Bad news for the Vikings

[1940sfootball]

This sucks for the Vikings. I hope AP heals quickly.
I also don't want any Vikings excuses when he returns to Lambeau

they wont need any. Theyll be fine

 

[bigbubbatd]

they wont need any. Theyll be fine

They could be but I think people are under appreciating AP. Defenses game plan for him. They fill the box to stop him. That is done. They also lost their LT for the year so an already bad oline just got worse.

They were ok without AP in 2014 but if you looking closer at the numbers they were quite weighted by Patterson and Bridgewater. Asiata was their lead back and averaged 3.5 ypc. McKinnon could be the guy as he had a nice average that year but is he an everyone down back and is this oline able to run block?

Bradford looked very good Sunday and so did Diggs but they are running out of other weapons. The Vikings could definitely win the division still but they are now so thin on the oline and really on offensive play makers. Zimmer is a very good coach so the team will play really hard and that defense will win them games but I think these two losses will hurt more than people think. I was listening to Minnesota sports radio and the guys were talking about even post Peterson the Vikings finishing 12-4. That seems high to me.

 

[El Guapo]

Who else are the Vikings going to lose to? They are 2-0 with potential losses to Carolina, maybe Philadelphia if Wentz is really this good, and the Cardinals. I don't see another team that should beat them on the schedule. Granted, they will probably lose one that they shouldn't but even at that they are 13-3 or 12-4 unless we beat them at Lambeau, which we couldn't do last year.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Who else are the Vikings going to lose to? They are 2-0 with potential losses to Carolina, maybe Philadelphia if Wentz is really this good, and the Cardinals. I don't see another team that should beat them on the schedule. Granted, they will probably lose one that they shouldn't but even at that they are 13-3 or 12-4 unless we beat them at Lambeau, which we couldn't do last year.

Houston, The Giants, The Packers, Carolina, Arizona, one of the Lions games, and Philly are all going to be tough games. Seriously people they beat the packers by 3 at the first home game in their new stadium with AP and Khalil. It isnt like they are playing like an unbeatable team. They are good but they lost two important starters one on an already bad offensive line. I think the Vikings can still make the playoffs and probably will but the over reaction to their win over a Green Bay team (all of this board is saying is average) is incredible.

 

[OldSchool101]

Who else are the Vikings going to lose to? They are 2-0 with potential losses to Carolina, maybe Philadelphia if Wentz is really this good, and the Cardinals. I don't see another team that should beat them on the schedule. Granted, they will probably lose one that they shouldn't but even at that they are 13-3 or 12-4 unless we beat them at Lambeau, which we couldn't do last year.

As bad as we played compared to our potential, I would not have felt comfortable in Vikings shoes with AR at midfield with time... needing 3 to tie and a TD to win. Ok they won and I'll give them credit they played tough.
In restrosoect, This game wasn't some blowout win by MN. We were playing a hot QB early season on the road where Aaron has a career road win % of about 50%. Bradford is good..
But c'mon..he clearly brought his A game early season and everyone knows he was hot, while AR left his at home and yet... we still had an opportunity to put them away on our final drive?
I believe in AR especially at home where he is at his best career wise. I also believe the second meeting will be much, much different in outcome so expect another loss to GB in Lambeau.
As far as The Vikes? They just lost arguably their best Offensive weapon so a 9-5 finish would be best case

 

[El Guapo]

Let's be honest about Matt Kalil, he's been on the hot seat ever since his sophomore season and he was atrocious on Sunday night. They are likely better off with Clemmings.

There is a lot of resistance from folks on this forum to the mere notion that the Vikings could be a better team than us. The fact is that they beat us for the division last year, beat us head-to-head in Week 2 this year, and have a top notch defense. Their offense just gelled faster than I thought they would with Bradford, and I don't think that losing AP really hurts them that much. Yeah they aren't tops in the league but they will be in the playoffs again and certainly have the odds in their favor at the moment to sweep us at Lambeau.

 

[Raptorman]

Houston, The Giants, The Packers, Carolina, Arizona, one of the Lions games, and Philly are all going to be tough games. Seriously people they beat the packers by 3 at the first home game in their new stadium with AP and Khalil. It isnt like they are playing like an unbeatable team. They are good but they lost two important starters one on an already bad offensive line. I think the Vikings can still make the playoffs and probably will but the over reaction to their win over a Green Bay team (all of this board is saying is average) is incredible.

"Seriously people they beat the packers by 3 at the first home game in their new stadium with AP and Khalil. and a QB that was only with the team for 14 days." Fixed it for you.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Let's be honest about Matt Kalil, he's been on the hot seat ever since his sophomore season and he was atrocious on Sunday night. They are likely better off with Clemmings.

There is a lot of resistance from folks on this forum to the mere notion that the Vikings could be a better team than us. The fact is that they beat us for the division last year, beat us head-to-head in Week 2 this year, and have a top notch defense. Their offense just gelled faster than I thought they would with Bradford, and I don't think that losing AP really hurts them that much. Yeah they aren't tops in the league but they will be in the playoffs again and certainly have the odds in their favor at the moment to sweep us at Lambeau.

