Vikings Message Board.Com

I'm really looking forward to this game.

The last game we played against them we lost Smith and Barr in the first quarter. Just from a gameplan standpoint, that really cripples what your defense can do even if your forget that those are two huge players from a talent standpoint. Being without Linval certainly didn't help, but he might be out again this week.

I think Teddy is going to have a game that silences many of his critics. He was embarrassed after the way Seattle handled him, and it gave him the fire to have a couple of really solid outings in December. I believe he won't forget the way he was embarrassed and he'll look to really redeem himself. Adrian will be the focus of the offense, but Teddy will be the reason we move the ball in chunks.

Defensively, as I alluded to above, I think having Smih and Barr is huge. Barr was supposed to spy Wilson, but I actually think that will be Kendricks' job this time around. Having Harry the Hitman running all over the field should take away some opportunities, too. If the D-line can pressure Wilson and Our secondary plays as well as they have been playing lately, I feel great about this one.

The last game could have been a lot closer of injuries hadn't struck, and it was still even a close game until the atrocious penalty on Robison at the end of the first half. Just like I don't think we were 30 points better than the Giants, I don't think Seattle was 30 points better than us.

I think a big wildcard will be the location. The atmosphere of having the (likely) last home playoff game outside in Minnesota will be a unique experience that I think brings out the best in our fans. As for the Seattle fans that travel...they might be sitting on their hands a bit in this type of cold.

Somewhere deep in my soul I feel like we make the NFC Championship game be redeeming ourselves against the Seahawks and Cardinals. I guess we'll see what I say next Monday.

I'm taking the Vikings by 4 points in this one.

I am very excited that we're playing the Seahawks instead of the Packers again.

I'm looking at it longview: we have now learned how to beat the Pack in Lambeau, that experience will stick with our young players and our coaches. Now we need to "solve" the Seahawks. Whether we do it this year or not is not really the point for me. With last night's win, we qualified for a game that can teach our young players something new.

With Barr and Smith back, I like our chances much better. If Linval is good to play and can play effectively, even better.

Yeah, I won't make a prediction cause I hate predicting us to lose but it's definitely about the experience and beating the packers to win the division is worth knowing what that feels like for this young club. They WILL want to get back there and do it again.

We all know they look like monsters on paper. And on the field, if the prior game against us is any indication. They matchup really well against us, being able to generate pressure with their front four without blitzing. And if Pete Carroll wasn't trying to be cute last February, they'd be the two time defending Superbowl champs.

538 Sports has the Seahawks as the strongest team in the league based on Elo ratings - essentially a system where teams start even and get points from the team you play if you win, and lose points if you lose; the amount based on the difference between your rating beforehand and margin of victory I suppose. Still, because they will have to play all games on the road, and an extra game, they aren't favored in the model to win the Superbowl: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... edictions/

So according to 538, we really drew the short straw, to play the toughest team in round 1. Other commentators agree, as some of you have posted.

But the odd thing about Seattle this year is how inconsistent they are, to my eyes at least. Playing like they did against us, Arizona, and Chicago/Cleveland/Baltimore (fairly easy games, those last three), they look like a totally dominant squad. But they really haven't played that way all year long. They looked much worse against St. Louis who swept them; against Detroit, who beat them save for a bad call at the end; against Dallas, a 4-12 team (a 1 point victory). The Vikings would smoke that team.

So, in essence, the game is really out of our hands. If Seattle shows up like they did against us the first time, we don't stand a chance. If they play like they did against the Rams, they'll lose. I think it's to our advantage to have been really outclassed in that first matchup. It'll get us focused, and hopefully get them to think they just need to show up to beat us.

The Elo model predicts that the Seahawks have only a 56% chance of winning, and should be only 1.5 point favorites. I think most of us were worried about being 10 point underdogs and having only a 20% chance to win. But we're only thinking of the hot Seahawk team, not the one that couldn't beat the Rams in two tries.

I don't see them winning the whole thing. They may smoke us, but they have struggled to put four games in a row together, and that's what it would take to win the Superbowl.

