mansquatch wrote:Well I'm sure our best pass rusher having turf toe in the latter half didn't have anything to do with the pass rush losing efficacy.
The grass thing happened THIS year, but I'm not convinced it is more than a coincidence. The defense was great against PIT at Hienz Field. They lost that game because the offense did nothing and eventually they got tired against one of the leagues top 3 offenses. In fact, I'd argue that offense is superior to the other three I listed and they did just fine against them on Grass. Also they have played just fine in Lambeau over the years and that QB is pretty good the last I heard.
They completely shut down Cam Newton and the Panthers in 2016 and that was also at Carolina on the grass.
I'm going fishing, it is the offseason
I would argue that grass affects the offense as much as the defense. Getting separation, planting, holding blocks. To me, it's just physics (maybe that's not the correct word. Muscle memory maybe?) . Unless you practice on grass, get comfortable playing on grass at game speed, I believe it will make a difference.
Also, I wouldn't say the Vikings have had much success at GB recently. 2-5-1 over the past 7 years at Lambeau isn't very good and that's including last years win without Rodgers.
Yes, they got outplayed and was beat by the better team that day, but I think it would have been a much different game had they played at home.
Since 1982, the Vikings are one of the worst teams playing outdoors (28th). Of course, if the Vikings are playing on grass, it also means that they're playing on the road (minus 2014, 2015) so that also comes into play. But I believe if the Vikings built an outdoor stadium, they'd have much better success playing on the road outdoors. They'd also have a advantage playing home games too.