Bye week status

[TheIrishVikingsFan]

Yes I agree that the schedule looks very tough, which it is.

But I do think people should take into account that it will probably be the number 2s in for Houston. Which could have a huge impact on the result of that game.

[Raptorman]

Any given Sunday! I think this team can beat any team left on the schedule. Yeah, call me crazy. But hear me out. Chicago wins by turnovers. Take that away and it's an even game. Green Bay, they win by the long pass, and can't stop the run. Take that pass away and they have to dink and dunk like the Vikings. And they don't have much of a run game. Houston. They are very similar to the Vikings. Should be a close game. I don't expect any blowouts. I can see 4-2.


Edit: BTW, The Packers just placed their starting right tackle on IR.

[Hunter Morrow]

Bye week status
Blew out the Titans
Beat the 49ers
Swept the Lions
Have 6 wins in 10 games when we had 3 games the whole last season
Have a stronger schedule with people doubting us in the second half. It is good. Vikings have always been a sharper team when they have doubters and haters
2 wins out of 6 games and we are .500
Peterson is back 100 percent and completely beasting out
We got some really nice young new players (Smith and Robinson are playing well. Greeway and Robison are out of their minds now. Walsh and Kalil could be studs for another decade)

Season is going GREAT. People want us to lose out now? Come on, we can play fine ball and split and make the playoffs with this team

[John_Viveiros]

I decided to do a little polynomial math on the subject of how many wins we get. Let's say we have a 20% chance to win game 1, and a 60% chance to win game two. The odds of winning are (.2w + . x (.6w + .4) = .1w^2 + .5w + .4 : In other words, 12% chance to win both, 56% chance to win one, and 32% chance to lose both.

So looking at history a bit, I'd give the Vikes a 1/6 chance at winning at Chicago and Houston, one in three of winning in Green Bay (we have had better success there than in Chicago), 5 in 12 chance of winning at home against the Pack, and 50-50 shots at the Rams and home against the Bears (historically, we have done better than that, but it made the math easier, and we are a tad weaker, and the Bears theoretically a tad stronger than normal).

Multiplying the large polynomials, I come up with <1% chance (1 in 1000) chance of winning them all, a 1.5% chance of going 5-1, a 8.5% chance of going 4-2, a 23.9% chance of going 3-3, a 34.2% chance of going 2-4, a 24.2% chance of going 1-5, and a 6.7% chance of going 0-6 (sorry if there are rounding errors!).

Now obviously, games are played on the field, and not in an excel spreadsheet, but perhaps our hopes can be tempered a bit. Ten wins should get us to the playoffs. That adds up to a 10% chance here - about the same as previously mentioned. Winning season? That's around a third of the time - we triple our wins a third of the time, not too bad. Going 8-8 is my benchmark. That should happen roughly two thirds of the time.

So in the end I'm a bit more optimistic. The toughest game on the schedule would appear to be the next one - we just don't play well in Chicago (two wins in our last twelve, even with some pretty good squads on our part) but after that it's likely that the Vikes pull out enough games to finish respectably.

[Eli]

But I do think people should take into account that it will probably be the number 2s in for Houston. Which could have a huge impact on the result of that game.

In the 15th game? I don't see it. Maybe if they take a comfortable lead at halftime or in the second half.

[Mothman]

I think the biggest factor as to how we finish this season all depends on Christian Ponder. With those tough games remaining we will not win any of them if he throws for 68 yards no matter how Adrian or the defense plays.

That's true but I think other factors will be just as significant. If you look at the games they've lost, in all but one (the loss at Indy) they allowed the opposition to score 30+ points and they allowed a single runner to gain 124+ yards. The Redskins racked up 185 yards rushing against the Vikes defense. The Bucs had 151 yards rushing and the Seahawks had whopping 195 yards on the ground. Teams don't win many games when their QB only throws for 68 yards but they don't win many when they allow close to 200 yards rushing either and it goes without saying that allowing 30+ points doesn't help either.

Winning the turnover battle will obviously be a huge factor too, as always. Of course, Ponder and the defense will both have a lot to say about that but if I' not mistaken, when the Vikes have win the turnover battle this season, they've also won the game.

[glg]

In the 15th game? I don't see it. Maybe if they take a comfortable lead at halftime or in the second half.

If they're already locked into the #1 seed, I could see them sitting some starters after a half.

[Demi]

I believe Ponder's performance affects the entire team emotionally and for morale. Any game that Ponder played well the rest of the team did too and we won, and in those games you referenced the defense crapped up, after Ponder established crappy play. In recent years the Vikings play with more emotion than most teams and they need Ponder to perform well for everyone to win.

Exactly. The team was ready to go after Allens fight/sack. Ponder comes out and helps kill any momentum. And it's easy for the opposing team to grind it out when they have zero to worry about offensively from the other team. If Ponder doesn't put up 68 yards in a game, there's likely more points on the board, and more the other team has to try and move the ball.

[Solar]

We really need to lean on 49ers coming out and making Chicagos defense look sloppy. Theyre offense looked very rubbish with Campbell in. I don't know how serious Cutler's concussion is but I hope it lasts a little whiles long. I feel we can steal @CHI and we can afford too lose too @GB. Then we got CHI@MIN which I feel other than the Bucs game idk why but were really good at home. Please yall don't forget what happened to the Bears last year when Cutler went down !! @STL idk idk could be another TB game. And if everything in the AFC plays out as should Texans should have backups in for us. If not were in for a dogfight. GB@MIN well that will be the deciding factor seeing as 10-6 might not make the playoffs this year.

