Vikings Message Board.Com

Prediction: We lose the next game going into the bye. A bunch of players come back from injury after the bye, Teddy starts, and the Vikings don't lose another game including the Super Bowl at home.

Cliff wrote:Prediction: We lose the next two games going into the bye. A bunch of players come back from injury after the bye, Teddy starts, and the Vikings don't lose another game including the Super Bowl at home.

We only have one game before the bye. Duh.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

PurpleMustReign wrote:We only have one game before the bye. Duh.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

Leave it to the Vikings to figure out how to go 0-2 in 1 game.

Texas Vike wrote: Leave it to the Vikings to figure out how to go 0-2 in 1 game.

I don't need your stupid counting!

What year is it?

808vikingsfan wrote:Good to see you back DK. Optimism? Depends on who you talk to.

Me? I think this is the most complete team since the Culpepper Moss days. Run D? Check. Pass D? Check. OL? Check. ST? Check. WR? Check. LBs? Check. RB? Good so far. They just have to get the QB position secure which looks like is coming just at the right time. Even if Case stays the starter for the rest of the year, I think they still make the playoffs and gain valuable experience for next year's SB run.

Thanks! It's good to be back.

I agree with most of what you said, but I'm guzzling Kool-Aid and think the sky is the limit at this point. The energy around this team and the way they want to see each other succeed (RB room has a great relationship, so do the receivers, and the entire defense is is cohesive and excited for their teammates) reminds me of Seattle before their run. The way they've fought through injuries since Teddy went down makes me remember what made the 2010 Super Bowl champs winners. I am openly talking about this team as the most complete I've seen since '98 and I believe this team can go as far as it wants as long as one of our QBs come back 85%+.

I think the failures of years past hang a dark cloud over our fanbase, I think that cloud pours onto the field when things are going bad, and I don't want to contribute to it. I'm arms wide open waiting for the warm embrace of Lombardi....or a knife in the back. If it happens, it happens!

I obviously don't judge the more jaded among us, and I realize that ultimately it all comes down to the payers on the field. I'm also aware that most games come down to 1 play, and I wonder if an energized and optimistic fanbase might be the energy boost or drain that tips the scales. I just like knowing where others stand!

dead_poet wrote:I'd be a lot more confident with Sam/Teddy along with Cook and Diggs healthy. As it stands, I'm cautiously optimistic. The offense is struggling but the defense is solid. This season hinges on quarterback play (and overall health of the team). We have the potential to play like we did vs. the Steelers and Lions so the floor is very low, with a mediocre ceiling absent those key guys on offense. The schedule doesn't look too terrible given how our opponents are playing right now. We should be "in" every game at least. I think we can make the playoffs (especially now with Rodgers out), but unless we have a healthy Sam and/or healthy and rust-free Teddy, I don't think we can expect an overly deep run.

To your point, I would argue Chicago was just as bad on the offensive side of the ball and it's not like we set Baltimore on fire (risky word choice!) with our dynamic plays.

I have an amazing amount of faith in every level of our defense, though, and I think our receivers could ball with just about any competent human with an arm and two knees.

If my optimism hasn't been obvious, I also think we can make the playoffs, but what level of QB play do you think we are going to need to be serious contenders? I think with mid-level QB play (which is what I think we will have from somebody by December) we have as good of a shot as any team in the league, but I also respect that not everybody else buys Kool-Aid at CostCo.

Cliff wrote:Prediction: We lose the next two games going into the bye. A bunch of players come back from injury after the bye, Teddy starts, and the Vikings don't lose another game including the Super Bowl at home.

I was thinking the same thing. Actually, the Vikings could lose the next 4 and then run the table with whichever QB is healthy. And if Rodgers can initially be ruled out for the season and then announce he could return in six weeks, why can't Cook do the same? (just kidding of course)

Let's hope the Vikings aren't thinking about the next five games. There's only one game they can control now, and it's in London. I hope they don't already think that one is in the win column.

If they win that and go 6-2 without serious injury, they are pretty well set up for the season. You have two games where the Vikings will be overwhelming favorites - home against the Bengals and the Bears. Taking care of business gets the Vikes to eight wins there. Then it's whether they split the competitive games.

