The Viking Age is Upon Us

[Thaumaturgist]

The Viking Age is upon Us.
Might as well turn this into a Packer Message board

I've been thinking the same thing lately. I'm dang tired about hearing how great the packers are on OUR message board.

[Jordysghost]

It's correct:

In 2011, they lost to the Giants and Rodgers threw 1 INT
In 2012, they beat the Vikings and lost to the 49ers. Rodgers threw 1 INT in that loss.
In 2013, they lost to SF again.
In 2014, they beat Dallas and lost to Seattle. Rodgers threw 2 picks against the Seahawks.

2-4, 4 interceptions.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... elog/post/

I was mainly saying the idea that Rodgers is 'trying to catch Favre' was incorrect. As it is pretty unlikely he ends his career with similar postseason numbers as the Favrester.

[cstelter]

I've been thinking the same thing lately. I'm dang tired about hearing how great the packers are on OUR message board.

Erm-- that's not how I interpreted Purple bruise's perspective. 'Age of Vikings' sounds like the type of 'epic' nonsense that Packer fans seem to feed on. e.g.Brett Favre 4 ever or 'decade of dominance' I may have read his intent wrongly though.

[Mothman]

I've been thinking the same thing lately. I'm dang tired about hearing how great the packers are on OUR message board.

Then make more posts about the Vikings, guys.

[Mothman]

Here's a link to an article about the Vikings defense that might help get this thread back on track:

http://espn.go.com/blog/minnesota-vikin ... -nfls-best

The Vikings are the only team in the league not to allow at least 24 points in a game this season. They allowed their first 300-yard passer when Derek Carr racked up garbage-time yards to get to 302 on Sunday, and they've only let one running back go over 100 yards since Carlos Hyde gashed them for 168 in their Monday Night Football season opener. And because of the defense (and Adrian Peterson), the Vikings are 7-2, leading the NFC North before a pivotal game against the Green Bay Packers this Sunday.

So why has the group been so good? Here are five things to know about the Vikings' defense:

More at the link (obviously).

[losperros]

Here's a link to an article about the Vikings defense that might help get this thread back on track:

http://espn.go.com/blog/minnesota-vikin ... -nfls-best

So why has the group been so good? Here are five things to know about the Vikings' defense:

You're right, Jim. This is an interesting article. I have to agree with the five points that state why the Vikings defense is working.

I've said this before but I also think Zimmer has done an impressive job at uniting the team. These guys play hard with and for each other.

Back to the Vikings Age article, which I don't think glorifies the team. Among the justifiable criticisms:

This controlled approach has lifted some of the pressure off Bridgewater and has served to neutralize a Vikings offensive line that has tackles (Matt Kalil and especially rookie T.J. Clemmings) who can be vulnerable in pass protection, and an interior (guards Mike Harris and Brandon Fusco plus backup center Joe Berger) that lacks athleticism.

I cannot agree enough about the above statement, especially the part about the interior of the OL lacking athleticism. In my view, that's been a problem for quite some time.

[Thaumaturgist]

Erm-- that's not how I interpreted Purple bruise's perspective. 'Age of Vikings' sounds like the type of 'epic' nonsense that Packer fans seem to feed on. e.g.Brett Favre 4 ever or 'decade of dominance' I may have read his intent wrongly though.

You're probably right! My point still stands though.

[mansquatch]

It's correct:

In 2011, they lost to the Giants and Rodgers threw 1 INT
In 2012, they beat the Vikings and lost to the 49ers. Rodgers threw 1 INT in that loss.
In 2013, they lost to SF again.
In 2014, they beat Dallas and lost to Seattle. Rodgers threw 2 picks against the Seahawks.

2-4, 4 interceptions.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... elog/post/

This is why I say stats do not matter as much as what you see with your eyes. Rogers may not have been the only reason they lost those games, but the fact is, outside of 2010, the Roger's led Packers have a rather consistent history of playoff collapses. The 2011 loss is especially significant. They went 15-1 that season and then lost their first playoff game. (They hold the dubious honor of being the only 15-1 team to not win a playoff game.) My view of this is that the reason they are choking in the playoffs has more to do with their poor defensive play. Favre's teams IMO had a different set of issues.

