Re: Playoff scenarios
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:22 am
just win baby
A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://vikingsmessageboard.com/
This.vikeinmontana wrote:just win baby
I think the thought process is to have a 3-way tie. In that scenario, the Vikings have the tiebreaker. Carolina alone is the only tiebreaker the Vikings do not have. (I think)Husker Vike wrote:Wouldn't we want the Saints to Win so they can win the south division and keep Carolina the 5 seed?
What is the tie breaker in a three way tie?S197 wrote: I think the thought process is to have a 3-way tie. In that scenario, the Vikings have the tiebreaker. Carolina alone is the only tiebreaker the Vikings do not have. (I think)
I think Cowherd says things just for shock value. Just a couple of weeks ago, he was saying the Vikings are just a good regular season team. Lots of good 'B' players but no 'A' players that can make the big plays during the playoffs.J. Kapp 11 wrote:OK, here's an absolute stunner. Watch who Colin Cowherd puts as the best team in the NFL.
(Hint: They wear purple, and they're not the Ravens.)
Myles Simmons@MylesASimmons
Follow Follow @MylesASimmons
More Myles Simmons Retweeted Los Angeles Rams
Zuerlein was on pace for a historic season with L.A. He’s now out with a back injury for the rest of the season. The Rams have signed kicker Sam Ficken.
If we can stay healthy we can compete with anyone.808vikingsfan wrote:This could be big.
We already did play against Rodgers (and won). It's not our fault he made a less-than-wise decision against this defense and decided to scramble outside the pocket while not throwing the ball away right away. Had he thrown the ball away when he first got outside the pocket, he probably wouldn't have been injured. I don't look at the fact that we knocked Rodgers out of the game (cleanly I might add) early in that game as somehow equating to the Vikings "only facing the backup." I look at it that the Packer's brought their best and limped away as a shell of their previous team when they got "cocky" on their offense.TheCoolerOne wrote:I'm kind of bummed Rodgers isn't going to play. He's one of the best QBs in the league, and I don't understand why we don't want to beat the best that teams have to offer. How good are we? Easier to find out playing Rodgers than Hundley.
I see what you're saying, but I don't really care at this point in the season. We know the Vikings are a great team already and we know they're making the playoffs. I don't need them to be AR to prove it and I also don't mind that this game should be marginally easier, thus less taxing on a team we know will be playing into January. If Rodgers being out makes a first round bye that much more of a likelihood, then yes...the chips fell where they did and I'll take it. Two quick wins to end the season another bye to rest and then a huge game on your home turf in a month from now to further supplant the idea that Minnesota is a real threat.TheCoolerOne wrote:Why is there seemingly this obsession and excitement over teams' best players not playing? I'm kind of bummed Rodgers isn't going to play. He's one of the best QBs in the league, and I don't understand why we don't want to beat the best that teams have to offer. How good are we? Easier to find out playing Rodgers than Hundley.
Some times it comes to this: a good team stops a good team and sets up a critical FG. It is part of the game.TheCoolerOne wrote: If the Vikings play the Rams in the playoffs, and the Rams miss the game winning kick because Zeurlein wasn't kicking, I mean great, we win, but also why were the Rams attempting a game winning kick?
.