on, but if the defense is that bad they're going to just get pounded by the other offenses in the North.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: How many wins this year

Post by Mothman » Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:48 pm

VikingLord wrote:I would have expected an improvement of some sort this season, but after watching the starting Viking defense against a solid, but unspectacular, 49er offense, I'd say they'll be lucky to get 3 wins again. Ponder and the offense look to be pedestrian. They'll probably improve as the season goes on, but if the defense is that bad they're going to just get pounded by the other offenses in the North.
The Vikes performance was discouraging but I wouldn't take too much away from a preseason game. The defense was missing arguably it's 3 best players (Allen, Kevin Williams and Winfield) and the starting offense might have looked pedestrian to you but they were also without their two best players (Harvin and Peterson). The Vikes and 49ers play each other pretty early in the season so I doubt either team was ready to reveal much and there was probably no real game-planning for the game. On top of all that, the 49ers were close to reaching the Super Bowl last year and they clearly have a deeper, more talented roster than the Vikings. Considering where the two teams are in their development, they should be able to best the Vikes in a preseason game.

If the Vikes are going to get to 6 wins this season, they'll probably have to do it by beating opponents like Indy, Jacksonville and St. Louis.

Jim
0 x

Post Reply