In Decisive Victory, St. Louis Rams Defeat St. Louis Rams
by Anthony21 on Oct 11, 2009 2:56 PM CDT
in Vikings 2009 Season
53 comments
In an exciting game on Sunday afternoon, the St. Louis Rams completed a decisive victory over the St. Louis Rams. The Vikings? They did indeed show up. Hopped on a plane from Minneapolis, took a bus to the Edward Jones Dome, put their uniforms on, and did what they needed to do to win. Scored some points, completed some drives. But without numerous key turnovers by the Rams, this game could have been a much different story.
We're left with a generic win. Not a bailout but not domination, either. Turnovers were the difference. A 52-yard fumble return for a touchdown by Jared Allen halted a St. Louis drive that was moving into Vikings territory. Later on in the first half, Stephen Jackson fumbled the ball near the goal line -- and Jared once again scooped it up. Yet another promising Rams drive was shut down by a turnover, with the ball popping out of Daniel Fells' hands inside the 10 yardline and ending up in the hands of E.J. Henderson. Those three plays were why the Vikings entered the half with a 17-3 lead. Three miscues by the St. Louis offense -- miscues that, in short, made the difference.
When the Vikings defense wasn't getting bailed out by St. Louis turnovers, it was busy allowing Kyle Boller to perform well. Boller was effective when utilizing his mobility to roll out of the pocket, and his effectiveness was aided by Stephen Jackson's success on the ground. The St. Louis offense was well-balanced -- unlike that of the Vikes.
It was a shocker to see Adrian Peterson only get seven carries in the first half. True, we saw last week that Brett Favre's arm can win a game for the Vikings (when he gets some help from Jared Allen on D) -- but that doesn't mean the offensive balance should be completely flipped around from what it's normally been. The Vikings have quite a bit more offensive flexibility than they once did, but this should still be a run-first offense.
To be fair, Favre did have a solid performance in St. Louis. He continues to get more comfortable with his receiving corps, and the effectiveness of the Farvin combo is displaying that Percy is the steal of the draft.
But still, there's reason for concern. This felt like a game the Vikings should have controlled from the opening kickoff, and yet they relied on several St. Louis turnovers to maintain a solid lead throughout the afternoon. The Rams deserve credit for how they battled it out in the trenches -- on both sides of the ball. Screens and roll-outs present problems for the Vikes D, and the defensive line failed to impress against Jackson. The Vikings defense remains suspect on third downs, which plagued them in the first half of last week's game against the Packers.
After a second half touchdown from Favre to Visanthe Shiancoe (which provided us with a rare Shiancoe sighting), the Vikings extended their lead to 24-3. That's the point in a game when elite teams never look back. They don't give opposing teams an inch of room to get back into the game -- especially sub-par opponents. The Vikings? They allowed the Rams to go on a huge drive. 15 plays, 72 yards, lasting 6:10. True, it ended with yet another turnover in the red zone. But elite teams don't allow that type of drive to happen after taking a commanding lead.
I've heard the argument before: It doesn't matter how you win games. I say: Bull. Sure, I'd rather win ugly than lose pretty, blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda. That goes without saying, and no one's going to disagree with that statement. But as a gauge for how the Vikings will perform in the next three weeks (Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Green Bay), how they win games against the easier teams on the schedule is relevant. If Kyle Boller can carve up this secondary, we have a problem. If St. Louis' inability to take care of the football was the only thing preventing this game from being considerably more competitive, we have a problem. Can't always rely on turnovers.
A quick glance at the scoreboard would suggest that this was a dominant victory for the Vikings. How can there possibly be so many complaints coming out of this one? Well, had the Rams not self-destructed on several effective drives, this would have been a ballgame. The Vikings did their part by sealing the deal after the Rams took tons of their own points off the board, but most importantly, the Rams beat themselves.
The Vikings got lucky this week. Hard to complain when a team doesn't perform to its full potential and still manages to win by several touchdowns, getting the opportunity to rest its key players in the process. But the score is deceiving. The Rams did a good job of beating themselves; the Vikings could have done more to deserve the win.
0 recs |
53 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Good Recap
The only problem I have is the coverage of the game. Instead of analysts agreeing with you, they’ll point out the turnovers, but not admit the Vikings could’ve, in theory, lost the game.
