Vikings Message Board.Com

I don't believe in tanking at all cause almost everyone on the team is NOT guaranteed a spot next year

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Amen to that.

Every year about this time, the tank talk starts up in earnest. Of course, that's an unfortunate byproduct of consistent losing seasons, but it still doesn't sit well with me. I don't watch the games going, "C'mon Packers, beat the snot out of us!"

I don't understand the tank talk either. Taking a dive is for losers, regardless the reason. I would hate to see anyone on the Vikings be like that.

Demi must have loved the Lions with Matt Millen running the show.

frosted wrote: You have to be kidding me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, I was not kidding. Not saying Barr is a bad pick vs. Mosely, I was just making the comparison snapshot. IMO, we need a true MLB, and an impact player like CJM at MLB doesn't come along every draft. The ranking from 8th to 16th would not be a reach. SO, my need at MLB was greater than LB/DE.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:Demi must have loved the Lions with Matt Millen running the show.

Wait...didn't we all love it when Millen was running the Lions?

DKSweets wrote:Wait...didn't we all love it when Millen was running the Lions?

lol. It was nice to play them back then. Wasn't so nice as a fan, I would bet. I get so sick of the tanking talk that's just around the corner, with Demi leading the charge, again.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:Demi must have loved the Lions with Matt Millen running the show.

Part of the reason they're currently fighting for the division is high picks in Suh, Johnson, Stafford, heck even Ansah.

Imagine if they hadn't hired an incompetent GM and had those picks. Between trades, and first shot at players, yeah in a lost year I'd take 2 wins over 6 every time. And IMO it's better for the team! We need talent. Big time. I want a crack at that elite top 5 receiver. Or whatever might be the once in a decade talent if there is one!

Pride and contracts get in the way of tanking a season. Players, good and not so good, "ease off the pedal" all the time. But the concept of tanking a season is flawed of course. A Pandora's box, if you will. Zim would not stand for this kind of mentality.

jackal wrote:The Panthers made a huge mistake getting rid of Steve Smith ... the guy has a warriors heart
most recievers do not .. Like Boldin ... I want reciever's that own their space on the field and fight
for the ball

Makes me think of Anthony Carter.

I am impressed that the Panthers still have any fans......

Millens utter failure paved the way for the drafts that built the current team, so I Guess he can take some credit for their improvement...lololololol

I'm not implying the team tank. Just that I'd prefer we finish the season with 4 wins and not win anymore games that get us nothing. I'm not going to cheer or get anything from beating a bad Panthers team, it only hurts the team in the long run.

Demi wrote:I'm not implying the team tank. Just that I'd prefer we finish the season with 4 wins and not win anymore games that get us nothing. I'm not going to cheer or get anything from beating a bad Panthers team, it only hurts the team in the long run.

It doesn't necessarily hurt them in the long run but since that argument never seems to convince those who'd prefer to see the team lose, it's probably not worth having...

If I'm not mistaken, the Vikings haven't been mathematically eliminated from playoff contention yet so even though it's probably unrealistic to think they could win out, I don't think the playoffs are out of their reach yet. Even if they are, it seems to me that winning season would be worth rooting for... and perhaps something to build on.

It doesn't necessarily hurt them in the long run but since that argument never seems to convince those who'd prefer to see the team lose, it's probably not worth having

Because there is no way you could convince me winning six games this year benefits this team in any more that winning four games wouldn't....and "winning culture" doesn't work when you're still losers...or the "building for next season" line that has been proven a crock time and again.

Demi wrote: Because there is no way you could convince me winning six games this year benefits this team in any more that winning four games wouldn't....and "winning culture" doesn't work when you're still losers...

They still have a chance to win nine games, which would make them a winning team and thus, by definition, they wouldn't be losers.

... or the "building for next season" line that has been proven a crock time and again.

... as opposed to the idea that a higher draft pick will yield a better player? That's clearly not true.

Demi wrote: Because there is no way you could convince me winning six games this year benefits this team in any more that winning four games wouldn't....and "winning culture" doesn't work when you're still losers...or the "building for next season" line that has been proven a crock time and again.

That's such a myth. Look at the consistent winners in the NFL. They all build from the bottom of the draft. Plus, no coach or GM who cares about having a job will allow it, let alone the players, none of whom have guaranteed contracts. And do honestly believe you'll ever convince a hyper competitive NFL player to just give up? Yeah, I'm sure Adrian Peterson would trip over his own feet so the Vikings can lose and draft Marcus Mariota.

The only crock here is the theory that tanking benefits anyone. It doesn't work in any sport.