As an aside, it turns out that classic bad ref calls do make a difference, in games we weren't even a part of. Had the Lions won the game against the Packers when the phantom facemask was called, and the game against the Seahawks with the Calvin Johnson fumble and illegal bat, they would have joined the Packers and Seahawks at 9-7, and would have swept them both, meaning the Lions would have been 5th seed. The Packers would have been 6th, based on the head-to-head victory over Seattle, and they would have been coming to Minnesota, and Seattle would be sitting at home. Some day, they'll allow video review of things like that facemask penalty, but it'll be just too late for the Lions.

Awesome post this week, guys. I'm liking a lot of your takes.

Billick's take:

http://www.vikings.com/media-vault/vide ... 463821eac8

John_Viveiros wrote: So, in essence, the game is really out of our hands. If Seattle shows up like they did against us the first time, we don't stand a chance. If they play like they did against the Rams, they'll lose. I think it's to our advantage to have been really outclassed in that first matchup. It'll get us focused, and hopefully get them to think they just need to show up to beat us.

So what you are saying it doesn't make any difference how we play, that it all depends on how Seattle plays, which I have to disagree with. I do agree that if Seattle plays the way they did the first time, it won't be a contest. But even if Seattle plays like they did the last time against St. Louis, we are still going to have to play a good game to beat them and not just show up. I believe the offense is going to have to play better than they did against GB (unless the defense comes up with a couple of scores).

I think the Vikings need to make sure Wilson can't hit them deep, plus make sure Kendricks or Barr keeps Wilson in check. Concede the short stuff, but make sure the Seahawks have to work the length of the field for each score. The weather could also help with this. It looks to be bone cold and the field could be a bit on the slick side, both factors that should favor the Vikings who have had a few cold weather games already. If the Seahawks can run the ball as well as they did in the first game I think the Vikings probably lose, so the front seven has to stay very disciplined, plug their gaps and tackle much better than they did in the first meeting.

On offense, the Vikings are going to have to try to establish the run and see if they can simply push Seattle off the ball. I have no issue with that approach, but if it doesn't work, or it isn't working as well as they like, Bridgewater has to be able to get the job done via the air. I don't care if it's mostly short and medium range as long as it works and he doesn't give the game away with a dumb INT or fumble. Just move the ball, stay on the field and keep the Seahawk offense off the field.

I think someone else mentioned that Bridgewater might have extra motivation in this game due to some of the comments made by Seattle defenders after the first game where they said he was scared or something like that. If there is a "mad Teddy", this is the game where I hope I see that side of him. I'd really like to see some visible fire from Bridgewater, especially if he scorches Sherman. In fact, if there were ever a game and a time for Bridgewater and Wallace to hook up for a few big plays, this is the game where I hope it happens. Sherman will probably stick with Diggs, but I sure would like Wallace to step up and light 'em up in this game.

Welcome them to the Land of the Ice and Snow. Make this old-fashioned Vikings outdoor football where they play not only the Vikings but the elements and the fans.

On paper the Seahawks are better than the Vikes in just about every statistical category over the season on both sides of the ball -- except for their record. And it looks like they will be healthier going into Sunday's game than they have throughout most of the season. Marshawn Lynch is back after missing 10 games and slated by Pete Carroll to start. (Might be a little rusty though). Strong safety Kam Chancellor is available after being out for four games, offensive linemen Russell Okung is back after missing two and J.R. Sweezy is back after missing one.

I like Teddy Bridgewater and I want him to succeed. But he just isn't the QB Russel Wilson is. Wilson is having a career year with a 68.1% completion percentage, 4,024 total passing yards, averaging 251.5 passing yards a game, 34 touchdowns and a 110.1 passer rating. Plus he can flat out run -- 553 yards rushing this year (over 800 last year). He had 52 in the last game against the Vikings. Bridgewater had 2.

Bridgewater has improved over last year in most categories (except TD passes which were the same) with a 65.3 completion percentage, 3,231 total passing yards, only 14 touchdown passes, and a respectable (but not outstanding) 88.7 passer rating. He ran for 192 yards this year. Again, not bad, but nothing like Russel.

I think Russel gives Seattle the advantage on offense. And now the pro bowler Lynch is back and bring an added dimension.