In an unrelated, yet related, story, Favre goes 5-0 for the first time in his career. Just wait, that’s what the headlines will be. It’s all been about him. And I’ll agree 100% that this is a team that will go as far as Peterson will run, and the defense will perform. Why is it now that it’s how long Favre can be consistent?
Peterson did have 2 touchdowns, but he only had 15 rushes. Look how far this team has come since Peterson’s monster performance in week 1. Better yet, since the pre-season. This team is a run-first offense. I don’t mind that Favre creates a significant threat for the pass. Heck, that’s a great thing to have. Instead of the defense having to worry about the unstoppable (when effective) running game, they have to worry about the possibility of the pass, and a (possible) dominant passing game. Use them both to the fullest, but don’t change the scheme of the offense to rely on the pass first, and the run second.
"Jaromir Jagr.... it's a POWER PLAY GOAL!"
- Sam Rosen
by rmc235 on Oct 11, 2009 4:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm fine with Peterson resting...
… because until the O-line starts actually creating holes and blocking well for him, there’s no need to pound out the -2.-1, 0, 1, and 2 yard runs. Keep Peterson healthy – and give Taylor the reps.
by solafide on Oct 11, 2009 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Viking's Defense sucks when........
…..there is no pass rush!!! This defense is good, but they get carved up with intermediate throws to tight ends and slanting receivers. I swear the Vikings only play defense when they’re in the redzone… there’s been way too many holes in our secondary this year.
Fraiser needs to mix something up… b/c if the Vikings don’t pressure Flacco and Roethlisberger those guys will throw for 400 + yds
by solafide on Oct 11, 2009 4:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Let me just add one more thing-
excellent prediction by the way Gonzo.
eh, make it two things-
The Rams defeating the Rams is a terrific assessment Anthony21. Let’s just hope the Vikings realize what could’ve been.
"Jaromir Jagr.... it's a POWER PLAY GOAL!"
- Sam Rosen
by rmc235 on Oct 11, 2009 4:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to get a non-Rams perspective
For whatever reason, this seems to be standard practice for the Rams. Have you guys seen this from other teams? We’re used to this.
In our season opener, we committed 10 penalties. In Washington, Donnie Avery fumbled the ball at the 7, squandering an easy FG for what would have been a lead in the fourth quarter. Against Green Bay, in the 1st quarter, we fumbled inside our own 15 twice. Dealing with San Francisco after a demoralizing loss in Minnesota, another 10 penalties. Today, it was the two turnovers within the 5 yard line.
Have you guys seen a team that is this self-defeating? I wonder how much of it is bad luck and how much is self-determined.
I’m not trying to short your team. Before the season started, I had the Vikings playing the Eagles for the NFC Championship. Still, as a Rams fan, it’s nauseating to see your team ruin your own opportunities, and somehow even worse to see fans of your opponent recognize that. Just wondering if anybody here has ever seen a team ruin their own fortunes as consistently as the 2009 Rams have.
BTW, you guys have a great community going on over here. Make sure you keep it together as people jump on the ship in the near future. The wins are going to bring people both to the Vikings and to the Norseman in particular. Don’t let them water down the strength of this site. Just an opinion. Holler.
Your uncle molests collies.
by 3k on Oct 11, 2009 4:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting points.
We’ve been through a few similar games this season (weeks one and two against the Browns and Lions). In those games, the Vikings got off to slow starts before taking control late in the game — which is somewhat like today’s game. The difference, though, is that the Vikings went out there in the second half against the Browns and Lions and earned a victory. It’s hard to say that they earned anything today, simply because it was handed to them. So no, they really haven’t been handed a win in previous weeks this year like the Rams handed them a win today. Interesting point re: Having the other team’s fans notice that your guys gave this one away. The AP recap gave the Vikings way too much credit, for what it’s worth.
by Anthony21 on Oct 11, 2009 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t care what team you are, when you can force 4 turn overs in a game, that’s amazing. The defense was sloppy at times, sure. But you make it sound like the team didn’t come ready to play.
Who cares if we’re passing more now? Save Peterson for the playoffs, I mean geeze. We didn’t need to run the ball down their throat this game, they were letting us pass with impunity for the most part. Honestly, the only negative things I saw this game were the big plays we gave up on defense, but things tightened up in the red-zone.
