Bad news for the Vikings

[OldSchool101]

I think it is time to give the Vikings credit as a pretty damn good team.
And yes, better than the Packers.

While I do respect your opinion DNA I both agree and disagree. I'm not quite ready to concede that MN is "better" than GB. It's very early in the season and we have both watched many teams start fast only to hit a rut. MN is playoff caliber but also very beatable.
We sit here and contemplate week in and week out how inept our own team is in several different areas such as finishing games, defensive passing, poor coaching etc.. (we are all guilty)
But two things remain..
1. We just went to MN on their turf and lost by just 3 pts with an INT on our last drive (in MN territory).
2. In the years under AR that we have had a slow start. We have actually finished strong.
I think we are very equal to MN and until they beat us in GB? I'll take AR and GB any day of the week on neutral ground.

 

[Packerlifer]

Houston at Minnesota injury report: http://thevikingage.com/2016/10/08/texans-minnesota-vikings-injury-report/

 

[Raptorman]

More bad news. Vikings starting right tackle is being put on IR. So, that's 3 of the starting o-line out.

 

[Packerlifer]

More bad news. Vikings starting right tackle is being put on IR. So, that's 3 of the starting o-line out.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/10/10/vikings-put-andre-smith-on-injured-reserve/

 

[bigbubbatd]

More bad news. Vikings starting right tackle is being put on IR. So, that's 3 of the starting o-line out.

Doesn't seem to matter for your boys!

Also I thought Boone berger and fusco are still playing. Is one of those three out too?

 

[Raptorman]

Doesn't seem to matter for your boys!

Also I thought Boone berger and fusco are still playing. Is one of those three out too?

Fusco was out with a concussion.

 

[Shawnsta3]

I'm not completely convinced Kalil going down isn't addition by subtraction as well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not completely convinced Kalil going down isn't addition by subtraction as well.

I disagree as T.J. Clemmings is one if the worst left tackles in the league.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Fusco was out with a concussion.

Got it. I thought you meant down three the rest of the year. The only two things I can see slowing the Vikings right now is that oline and the kicker. However Bradford has been very good under pressure and their games are not close enough to rely on Walsh so they are probably fine

 

[Shawnsta3]

I disagree as T.J. Clemmings is one if the worst left tackles in the league.

After doing a little reading on Clemmings I'm inclined to agree with you. Though I already thought Kalil was a well below average LT the past two years.

 

[bigbubbatd]

After doing a little reading on Clemmings I'm inclined to agree with you. Though I already thought Kalil was a well below average LT the past two years.

Clemmings is not good. He was bad at RT last year. He moved to a harder position and is bad again. PFF had him rated as the 5th worst player last week

http://vikingswire.usatoday.com/201...s-named-fourth-worst-player-in-week-5-by-pff/

Minnesota is the worst rushing team in the NFL at 2.5 ypa. Against good pass rushing defenses (Packers, Texans) Bradford has been under constant pressure. Their offensive line was poor when healthy and it figures to struggle going forward but Bradford has been so quick and decisive they havent felt the pass protection problems. Man was I wrong on that Bradford signing because he looks like a different qb in Minnesota

 

[C-Lee]

Not trying to sound salty or anything, but I really think these guys will come down to earth pretty soon. This defense is 100% legit but I think this offense will crumble soon enough.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Vikings sign Jake Long. Not much to lose by signing him

 

[PackerDNA]

While I do respect your opinion DNA I both agree and disagree. I'm not quite ready to concede that MN is "better" than GB. It's very early in the season and we have both watched many teams start fast only to hit a rut. MN is playoff caliber but also very beatable.
We sit here and contemplate week in and week out how inept our own team is in several different areas such as finishing games, defensive passing, poor coaching etc.. (we are all guilty)
But two things remain..
1. We just went to MN on their turf and lost by just 3 pts with an INT on our last drive (in MN territory).
2. In the years under AR that we have had a slow start. We have actually finished strong.
I think we are very equal to MN and until they beat us in GB? I'll take AR and GB any day of the week on neutral ground.

Maybe beating us 10 in a row and winning the division 5 times in a row will open some eyes.
Cracks me up that what starts as "Super Bowl!!" here devolves into" hey we only lost by 3!" as the new standard to be excited about.

 

[Valhalla Express]

Has an NFL team ever put 15 players on injured reserve and still won a Super Bowl?

Yes. You guys. Super Bowl XLV. The Green Bay Packers went into the playoffs as a sixth seed. A very banged up sixth seed, but held it together. That "next man up" and "we are a team" mentality served your Packers well. The Packers went into the Super Bowl without Charles Woodson (arguably the Packers' most important defensive player) and Donald Driver (arguably the Packers' most important receiver) and they were still able to hold off the Steelers last minute drive in the 4th quarter and win 31-25.

The Vikings, under Zimmer, have that same mental attitude. It's one game at a time. Only look forward to the next opponent. As a football coach of over 20 years, I really respect the instilling of this kind of philosophy in the players. It's much the same as I instilled in my program... "Learn from the Past. Live in the Present. Prepare for the Future."

Good luck this week against the Cowboys... Dak Prescott and Ezekiel Elliott are forming quite the rookie-tandem from the Cowboys. Then it's on to a short week as you host the Bears on Thursday night.

SKOL!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Has an NFL team ever put 15 players on injured reserve and still won a Super Bowl?

Yes. You guys. Super Bowl XLV. The Green Bay Packers went into the playoffs as a sixth seed.

It was 16 that year, but I think we all stopped counting. Quality depth is really important in a season like that one. So far it appears that the Vikings depth, as well as the fact that they aren't afraid to go out and get players they need, is serving them well.

