Vikings Message Board.Com

IrishViking wrote:
Hey now, You know the rules. You can either

A. Rub your history of championships in our face whenever we get uppity but use them to balance out the pain of loss

OR

B. Never mention your history of winning ever again, but be allowed to lament heartbreaking losses.

I can

A. Post smack in the smack forum

B. Not post smack outside the smack forum



(Honestly though Irish, you shouldn't take anything I say over there all to seriously,)

DanAS wrote: When we lost to the Chiefs in the Super Bowl, we had already won the NFL Championship. Previous to the first Super Bowl, if you won the NFL Championship, that was considered the World Championship (as the NFL was considered the best league). The Colts might have lost the Jets in the Super Bowl, but the Colts have also been World Champions during other years. We haven't. Does that make sense?

Yes, that makes sense - technically. But really you are only talking about a 3 year time span where this could happen. That would be in 1967-1969 where the NFL Championship and World Championship overlapped so only 3 teams could have ever qualified. So it really isn't that big of a deal. I think it's a bigger deal that we've lost 4 Super Bowls and haven't won any.

Lars wrote: Yep. No one expected this team to win the North -- that's for sure. And no one in the media (I mean no one) expected the Vikings to beat the Seahawks.

Actually there were a couple of media people who predicted the Vikings would win. Tom Powers of the Pioneer Press even predicted the Vikings winning by a score of 35-3 (or something ridiculous like that) and of course our own Fran Tarkenton picked the Vikings.

Works

We have a great defense next year to work with ....

I assuming Greenway and Robison might not be here next season or not starting. I would like to see Hunter at least
split reps.

OL is our biggest problem still IMO..I would imagine we have to draft and go for a FA OL or two to fix the problem

Wallace...Unless he redoes his contract with an incentive laden deal.. I don't want him back

Patterson ... get rid of him ....

Locke..we can do better

Blair Walsh.. He has been great at times, but its hard to defend a 27 yard miss

Peterson.. Peterson is a HOF player but too much money for one of the rosters spots that is fairly easy to scout out of college.
I wash not thrilled when he ran down the coaches after the loss this season. I doubt he would take less money.. I say trade him to
Dallas for a decent pick...

Robison should be back, he has another year on his contract. I get the vibe that he and Greenway are leaders in the locker room, so while I expect Hunter to continue stealing snaps I would expect 96 to start.

Greenway says he wants back, and if he'll do it at a low cap number I think he's showed too much to not bring him back.

DK Sweets wrote:Robison should be back, he has another year on his contract. I get the vibe that he and Greenway are leaders in the locker room, so while I expect Hunter to continue stealing snaps I would expect 96 to start.

Greenway says he wants back, and if he'll do it at a low cap number I think he's showed too much to not bring him back.

I agree. It would be a mistake not to re-sign greenway and Newman. I would also try to restructure Robison to reflect taking on a similar veteran role on the cusp between starter and backup.

fiestavike wrote: I agree. It would be a mistake not to re-sign greenway and Newman. I would also try to restructure Robison to reflect taking on a similar veteran role on the cusp between starter and backup.

I may be in the minority but I thought Robison had one of his better years this year. He sure ended strong.

808vikingsfan wrote: I may be in the minority but I thought Robison had one of his better years this year. He sure ended strong.

Not saying much. To me it's Griffen vs. Allen again. And we were better off without Allen. At least Robison has more flexibility. I don't think he should be starting though. Hunter showed last year he's more than capable of playing in the NFL. Use Robison to spell guys across the line. Put him inside on passing downs. For every play he makes, he disappears for 10. Hunter is an impact guy. Let him grow and learn the game on the field.

I think Robison did well this year, had some key sacks/turnovers and he seemed better against the run. A lot of that probably had to do with less snaps due to Hunter. I wouldn't mind him transitioning to more of a flex/situational rusher as he can play tackle on passing downs. I think guys like him and Greenway have showed they can still be productive but in a different role where they aren't on the field every down.

Speaking of DE's, what the heck happened to Crichton?

S197 wrote:Speaking of DE's, what the heck happened to Crichton?

Injury and got jumped on the depth chart by Hunter. I think he makes the 53 but 2016 will be an important year for him.