St. Louis beat themselves? No. We beat them. Soundly.
by Frost on Oct 11, 2009 4:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Force 4 turnovers?
I’m not exactly sure you “forced” 4 turnovers. There is a difference between takeaways and giveaways.
Your uncle molests collies.
by 3k on Oct 11, 2009 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right because a huge-hit on the FB to force a fumble at X-and-goal, and an interception are definite give-aways. The only thing I’d say the Rams gave us was the JAckson fumble in the redzone, because he didn’t have a good grip on the hand off. I’m calling the Boller-fumble a take-away because Kevin was right in the man’s face and applying pressure. And I don’t want to take away from Allen’s scoring run.
by Frost on Oct 11, 2009 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take away those three first half turnovers
and the game completely changes. All of those drives seemed sure to result in points for the Rams, especially the ones that went inside the 10. That’s defeating a team soundly?
by Anthony21 on Oct 11, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah..
the ball was coughed up all to eagerly by St. Louis which is sad to see. But the Defense did capatalize I guess you could say..
1. miscued Boller-Jackson handoff was bad exchange and not really defense induced…
2. the hit put on the fb in the red zone that resulted in the ball popping right into E.J.‘s hands was first part good defense and second part luck (but had much to do with loose hold on the ball because I didn’t think the hit was that big)
3. the first fumble that JA recovered and then returned was mostly on Boller because the ball slipped out of his hand (but it was party good defense since Kev was right in his face)
So I would say good defense played a part but the majority was mistakes by St. Louis
Would have been a very interesting game if those 3 drives inside the 10 resulted in Rams points
The Vikings=$600 Million
The Metrodome=$55 Million
Adrian Peterson=Priceless
by 4 AP Jerseys on Oct 11, 2009 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lebers head
hit the ball. The ball coming out had nothing to do with a big hit, but more to do with a well placed hit.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 12, 2009 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
apparently
it was greenways head…not lebers…my bad.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 12, 2009 9:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s so ridiculous to argue. Why take away the turnovers? It’s not like Steven Jackson just dropped the ball and only our guys went after it. Fumbles can really go either way. Why do you want to take away from Greenway’s huge hit? It doesn’t even make sense to say “well if they didn’t turn the ball over they COULD have scored.” You could say that for any team in the NFL. Did they score? No. So it was a good game by the defense in the redzone.
If we go to the SB, and we get turnovers, are you going to be apologetic for those and say “Well, if they hadn’t turned the ball over, they could have won”?
by Frost on Oct 11, 2009 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So we rely on turnovers.
Sounds like a good strategy to me. Give up 10-15 play drives and hope the defense can force a turnover inside the 10 yardline. Why not play good defense from the get-go and not be in that situation to begin with? The point isn’t to apologize for the win; it’s that giving up lengthy drives and trying to force turnovers isn’t the best recipe for a win.
by Anthony21 on Oct 11, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We can play defense like that. We didn’t. But that doesn’t mean that the Rams beat themselves. The defense still beat them by causing turn overs. Lengthy drives are going to happen. People were doing this last year when we beat Detroit, and it drove me crazy then too. Turn overs are going to happen. Sometimes it will happen to us. But I bet you won’t see the other teams on DN saying “Well, it would have been a better game if we hadn’t forced those T.O.s” Stop beating up the defense over it.
Can they do better? Yes. But today they did good too, Rams getting into the red-zone or not.
by Frost on Oct 11, 2009 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kyle freakin Boller
I’d be with you 100% if the Vikings were facing a legit quarterback. Teams will inevitably give up a few solid drives against a formidable offense. That this happened against Boller makes me concerned. I don’t like it when backups look good against this defense. The Rams came into this one averaging six points per game, and although they didn’t score too much more than that today, they could have by protecting the football. I just think the final score is a bit deceiving — that’s all.
by Anthony21 on Oct 11, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Boller’s a Cal boy just like Aaron Rodgers and anything from California sucks!
by Chucks Nucks on Oct 11, 2009 9:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agree completely. Greenway punched that ball out of there. You know something else? Our defense may have given up yards but never looked fazed; they know they are good and can make plays. Frost you’re right on the turnovers…we may not cause ’em, but we sure as hell capitalize on them
by cutlassbob on Oct 11, 2009 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok I was wrong on the Greenway hit...
