Eagles @ Vikings Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 15

[Purple Reign]

Do you have a point to make? Just trollin? All your posts are about calls the Vikes got, that they usually don't. Or when they got a bad call, you like being sarcastic about it.

Probably this week it was more in response to all the 'the game is rigged' or 'the refs are against us' posts from last week more than anything. I like to think that I'm an objective fan and don't just see things one way. Sorry if I offended you.

[tmscr]

Such a nice game to watch. Years from now, people with look back and see 4 or so wins and think this team stunk, but they've been very competitive (with some tough teams) just about all season. They battle harder than just about any vikings team I can remember, considering their talent level. It's just too bad they blew so many leads. This team could easily be in the playoff chase.

I'm not sure how I feel about Frazier staying or getting the boot. The team is playing hard, they haven't quit. There was a rough patch where the vikings were kind of in a tailspin and embarrassed themselves. I think that had a lot to do with the turmoil at QB. But they've climbed out of it. I don't like that he shows so little emotion, but if the team is fighting every Sunday, I'm not sure he should be canned. Oh, and Cassel needs to be resigned for next season.

[tmscr]

Probably this week it was more in response to all the 'the game is rigged' or 'the refs are against us' posts from last week more than anything. I like to think that I'm an objective fan and don't just see things one way. Sorry if I offended you.

For as bad as the calls were against us last week, they were equally as bad FOR us this week. The PI call in the endzone was bogus. Some ticky tack personal foul calls. I also think the Eagles had actually picked up the first down twice on that series when we stopped them on 4th down. Some pretty bad ball spotting.

[yezzir]

Probably this week it was more in response to all the 'the game is rigged' or 'the refs are against us' posts from last week more than anything. I like to think that I'm an objective fan and don't just see things one way. Sorry if I offended you.

I think the main argument, is that some of these calls are SO ridiculous (especially after reviews), that it makes a fan wonder, regardless of the team the calls are helping.

[Just Me]

I still didn't get why the "taunting" penalty wasn't offset by the (non)call of unsportsmanlike conduct when the Eagle player shoved Simpson to the ground after the alleged taunting. I don't think the game was 'rigged' but those types of inconsistencies in referee's decisions drives me crazy sometimes.

I get that in a fast paced game, mistakes are going to occur, but still SMH over a fumble review (last game) that was clearly botched and a dead ball situation (taunting - this game) that they can't get right.

[Purple Reign]

I still didn't get why the "taunting" penalty wasn't offset by the (non)call of unsportsmanlike conduct when the Eagle player shoved Simpson to the ground after the alleged taunting. I don't think the game was 'rigged' but those types of inconsistencies in referee's decisions drives me crazy sometimes.

I get that in a fast paced game, mistakes are going to occur, but still SMH over a fumble review (last game) that was clearly botched and a dead ball situation (taunting - this game) that they can't get right.

Agreed - there are just too many inconsistent calls. But I'm not really sure what can be done about it when penalties like PI are interpretive by the officials. You see one where a defender is draped all over a receiver and no call, and then another where a defender just putting his hand on the receiver will get flagged for it. But yeah, the Gerhart fumble that wasn't overturned after review is a real head scratcher.

As far as the taunting penalty not being offset by the shove, I think that's the way it should be called. It really doesn't do any good to flag both players (unless the 2nd guy throws a punch or something really flagrant - the shove wasn't that bad I didn't think). I think the refs have been instructed to flag the instigator in a case like that. I know a lot of times the ref will only see the retaliator and flag him. I'm sure there are opposite views on this, but this is my opinion.

[PotGoblin]

Dallas is starting to choke against the Packers - even with a 23pt halftime lead

[Webbfann]

Do you mean "do I predict Vikings WIN every week"? I don't know, but I like to optimistic. I predicted this win because I have seen what Matt Cassel has done for us all year. While so many have poo-poohed him, I have thought he did an excellent job every time except the game after we slapped him in the face with a cold Freeman. I am not joking that I was going to predict a 400 yard game for him. He has clicked with our receivers from the start, who I think are a very talented group.

Hilarious. At first I didn't realize you were pimping yourself.

Honest answer: do you predict a Vikings' prediction every week regardless of the opponent and situation (injuries)?

