Difference between the vikings and a playoff team...

[Webbfann]

I'm glad you're amused. Now the question is: why don't you think the Vikes could win with better talent and the same coaching staff? After all, they won 10 games last year and reached the playoffs. They were close to winning quite a few more games this season and if I'm not mistaken, you've already stated that you believe they would have won more games if they'd started Cassel all year. If you believe that, it implies that you think talent makes some difference so when you take the closes losses and a winning record last season into consideration, doesn't it seem likely that upgrading the talent could lead to another winning record and a return to the postseason, even with the same coaching staff? If not then, logically, why not?

I'm waiting for answers to my question from people who think the coaches are stooges. You don't think the coaches are stooges, so you're disqualified.

[thatguy]

Yes. I have no idea if they could win a Super Bowl but I think Frazier and his staff would be capable of leading a team with, say, SF's talent to the playoffs each year. I thought they did a pretty impressive job just leading the Vikes into the playoffs last season.

Agreed.

[VikingPaul73]

The biggest difference is that none of those teams that beat the Vikings had Matty "Ice" at QB, the most over-rated, over-paid QB in the NFL not named Stafford!!!

But seriously, put me in the camp of that was just a lucky bounce and a horrible decision and horrible throw by Ryan.

And also, should a "playoff" team, playing AT HOME against a 4-10 team, needing a win to clinch a playoff spot, really have been in that situation to being with? If not for Ryan horrid play, the 49ers would be forced to win at AZ next week (something I think they will NOT do) just to sneak in as a 6 -seed

I feel bad for the Cardinals. They'd have already clinched the East or the North, but they will almost certainly be home for the playoffs. Gotta admire what Arians has done there.

[thatguy]

I feel bad for the Cardinals. They'd have already clinched the East or the North, but they will almost certainly be home for the playoffs. Gotta admire what Arians has done there.

I'm pulling hard for them - go Tampa Bay!

[VikingPaul73]

I'm pulling hard for them - go Tampa Bay!

Me too!!! Nothing would make me happier than to see the 'Aints home for the playoffs, even after the return of their cheating hero

[Mothman]

I'm waiting for answers to my question from people who think the coaches are stooges. You don't think the coaches are stooges, so you're disqualified.

Fair enough.

[Mothman]

I feel bad for the Cardinals. They'd have already clinched the East or the North, but they will almost certainly be home for the playoffs. Gotta admire what Arians has done there.

I agree. He's done an impressive job.

[mondry]

It's a moot point, our DB's would have been 6-8 yards off in a soft zone and never in a position to cause that play in the first place.

[thatguy]

It's a moot point, our DB's would have been 6-8 yards off in a soft zone and never in a position to cause that play in the first place.

Not inside the 20...

[NextQuestion]

I still like Matt Ryan, and he for sure still can play well. His OL is a disaster, and his most explosive player was injured in week 4.

[thatguy]

I still Matt Ryan, and he for sure still can play well. His OL is a disaster, and his most explosive player was injured in week 4.

Really doesn't explain his season or postseason collapses though.

[NextQuestion]

I thought he turned a corner last year with the 13-3 season and NFC Title Game. He put up 24 points vs SF but his defense blew a 17-0 half time lead.

This season is alarming as hell for him, but I still like the guy and I think he's in for a nice bounce back year in 2014 with a healthy Julio and Roddy.

[Purple Reign]

I'm glad you're amused. Now the question is: why don't you think the Vikes could win with better talent and the same coaching staff? After all, they won 10 games last year and reached the playoffs. They were close to winning quite a few more games this season and if I'm not mistaken, you've already stated that you believe they would have won more games if they'd started Cassel all year. If you believe that, it implies that you think talent makes some difference so when you take the closes losses and a winning record last season into consideration, doesn't it seem likely that upgrading the talent could lead to another winning record and a return to the postseason, even with the same coaching staff? If not then, logically, why not?

Obviously Webbfann is under the impression that everything is the fault of coaching and thinks the talent we have on the team is just fine. I don't think you are going to be able to convince him otherwise, proven by the fact that he has avoided replying to your question and has not provided a logical explanation.

[Webbfann]

Obviously Webbfann is under the impression that everything is the fault of coaching and thinks the talent we have on the team is just fine. I don't think you are going to be able convince him otherwise, proven by the fact that he has avoided replying to your question and has not provided a logical explanation.

I didn't answer his question because I was (and am) waiting for answers from people who think the coaches are a problem. I'll jump ahead for you. But please don't mention logic on this board, its in very short supply.

I'm not under the impression talent is fine, I'm under the impression that it is probably underrated because coaching is horrendous. The reason I asked my question, "Do you honestly think we could win with the 3 stooges even if we had the talent you guys think we lack"? is because I don't think we could. Our coaching strategy requires no mistakes, 100% perfect execution, and even the best talent can't achieve that except on occasion.

I never said we are overflowing with talent, especially on defense, but I don't think our roster is that bad either. Its obvious to me how bad the coaching is though, and it has been obvious to me for over 2 years. They have been doing the same things, over and over for 3 years and it still doesn't work and they still don't change. The one game they changed it up we scored more points than in the last 15 years. Then they go back to the same old stupid predictable crap that never worked. Hell, I could defend against it.

My point is that if you accept the premise the coaches suck, then you have to accept that the talent is at a disadvantage and will look worse than it is. And the reason that's important is because if you start replacing everyone at once you lose the ability to discern where the problem really was, and you might just trade old problems for new ones.

[mondry]

I'd take Ryan on the Vikings in a heart beat.

That team this year was just ravaged by injuries and some players got old fast.

It's the perfect example of how a couple bad moves can really destroy a team in the long run. Trading up for Jones, even when getting a stud player left a lot of holes in that defense. Signing Ray Edwards and I forgot the other guys name to be elite players on your defense hurts. Then forcing the need pick in the first round last year sealed it.