How are the odds in their favor to beat us at Lambeau when they only beat us by 3 at home and lost their rb and lt? It is going to be close but this last game was one they was expected to be close and it was.

And there is no way the Vikings are better off with Clemmings. He was really bad at rt last year. Kahlil while a disappointment is definitely better than Clemmings.

Their defense and bradford/Diggs will win them games but to acting like they are automatically favored to beat the Packers seems weird

 

[Croak]

The Vikings are more the contenders right now than our Pack. At least the Vikings are bouncing back from catastrophe with great resilience. Our team seems like it lacks clear direction in my opinion.

 

[bigbubbatd]

"Seriously people they beat the packers by 3 at the first home game in their new stadium with AP and Khalil. and a QB that was only with the team for 14 days." Fixed it for you.

That is true and I have been giving a ton of credit to Bradford but do you think he is going to play a ton better than he did on Sunday night? I think repeating that performance would be about as good as anyone should reasonably expect right?

I don't mean this as a slight to his talent just asking how much better can he get bc that was a great game

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That is true and I have been giving a ton of credit to Bradford but do you think he is going to play a ton better than he did on Sunday night? I think repeating that performance would be about as good as anyone should reasonably expect right?

If you are a Viking fan right now you are saying "Great move trading for Bradford, he is finally going to be able to play up to his potential that made him the #1 pick in 2010." Wouldn't be that far fetched given that he played for the Rams his first 4 years and a mess at Philadelphia last year. As a Packer fan, I was hoping for a below average QB and a waste of their 2017 #1 pick, I guess time will tell.

 

[Raptorman]

If you are a Viking fan right now you are saying "Great move trading for Bradford, he is finally going to be able to play up to his potential that made him the #1 pick in 2010." Wouldn't be that far fetched given that he played for the Rams his first 4 years and a mess at Philadelphia last year. As a Packer fan, I was hoping for a below average QB and a waste of their 2017 #1 pick, I guess time will tell.

Time will tell. His last half of the season last year with the Eagles was actually pretty good. And, since he was a top 10 drafted QB he should have some upside, even though he hasn't done a whole lot so far. Sometimes it's not the player, it's the team they are on.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Time will tell. His last half of the season last year with the Eagles was actually pretty good. And, since he was a top 10 drafted QB he should have some upside, even though he hasn't done a whole lot so far. Sometimes it's not the player, it's the team they are on.

That is very true. He looked so calm in the game. The knock on him has been injuries and reading defenses. Neither were issues Sunday night

 

[OldSchool101]

Time will tell. His last half of the season last year with the Eagles was actually pretty good. And, since he was a top 10 drafted QB he should have some upside, even though he hasn't done a whole lot so far. Sometimes it's not the player, it's the team they are on.

True that.
If I was a Vikings fan (which won't be in this lifetime or the next three) I'd be very pleased with how Bradford came out and showed some presence. I love the uncertainty of this league where guys can get injected into a program and they just fit.
Big Difference: The only thing to be concerned with Bradford is, while Aaron can go through lukewarm patches, Bradford can go into altogether cold patches. Sam's never finished a season ABOVE 90.9 passer rating while Aaron has never finished BELOW a 92.7 rating
so expect the honeymoon to end here soon

 

[Raptorman]

True that.
If I was a Vikings fan (which won't be in this lifetime or the next three) I'd be very pleased with how Bradford came out and showed some presence. I love the uncertainty of this league where guys can get injected into a program and they just fit.
Big Difference: The only thing to be concerned with Bradford is, while Aaron can go through lukewarm patches, Bradford can go into altogether cold patches. Sam's never finished a season ABOVE 90.9 passer rating while Aaron has never finished BELOW a 92.7 rating
so expect the honeymoon to end here soon

Passer rating is over rated in my book.

 

[OldSchool101]

Passer rating is over rated in my book.

.
You're right. Forget passer rating. Let's look at what wins games?
To be fair let's compare 1st 5 years in league as a starter.
Bradford best career year is 132 points
As a comparison
Rodgers best career year is 288 points

 

[bigbubbatd]

Passer rating is over rated in my book.

Is there a stat where Bradford compares favorably to Rodgers before last week? Last year he probably was better in a few stats I would assume.

 

[TeamTundra]

Shariff Floyd, one of the Vkings starting DT's, had minor knee surgery today
(cartlidge cleanup) and will probably miss a few weeks.

 

[Raptorman]

Is there a stat where Bradford compares favorably to Rodgers before last week? Last year he probably was better in a few stats I would assume.

Your mistake is assuming I am comparing him to Rodgers. He doesn't have to play like Rodgers for the Vikings to win. 65% completion, 25 tds and 12 int should be good enough to put together a 12 win season.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Your mistake is assuming I am comparing him to Rodgers. He doesn't have to play like Rodgers for the Vikings to win. 65% completion, 25 tds and 12 int should be good enough to put together a 12 win season.