[Purple Reign]

Do you mean "do I predict Vikings WIN every week"? I don't know, but I like to optimistic. I predicted this win because I have seen what Matt Cassel has done for us all year. While so many have poo-poohed him, I have thought he did an excellent job every time except the game after we slapped him in the face with a cold Freeman. I am not joking that I was going to predict a 400 yard game for him. He has clicked with our receivers from the start, who I think are a very talented group.

Can you elaborate on that? What do you mean by 'after we slapped him in the face with a cold Freeman'? Freeman played in the Giants game which was the game after Cassel started against the Panthers, which was arguably Cassel's worst game.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Being from Philly, beating the Eagles is like winning the Super Bowl for me, but it's just so typical of the Vikings to win a meaningless game and screw their draft pick up.

Mixed feelings.

Don't worry, you have a few more weeks to root for the Vikes to lose.

[Webbfann]

Despite being professionals, they are human beings too (at least some of them). When Cassel came in and won in London, he was rewarded by the Vikes signing Freeman with full expectation that he (Freeman) would be starting or competing for the starting job. THis was a slap in the face to Cassel, who turned in an understandably underwhelming performance the next week. Can you imagine what that must have been like for him, to think you are in the drivers seat with an excellent performance and our first win? That was a HUGE insult to a guy who had just shown that he deserved the job, and immediately there is someone dazed kid with ADHD in the locker room breathing down his neck for the job. And to his credit, he got over it and has performed well (and today, exceptionally well) ever since.

Can you elaborate on that? What do you mean by 'after we slapped him in the face with a cold Freeman'? Freeman played in the Giants game which was the game after Cassel started against the Panthers, which was arguably Cassel's worst game.

[Texas Vike]

Yes, that's what I meant. I was just wondering if you are one of these guys that always predicts a Vikings win, just out of homerism, in which case you'd have a poor record this year!

You're high on Cassel: do you think he's our starter for next year?

I think we need to re-sign him and draft a guy in the 2nd or 3rd; no one at the very top is a total slam dunk.

[quote="Webbfann"]Do you mean "do I predict Vikings WIN every week"? I don't know, but I like to optimistic. I predicted this win because I have seen what Matt Cassel has done for us all year. While so many have poo-poohed him, I have thought he did an excellent job every time except the game after we slapped him in the face with a cold Freeman. I am not joking that I was going to predict a 400 yard game for him. He has clicked with our receivers from the start, who I think are a very talented group.


[quote="Texas Vike"

[Purple Reign]

Despite being professionals, they are human beings too (at least some of them). When Cassel came in and won in London, he was rewarded by the Vikes signing Freeman with full expectation that he (Freeman) would be starting or competing for the starting job. THis was a slap in the face to Cassel, who turned in an understandably underwhelming performance the next week. Can you imagine what that must have been like for him, to think you are in the drivers seat with an excellent performance and our first win? That was a HUGE insult to a guy who had just shown that he deserved the job, and immediately there is someone dazed kid with ADHD in the locker room breathing down his neck for the job. And to his credit, he got over it and has performed well (and today, exceptionally well) ever since.

Except that Cassel was signed to be our backup qb, not a starter. Yeah, he won the game against Pittsburgh and was rewarded with a start the next game, but that doesn't mean that the Vikings shouldn't try to improve themselves by getting a 'starting' qb. So are you saying because they signed Freeman that that is the reason Cassel didn't perform very well against the Panthers? Every player on the team is competing for their job and I don't think you can use signing Freeman as an excuse for his bad game. Now I'm not saying that I agree with throwing him into a game when he didn't really have time to learn the offense, but I understand the logic that they wanted to see what Freeman would do in a game to see if he was their qb of the future. As I said, Cassel was signed to primarily be a backup and not a starter so I don't really see it as a slap in the face. If anything, I would call it a slap in Ponder's face, not Cassel's.

[yezzir]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp-ASlJMBdg#t=46

[purpletinted66]

peterson in with today's playcalling and sky's the limit: i admit the eagles changed their plans to guard more against the pass instead of stacking the box, but, to be able to emphasize the pass as the chief threat is what unleashes the possibilities of a.p.'s power