So even if the Vikes have a mini-slump and go 1-3 in games two through five in the above scenario, they will still be in good shape, especially if they get back to full health either Sam or Teddy. It might actually make the team stronger in the long term, to play without those guys and find ways to win that don't depend on top flight QB play.

John_Viveiros wrote:Let's hope the Vikings aren't thinking about the next five games. There's only one game they can control now, and it's in London. I hope they don't already think that one is in the win column.

If they win that and go 6-2 without serious injury, they are pretty well set up for the season. You have two games where the Vikings will be overwhelming favorites - home against the Bengals and the Bears. Taking care of business gets the Vikes to eight wins there. Then it's whether they split the competitive games.

So even if the Vikes have a mini-slump and go 1-3 in games two through five in the above scenario, they will still be in good shape, especially if they get back to full health either Sam or Teddy. It might actually make the team stronger in the long term, to play without those guys and find ways to win that don't depend on top flight QB play.

I'm worried about how many road games we're playing, we could see a big swing of momentum soon.

DK Sweets wrote:Obviously been a while since I've posted, but what's the pulse around here on optimism? Reddit seems to be inviting heartbreak with open arms, but I know the more tenured fans aren't as likely to welcome pain.

Welcome back!

I consider myself fairly tenured -- next year will be my 50th as a Vikings fan, and I've been on the board 11 years. I don't welcome pain, but I'm not afraid of it, either. I'm truly optimistic about the Vikings. Because of the quarterback situation and the loss of Dalvin Cook, it might not be this year, but I think our time to hoist the Lombardi Trophy is coming.

There's one reason for my optimism. His name is Mike Zimmer.

I think this guy is the real deal, the best we've had since Bud Grant. His players love him and would run through fire for him, yet he doesn't coddle them. In fact, I think that's why they love him so much. He's brutally honest with them, and they know that honesty stems from Zimmer wanting them to be the best they can be. I look at a guy like Andrew Sendejo, who was the object of universal scorn just 3-4 years ago -- now he's often one of the Vikings who stand out on film with analysts. Look at Trae Waynes, whom Zimmer brought along ever-so-slowly (much to our chagrin). He's one of the most targeted CBs in the league because he plays opposite of Xavier Rhodes, but he's giving up a very low QBR and almost no YAC. Even though Zimmer specializes in defense, he's got relatively unknown offensive guys playing the best football of their careers.

Don't know what's going to happen over these next few games. Having 6 of the last 9 on the road (including the Cleveland game in London) is no joke. But I'd bet my paycheck that the Vikings are very competitive in all of them, and it wouldn't surprise me to see them win 3 or 4 out of these next 5. In my life, I've seen nearly every heartache game (except for a few in the 80s when I was in the Navy on submarine duty). The one thing I know is this: I'd rather see the Vikings get to an important game and suffer the heartache of defeat, than to watch them lose meaningless games in a 3-13 season.

PurpleMustReign wrote:Cleveland will not be an easy win. Idk why people keep saying that. They will play with Nothing to lose and who knows what could happen during the game.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

I didn't read anyone say it should be an EASY win. my view is no game is an easy win in the nfl. hell, the ravens beat the dolphins by 40 last night and I doubt anyone said it was "easy".

that said, if this isn't a game the vikes "should" win, then there isn't such thing. there should be no betting lines because there is no such thing as one team being favorites over other teams.

the browns have won ONE game in their last 23 games. that is 92 quarters of football. you know how many of those quarters they had a lead in? two. two quarters they have had a lead in. this team is simply not good. they are pretty bad.

am I suggesting the vikes are going to beat them by 50? of course not. it's an nfl team playing another nfl team. I can assure you the vikes are preparing 110% just as if they were playing the packers, eagles, patriots or chiefs. but we are not players. we can look ahead and promise wins if we choose to do so. I don't care if the game is in London, Cleveland or on the moon. the vikes SHOULD win this game!

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Welcome back!

I consider myself fairly tenured -- next year will be my 50th as a Vikings fan, and I've been on the board 11 years. I don't welcome pain, but I'm not afraid of it, either. I'm truly optimistic about the Vikings. Because of the quarterback situation and the loss of Dalvin Cook, it might not be this year, but I think our time to hoist the Lombardi Trophy is coming.