I rewatched it about 30 times and realized it wasn’t the hit that jarred the ball loose.. my apologies because he did punch it out
The Vikings=$600 Million
The Metrodome=$55 Million
Adrian Peterson=Priceless
by 4 AP Jerseys on Oct 11, 2009 9:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no i didn't say we rely on turnovers or that I'm taking them away...
I’m just saying that those turnovers weren’t BECAUSE of the defense and they were MISTAKES. The greenway hit was good but was it that hard of a hit? I mean come on it was a solid hit but doesn’t normally jar a ball that loose. I am a huge vikes fan so don’t get me wrong, but I’m just saying the Rams made big MISTAKES and our defense for the most part only capalized on the mistakes instead of being solid and dominating every play
The Vikings=$600 Million
The Metrodome=$55 Million
Adrian Peterson=Priceless
by 4 AP Jerseys on Oct 11, 2009 9:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who cares if we’re passing more now? Save Peterson for the playoffs, I mean geeze. We didn’t need to run the ball down their throat this game, they were letting us pass with impunity for the most part.
Exactly. Look guys, teams have seen Favre for 5 games with us and still aren’t willing to quit stacking the box. What I love is that we finally have a QB that is able to take advantage of that; the playcalling has been better in passing too. We KNOW we can run; what’s wrong with letting Favre, receivers, and the offense continue to build chemistry? It will only make us more dangerous in the long run.
by cutlassbob on Oct 11, 2009 6:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a win...
…be happy. The Ravens look vulnerable. I expect your team to snap back to more of a balance on offense next week. That Ravens defense is tough. Yet I think the Vikings can exploit them. Favre has seen everything. Defensively, the Vikings are pretty good too. I know they’ve given up some yards, but they have not crumbled. That is the main thing to look at. Bend but don’t break and all that. Getting turnovers is not a fluke in the NFL. The Rams did not GIVE away anything. The Vikings TOOK the ball away for those turnovers, just as they took the game in convincing fashion. Enjoy what you have.
Early prediction for next week?
Vikings 24
Ravens 13
by starmark on Oct 11, 2009 4:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
the Rams did indeed give away a few...
You gotta admit at least ONE of those turnovers was a big mistake/giveaway that just needed a viking within 2 yards to fall on the ball
The Vikings=$600 Million
The Metrodome=$55 Million
Adrian Peterson=Priceless
by 4 AP Jerseys on Oct 11, 2009 9:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Compare Vikings and Giants box scores from today
That gives you a good idea of which team is a dominant team and creates its own destiny. I wish the Vikings were but they aren’t yet.
Certainly “a win is a win” is a good baseline, but today should have been about shutting down a sub-par team. On a similar note, we let Green Bay get back into that game when it should been over.
put a body on 'em
by RayBourque on Oct 11, 2009 5:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
wow
Total yards: 483-124. Vikes D gave up 400 to the Rams! Win is a win. But I do agree, the defense could very well be what holds this team back from a trip to Miami.
by uncle rico on Oct 11, 2009 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Total yards were Rams: 400 Vikings: 377
"Jaromir Jagr.... it's a POWER PLAY GOAL!"
- Sam Rosen
by rmc235 on Oct 11, 2009 7:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OR...
They could be a defense that buckles down in the red zone, getting turnovers and limiting teams to Field goals.
by stratoscaster on Oct 11, 2009 7:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
DING! DING! DING!!
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Oct 11, 2009 11:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
134 of those Ram yards...
came in the 4th qtr when the game was over and the subs were in. Not a game I’d be proud of, but I’m not sure we need to be too upset either. As this blog site pointed out, this had trap written all over it, and at no time during this game did it feel like we might lose it, unlike the first two games. And Boller, Jaclson and the Rams are far better at home than Rusell and the Raiders on the road, so that comparison seems meaningless.
Been along time since we tasted 5-0… lets savor it just a little. Go Vikes!!!
by San Diego Viking on Oct 11, 2009 7:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah?
The idea is not to paint a big target on yourself. The B-1 bomber is not painted with radar enhancing glitter or with dayglo orange paint for very good a reason.
