Poor Vikings.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

Why would Petterson get any blame? None of his fumbles were lost.

Whether the fumbles were directly his fault or not he spent the last part of the 3rd quarter and early part of the 4th quarter watching so someone must have wondered what was going on with him.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

He said in his post he is a Packers fan.

I see no problems in wondering if the better team lost when the total yardage is 475-257 and time of possession is 36.49 to 27.56 despite the Saints getting the free possession in OT.

The Vikings gave the Saints the game, the Saints certainly didnt go out and take it.

But that is how Saints played all year. They gave up the yardage but they got the takeaways. So the Saints played their game and won.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

But that is how Saints played all year. They gave up the yardage but they got the takeaways. So the Saints played their game and won.

Saints average 403 yards of offense per game and gave up 357 yards per game. Pretty sure they werent getting outgained by 200+ yards every game.

[jaxmagicman]

I was actually rooting for the Vikings because I wanted to see Favre vs Manning. My friend talked me into that being the idea match-up. I just never felt, until that final drive that the Vikings could win the game. They seemed to turn the ball over when they needed to hold on to it. To me, I don't care how many yards you get, if you turn the ball over you did not play a good game.

And maybe some of the yardage outgained could be attributed to giving the Saints great field position. The Saints didn't have to go far to score, so who knows what would have happened if they had to.

[jbergey22]

I agree Tos are a huge part of the game. I'm just making the point that most of the time teams arent going to have 5 TOs and still be in position to win the game.

Yes the Saints did have a short field a few times during the game but they really werent moving the ball that effectively for the most part. Vikings averaged 5.8 yards per play while the Saints averaged 4.7 yards per play.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I agree Tos are a huge part of the game. I'm just making the point that most of the time teams arent going to have 5 TOs and still be in position to win the game.

Yes the Saints did have a short field a few times during the game but they really werent moving the ball that effectively for the most part. Vikings averaged 5.8 yards per play while the Saints averaged 4.7 yards per play.

I agree that your Defense played spectacular. They did a lot with what little they were given. Your offense, even though they gained yardage played terrible. They gave the ball away 5 times and the 2 AP fumbles should have been recovered by the Saints if they did not try to pick it up an run.

[TGH-Adfabre]

I was rooting for Favre/Manning but the Vikings blew it. I was livid, mishandling the ball that many times and still go to O.T. bone heads.

The Super Bowl looks like it will be a good one though.

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by Beavis Christ

The Super Bowl looks like it will be a good one though.

Yeah...I'm stoked for U2.

[pstrickert]

Everything is magnified in playoff games, particularly in OT. The refs, because they're human, will make bad calls. Presumably, the bad calls even out over the course of a game or season. But in an OT playoff game, there is little or no opportunity for a team to overcome bad calls (or non-calls).

On a huge non-call in the MINN-NO game, here's an interesting column: Low moment: Missed call on Favre hit inexcusable - NFL - CBSSports.com Football

This comes two weeks after the refs missed two infractions in OT in the GB-AZ game.

[stevebydac]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Do some of us forget these things or just have selective memory? One play doesnt decide a game and never will.

I agree with you that they were a few players who messed up for the Vikes. But it comes back to Favre for two reasons IMO:

1. He does this nearly every year. The final game of his teams' seasons come down to him throwing one or multiple bad picks at the worst times. From 1999-2010, he has thrown 22 TDs and 21 INTs in the postseason. That's 10 games of history -- he's not a great quarterback, the postseason numbers don't lie. He always hurts his team in the biggest game possible. It's inevitable, every year.

2. His self-centered act is so annoying to so many people. Will he or won't retire again...and again. Skipping training camp while his teammates are busting their butts in the heat of July/August. Throwing a tantrum when Childress tried to remove him from the game. Even yesterday, making a point to the press about how he was hurt, making an excuse. I've been a Pats fan forever, and I've NEVER heard Brady mention in a post-game presser a bump or bruise as a reason why he didn't perform well. Manning either.

Favre has accumulated big stats in the regular season because he's been fortunate physically. But I could name 20 QBS in history, at least, who I'd pick in a big game over Favre. Manning, Brady, Montana, Young, Starr, Staubach, Bradshaw, Elway, Aikman, Bob Griese, Stabler, Big Ben, Phil Simms, Moon, ...

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by pstrickert

Everything is magnified in playoff games, particularly in OT. The refs, because they're human, will make bad calls. Presumably, the bad calls even out over the course of a game or season. But in an OT playoff game, there is little or no opportunity for a team to overcome bad calls (or non-calls).

On a huge non-call in the MINN-NO game, here's an interesting column: Low moment: Missed call on Favre hit inexcusable - NFL - CBSSports.com Football

This comes two weeks after the refs missed two infractions in OT in the GB-AZ game.

No...no...no.

I do not see that as being a non-call or even a late hit. If it's a non-call, it was a good call. It should not have been a late hit.

I'll say it again. I was generally pleased with the officiating in that game. Was it perfect? No. But it was 110x better than most games I watch that involve the Vikings.

[pstrickert]

Originally Posted by pstrickert

Everything is magnified in playoff games, particularly in OT. The refs, because they're human, will make bad calls. Presumably, the bad calls even out over the course of a game or season. But in an OT playoff game, there is little or no opportunity for a team to overcome bad calls (or non-calls).

