Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jerry Sandusky's Wife Tries To Run A Reporter Over

An Insanely Early Look at the Vikings' 2009 Schedule, Part Two

As detailed in the first post of this series, things appear to be set up for the Vikings to get off to a fast start in 2009.  Hopefully that will be the case, because the second quarter of the schedule for the Beloved Purple looks, at this point. to be absolutely brutal.  This isn't to say that we should be automatically chalking up losses for the Vikings in these particular games, but they're going to be tough ones, to be certain.  Let's examine this further.

Star-divide

The Second Quarter - Sundays, Bloody Sundays

The second stanza of the 2009 season kicks off with the Vikings travelling to the Edward Jones Dome for a date with the St. Louis Rams.  This may or may not be the first game back for the Williams Wall, depending on the circumstances of the StarCaps case.  However, it will definitely be Minnesota's third game in their first five against a team with a brand new head coach, as former Giants' defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo has taken the reins of what used to be "The Greatest Show on Turf."

The Rams have been pretty bad for a while now. . .after all, you don't pick #2 overall in two consecutive drafts by being great or anything like that.  They were 31st overall in the NFL in 2008 in both points scored (14.5 ppg) and points allowed (29.1 ppg).  After being outstanding in 2006, Rams' quarterback Marc Bulger has spent the last two seasons looking pretty brutal, throwing for only 22 touchdowns and getting sacked 75 times over that span.  Running back Steven Jackson has battled injuries the last two seasons as well, missing four games in both 2007 and 2008.  Things don't figure to get any easier for the Rams' offense in 2009 after the losses of WR Torry Holt and future Hall of Fame OT Orlando Pace.

St. Louis was equally brutal on offense.  They were near the bottom of the league against the run (29th overall), and while they look slightly more respectable against the pass, they faced the second-fewest pass attempts in the league. . .no doubt a function of trailing frequently and having teams running the ball to eat the clock. . .and allowed right around 63% of those attempts to be completed.  Opposing quarterbacks had a QB rating of 92.5 against the Rams' defense in 2008.  Only five other teams allowed opposing quarterbacks to be more efficient than that.  On paper, the Vikings should be able to get past the Rams with no real trouble. . .but, as we know, games aren't played on paper.

However, it would be nice if the Rams' game was a bit of a "breather," because Minnesota's next two games are going to be absolute slobberknockers.

The Beloved Purple will return to the Metrodome in Week Six for their second inter-conference match-up of the season, as they'll line up against the Baltimore Ravens.  The Ravens are as great on defense as the Rams were bad, ranking no worse than third in any of the four major defensive categories.  They were third in the NFL in points allowed (15.2 ppg), second in total yards allowed (261.1 ypg), second against the pass (179.7 ypg), and third against the run (81.4 ypg).  The Ravens are one of the toughest, most physical defenses in the NFL, and they really have been for quite some time.  You would also think that they might be due to start slowing down. . .Ray Lewis is getting older, they lost LB Bart Scott to the New York Jets, CB Chris McAlister likely won't be back. . .but the Ravens also have outstanding depth on the defensive side, so any drop-off that might happen will more than likely be minimal.

Offensively, they have a youngster at QB in Joe Flacco who played above and beyond expectations as a rookie in 2008.  Thought to be a project when he was selected by the Ravens out of Delaware, Flacco started all 16 games for the Ravens last year, and played very well.  He looked brutal in the post-season, completing about 44% of his passes, but he didn't turn the ball over until the team's loss in the AFC Championship Game.  He was helped by a three-headed rushing attack that was fourth in the NFL in that department, and with a year under his belt should be even better.  This is definitely going to be a fight for Minnesota, because they will absolutely have to get to Flacco to be successful.

And there will be no rest for the Vikings, because their next game will be a trip to the place that the Ravens lost that aforementioned AFC Championship Game.

Yes, after playing one of the best defenses in the NFL the week before, the Vikings will take a trip to Heinz Field to take on the defending world champion Pittsburgh Steelers and what was unquestionably the best defense in the NFL in 2008.  Pittsburgh was #1 in the NFL in three of the four major defensive categories in 2008.  Minnesota's game against the Ravens will features two of the top three rush defenses in the league from 2008.  The game against the Steelers will feature two of the top. . .well, two.  Former Vikings coach. . .man, it's painful to write that. . .Mike Tomlin has asserted himself quite nicely in Pittsburgh, and Dick Lebeau's defense will be out to terrorize Sage Rosenfels or Tarvaris Jackson.