But I believe it's the strength of Seattle's defense that will make this game very difficult to win. Look at the season stats:

Seattle
PTS 17.3 (1st)
YDS 291.8 (2nd)
PASS YDS 210.2 (2nd)
RUSH YDS 81.5(1st)

Minnesota
PTS 18.9 (5th)
YDS 344.2 (13th)
PASS YDS 234.9 (12th)
RUSH YDS 109.2 (17th)

I know that these are season stats... but even so, the Seahawks have one of the top three defenses in the NFL. The Vikings have a good defense -- but not a great one. I believe everything depends on whether Adrian Peterson can run the ball. That will help Bridgewater sell the play action pass and win the time of possession battle. Somehow the Vikings need to keep the ball away from Russel as much as possible. I hope Zimmer and Turner can figure that out. The Vikes could use to score some points on defense as they did against the Packers. And maybe the weather will make a difference in favor of the Vikes -- like it used to in the playoffs at Metropolitan Field. They just finished playing a pretty frigid game in Green Bay. Seattle hasn't played a game in serious cold this year. We'll see...

I think Seattle is the kind of team the Vikings are striving to become: run orientated, power football, control the clock, win the field position battle, make a few big plays for points on offense and defense, and shut the other team down defensively. I just don't believe they are there yet. Seattle is though.

I hope I'm wrong, but Seattle should win again -- I'll say 20-10. Then again, on any given day in the NFL...

vikings win 24-17. take some notes of what the Rams did in their 2 wins against them, even what the Cowboys and Lions did to contain their offense. may Peterson breakout upon them, peppered with plenty of Asiata. that way Russ can take leave from his supplemental football career to pursue his passion in beach photography...

Vikings win 17-14. Walsh nails a fg for the win.

Purple Reign wrote: So what you are saying it doesn't make any difference how we play, that it all depends on how Seattle plays, which I have to disagree with. I do agree that if Seattle plays the way they did the first time, it won't be a contest. But even if Seattle plays like they did the last time against St. Louis, we are still going to have to play a good game to beat them and not just show up. I believe the offense is going to have to play better than they did against GB (unless the defense comes up with a couple of scores).

Not exactly. But if we play a reasonably good game (2nd Packers game - specifically the defense, Chiefs, etc.) against the team that struggled against the Lions and Cowboys and Rams, we should be fine. If we play a great game, but don't get really lucky, we'll still lose to the juggernaut Seahawks. But if we put up a performance like against SF, then no, we won't win. That's just how I see it.

John_Viveiros wrote: Not exactly. But if we play a reasonably good game (2nd Packers game - specifically the defense, Chiefs, etc.) against the team that struggled against the Lions and Cowboys and Rams, we should be fine. If we play a great game, but don't get really lucky, we'll still lose to the juggernaut Seahawks. But if we put up a performance like against SF, then no, we won't win. That's just how I see it.

I have to say that I agree with you, John.

The most interesting part of this game, for me, is Teddy's performance. SEA got in his head both during and after the last clash with these guys. How will he respond? I'd like to see some competitive fire from the kid too (someone mentioned it upthread). Get feisty Teddy!

Obviously, the D also has to show up and we'll need some guys to step up and make big plays at key moments (a la Theilen vs. the Pack), but the main storyline that has my eye is Teddy.

This is a game where two very similar teams are smashing into each other. You have to give Seattle a bit of an edge due to experience, however we also shouldn't under appreciate the fact that we are playing at home in probably the coldest environment Seattle has seen in the past 3 years. I'm not sure if that is a complete push, but it should level the playing field a bit.

I see three huge keys in this game:

1.) We need to protect the football.
2.) Our defense needs to tackle well and keep Wilson in check
3.) We need to stay within one score until the 4th quarter

I feel that if we can get to the 4th quarter and not be down by more than 7 points, preferably 3 or have a lead, then we can punish their defense with Petersen and win. Their secondary is their strength, not their rush defense. If we can keep it close and make the game physical, then I think we have a chance.

IMO, the reason we got blown out last time was not the offense. It was the fact that the defense gave up 20 points in the 1st half forcing us to be a passing team which exposed our OL and forced us to play to SEA strength. We need to do what the Rams do and makes this a physical game.

We cannot have stupid turnovers in this game if we do, we are toast.

mansquatch wrote:IMO, the reason we got blown out last time was not the offense.

The offense didn't score a single point. I think it's safe to say that had a lot to do with the loss.