Winning next week’s game is always the one thing that counts. If you must talk about the Giants, you must then remember this: the Patriots once went 19-0. We now know that this charming little statistic neither overrode nor altered the final score of the following Super Bowl, which was the fundamental thing of life as time goes by. The Lombardi Trophy has nothing to do with style points, halftime highlights, or how many people have said nice things about you on ESPN the day before.
On the other hand, if you simply feel better worrying, this is still a free country, and you certainly may worry all you want.
Personally, I’d rather hear an encore of Bobby McFerrin’s old song. It had a nice beat, was easy to dance to, and I gave it a seven.
by Elgar on Oct 11, 2009 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A win by 4 TD's...
…And I’m not impressed. I’m glad I’m not the only one that feels that way. It was the ugliest win by 28 points that I have ever seen. I hope our D comes to play for the next 3 weeks, and I hope they figure out how to block for Peterson, because they sure as hell haven’t been able to do it for a couple of games now.
The Minnesota Vikings - Undefeated in the Playoffs at Lambeau Field!
by BaldViking on Oct 11, 2009 6:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey, where are all the Niner "suck ass" Norsemen now?
Yes, you know who you are (calling you out Knut)! Anyone check out that bloodletting today. The Falcons totally boned the Niners at home. They have only beaten teams with a combined win total of 2 and they were extremely lucky to come so close to us. I said it before and I’ll say it again, they are a bad team and Singletary will not last the season. They are formerly the most overrated team in football! Let me hear someone defend them now.
Purple rules!
by Chucks Nucks on Oct 11, 2009 6:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
They left their stadium after they found out that that commercial which now runs on TV in the Bay Area selling Niners tickets, the one in which Singletary says their style is to punch people in the mouth, is not all as wonderful as it sounds. Sometimes the other guy in the bar hears that and just knocks you into the middle of next week (or even the week after).
Consciousness is a terrible thing to waste.
by Elgar on Oct 11, 2009 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh boo hoo
We win by 4 TDs and we are acting like we suck. I have every confidence in our ability to beat the massively overated Ravens, the Pitt Giant Head of Roethlesnoggin, and walk into Lambeau and curb stomp them. Chill baby. Know who ISN’T bitching about being 5-0? 27 other NFL teams.
by Jepp The Viking on Oct 11, 2009 8:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I point out that the Rams did the Vikings plenty of favors today...
and it’s turned into the idea that I’m moaning about being 5-0. Wow.
by Anthony21 on Oct 11, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Rams sprung the Trap on themselves...
… the Vikings won, while their Defense got run over for 400 yds and got lucky by forcing turnovers and collecting giveaways in the redzone.
If the Vikes D plays like that against the Ravens and Steelers, the Vikings will lose… let’s hope they show up nxt wk.
by solafide on Oct 11, 2009 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about this stat
the vikings primary defense earned a net of 3 pts. One FG against…one TD scored. The other TD was throws against our backup CB because we were giving game reps to our depth because we had it locked up. Our primaries will play the whole game next week.
Anyone else notice that whenever we blitz we get burned? My question is why are we blitzing in the first place? We certainly don’t need to anymore. And stopping that might significantly stiffen our passing D.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 12, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get what you’re saying and I’m concerned too about how the defense let the Rams march down the field on us. On the other hand, we can’t start going into the “what it?” situation. What if Favre hits Berrian on that long ball? What if Harvin holds on to the ball on his bomb play? Maybe we should have scored another TD or two but we didn’t. Maybe the Rams score if they didn’t fumble, or maybe our D steps it up in the redzone.
by cutlassbob on Oct 11, 2009 10:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You must be crazy...
The Vikings had a Bye this week!
Other than the Giants, how many other teams racked up a “W” in a bye week?
The Vikings did not even play their full 1st team in the 4th Quarter.
Favre & Peterson sat, along with some of the linemen.
It is VERY difficult to get up for a game against a pee-wee team.
The mental focus aspect was a lot harder than the physical aspect.
The Vikings have a pretty good goal line defense… just ask the Packers.
The Rams best rusher was held under 100 yards and the Vikings have not given up a rushing TD this year.
Yes, The Vikings have been very sloppy at times, but their ability to move the ball when needed, has afforded them this luxury.
The ONLY stat that matters is 5-0 vs 0-5…. all of that other crap you wrote is simply wasted bandwidth on my computer.
by PackCat on Oct 11, 2009 8:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Complain, Complain...
I did not heat of anyone getting b*tch-slapped when Favre threw up 6 interceptions against the Rams. Do you think anyone on that playoff team complained about the Pack beating themselves, as if the defense had nothing to do with it?
by PackCat on Oct 11, 2009 8:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Vikings avoided the Trap! Mission success - time to move on
5 – 0 is amazing for a team still not 100% in sync… let’s worry about how good this defense is going to make Flacco and the Ravens O look.
The Ravens will be hungry for a win… and Flacco will absolutely shred the secondary if the Vikes D plays the Ravens like they played the Rams.
by solafide on Oct 11, 2009 8:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Chill
The game vs. the Ravens won’t even be close; just another team with an overinflated reputation.
by Chucks Nucks on Oct 11, 2009 9:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
perfect?
you cry babies are killing me. we’ve come so far so quickly. remember the days when we couldn’t throw or catch a pass? we play in zone more than i would like, granted. i do hate it when our corners play 10-12 yards off the ball. we are better suited playing them tight on the line and hitting them coming off the ball in my humble opinion. next few weeks will be fun. see ya in minny next weekend!! go vikes!!!
by deadeye on Oct 11, 2009 9:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The day in football
I disagree that the ravens game wasn’t close but Kyle Boller has proven that the Rams are certainly doomed for the season. I have all the in depth stats, scores, and news from todays action at: Coopers Sports Picks Right now I am rooting for the colts and they are fulfilling our sunday night pick!
http://www.cooperspick.com
We Pick, You Win
by Coopers Sports Picks on Oct 11, 2009 10:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Marc Bulger will replace Boller next week and probably the rest of the season. Cause for hope? Probably not much but Boller won’t be the downfall of the Rams
by cutlassbob on Oct 11, 2009 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trap Game
Although I’m with the majority of you in believing that the Vikes could have played better, this was the perfect “trap game” on their schedule. They played a very emotional game on Monday night against their most hated rival and then had to go on the road to play a winless team. I’m just happy they came out of it with a W. Like an analyst on the NFL Network said, It was a win but there’s enough on tape to chew the team out about before the game with the Ravens. They’ll be ready come next Sunday.
by purplegrey on Oct 11, 2009 11:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
+10000
i think this is a good thing that they played like this for this game. i like the bend but don’t break d. give up a lot of yards, but stuff em in the red zone. i think they did have a bit of a lackadaisical attitude coming into this one, but it’s good they hopefully got it out of their system before they put the boots to baltimore. for the record, the hit wasn’t what popped that ball loose, greenway caused that fumble by punching the ball out. good play yields good results!
I piss people off on a fairly regular basis. I cherish my right to speak my mind, whether I sound like an uneducated savage or not. I've never been accused of keeping what I think a secret, nor will I ever. Don't like it? I don't care.
by IABerserker1 on Oct 11, 2009 11:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Yeah, but..."
The game had its pluses and minuses I would have liked to have seen fewer Rams yards, but the D was stout when it had to be. Benny Sapp had a damn good outing – making the tip-aways this week he missed before. Continuous improvement every week must be the mission. Go Vikes!!
If you give a man a match he will be warm for a moment. Set him alight
and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
by Mr. Underfoot on Oct 12, 2009 8:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that the vikes
wanted to put on a passing display to give the ravens something to think about. We don’t want the Ravens to just gear to stop AD. The past few games with passing success was only the result of teams stacking the box and solely trying to stop our run game. This time I believe they wanted to air it out a little to make teams reconsider how much emphasis they want put on selling out to stop the run. It makes for a more balanced game and greater ability to mix up the play calling to keep the defense on its heels.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 12, 2009 8:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that's a very fair summary all the way around, based on what I saw.
Not trying to troll, but I’m curious: are any of you concerned that Chilly is falling in love with Favre? Is he starting to see the team as a pass first offense? Or did AP end up with just 7 carries in the first half because the Rams turnovers (and Allen’s run) were limiting the number of offensive snaps?
Personally, I don't give a crap about Brett Favre.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Oct 12, 2009 7:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
