Vikings look like Super Bowl contenders in a lot of ways ...

[Mothman]

This is an interesting article from the Washington Post:

The Vikings look like Super Bowl contenders in a lot of ways. Except one.

[chicagopurple]

Yeah, that league high for allowing pressure on QB is going to cost us. Either Bradford is going to get hurt or become gun-shy. We just can afford it and unless they find some big talent off the street I think our RB corp is really going to have to shine in helping out in pass protection. In the old days you usually had a FullBack who could really help. Those days are over.

[mansquatch]

I've been saying this all season: Give it time. New OL coach, 2 new guys who were not on the team last year, RG played LG last year, now on top of it, new LT since starter is on IR. That is A LOT of change on a group the requires trust and playing time to achieve it's potential.

I don't think the ceiling is high for the current group, but I still believe we are in the valley of the season and we've yet to see the peak. (or small hill)

A positive is that in spite of this performance we are 3-0 AND our starting QB has yet to commit a turnover. These reasons for optimism.

[chicagopurple]

as long as Bradford doesnt get hurt in the process......

[IrishViking]

as long as Bradford doesnt get hurt in the process......

No QB ever got injuries off a hurry (barring late/illegal hits)

We have only given up 6 sacks and when they find their rhythm he is rarely touched.

[Mothman]

I've been saying this all season: Give it time. New OL coach, 2 new guys who were not on the team last year, RG played LG last year, now on top of it, new LT since starter is on IR. That is A LOT of change on a group the requires trust and playing time to achieve it's potential.

I don't think the ceiling is high for the current group, but I still believe we are in the valley of the season and we've yet to see the peak. (or small hill)

As the article says:

So how will the Vikings cope with seemingly having the Giants’ problem and the Cardinals problem? The only answer is to play better. Bradford has been under pressure at the second highest rate in the NFL (43.1 percent) and they also have the lowest yards per carry of any team in the league (2.1). That type of incompetence would be unprecedented for a Super Bowl offense in the modern era. They brought in linemen who have had successful years in the past with Andre Smith at right tackle and Alex Boone at left guard, however neither is playing close to that form.

The problem is Smith wasn't playing at that more successful level last year either. I think we all understand that the OL needs some time playing together and some time with their new coach and they probably aren't peaking yet (let's hope not). The question is: when they peak, will it be anywhere near enough? On top of that, there's the question of keeping Bradford upright while the OL tries to improve.

A positive is that in spite of this performance we are 3-0 AND our starting QB has yet to commit a turnover. These reasons for optimism.

They're reasons to feel good about where the team is now. I agree. After all, you can't do better than 3-0 after 3 games.

I just thought the article provided a nice outside perspective on where the team is and what it takes to go the distance. I think it illustrates that there IS reason for optimism but there's also a unit on the team that could sabotage the Vikings Super Bowl chances.

[Mothman]

No QB ever got injuries off a hurry (barring late/illegal hits)

We have only given up 6 sacks and when they find their rhythm he is rarely touched.

6 sacks but quite a few more hits, which can cause injuries.

[IrishViking]

6 sacks but quite a few more hits, which can cause injuries.

So can dropping back for a pass

Its worth noting on top of our struggle internally we also just faced back to back two of the better Dlines in the league. We should fare much better against the Giants. I am hopefully that they will protect Bradford enough this year

[halfgiz]

6 sacks but quite a few more hits, which can cause injuries.

We needed a decent backup offensive tackle due to injuries and Rick took care of it. Sean Hickey

[Mothman]

So can dropping back for a pass

I almost said the same thing.

Its worth noting on top of our struggle internally we also just faced back to back two of the better Dlines in the league. We should fare much better against the Giants. I am hopefully that they will protect Bradford enough this year

We'll see. I take little comfort in the quality of opponent argument because good defensive teams tend to be plentiful in the postseason. That's who the Vikes will likely need to be effective against if they want to win a championship.

Excuses and qualifications for the OL's performance aside, the bottom line is they simply need to be better and so does the offense as a whole. Winning the Super Bowl with an offense that can't even average 14 points a game is going to be a VERY tall order. Hopefully, we'll see improvement on Monday night and going forward.

[IrishViking]

But if the passing game finishes with 32 sacks and Bradford throws for 4200 yards and 23 TDs in 15 games are we really going to say those numbers are impossible to win with? Those arent world beating stats but a far cry from a crippled ineffectual unit. Idk, I do agree with the concerns for the running game but in the passing game it seems a little overstated.

[Nunin]

I've been saying this all season: Give it time. New OL coach, 2 new guys who were not on the team last year, RG played LG last year, now on top of it, new LT since starter is on IR. That is A LOT of change on a group the requires trust and playing time to achieve it's potential.

I don't think the ceiling is high for the current group, but I still believe we are in the valley of the season and we've yet to see the peak. (or small hill)

A positive is that in spite of this performance we are 3-0 AND our starting QB has yet to commit a turnover. These reasons for optimism.

Also the fact that they were synching up to 3 QBs in 3 weeks to begin the season. Not to make excuses, but there is plenty there to suggest they can make real improvement as lng as Bradford doesn't get killed in the process.

[Mothman]

But if the passing game finishes with 32 sacks and Bradford throws for 4200 yards and 23 TDs in 15 games are we really going to say those numbers are impossible to win with? Those arent world beating stats but a far cry from a crippled ineffectual unit. Idk, I do agree with the concerns for the running game but in the passing game it seems a little overstated.

Nobody is saying it's impossible, just much more difficult and less likely without better OL performance and more points from the offense. Don't you think they probably need to average more than 13 points a game or so on offense to win the Super Bowl? They almost certainly need to run the ball more effectively than they have in any of the first 3 games.

I don't understand the resistance to this idea when the OL play and struggles to score on offense are so obviously problematic. It's clearly an aspect of the team in serious need of improvement and a shortcoming that could seriously hurt their chances to win it all.

[Nunin]

Also, to Jim's point, regular season and stats won't mean jack come the playoffs. 1 one big hit, 1 big play can extend or end the season. Every defense will be above average, most likely. I'm not invested too heavily in this being THE year, in spite of the hot start. But I do believe it will be a defining/crossroads type of year for the crap they have been trotting out there for an offense the past 3 seasons.
If the offense doesn't get to a place of legitimacy by seasons end, I would be stunned not to see major changes. But as a fan of this franchise, I'm quite used to that stunned feeling

[IrishViking]

Nobody is saying it's impossible, just much more difficult and less likely without better OL performance and more points from the offense. Don't you think they probably need to average more than 13 points a game or so on offense to win the Super Bowl? They almost certainly need to run the ball more effectively than they have in any of the first 3 games.

I don't understand the resistance to this idea when the OL play and struggles to score on offense are so obviously problematic. It's clearly an aspect of the team in serious need of improvement and a shortcoming that could seriously hurt their chances to win it all.

Because by the numbers the oline play in the passing game isn't doing that poorly. They have turned in just as many duds and good performances (blanking the titans versus 4 in Bradford's first start) panthers 1st half versus second half. I agree on the running offense aspect, I just dont see the evidence that supports bardford being in danger or or passing attack being super anaemic yes I get 13 points a game. But that generalized pass and run. I think ir would be fairer to say or rushing offense is in dire straits and passing offense needs to tighten up a bit.

Edit, on phone