Vikings Message Board.Com

Reading all these "preseason rankings" that come out and I know they really don't mean anything, but it still stings me to see the Vikings placed at ~20 or higher, regularly behind teams like the Cowboys, Redskins, Bears, Giants, Rams, Bears, Buccaneers. Yeah, the Vikings didn't win the super bowl, but they still well earned their 10-6 record and playoff berth and their team hasn't become any weaker, quite the contrary considering pickups like Greg Jennings and the excellent draft they had......

It's just baffling I see much of the same reasoning "Vikings are going to regress, Peterson won't get 2000 yards," well nothing the Vikings have done since the playoffs shows they'll regress, and ok so what if AP doesn't get 2000 yards, even if he gets 1600 yards he's still pretty much leading the league........

actually NFL.com puts the Vikings at #11 which is pretty realistic.

depends on how productive ponder is.

hibbingviking wrote:depends on how productive ponder is.

Of course but there's so much speculation now he'll be worse even despite the WR core vastly improving and Ponder training hard in the offseason. And in fact who knows how far the Vikings would've gone in the playoffs if Ponder was healthy. I mean I guess it's fine for every other playoff team to keep their spot at the top of the rankings but not the Vikings....

It's really on the QB and that's why they are ranked low. Imagine if we had a mid-tier, big arm guy like Stafford. We'd be favorites.

Rankings have always been worthless. Way too subjective and when you combine that with it being media driven, then you realize why they're ridiculous.

Let them be ranked low...Then watch them all scramble with their words while they try and convince us they knew all along.

PacificNorseWest wrote:Rankings have always been worthless. Way too subjective and when you combine that with it being media driven, then you realize why they're ridiculous.

Let them be ranked low...Then watch them all scramble with their words while they try and convince us they knew all along.

100% agreed. I kind of like the disrespect. It ought to put a little fire in their bellies.

That's what a bottom 5 QB gets you in a QB driven league...

PacificNorseWest wrote:Rankings have always been worthless. Way too subjective and when you combine that with it being media driven, then you realize why they're ridiculous.

Let them be ranked low...Then watch them all scramble with their words while they try and convince us they knew all along.

Definitely agree. Especially when many times you see people essentially repeating the ranks of where teams ended up at the end of the year last year (save the couple eyebrow raising predictions they make just to get hits on their pieces. Obviously doesn't work in the recent NFL because you typically see half the playoff teams from the previous season turnover and rankings change dramatically throughout the year. Just talkers to fill slow news days. What I guess it shows is the desperate fix many of the fan base needs for football discussion and how many of us are starved for actual games to start:)

I forgot what site or talking head it was, but I seem to remember they had the Cowboys ranked #1 and #2 in back to back preseason rankings the last couple of years. But I'd rather be ranked low and exceed expectations than to be ranked high and disappoint.

hibbingviking wrote:depends on how productive ponder is.

Exactly! our hole success and season depends on that exact statement, yet some people wonder why 3/4 of the conversations are about ponder, I wonder why.

allday1991 wrote: Exactly! our hole success and season depends on that exact statement, yet some people wonder why 3/4 of the conversations are about ponder, I wonder why.

Because they want to pretend QB doesn't matter as much as it OBVIOUSLY DOES.

Why? Because their homer team has a bad one.

Orion wrote:Reading all these "preseason rankings" that come out and I know they really don't mean anything, but it still stings me to see the Vikings placed at ~20 or higher, regularly behind teams like the Cowboys, Redskins, Bears, Giants, Rams, Bears, Buccaneers. Yeah, the Vikings didn't win the super bowl, but they still well earned their 10-6 record and playoff berth and their team hasn't become any weaker, quite the contrary considering pickups like Greg Jennings and the excellent draft they had......

The Purple won't get love until they demonstrate that they have a quarterback.

Yes, we all remember that Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl, but the Ravens had a freakish defense that year. Like 99% of NFL teams over the decades, the Vikes' D isn't nearly as good as that Ravens' D. So to be a legit contender, we need a high quality QB, and most people don't think we have one on the roster.

As brilliant as AD is, he's still "just" a running back. This is a QB's league. It will be fascinating to see if one of our two veteran guys -- and that is what Ponder and Cassel are now, veterans -- can lift their game. I am skeptical myself, but as a die-hard partisan of the purple, I always try to suspend disbelief in August ... while the team remains "undefeated."

P.S. -- One thing to remember about last year and our 10 -6 record is that we stayed pretty darned healthy during the regular season (the playoffs, of course, was different, when he had to trot out Joe Webb as a signal caller). Sadly, no team can count on that degree of health two years in a row.

Shoot Dallas and Green Bay get all the love in this League

I'm honestly just shocked that Vikings fans are still surprised by this.


Patriots
Cowboys
Packers
etc.






































Vikings

What's new?

The media sucks. The Vikings could win 8 in a row and we'd be due to play the 3rd worst team in the NFL, and they'd still pick them over us. It's absurd.