Favre was much more of gunslinger than Rogers, but does anyone doubt that when the game is on the line Favre brings a certain gravitas of positives as well as his negatives? We got burned in OT against the Saints in 2009 by one of those picks, but we also won in the regular season against SF that year with a pass that remains to this day the single greatest football play I've ever seen. I can never say Favre isn't one of the all time greats and I hated him for over a decade. Rogers on his current trajectory is in the same conversation, but to say one is better than the other, I'm not sure.

IMO though, Brady is the GOAT, at least today.

[Jordysghost]

This is why I say stats do not matter as much as what you see with your eyes. Rogers may not have been the only reason they lost those games, but the fact is, outside of 2010, the Roger's led Packers have a rather consistent history of playoff collapses. The 2011 loss is especially significant. They went 15-1 that season and then lost their first playoff game. (They hold the dubious honor of being the only 15-1 team to not win a playoff game.) My view of this is that the reason they are choking in the playoffs has more to do with their poor defensive play. Favre's teams IMO had a different set of issues.

Favre was much more of gunslinger than Rogers, but does anyone doubt that when the game is on the line Favre brings a certain gravitas of positives as well as his negatives? We got burned in OT against the Saints in 2009 by one of those picks, but we also won in the regular season against SF that year with a pass that remains to this day the single greatest football play I've ever seen. I can never say Favre isn't one of the all time greats and I hated him for over a decade. Rogers on his current trajectory is in the same conversation, but to say one is better than the other, I'm not sure.

IMO though, Brady is the GOAT, at least today.

There is a fair argument for saying that Favres negatives in the clutch far outweighed his positives.

[IrishViking]

There is a fair argument for saying that Favres negatives in the clutch far outweighed his positives.

No Argument on Rodgers Talent but if they were to end football today, I don't think Aaron has the "time in" to be in the convo for GOAT(s) and everything you are saying is based on him continue to play at a high level. But how long does a slump have to last until its the new norm? I am not saying Aaron wont get back on track but as of right now, Aaron is not playing very well. I would be shocked beyond reason if he didn't recover but every player has that point at which their ceiling starts to descend. I personally think that 2011 Rodgers was the Peak, and not that he is dropping off, just that, that was the best he will ever have been.

[Jordysghost]

Alot of circumstance went in in to 2011 numbers, but I think im not really grasping your point clearly, sure it could be the best he ever attains, then again, it could not be one day, we wont know until it is all said and done. I personally think that last year he was moving around and seeing the field as well as he ever had, and I felt similar the first 6 games of this season, despite our underwhelming passing game. (Which is underwhelming on account of multiple factors, I fear)

As to his slump, Im not worried about him specifically, he has gone through slumps before believe it or not. His numbers on the season are still pretty impressive, even in a slump.

Im saying the word 'slump' far too much.

As to where Rodgers stacks up in the GOAT talk, well I disagree with you, but ill save it for another more appropriate thread.

[Just Me]

Rodgers has been great. Seriously, his stats are out of this world, he has a Super Bowl win... he's been an excellent player so far and the less said about Favre, the better (I'm not a fan).

Don't let him fool you, Jordy! This used to be Jim's avatar!




<Cringes> waiting to be banned for the heresy I just committed...

[Mothman]

Don't let him fool you, Jordy! This used to be Jim's avatar!




<Cringes> waiting to be banned for the heresy I just committed...

[PurpleMustReign]

Don't let him fool you, Jordy! This used to be Jim's avatar!




<Cringes> waiting to be banned for the heresy I just committed... [emoji14]

Haha... We used to call Jim "Jim Favre"... We should start doing that again.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[mansquatch]

Haha... We used to call Jim "Jim Favre"... We should start doing that again.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Now the thread is back on track.