I found this on a friend's blog

by KC Viking on Dec 7, 2009 3:17 PM CST Comment 19 comments

I'd sum it up for you, but you wouldn't believe me.

The Saints really made something out of less than nothing and came from behind this week, according to that graphic.

I'm a Vikings fan through and through, but I don't think that many Vikings teams could have pulled that off, although I faintly recall a game in which Sean Salisbury had seemingly done everything he could to score -1 points. I think it was this one. Losing to Tampa Bay was almost the same as playing a negative game back then.

Onto another subject...

Poll

Who do you blame most for the loss to the Cardinals?

Brett Favre for throwing those picks.

1 votes

AP for not establishing an effective running game, probably because he had spent all of his angst and aggressiveness on endangering peoples' lives on the highway instead of on the field.

2 votes

The OL for getting hurt and not protecting Favre.

5 votes

The D line for being invisible most of the game (except when Pat Williams was in coverage, as if that could ever be a good idea).

12 votes

The defensive backfield for allowing 15 catches for 241 yards and 3 TDs to Fitzgerald and Boldin alone.

11 votes

Childress for being outcoached and for playing his starters late in the game.

12 votes

Leslie Frazier for failing to stop the run or cover the Cardinal receivers.

6 votes

Darrell Bevell for failing to take advantage of a porous Arizona D.

1 votes

50 votes | Poll has closed

This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.

0 recs | Comment 19 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It was a collective failure. How about an all of the above option?

by dsludo on Dec 7, 2009 3:21 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

All of the above..

…and then some. It takes a team effort to get beat that bad.

by KC612 on Dec 7, 2009 3:21 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

And since that’s not an option, I’m gong with Chilly’s fault…

by dsludo on Dec 7, 2009 3:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yep, Just a general fail.....

In this case coach takes the bullet…..

Not a serious wound mind you…unless they come out next weekend the same…

Which somehow……do not think will happen…..

You think fans are screaming, wonder what the Vikes tapes review room (or whatever they call it) is like…

I hope (am sure) is a combo deathly quiet along with some deep discussion/assessment of what the heck happened, why, and how to fix immediately….

We shall see how well they perform….next big test Sunday….Cinci is for real too if their A game comes to play…

I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...

by vikingfanfrom afar on Dec 7, 2009 3:36 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

You may be right about pulling that one out.

I’ll give the Saints credit for pulling that one out but they must have a horseshoe up their ass because NFL kickers shouldn’t be missing 23 yard field goals. That’s an extra point try for crying out loud. Whats the old saying its better to be lucky than good. It appears the Saints are both.

by iowaron on Dec 7, 2009 3:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Sean Suischam is now unemployed

I wonder how much he pulls from unemployment insurance….

It’s totally unfair, of course. He tried really really hard to make those field goals, his effort should be worth something. Maybe a silver star or something….

Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!

by DCPurple on Dec 9, 2009 8:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Conspiracy Theory

If you noticed last nite, we didn’t do any big plays. Could it that we didn’t connect? or could it be what I’m thinking. Chances are, we will be the number 2 seed and Cardinals with be the 3rd. They did all their “money” plays and we really didn’t. Could it be that we “threw” the game just so we could unleash some new and amazing plays against them in the playoffs? Maybe! The world will never know. and no.. you can’t blame the game on anyone but the team in general.

by hickenizgriz on Dec 7, 2009 4:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

The whole team played without fire or chemistry it was like we were playing in week 2

Lines were useless, receivers were bad.. it was terrible.

by Grime on Dec 7, 2009 4:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Two sides

The Cards had a phenomenal defensive scheme in place for the game and their players executed it with a vengeance. Our offense looked flat, but I’m not going to take anything away from the Arizona defense on Sunday.

