I have to agree with Kapp that the D is showing promise and there have been some improvements. There's more to do, yes, but I think it's farther along than the offense, which has frustrated me beyond belief. That's especially true with the OL, though I'm annoyed about some of the skill positions and even how some players are being utilized.
I think we Vikings fans have shown enough patience. Maybe it's time to be more demanding. Maybe not, I don't know. As I said, the situation is irritating.
It sure is and It's getting harder to be patient, although it's not like we really have more choice. Patient or demanding, the Vikes are going to do whatever they want to do...
I think the D is showing promise too. They definitely need work but they're trending upward. The offense has been very disappointing so far.
I agree that we've shown enough patience but unfortunately, it looks like we'll probably have to keep waiting for a winner.
Mothman wrote:
The problem is that the two of you have been debating different points altogether.
The 2014/2012 comparison began a few pages back when Kapp posted:
... and I responded...
Those are edits but the posts are still visible a few pages back. Anyway, from there, it somehow progressed into a comparison of the two teams and a disconnect emerged. I was arguing, and as far as I can tell, Purple Reign has been arguing all along, that Kapp's initial statement isn't true and the 2012 team was more competitive than the 2014 has been. In other words, the Vikings are not more competitive than they've been in five years. It's that simple and that's why Purple reign is saying Peterson can't be removed from the equation. The comparison was about which team was more competitive, not which team would fare better in a hyopthetical head-to-head confrontation. That whole aspect of the discussion came later. The argument about which team is better excluding Adrian Peterson is a completely different argument.
Does that help clear things up? Did I just make it worse?
