Who's better than the Vikings?

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by Mothman »

Fuel for optimism:

Souhan: Who's better than the Vikings?
We know who dabs.

But who’s got dibs?

The Carolina Panthers were the best team in the 2015 regular season, good enough to make their celebrations notorious. The Denver Broncos were the best team in the playoffs, beating Ben Roethlisberger, Tom Brady and Cam newton in succession without allowing any of them to produce more than 18 points.

Today, with Peyton Manning headed toward retirement, the Broncos will not be considered the team to beat in 2016.

So, once Manning retires, who in the NFL will be clearly better than the Minnesota Vikings?
Dmizzle0
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 5:03 pm
x 51

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by Dmizzle0 »

The Minnesota Vikings biggest opponents will be ................The Minnesota Vikings! If the Vikings learn to stop shooting themselves in the foot, they'll be alright next year.
IrishViking
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by IrishViking »

Off the top of my head here are the teams that could be as good, better than, or far better than the Vikings with MINOR adjustments; New England, Kansas City, Seahawks, Packers, Steelers, Bengals, Panthers, Rams, Detroit, Chicago.
The Breeze
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4016
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: So. Utah

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by The Breeze »

Better at what? ;)
They have yet to score an offensive TD against Seattle in two tries and have beaten GB once since Zimmer was hired.
Any given sunday....
I think there is a solid handful of teams capable of winning it all. Getting there is the hardest part. Winning that one game is just like any other game in terms of what needs to happen.
I think the Vikes are as good as any team on their best day, but their bad days are probably a bit worse than some of the more experienced playoff teams in general.
Sea, Pitt, Den, NE etc.
I expect them to take a big step next season....hopefully some good fortune and fortunate bounces along the way.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by mansquatch »

I'll say this, this is the first year in a long time where such talk is not just outright ridiculous.

What needs to happen has been beaten to death on here for awhile now so it isn't really worth rehashing in this thread.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by losperros »

It's mental masturbation at this point. I remember when the 2010 Vikings were "all in" because the 2009 version had lost the Championship game by a hair. We saw how that turned out.

Let's see what happens in the off season. Then we'll know more about the team's progress.
Demi
Commissioner
Posts: 23785
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
x 8

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by Demi »

Wow, already an established team? I think there are a half dozen teams you can rely on to stay about the same, barring injuries to their franchise QBs. I'm not sure the Vikings are reliable enough to pencil them in for a playoff spot. This doesn't strike me as a team that's guaranteed a wild card spot. The offense could continue to struggle, the QB could continue to struggle...or possibly even take a step back. The defense played lights out, and should continue to. But they could have issues too if some holes aren't plugged up, with teams having two years of tape on Zimmer and the personnel.

This team has pulled this trick too many times to buy in now...a couple times we were on the rise, one of the youngest teams, only to come back the next season and fall on their face.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by Mothman »

Demi wrote:Wow, already an established team? I think there are a half dozen teams you can rely on to stay about the same, barring injuries to their franchise QBs. I'm not sure the Vikings are reliable enough to pencil them in for a playoff spot. This doesn't strike me as a team that's guaranteed a wild card spot. The offense could continue to struggle, the QB could continue to struggle...or possibly even take a step back. The defense played lights out, and should continue to. But they could have issues too if some holes aren't plugged up, with teams having two years of tape on Zimmer and the personnel.

This team has pulled this trick too many times to buy in now...a couple times we were on the rise, one of the youngest teams, only to come back the next season and fall on their face.
That's how I feel about it too. Their success seems precarious right now and they could easily take a step back. There might be a dozen or more teams better than the Vikes next year or they might be the best and win it all but at this point, they still ahve some big question marks and a lot to prove.
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by losperros »

Demi wrote:This team has pulled this trick too many times to buy in now...a couple times we were on the rise, one of the youngest teams, only to come back the next season and fall on their face.
Well said. Let's not forget we're all Vikings fans and we've seen wishful thinking scenarios turn into clunkers in a hurry.

I think there are some big fixes still needed on the team. Can they do it all in one year? They haven't been able to do it in the past.
User avatar
chicagopurple
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
x 88

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by chicagopurple »

Delusions of glory here lately. We have No OL, we have a very questionable QB, a middling receiver corp. A RB who wants to be the center of the team but has a knack of fumbling away the play-off hopes, and an OC who may not know how to utilize the odd mix of players he is dealt. The one seemingly strong point is the defense. Special teams may also be reworked a bit given their contribution to the seasons end.
The Breeze
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4016
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: So. Utah

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by The Breeze »

I'm not ready to knock the receiving corp just yet, with or without Wallace. A trio of Cotchery, Ginn and a guy named Brown just started in the SB on the league's best offense. Meanwhile the ability of their TE opened up a lot of opportunity for them.
IMO, there is no real way to even properly diagnose the offense until the line can hold up better. No way can I get too high on this group yet, other than to say the D is top tier and the return game the same.
The offense could be much more functional on a whole or there could be undeniable need for serious changes.
Either way, I think the running and kicking game will still keep them afloat and relevant while the other stuff plays out.
shannontw
Veteran
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:41 pm

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by shannontw »

lets see here, to win 11 games and win the division, and to come a FG kick away to advancing. We have a great coaching staff. a good young core and good depth. We have cap space and a GM known to making solid moves in the NFL draft and yall think we going to take a step back. this is a negative Vikings message board. I saw one guy mention Detroit. LOL calvin Johnson just retired.
User avatar
chicagopurple
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
x 88

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by chicagopurple »

luckily the rest of our division is floundering. Detroit is, well, Detroit...doomed to failure. THeir window for success is closing. Green Bay has some serious rebuilding to do. The Bears have more holes then Obama's foreign policy program. So, the Vikes should have a great chance of taking the division. But, I dont buy that we have a great yourg core on Offense. Defense, sure...not Offense. The O has holes to fill and some young guys that still have a bunch to prove.
IrishViking
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by IrishViking »

chicagopurple wrote:luckily the rest of our division is floundering. Detroit is, well, Detroit...doomed to failure. THeir window for success is closing. Green Bay has some serious rebuilding to do. The Bears have more holes then Obama's foreign policy program. So, the Vikes should have a great chance of taking the division. But, I dont buy that we have a great yourg core on Offense. Defense, sure...not Offense. The O has holes to fill and some young guys that still have a bunch to prove.

I guess I just don't see the rebuilding issues in our division. Our entire division is essentially an Oline short of creaming each other. Could you imagine The Packers, Lions, Or Bears with the oline we are hoping to have next year. I get it that the bottom lines are wins but we were a bad bounce away from losing to St. Louis (LA?) chicago the first time and KC. That would have meant 8-8. I certainly think we are a team on the rise but I think that we are essentially a barely top 15 team that got some lucky bounces.
User avatar
halfgiz
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2289
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pm
x 111

Re: Who's better than the Vikings?

Post by halfgiz »

Injuries is going to be a big factor in that question. What would the panthers have been with Newton injured or the Packers with Rodgers injured?
Look how injuries hampered our OL this year.
I like a lot of teams for next year.
Post Reply