On the other side of the ball I don’t think Arizona did anything too spectacular, we just did nothing to match them. Frazier made no adjustments to take advantage of Allen’s double teams, and the rest of AWWE failed to step up. If Benny Sapp and Madieu Williams don’t start using their arms to tackle they need to be benched. And can anyone tell me the identity of our linebacking core, even before we lost EJ? Are they hard hitting run stoppers? Fast blitzers that can cover the middle of the field when they have to? Both? Neither? They were playing great football to start the season, especially Greenway, but I haven’t seen much of them since then and I just didn’t know how they were being used last night.

We were clearly out coached and our players were outplayed at most positions.

A good coach makes his team better, he doesn’t wait for a better team to make him look good.

by dwarg on Dec 7, 2009 11:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I agree with you.

I simply can’t buy that the Cardinals’ D is really as for real as they played Sunday night, and I can’t buy that their OL was really that great despite being without their starting LT. The only way those units could look better than the Vikings’ top-notch lines is by having better coaches than the Vikings. And I’m pretty sure that they did.

Some have hinted at the possibility that the Vikings weren’t really trying on purpose, and I would call that awful coaching as well. Unless a coaching staff has no imagination, it is very possible to have a unique game plan every week, or at minimum to not have a predictable game plan every week.

It has also been said that D-line is more important than the secondary, but who thinks that Arizona has a better D-line than secondary? Their lower quality DLs got a few coverage sacks because of the secondary, who also provided 2 picks and a few knocked down passes. I’ve seen that type of game before, and I’m convinced that it can be a major factor and sometimes the most important unit of the defense.

by KC Viking on Dec 8, 2009 11:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I’ll give it to coaching as well.

They were bringing extra guys to chip and block Allen, and we never adjusted to compensate. With that kind of attention, you would think we would throw in some stunts or mix up the line a bit. Hell, you would think that Ray Allen and the Williamses would have done SOMETHING.

We gave up on the run game with about 1:14 left in the second quarter. That is too early, even if we are behind. Yea, we were trying to make it to the end zone before the half, but what better way to take advantage of a team trying to prevent the long pass before the half than to run the ball when you have 3 time outs left?

Brett was not the problem. We all know he throws interceptions, he does have the record for them. He was behind and was trying to make a play.

We got outplayed and outcoached.

by Bjorno on Dec 8, 2009 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed.

3 Norsemen = 0 without the Mullet Man? I know that they may have gotten some pressure on Warner that didn’t show up in the box score, but it couldn’t have been much of a factor. A stunt would have been much better than dropping Pat into coverage.

I had seen nothing to indicate that the Cards had an effective D or running game, and they took all of the Vikings’ strengths away.

by KC Viking on Dec 8, 2009 12:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Viking Fans can Dream too

I was born in Purple…Not really, but I am trying to set a tone for what a Viking fan I am….
I have watched them religously for 30 years, and I will tell you several truths…Like it or not….
1. They have as much talent on offense as anyone in the league.
2. They have alot of talent on defense, but I am afraid our corners arent good enough.
3. I think Brad Childress Great at coaching in several dimensions but is missing a few Key dimensions, albeit the important ones..
4. If the Purple can demonstrate a consistant level of intensity and will, they could pull this off, but they are not good enough on the defensive side of the ball to play without 100% intensity for the rest of the season. They have already played the weak teams, now its time to play the Big Boys, and the Purple need to believe they are 1 of them.
SKOL

by PURPLEPUSSYEATER on Dec 8, 2009 11:52 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Bad Coaching The Buck Stops With Chilly

We have a weak secondary .. With Winfield out and SHARPER in New Orleans … (how did they let him get away … ) we are so in trouble … The Cardnals showed all the holes that Childress have to plug before the Playoffs .. If not we will have a early departure .. again …

by VikinginCalifornia on Dec 8, 2009 1:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Wasted Talent

We weren’t really using Sharper while he was here anyway. The Tampa 2 is a terrible defense for a ball-hawking safety and Sharper was bored with it. That and I think the change of scenery lit a fire under him for this year as well.

A good coach makes his team better, he doesn’t wait for a better team to make him look good.

by dwarg on Dec 8, 2009 4:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs