Vikings Message Board.Com

DKSweets wrote:Rough game.

*Xavier Rhodes and Harrison Smith continue to look like the foundation of a secondary that can be relied on for years. Josh Robinson got back to playing good football, too.
*Charles Johnson is looking like a nice pickup. He's not going to be a number one guy, which we still desperately need, but he is definitely an asset.
*Kyle Rudolph played hard. It was nice to have him back, even if he isn't 100% yet.
*Cordarrelle Patterson clearly isn't healthy, but he was giving everything he had on the field.
*Our D-Line played well. They were left to get the pressure and send everybody else in coverage for most of the day, and they did well.
*Our D as a whole was good enough to win.

Well, they were competitive but I can't agree that they were good enough to win because they folded with the game on the line. I know that sounds harsh but hat isn't good enough to win. When the offense gets within one score and the defense needs to get a stop to get the ball back, they have to find a way to get that done.

-Teddy thinks his receivers are all as tall as Megatron. HIT THE CHEST, DUDE.

He clearly needs to work on his accuracy and I pray he can improve it because if not, he's going to be another QB misfire for the Vikings.

It's hard to be too upset since we stopped the massacre that so many were predicting, but it's still very disappointing. This is another loss that has false promise. We held Tom Brady to under 150 yards and 1 TD. We stopped Brees for going over 300 at home in the first time since the middle of 2012. Close but not good enough has been the story against elite QBs this season.

Holding Brady under 150 yards in a blowout victory for the Patriots wasn't a big achievement as far as I'm concerned. NE had a huge lead and they ran all over the Vikes defense. I felt that Brady didn't throw for much because he didn't need to throw for much.

Brees was 7 yards short of 300 in the NO game so holding him under that benchmark seems like a pretty hollow statistical victory to me too. I mean no offense, I just I can't hang my hat or my hopes on that stuff.

This is a fanbase that really needs something to embrace, and since Peterson left the field after St. Louis, there hasn't been much.

Exactly. They were very competitive today, and that's encouraging, however I think we can probably agree that close but not good enough" has been the story way too often these past two seasons.

If Teddy really starts to come along over these next 5 games, that would give us something to embrace.

I'm not trying to swim upstream, but moral victories still blow...

...wisdom

Mothman wrote:Well, they were competitive but I can't agree that they were good enough to win because they folded with the game on the line. I know that sounds harsh but hat isn't good enough to win. When the offense gets within one score and the defense needs to get a stop to get the ball back, they have to find a way to get that done.

With the way that the defense played today, a league-average offense should have been able to win the game. To judge the defense off of the last 3 instead of the first 57 is a bit unfair. As Kapp said, the defense was put in a rough position. I didn't say the defense dominated...but all-in-all, they were good enough for us to win the game.

Holding Brady under 150 yards in a blowout victory for the Patriots wasn't a big achievement as far as I'm concerned. NE had a huge lead and they ran all over the Vikes defense. I felt that Brady didn't throw for much because he didn't need to throw for much.

Brees was 7 yards short of 300 in the NO game so holding him under that benchmark seems like a pretty hollow statistical victory to me too. I mean no offense, I just I can't hang my hat or my hopes on that stuff.

"False promise."

Exactly. They were very competitive today, and that's encouraging, however I think we can probably agree that close but not good enough" has been the story way too often these past two seasons.

If Teddy really starts to come along over these next 5 games, that would give us something to embrace.

I'm hoping, but at this point, I'm not sure if it's even worth getting my hopes up for...

This was a team loss. The offense let the defense down throughout the game, the defense let the offense down at the end of the game. I thought there was a lot of positives to take away from this game, and still some things that need polishing.

Sorry, but I don't see a reason to be optimistic.

We lost. We lost to our most hated rival - at home for the second straight year. This is yet another year where we will have a losing record in our division (quite possibly, a winless record). This is yet another year the Packers have swept us. This is yet another year where will not win the division. This is yet another year where will have a losing record at the end of the year (it is going to happen). Minnesota: redundancy at its finest.

I never expected this team to be elite, but come the heck on. Every crucial third down, we choke. Honestly, in my eye, the defense isn't great. I couldn't care less about stats - the same stupid stuff happens. We cannot contain the QB. We cannot get off the field on third down. We cannot defend against the screen. I am tired of it. It is like slowly beating your head against a brick wall - every single week.

Offensively, we are still a mess. Our offensive line is a complete regressive mess. Matt Kalil is finished. I refuse to stick up for him any longer. How Charlie Johnson remains in the NFL is a mystery to me.

Teddy needs to hit open receivers - no excuses. At least he keeps his eyes down the field and handles the blitz well. Definitely has the ability to improve over the course of the rest of the season and the off-season.

I admire the optimism, but personally, I don't see it. The only hope I have is we have a QB that we can build around - if we actually start building around him (I am looking at you o-linemen).

DKSweets wrote:With the way that the defense played today, a league-average offense should have been able to win the game. To judge the defense off of the last 3 instead of the first 57 is a bit unfair. As Kapp said, the defense was put in a rough position.

I didn't say the defense dominated...but all-in-all, they were good enough for us to win the game.

I'm not judging the defense's whole performance based on the final minutes but to me, "good enough to win" literally means "good enough to win". When they defense failed to stop the Packers in the game's most crucial moments, that wasn't good enough to win. It was good enough to lose a close game. It's easy to say a league-average offense should have been able to win the game but it seems to me that 21 points is probably right around the league average for scoring per game. I'm not putting the loss on any one unit but the defense doesn't deserve a pass just because they held GB to 24 points.

Lacy rushed a for season high 125 yards on 25 carries. That was a big factor in this game, especially in it's final moments. when a back has that kind of day, it's an indication that the defense needed to play better.

where was our running game. Zim just seems to have handed the ball to Teddy and said , "lets see what you can do kid...." we had many possessions in a ow with no runs to keep the Defense honest. we may not have a great RB but you have to mix it up a bit.

The Pack doesnt have a real running game, but we seem to help them find one.....

Does Teddy over throw all his receivers so far over their heads on purpose? Was everyone really covered that well and its just his way of throwing the ball away??? Or is he really as raw a talent as he looks?

To pin this loss on the defense is ridiculous. The Packers' offense is either the best in the league, or a close second. And we held them to less than 30 points and nearly equaled them in yardage and time of possession. That is a hell of a defensive effort. We lost primarily because we couldn't make enough plays against the Packers' 25th-ranked defense. And we had chances. Plenty of them.

Here's the other thing that needs to be said. All the hand-wringing that's going on around here is masking the fact that this team is at least competitive ... WHICH WE HAVE NOT BEEN FOR FOUR OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS. The offense has played without Matt Cassel, Brandon Fusco, Kyle Rudolph and none other than Adrian Peterson for most of this season. That has caused us to play rookies and journeymen in key positions, and guess what? We're not terribly good on offense. Injuries are no excuse, but it gets old when people refuse to acknowledge ANY progress. This is not a great defense yet, but it's a good defense.

Bottom line: This team is more competitive than it's been in five years. Period. Disagree if you want. I don't care. Making the playoffs was a long shot BEFORE all the injuries. It's simply been a pipe dream since. Progress is all we can hope for this year. Rome wasn't built in a day. I believe brighter days are ahead. We don't have enough players yet, but I believe we have the right coach, which to me means we're headed in the right direction.

All of you who think the sky is falling, well, be sure to grab an umbrella.

Mothman wrote: "Right now"? It's here all the time. I've never fully understood it. I guess everyone handles the emotional swings of football fandom differently.

I didn't get to actually see too much of the game but from what I saw and heard, the Vikes left a few too many opportunities on the table. At least they were competitive but they still ended up 4-7 and they don't have a divisional win yet. The most disappointing thing to me is that the defense couldn't stop GB's running game at the end when it counted.