I won't lie to you, folks. . .out of the sixteen games on Minnesota's 2009 schedule, there's only one that I can honestly say that I don't think the Vikings have any real shot at winning.  And it's this one.  The Steelers are just that good.  If this game was in Minnesota, I might give us a slight chance.  At Pittsburgh, on the other hand?  Not so much, no.  Sure, we might catch the Steelers on a bad day or something. . .crazier things have happened before. . .but that's not something we should necessarily be betting on.

The first half of our season ends with our annual trip to Corrugated Tin Shack Field in Green Bay for our second bout with the Packers.  We briefly touched on the Packers in the previous post, so I won't re-hash everything here.  However, it's always been significantly tougher for the Vikings to win at Lambeau than it's been for them to beat the Packers at the Dome.  On the bright side, we'll be getting there while the weather should still be fairly decent, which is always nice.  But I wouldn't be surprised to see the Packers get a measure of revenge for the slapping down they should get in Week 4 at our house in prime time.  I'd be slightly more surprised to see Minnesota complete the season sweep here, but that certainly would be nice.

As things stand right now, I'd be disappointed if Minnesota was worse than 5-3 going into their bye week.  But the second quarter of this season, highlighted by games against what might be the two most physical defenses in the National Football League, will certainly be a rough one from a personnel standpoint for Minnesota.

What do you think, ladies and gentlemen?  Will the Vikings be better or worse than 5-3 when the first half of the season comes to an end?  Discuss it here, and we'll be back with more later!

Comment 23 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

5-3 is reasonable...

I’m trying to temper my expectations. In the first four games, I’m expecting one loss at most. The second four is going to be tough. Going 2-2 in those would be ideal. That would set the Vikings up to compete better throughout the rest of the schedule. I just hope the QB situation is figured out by then and the Vikings aren’t switching in and out.

Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com

Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!

by Manimal on Apr 17, 2009 7:48 AM CDT reply actions  

5-3

at this point in the season is not unreasonable, but will require a fast start for once.

Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?

by the Real Thor on Apr 17, 2009 8:48 AM CDT reply actions  

5-3?? Hmm...

Knowing the way the Vikings play up and down to their competition, it’s hard to tell. I could actually see them winning one of the two from either the Ravens (more likely) or Pittsburgh, but cringe when they play a Lions, Browns, or a Rams team.

I just dream for the day when I can honestly feel there isn’t any team we face that can stop us, but there’s a head coach in my way.

by SpaceVike on Apr 17, 2009 8:49 AM CDT reply actions  

5-3

Is totally doable. I am actually happy that the toughest teams we’re playing are on the road for 2 reasons. One, if we’re gonna take our lumps, let’s lose in the hardest situation where no one gives us a chance to win in the first place. Two, as any true
Viking fan knows, our best victories always come when no one is expecting it. I’ve seen it since I’ve been old enough to watch. Beat a playoff team on the road………lose at home to the Lions…………VIKING FOOTBALL!!! Although I have to say our current defense has really helped us pull through on those days when we’re playing down to bad teams. They’ve been buying us just enough time.

by NYCVike on Apr 17, 2009 9:14 AM CDT reply actions  

First Half Record

I’ve been a Vikes fan since they were organized, and there is one thing that has stood out to me the whole time. They usually play very close to their oponents skill level no matter if they are better or worse than the Vikes. Thererfore I’m going to go out on a limb and say that they very easily could win over the Steelers. I agree with SpaceVike. Last season when they played the Lions the second time, I thought we might be the ones to let them win a game, but we got by them just barely. Anyway I think that 6-2 is a very reachable record for the first half.

by Frankman on Apr 17, 2009 10:39 AM CDT reply actions  

I think 5-3 is reasonable

but I also think you may be underestimating our chances in the game against the Ravens. This is a game I think we can win because we will be able to get to Flacco and it’s at the dome. We can beat ANYONE at the dome. Plus the Williams wall will be back and Flacco will have to drop back. Jared Allen and crew will have their ears pinned back. The Vikes will be 6-2 at this point.

Also, I am going to agree with you on the Steelers game… this is not like going into Arizona and winning a road game. We don’t have much chance in that one.

by skiumah06 on Apr 17, 2009 10:49 AM CDT reply actions  

aint no tellin

i dont agree with playing up or down.. the LIONS barely lost a ton of games. there is no way they will go 0-16 again, they could win 6 easily.

We played shitty against the saints. still one.
we owned jacksonville.
we owned the cards.
we played shite against the colts and barely lost

In fact, in all 16 games, we competed except for maybe one. And we shot ourselves (the players not the coaches or refs) in the foot in the few losses and in many games we did “what we had to do” in the end by getting a game winner or holding the other team.

So we were an underacheiving 10-6 team in my eyes…

Even the 98 vikings had their games they barely pulled out, 48 to 42 etc. they couldnt stop anyone and thats why we got owned by the rams twice and lost to the giants in ’00 and THATS why denny green sucked ass. Same goes for the TICE teams..

