Vikings Message Board.Com

chicagopurple wrote:What a sad state our team is in that we are down to Aweful questins like this thread! Its Dumb and Dumber.....

The Vikes haven't had a good coach since Bud Grant......

The owners have put some really great talent on the field but neglected to have anyone with a sharp mind to USE THEM.....Moss, CUlpepper, Favre, AP AP AP AP, Robt Smith, Cris FRIGGIN CARTER, etc etc and its all been wasted by under-qualified coaches.....

I really respect Mr Wilf for putting scary amounts of his cash on the field for us but, jeeeezus, spend a small amount of it on a REAAL coach who has been proven a winner, not some bargain-basement experiment like Leslie (the name says it all) Frasier.....

I'm still thrilled we've had/still have fairly legit threads about the playoffs. Few expected that type of talk this offseason.

dead_poet wrote:I'm still thrilled we've had/still have fairly legit threads about the playoffs. Few expected that type of talk this offseason.

Exactly and it's been fun to have that hope in a season where it wasn't expected.

Mothman wrote: Exactly and it's been fun to have that hope in a season where it wasn't expected.

The reason we've had this success so far is because of our schedule earlier in the season. I once heard this in a movie:

In the beginning of your schedule, you gotta play some teams you can beat the #### out of. We were lucky enough this year to have that happen to us. There was definately improvement from last year but I still think we have a long way to go before we can think about playoffs.

Infinity wrote:The reason we've had this success so far is because of our schedule earlier in the season.

I'm getting a little tired of this as a way to dismiss the Vikings' current record. You still have to play the game. They clearly aren't New England or Atlanta or any of the upper echelon teams just yet, especially given their performance lately, so a middle-of-the-road squad (which we are) isn't a lock to beat anybody. They've won six games (and doubled their win total from last season) which is more than: Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Cleveland Miami, Buffalo, NYJ, Arizona, St. Louis, Carolina, New Orleans, Detroit and Philly and are tied with three others. They've swept a division rival that was in the playoffs last season (scoring 54 combined points against them) and beat what many say is a Super Bowl bound team (49ers). The defense (particularly secondary, even without its arguably #1 CB) is improved from a year ago as well.

Given how low the bar was set I don't see how this season hasn't already been a success – it's only a matter of subjective degree – save for having a clear idea of our starting QB going forward, which, granted, is a major issue. We knew going in that this season probably wasn't going to be pretty, that you can't fix every hole in one offseason. There are certainly areas that need addressed again, and that will happen one way or another. Another successful draft and free agency, coupled with the ability of the team to stay healthy and improvement from the QB position (either by individual growth or another guy) it's not out of the realm of possibility that this team can be a 8-11-win team in 2013 and win a playoff game. Heck, they're still not mathematically eliminated from this year's playoffs (though, admittedly, it doesn't look pretty).

dead_poet wrote: I'm getting a little tired of this as a way to dismiss the Vikings' current record. You still have to play the game. They clearly aren't New England or Atlanta or any of the upper echelon teams just yet, especially given their performance lately, so a middle-of-the-road squad (which we are) isn't a lock to beat anybody. They've won six games (and doubled their win total from last season) which is more than: Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Cleveland Miami, Buffalo, NYJ, Arizona, St. Louis, Carolina, New Orleans, Detroit and Philly and are tied with three others. They've swept a division rival that was in the playoffs last season (scoring 54 combined points against them) and beat what many say is a Super Bowl bound team (49ers). The defense (particularly secondary, even without its arguably #1 CB) is improved from a year ago as well.

Given how low the bar was set I don't see how this season hasn't already been a success – it's only a matter of subjective degree – save for having a clear idea of our starting QB going forward, which, granted, is a major issue. We knew going in that this season probably wasn't going to be pretty, that you can't fix every hole in one offseason. There are certainly areas that need addressed again, and that will happen one way or another. Another successful draft and free agency, coupled with the ability of the team to stay healthy and improvement from the QB position (either by individual growth or another guy) it's not out of the realm of possibility that this team can be a 8-11-win team in 2013 and win a playoff game. Heck, they're still not mathematically eliminated from this year's playoffs (though, admittedly, it doesn't look pretty).

I agree. Im just saying that if we played teams like the ravens or patriots in those games we might have lost a couple more games. Im still impressed with our performance this season, but I do think the first half our season was light.

Infinity wrote:Im just saying that if we played teams like the ravens or patriots in those games we might have lost a couple more games.

That's just so hard to say with any certainty. Had they played the Ravens instead of the Colts they could've just as easily had win instead of a loss. Maybe the game plan would've been more effective. Maybe we got a couple fortunate calls, or a play like RGIII against the Giants last night where he fumbled and it was recovered by a teammate for a TD. Maybe AD runs for 250 yards and 3 scores. Maybe Winfield stip-sack-fumble-TDs Flacco. This team is not SO inept they cannot compete with some of the tougher teams. I wouldn't chalk up playing either of those teams as an automatic "L." In my eyes, their record stands on its own merits.

dead_poet wrote: That's just so hard to say with any certainty. Had they played the Ravens instead of the Colts they could've just as easily had win instead of a loss. Maybe the game plan would've been more effective. Maybe we got a couple fortunate calls, or a play like RGIII against the Giants last night where he fumbled and it was recovered by a teammate for a TD. Maybe AD runs for 250 yards and 3 scores. Maybe Winfield stip-sack-fumble-TDs Flacco. This team is not SO inept they cannot compete with some of the tougher teams. I wouldn't chalk up playing either of those teams as an automatic "L." In my eyes, their record stands on its own merits.

So the harder the team is to beat, the better odds we have at sucking one out?

PurpleKoolaid wrote:So the harder the team is to beat, the better odds we have at sucking one out?

At full health, this team is capable of beating anyone any given Sunday. Improvements to several key areas next season will only strengthen those odds.