I was surprised to see so much negativity on here after the game. It was disappointing to lose to the Pack, but they were a team on a tremendous offensive roll coming in and we made them work for every score. Teddy started terrible but he settled down and had a number of very long drives for scores, and looked pretty good. The secondary played tremendous today. There are always negatives that can be taken from every game, but we just took a team that was scoring 50 pts per first half before this game and came within a defensive stop of winning this game at the end. The worst thing about this game was the pencil necked, sweater vest wearing Packer fan who didn't know the rules of football sitting next to me at the bar. Annoyed the hell out of me. (I guess I have some negativity also)

J. Kapp 11 wrote:To pin this loss on the defense is ridiculous. The Packers' offense is either the best in the league, or a close second. And we held them to less than 30 points and nearly equaled them in yardage and time of possession. That is a hell of a defensive effort. We lost primarily because we couldn't make enough plays against the Packers' 25th-ranked defense. And we had chances. Plenty of them.

Here's the other thing that needs to be said. All the hand-wringing that's going on around here is masking the fact that this team is at least competitive ... WHICH WE HAVE NOT BEEN FOR FOUR OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS. The offense has played without Matt Cassel, Brandon Fusco, Kyle Rudolph and none other than Adrian Peterson for most of this season. That has caused us to play rookies and journeymen in key positions, and guess what? We're not terribly good on offense. Injuries are no excuse, but it gets old when people refuse to acknowledge ANY progress. This is not a great defense yet, but it's a good defense.

Bottom line: This team is more competitive than it's been in five years. Period. Disagree if you want. I don't care. Making the playoffs was a long shot BEFORE all the injuries. It's simply been a pipe dream since. Progress is all we can hope for this year. Rome wasn't built in a day. I believe brighter days are ahead. We don't have enough players yet, but I believe we have the right coach, which to me means we're headed in the right direction.

All of you who think the sky is falling, well, be sure to grab an umbrella.

What he said!

J. Kapp 11 wrote:Here's the other thing that needs to be said. All the hand-wringing that's going on around here is masking the fact that this team is at least competitive ... WHICH WE HAVE NOT BEEN FOR FOUR OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS. The offense has played without Matt Cassel, Brandon Fusco, Kyle Rudolph and none other than Adrian Peterson for most of this season. That has caused us to play rookies and journeymen in key positions, and guess what? We're not terribly good on offense. Injuries are no excuse, but it gets old when people refuse to acknowledge ANY progress. This is not a great defense yet, but it's a good defense.

Losing Adrian Peterson has been huge, more than I expected, and the offense has paid for it. The RB position may not have the star luster it used to in the NFL, but we're talking about the hardest pure runner out of the backfield in the business being gone. As I pointed out in another thread, the Vikings offense has no real identity without AD.

I also believe that losing Fusco has hurt the right side of the OL more than most of us can imagine.

Also, I wonder if a healthy Sharif Floyd being in there today would have helped. Floyd has been playing lights out football, in my view.

losperros wrote: Losing Adrian Peterson has been huge, more than I expected, and the offense has paid for it. The RB position may not have the star luster it used to in the NFL, but we're talking about the hardest pure runner out of the backfield in the business being gone. As I pointed out in another thread, the Vikings offense has no real identity without AD.

I also believe that losing Fusco has hurt the right side of the OL more than most of us can imagine.

Also, I wonder if a healthy Sharif Floyd being in there today would have helped. Floyd has been playing lights out football, in my view.

I look at it this way.

Norv Turner's offenses have always featured a solid running back and a serious threat at tight end. Because of the injuries to Peterson (best back in the league) and Rudolph (Pro Bowler), Turner has had to turn to a rookie at RB and a guy with 11 career receptions at TE. Add a rookie QB, and it's a formula for a struggling offense.

Floyd likely would have helped, but to what degree? Hard to say. Maybe we stop the Pack late in the game, maybe we don't.

chicagopurple wrote:where was our running game.

Suspended and probably hanging out somewhere in Texas.

Mothman wrote:

When did that ever stop Brady and NE from running up the score? IMO, the defense played well in that game. If not for the blocked FG, the halftime score would have been 17-10 instead of 24-7. The defense only allowed 2 FG's the rest of the game. Both FG's were setup by an INT and a long punt return.

Overall it was a pretty good showing. We definitely proved something to a lot of packer fans. Living in Wisconsin I heard the same crap all week. That they were gonna throw all over us, drop 50, and blow us out. Well after the game they must realize that our defense is no pushover like last year.