I just figured since the post you responded to had that comparison that is what you were going with.

I think that would be close to enough. He might need a few more tips since they might not have many rushing tds but those are doable numbers. I still see the Vikings more as a 10 win or so team but I am often wrong. I think they will play a lot of tight games which will lead to a few losses that are unexpected. Good enough to get in the playoffs and compete for the division. This week will be telling to see how much the losses of ap and Khalil hurt them. Also will be telling to see how teams cover Diggs now. Doubt they will go no help like the packers

 

[Raptorman]

I just figured since the post you responded to had that comparison that is what you were going with.

I think that would be close to enough. He might need a few more tips since they might not have many rushing tds but those are doable numbers. I still see the Vikings more as a 10 win or so team but I am often wrong. I think they will play a lot of tight games which will lead to a few losses that are unexpected. Good enough to get in the playoffs and compete for the division. This week will be telling to see how much the losses of ap and Khalil hurt them. Also will be telling to see how teams cover Diggs now. Doubt they will go no help like the packers

My prediction for this week, McKinnon will have over 100 yards rushing. The Panthers will be so set on going after Bradford thinking that Peterson was our only good back they will over look him. If I had to guess, 20 attempts 107 yards. One of Peterson's weakness' is that he does not run well out of the shotgun formation. McKinnon does not have that problem. Double coverage on Diggs will open up the other guys. I am more concerned with the loss of Kalil than I am the loss of Peterson.

 

[sschind]

Your mistake is assuming I am comparing him to Rodgers. He doesn't have to play like Rodgers for the Vikings to win. 65% completion, 25 tds and 12 int should be good enough to put together a 12 win season.

And if things don't change that just may end up being better than Rodgers anyway.

How are the odds in their favor to beat us at Lambeau when they only beat us by 3 at home and lost their rb and lt? It is going to be close but this last game was one they was expected to be close and it was.

I don't want to speak for El Guapo but he didn't say beat us in Lambeau he said sweep us. Since there is no way for the Packers to possibly sweep the vikings this season I would have to agree that the vikings would be the odds on favorite to sweep. I'm not sure if that was his line of thinking or not, its just the way I read it

There is a lot of resistance from folks on this forum to the mere notion that the Vikings could be a better team than us. The fact is that they beat us for the division last year, beat us head-to-head in Week 2 this year, and have a top notch defense. Their offense just gelled faster than I thought they would with Bradford, and I don't think that losing AP really hurts them that much. Yeah they aren't tops in the league but they will be in the playoffs again and certainly have the odds in their favor at the moment to sweep us at Lambeau.

You probably didn't make any friends here with that post El Guapo, well maybe Raptorman, but sadly I think you are right. No fan likes to admit when another team is better than his, especially when that other team is a hated rival but taking off the homer glasses I think you would be hard pressed to come up with a legitimate argument for why the Packers are better than the vikings right now. About the closest you could possibly come would be that they just lost their all world RB but they are 2-0 so far this year without much of a contribution from AP at all.

That said I will say that I still think the Packers will win the division. My argument isn't based on the way the teams are right now rather I think the Packers will get their offense rolling again and will eventually win out. Not win out as in the rest of their games but eventually come out on top. Of course that just may be the homer in me talking.

 

[OldSchool101]

The Vikings are more the contenders right now than our Pack. At least the Vikings are bouncing back from catastrophe with great resilience. Our team seems like it lacks clear direction in my opinion.

I'll give you that at present, we seem discombobulated while they seemed more in tune (I've always wanted to use that word and the Pack makes it come to life!)
We have been a franchise of fans that has certainly had to exercise patience from season to season lately. But we have had an exciting ride also and win or lose that's what makes good football. IMO.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves, we have an opportunity in our home opener to improve in several areas and if we focus on this and putting away 1 opponent per week things take care of themselves.
Each years squad present new challenges as we have seen from prior Super Bowl teams performance the following year.
The true mark of a "contender" is who improves around the track..and has a strong "kick".. not who starts out of the blocks fast.

 

[sschind]

I'll give you that at present, we seem discombobulated while they seemed more in tune (I've always wanted to use that word and the Pack makes it come to life!)
We have been a franchise of fans that has certainly had to exercise patience from season to season lately. But we have had an exciting ride also and win or lose that's what makes good football. IMO.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves, we have an opportunity in our home opener to improve in several areas and if we focus on this and putting away 1 opponent per week things take care of themselves.
Each years squad present new challenges as we have seen from prior Super Bowl teams performance the following year.
The true mark of a "contender" is who improves around the track..and has a strong "kick".. not who starts out of the blocks fast.

I use the word tune all the time.

 

[OldSchool101]

I use the word tune all the time.

Oh ok. Yes. "Tune" it's a pretty Jam packed word. I can see why that word excites you sSchind!