Vikings Message Board.Com

chicagopurple wrote:1.) you cant run any offense without an OL. its just a simple unescapable fact of life.

This is an overstatement, having a good offense with a crap O line makes things a whole metric #### ton more difficult, but it can be done, and has been many times.

Jordysghost wrote: This is an overstatement, having a good offense with a crap O line makes things a whole metric #### ton more difficult, but it can be done, and has been many times.

Yours is an overstatement. There isn't an offense in the NFL that doesn't need their OL to win the war in the trenches.

losperros wrote: Yours is an overstatement. There isn't an offense in the NFL that doesn't need their OL to win the war in the trenches.

Ok, your talking to a fan of a team that went 5 and a half years straight with terrible O Lines and captured a SB title and 5 straight Playoff bids in that span of time.

It is hard to overcome bad O line play, but teams have done it.

Jordysghost wrote:Ok, your talking to a fan of a team that went 5 and a half years straight with terrible O Lines and captured a SB title and 5 straight Playoff bids in that span of time.

It is hard to overcome bad O line play, but teams have done it.

And you're talking to a Vikings fan. Our offensive line has played a hand in jeopardizing every part of the offense.

This team isn't winning any SB titles unless there is improvement, with the offensive line being the one unit that may need it the most.

losperros wrote: And you're talking to a Vikings fan. Our offensive line has help jeopardize every part of the offense.

This team isn't winning any SB titles unless there is improvement, with the offensive line being the one unit that may need it the most.

Ok, but my only point was that it is possible to overcome lackluster O Line play, not easy nor ideal, but it can be done. That's all.

Jordysghost wrote: Ok, but my only point was that it is possible to overcome lackluster O Line play, not easy nor ideal, but it can be done. That's all.

It's a fair point. the Vikings may even be able to do it to some degree this season. 11th in point differential, 11th in TO margin, 2nd in starting field position differential...The line has been rough, but If they can improve a bit and continue or the team can enhance their overall performance they could surprise.

Jordysghost wrote: Ok, but my only point was that it is possible to overcome lackluster O Line play, not easy nor ideal, but it can be done. That's all.

I don't mean to get grumpy with you. You might be right, especially since you experienced what you did as a fan.

It's just that the OL has been a sore spot for the Vikings for a while.

And yeah, great players like Adrian Peterson can sometimes make things happen even with a leaky line. But not enough that the Vikings are a perennial playoff team.

It gets to a person after a while.

No worries Losperros, I was actually worried that I came off as a snarky ####, were all good!

And trust me, I know how frustrating lackluster O line are an can be.

Jordysghost wrote:No worries Losperros, I was actually worried that I came off as a snarky ####, were all good!

And trust me, I know how frustrating lackluster O line are an can be.

Cool!

A few more thoughts on last week before the Detroit game

-Allen Bailey is really good. He was in the middle of disrupting so many plays last week. The Chiefs have some really nice defensive line and secondary pieces to build with.

-Eric Kendricks reminds me of another 54. Brian Urlacher. I'm not saying he is that level of player or even that he will become that level of player, but there are some similarities in quickness, speed, reaction time, instincts, and unfortunately, tackling technique.

-Not sure Mike Wallace was 100 percent. After his great showing against Denver he missed a lot of practice time with 'knee' injury. He didn't look quite as quick against Kansas City.

-The Vikings have some pretty good depth on the D Line. With Griffen and Trattou both out, 3rd String D. Hunter played pretty well. They'll have to show that again now without Sharrif Floyd, Shamar Stephen and Trattou all out.

-Kyle Rudolph did pretty well one on one against Houston in the run game. You'd sure like to think that the offensive line would've been able to take better advantage of that and open some bigger holes.

fiestavike wrote:-Eric Kendricks reminds me of another 54. Brian Urlacher. I'm not saying he is that level of player or even that he will become that level of player, but there are some similarities in quickness, speed, reaction time, instincts, and unfortunately, tackling technique.

-Not sure Mike Wallace was 100 percent. After his great showing against Denver he missed a lot of practice time with 'knee' injury. He didn't look quite as quick against Kansas City.

I think Kendricks is really coming on. He's not a seasoned veteran, yet there are times when he plays like one. His overall athleticism is impressive.

I had the same reaction you did to Wallace. I don't think he was running on all eight cylinders last week. I hope he's healthy now.

losperros wrote:I don't mean to get grumpy with you. You might be right, especially since you experienced what you did as a fan.

It's just that the OL has been a sore spot for the Vikings for a while.

And yeah, great players like Adrian Peterson can sometimes make things happen even with a leaky line. But not enough that the Vikings are a perennial playoff team.

It gets to a person after a while.

It truly does...