Now to break it down further if Lions pull off a W against visiting GB that'd be awesome and I'd love that[6-4]. Then they visit the Giants, im banking on the Giants take GB down and could possibly have them at 6-5 or maybe 7-4 could be same as us. Then they face us and that'll speak for itself.

Chicago loses to 49ers unless god physically changes that game point blank. Without Jay Cutler i see us stealing one, with Jay i dont even know. That could leave us all fighting for life at 7-4 saying eveything playing out as mentioned, except I believe after Johnson going for 200+ receiving past week I can see them snagging this game. Then the Bears play Seattle a VERY GOOD SEATTLE! Then us then GB so this could be a Royal Rumble yall no matter how much all of you think this was a "fluke" start.

Now I could be wrong about all of this, I HOPE IM NOT, but wouldnt be surprised if I was. But lets face it:

Adrian Peterson running this way, and the play from Ponder we just saw, we have a #### shot !

[Solar]

That's true but I think other factors will be just as significant. If you look at the games they've lost, in all but one (the loss at Indy) they allowed the opposition to score 30+ points and they allowed a single runner to gain 124+ yards. The Redskins racked up 185 yards rushing against the Vikes defense. The Bucs had 151 yards rushing and the Seahawks had whopping 195 yards on the ground. Teams don't win many games when their QB only throws for 68 yards but they don't win many when they allow close to 200 yards rushing either and it goes without saying that allowing 30+ points doesn't help either.

Winning the turnover battle will obviously be a huge factor too, as always. Of course, Ponder and the defense will both have a lot to say about that but if I' not mistaken, when the Vikes have win the turnover battle this season, they've also won the game.

Well all the 200+ rushing yards and 30+ points all falls back to Ponders 68 passing yards because that all relays too length of our drives and the peoples confidence. We can have a drive last 4-8 mins. or for 32 seconds. Now those games you mentioned we had a BUNCH of 3 and outs or >2 mins drive.

#### play from the leader of a team the QuarterBack will emotionally disfunction a team and lead to no confidence in winning AKA our 3/4 losses

[Mothman]

Well all the 200+ rushing yards and 30+ points all falls back to Ponders 68 passing yards because that all relays too length of our drives and the peoples confidence. We can have a drive last 4-8 mins. or for 32 seconds. Now those games you mentioned we had a BUNCH of 3 and outs or >2 mins drive.

I understand what you're saying but if the defense does their job, they get right back off the field.

When the opposing team dominates ToP 36:00 to 24:00 (as Seattle did), that's an indication that the offense and defense struggled.

I understand that QB play is important but blaming poor run defense and 30+ points allowed on Christian Ponder is just excuse-making for the defense. Everybody on the team has to do their job, not just the QB and if the collective psyche of the team is so fragile that a poor performance by Ponder causes them all to meltdown (a theory I don't buy), they need to look in the mirror and get it together. When the offense struggled at Detroit earlier this year, the defense and special teams picked them up and the Vikes won. When the offense struggled against Arizona, the defense sucked it up and got the job done again. They're clearly capable of playing well whether the offense is playing well or not so no excuses. QBs don't give up 195 yards rushing. That's on the defense.

[Solar]

I understand what you're saying but if the defense does their job, they get right back off the field.

When the opposing team dominates ToP 36:00 to 24:00 (as Seattle did), that's an indication that the offense and defense struggled.

I understand that QB play is important but blaming poor run defense and 30+ points allowed on Christian Ponder is just excuse-making for the defense. Everybody on the team has to do their job, not just the QB and if the collective psyche of the team is so fragile that a poor performance by Ponder causes them all to meltdown (a theory I don't buy), they need to look in the mirror and get it together. When the offense struggled at Detroit earlier this year, the defense and special teams picked them up and the Vikes won. When the offense struggled against Arizona, the defense sucked it up and got the job done again. They're clearly capable of playing well whether the offense is playing well or not so no excuses. QBs don't give up 195 yards rushing. That's on the defense.

Very true as well yes some of it obviously is on the defense especially the fact we jumped on Seattle early and forced them to play through adversity and they still prevailed. But we usually have bad offense and defensive success when were playing with the lead referring to DET and ARI. Not so much like SEA and WAS and especially TB. This I wouldn't call an arguement BUT it can go both ways I only support and believe my reasoning 100% because of my real life experience of when I played at Boston College 2 years ago specifically 2009 in which we were fairly decent compared to my other years lol. Beyond the point, when we played Virginia Tech that year we couldn't get 2 first downs in 1 drive too save our lives. And I single handedly played in a game were we started STOUT on defense just lose confidence because of offense 3 and outs and constantly the defense was on the field. Just a game I really dont want to remember play wise and end score wise to be honest .

[Mothman]

Very true as well yes some of it obviously is on the defense especially the fact we jumped on Seattle early and forced them to play through adversity and they still prevailed. But we usually have bad offense and defensive success when were playing with the lead referring to DET and ARI. Not so much like SEA and WAS and especially TB. This I wouldn't call an arguement BUT it can go both ways I only support and believe my reasoning 100% because of my real life experience of when I played at Boston College 2 years ago specifically 2009 in which we were fairly decent compared to my other years lol. Beyond the point, when we played Virginia Tech that year we couldn't get 2 first downs in 1 drive too save our lives. And I single handedly played in a game were we started STOUT on defense just lose confidence because of offense 3 and outs and constantly the defense was on the field. Just a game I really dont want to remember play wise and end score wise to be honest .

Thanks for the real life perspective, that's greatly appreciated (I mean it) and I don't doubt that it can be demoralizing for one unit when another struggles.

What position did you play at BC? I envy you that experience.