There's one reason for my optimism. His name is Mike Zimmer.

I think this guy is the real deal, the best we've had since Bud Grant. His players love him and would run through fire for him, yet he doesn't coddle them. In fact, I think that's why they love him so much. He's brutally honest with them, and they know that honesty stems from Zimmer wanting them to be the best they can be. I look at a guy like Andrew Sendejo, who was the object of universal scorn just 3-4 years ago -- now he's often one of the Vikings who stand out on film with analysts. Look at Trae Waynes, whom Zimmer brought along ever-so-slowly (much to our chagrin). He's one of the most targeted CBs in the league because he plays opposite of Xavier Rhodes, but he's giving up a very low QBR and almost no YAC. Even though Zimmer specializes in defense, he's got relatively unknown offensive guys playing the best football of their careers.

Don't know what's going to happen over these next few games. Having 6 of the last 9 on the road (including the Cleveland game in London) is no joke. But I'd bet my paycheck that the Vikings are very competitive in all of them, and it wouldn't surprise me to see them win 3 or 4 out of these next 5. In my life, I've seen nearly every heartache game (except for a few in the 80s when I was in the Navy on submarine duty). The one thing I know is this: I'd rather see the Vikings get to an important game and suffer the heartache of defeat, than to watch them lose meaningless games in a 3-13 season.

Thanks for the input, Kapp!

I agree 100% on your assessment of Zimmer and Waynes. I'm actually really impressed with Waynes right now - he tackles well and has great recovery. Most of his passes given up are contested, and he's a young guy. You can't ask much more out of you CB2.

The away schedule is the largest source of my hesitation, but my belief in THIS team, the 2017 Vikings, is unwavering. Our fanbase is going to speak the greatest Super Bowl story into existence and the team is going to have no choice but follow through!


Okay, so maybe it won't really work out like that. My faith is here, though!

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Welcome back!

I consider myself fairly tenured -- next year will be my 50th as a Vikings fan, and I've been on the board 11 years. I don't welcome pain, but I'm not afraid of it, either. I'm truly optimistic about the Vikings. Because of the quarterback situation and the loss of Dalvin Cook, it might not be this year, but I think our time to hoist the Lombardi Trophy is coming.

There's one reason for my optimism. His name is Mike Zimmer.

I think this guy is the real deal, the best we've had since Bud Grant. His players love him and would run through fire for him, yet he doesn't coddle them. In fact, I think that's why they love him so much. He's brutally honest with them, and they know that honesty stems from Zimmer wanting them to be the best they can be. I look at a guy like Andrew Sendejo, who was the object of universal scorn just 3-4 years ago -- now he's often one of the Vikings who stand out on film with analysts. Look at Trae Waynes, whom Zimmer brought along ever-so-slowly (much to our chagrin). He's one of the most targeted CBs in the league because he plays opposite of Xavier Rhodes, but he's giving up a very low QBR and almost no YAC. Even though Zimmer specializes in defense, he's got relatively unknown offensive guys playing the best football of their careers.

Don't know what's going to happen over these next few games. Having 6 of the last 9 on the road (including the Cleveland game in London) is no joke. But I'd bet my paycheck that the Vikings are very competitive in all of them, and it wouldn't surprise me to see them win 3 or 4 out of these next 5. In my life, I've seen nearly every heartache game (except for a few in the 80s when I was in the Navy on submarine duty). The one thing I know is this: I'd rather see the Vikings get to an important game and suffer the heartache of defeat, than to watch them lose meaningless games in a 3-13 season.

I think Anthony Barr is another good example. There were some who felt Zimmer threw him under the bus last year but he's clearly responded well to the criticism.

There's always going to be players, like Rhett Ellison's dad, who may not like Zimmer's style but overall I'd have to agree with your sentiment. You often hear vets from other teams talk about how great the locker room is and how this is the best team they've played on. Case Keenum recently said something to that affect. I hope we can keep the nucleus of the team together and continue some of these strong bonds. Winning tends to help that type of stuff