On a huge non-call in the MINN-NO game, here's an interesting column: Low moment: Missed call on Favre hit inexcusable - NFL - CBSSports.com Football

This comes two weeks after the refs missed two infractions in OT in the GB-AZ game.

Source: Saints DE fined $20,000 for hit on Favre - NFL News - FOX Sports on MSN

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

No...no...no.

I do not see that as being a non-call or even a late hit. If it's a non-call, it was a good call. It should not have been a late hit.

I'll say it again. I was generally pleased with the officiating in that game. Was it perfect? No. But it was 110x better than most games I watch that involve the Vikings.

It was well refed until the calls became important in which they couldnt get anything right at that point.

First half they gave the Vikings some calls in the second half everything went against the Vikings. If I could choose the time to have the refs on my side Id choose 2nd half and OT.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by phightin

Interesting you're so quick to trash the NFC East where from top to bottom by win loss record they've out performed the NFC North this year. Very interesting indeed. If you can't make the case that the lions and bears are both better than the redskins and giants (which would be idiotic) the only other one you would have would be that the packers and vikings are vastly superior to the eagles and cowboys (again idiotic). So in essence the NFC North is by no means better than the NFC East it's in fact probably slightly worse. pot calling the kettle black eh?




Ummm maybe you can make a case of this for the saints but considering the vikings and cardinals have been playing for home field advantage and have looked flat out terrible at times this past month doesn't make any sense. if your genius theory is right though then the vikings may have just cruised themselves out of a first round bye. interesting and well thought out point.




ummm because one series in baseball is equal to an nfl 16 game schedule???? Last time I checked, and im not sure maybe you can look this up for me, there were 16 games in an nfl season so each one met a tremendous amount etc etc etc. In the nfl you're not in trouble because of who you lost to it's more of a fact because you lost in general and each one hurts that much more. and to compare the vikings to the best team in baseball is laughable anyway.



So if the eagles should be looked down because 3 out of their 4 losses were to top 10 teams while the vikings and the other teams in the nfc should be held in a higher regard because????? If anything it looks better that they won all the games they should have and lost to quality teams except for the raiders.

Now if we go by your logic though let's look at who the vikings have lost to so far the steelers, (destroyed) by the cardinals, (destroyed) by the panthers, and beaten by the bears. their losses besides arizona have come against subpar teams so what does that say about them? I'm sure they won't play against better teams in the playoffs than the steelers, cardinals, panthers, and bears though and it looks a lot better than losing to the cowboys, chargers, raiders, and saints you're so right jbergey. Now considering the Eagles beat the bears, destroyed the 49ers who beat the cardinals, and destroyed the panthers what does that say about the vikings? sorry can't have it both ways : laugh:

Now you mention that the eagles have trouble scoring and while their offense is explosive it's inconsistent etc. Other seasons this has held true but not even close this year. Their third in points per game scored (ahead of the vikings i might add) with 28 pts per game. In fact the last time the offense has been this good was the year they went to the super bowl with T.O. . The problem this year has been the inconsistent defense at times so if you want to make that case then maybe you can come back and hold your own but until you do please read up on certain things first before wasting my time.

Anyone remember how the Eagles ended last season?

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Anyone remember how the Eagles ended last season?

Same way every team other then New Orleans did?

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Anyone remember how the Eagles ended last season?

At home watching the Saints win the Super Bowl.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

Same way every team other then New Orleans did?

Not quite, its not college basketball

I figured I had to bring this up again since I was called an idiot for thinking the NFC East sucked last year. I think the Cowboys and Eagles did all they could to prove me correct on that.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Not quite, its not college basketball

I figured I had to bring this up again since I was called an idiot for thinking the NFC East sucked last year. I think the Cowboys and Eagles did all they could to prove me correct on that.

But compared to who? The Saints and Vikings?

You criticized the Eagles and Cowboys for not playing D. Ok, that's fine, but what about the Packers and Cardinals? They play D like the New York Knicks.

The playoffs pretty much ended as expected anyway. The only change I would make is that the Vikings go to the SB if the NFC championship was played in Minnesota. But that's what the regular season is for, and minnesota was almost as bad away as they were good at home.

[Afino]

Oh good, another season of the "Poor Vikings" thread.

Maybe today, maybe tomorrow, maybe three weeks from now I'll start posting regularly in Talk Sports. When I'm healthy and feeling like it, of course!

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

But compared to who? The Saints and Vikings?

You criticized the Eagles and Cowboys for not playing D. Ok, that's fine, but what about the Packers and Cardinals? They play D like the New York Knicks.

The playoffs pretty much ended as expected anyway. The only change I would make is that the Vikings go to the SB if the NFC championship was played in Minnesota. But that's what the regular season is for, and minnesota was almost as bad away as they were good at home.

Youd have to read what the Eagles fan said to understand where Im coming from. I was called an idiot for calling out the NFC East when I thought they were overrated. I believe by the Cowboys getting killed by the Vikings and the Eagles choking at the end of the season I was spot on in saying what I said. They were 0-8 at one point vs the other divisions.