But aren't you guys only at like 6 on IR? Imagine 10 more.

I think if I was a Vikings fan, my biggest concern right now would be Bradford's long term health. With a very patched up OL and no AP, just how many hits can Bradford take until Shaun Hill is playing?

 

[bigbubbatd]

Maybe beating us 10 in a row and winning the division 5 times in a row will open some eyes.
Cracks me up that what starts as "Super Bowl!!" here devolves into" hey we only lost by 3!" as the new standard to be excited about.

We only lost by 3 isnt something people are saying should excite everyone but it should give pause to the crowd who wants to hand the division to the Vikings right now. The Packers lost on the road to a very good team and they had a chance at the end to tie it up but failed to execute. Their offense looked better against the Vikings than probably any other. In the game they played the Packers did not seem far behind the Vikings. In fact it is pretty easy to point to 1 or 2 plays in that game that changed everything

 

[PackerDNA]

The point stands . The team and fan base that does the most talking about winning titles can't 'execute' yet wants to point to losing a close game because they couldn't get the job done as proof of being contenders, while many refuse to credit the Vikings as being the better team now.

 

[swhitset]

The point stands . The team and fan base that does the most talking about winning titles can't 'execute' yet wants to point to losing a close game because they couldn't get the job done as proof of being contenders, while many refuse to credit the Vikings as being the better team now.

I don't think many serious fans are discounting the accomplishments of the Vikings. However, being a PACKER fan, while I am very critical of the struggles the Packers are having with the offense, I also recognize that the potential to get better is there. Those that point out how close the Viking game was are simply stating a fact. The gap between the two teams at least on that day did not seem all that great. Perhaps the Vikings are better right now, but since we are Packer fans it is not unreasonable to speculate about our chances of beating them.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

While the Vikings have also not beaten any top teams (besides the Packers) their margin of victory in those other 4 games, their win over us, as well as the way they dominated the Giants (common opponent), has me comfortable with saying, right now the Vikings are the better of the 2 teams. But I do think the Vikings turnover ratio has helped them considerably, while the Packers inconsistencies on offense and in the secondary has hurt them.

The good news for Packers fans is that we have the ability to clean up those mistakes on offense and in the secondary and be a much better team. The Vikings on the other hand seem to be playing at the top of their game right now.

 

[PFanCan]

... The Packers went into the Super Bowl without Charles Woodson ... and Donald Driver...

Technically speaking, the Packers went into the Super Bowl with those two players healthy. They both got injured during the Super Bowl.

I have watched that game many times over the past years. And, trust me, in every game Charles Woodson lands on his collar bone and breaks it. No matter how many times I scream to him not to make that dive!

 

[El Guapo]

I would say that the defending NFC champions were a top team earlier this season when the Vikings beat them, but hits to Cam kept adding up. Listen, the Vikings defense is legit from top to bottom. They put pressure on QBs and are playing good enough in the secondary to capitalize on that pressure. That's not likely to change. Turnovers aren't a gimmick as many on her seem to be touting, as some trick that will eventually elude this team. They won't continue at the same rate for sure, but unless injuries ravage the defense they will keep playing that way.

I agree about us having room for improvement. There's countless threads about that. The Vikings still have another level they could ascend to this season. Once Bradford knows the playbook better, he may get more out of all those WRs. Diggs, Charles Johnson, and Thelen won't be as electric as the Giants' trio but I think they could be more effective. Then add in Rudolph who is having a good season at TE. Furthermore, Cordarrelle has climbed out of the crypt and might have actually "figured it out." That leaves Treadwell to get some chances to contribute later in the season. The Vikings defense is about as good as it will get but there is a higher ceiling on their offense.....much of which as was pointed out, will depend on their band-aid OL.

 

[El Guapo]

I have watched that game many times over the past years. And, trust me, in every game Charles Woodson lands on his collar bone and breaks it. No matter how many times I scream to him not to make that dive!

He made a pretty good play on that one, as I remember.

 

[PackerDNA]

I don't think many serious fans are discounting the accomplishments of the Vikings. However, being a PACKER fan, while I am very critical of the struggles the Packers are having with the offense, I also recognize that the potential to get better is there. Those that point out how close the Viking game was are simply stating a fact. The gap between the two teams at least on that day did not seem all that great. Perhaps the Vikings are better right now, but since we are Packer fans it is not unreasonable to speculate about our chances of beating them.

I'm not giving us no chance of beating them , or improving enough to overtake them in December, so stick with what I
posted and not interpretations of it.
Here's your simple facts; they are currently better than us, based on performance, having beaten us on the field for the division title last year, and again having beaten us this year while outperforming us, despite having to overcome a lot of adversity.
There are Packer fans here and elsewhere who refuse to acknowledge these things, and sound like a bunch of pissy little jackasses because of it.
And if in your second sentence you were implying that I'm not a PACKER fan, I think you know what you can do with it.

 

[El Guapo]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...ings-new-england-patriots-pittsburgh-steelers
We've all discussed power rankings at length, but the sportwriters seem to think that the Vikings would beat the Packers again today/tomorrow/etc and so would seven other teams. Top ten is still better than bottom ten. Oh yeah, they don't mention a fleeting turnover margin. They mentioned a defense that is also allowing the fewest points per game, which in my opinion is the most important defensive stat.

1. Minnesota Vikings
2016 record: 5-0
Week 5 ranking: 5

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Is there any doubt Mike Zimmer is the league's front-runner for Coach of the Year right now? He lost his starting quarterback before the season started, yet has the Vikings unbeaten heading into a bye thanks to a defense that is allowing the fewest points per game. The Vikings ranked last in PPG allowed in 2013, the season before Zimmer arrived in Minneapolis.