Only jerry burns’ team had that killer number one we can win it all defense. (and the purple people eaters)

we need to get THAT back. people aren’t scared of us on 3rd and long and it’s a damn shame

so in reality we showed a lot of character and grit…

cromscorner.blogspot.com

by Crom on Apr 17, 2009 11:53 AM CDT reply actions  

5-3 or 4-4
the LIONS barely lost a ton of games. there is no way they will go 0-16 again, they could win 6 easily.

No, that isn’t really true. The Lions only suffered 3 really close losses: by 2 to the Vikings, by 4 to the Vikings, and by 4 to the Bears. The Texans beat them by 7 (but a TD isn’t really that close), and the other 12 games were decided by 8-37 point margins (including 4 losses by more than 21 points each).

It says a lot about the 2008 Vikings that they played 2 of the closest 3 games vs. the worst team ever, and that both games required a 4th quarter comeback!

Really, if the Vikings are any worse than 5-3 or 4-4 by midseason, they won’t have much of a chance to end with a winning record, barring some miraculous level of play from key bench players who take over for ineffective starters.

by KC Viking on Apr 17, 2009 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions  

Ladies and Gentlemen...

The face of optimism!

http://vikingsmashfootball.wordpress.com/

by BeardedAxe on Apr 17, 2009 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

Why not?

Seriously, I think the Vikings can start out 4-1 or 5-0; therefore, I think a winning record (and winning the weak NFC North title) is probable.

I’m an optimistic realist, for the record.

by KC Viking on Apr 17, 2009 6:59 PM CDT up reply actions  

It could just have been bad days. Like I’ve said in another post, we obviously aren’t just barely better than the Lions, because we managed to get to the playoffs last season. And had 10 more wins than they did.

by Frost on Apr 17, 2009 10:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

Maybe

All I’m saying is that the Lions did not lose many close games, and the fact that all Lions losses decided by a TD or less were to the Vikings (the shakiest division winner not in the AFC West), Bears (not quite good enough to contend for a weak division), and Texans (mediocre at best) does not put them in good company.

I think the Lions can win at least 4 games next year, even if they only have an OK draft. We probably can’t count on beating them twice every year from now on after last year’s 0-16 aberration. The Vikings are/were certainly more talented than the Lions, but the coaching and playcalling was only good enough to come back in the 4th qtr both games! The Bears were the only other team to need the 4th quarter at all, and only once. In the Lions’ other 13 games, the 4th quarter (and sometimes the 3rd quarter) could have been skipped without changing the final outcome.

by KC Viking on Apr 18, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions  

It just strikes me as silly. Sure, our games against the Lions were close, no denying that. But we had games against teams that didn’t have close games versus the Lions, and we beat them by more than a TD. I’m willing to chalk it up to sloppy play, because I don’t think the playcalling changed for the other games. The close games were just because AD fumbled in the redzone twice, or something like that, in the first game, and then the second Frerotte was pretty much useless in the first half.

by Frost on Apr 18, 2009 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions  

steelers and ravens sooo beatable

they can’t score. then win games 10 to 3. 17 to 15.
all you need to do is score three times. the barely won a lot of games. they’re not totally dominant

cromscorner.blogspot.com

by Crom on Apr 17, 2009 11:55 AM CDT reply actions  

you are correct

Ravens and Steelers win by small margins. But there might be a good reason for that. maybe it’s cause they had the best 2 defenses in the league last year? Maybe it’s cause they were #1 and #2 against the run. Considering how good they are against the run, and how bad the Vikings are passing the ball, scoring 21+ points is far easier said than done.

by PurplePeopleEaters09 on Apr 17, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions  

Ravens and Steelers

They were also great against the pass, which is the missing link between the Vikings and those two. Ravens: 26 INTs (best in the NFL); Steelers: 20 INTs (6th); Vikings: 12 INTs (tied for 21st/26th).

by KC Viking on Apr 17, 2009 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

Thoughts on these 4 games

Rams – Should be an easy win. While the Vikings can play down to their opponents level sometimes, I think this game will be a dominating effort.

Ravens – The more I think about it, the more I’m not too worried about the Ravens. Their D has always been the strong point, and they lost their most important piece in Rex Ryan. This year’s D is still gonna be good, but I don’t see it being as good as it has been recently. As far as their offense goes, I think the key to stopping them is shutting down their running game. If only we had a team who lead the league in run D 3 years straight. O wait… we do! hahaha. I think with the running game shut down, that will put too much on Flacco. While he can throw some decent passes, he cannot win games by himself.

Steelers – Superbowl champions. enough said

Packers – This game is gonna be in Green Bay, so I have to chalk this one up to a loss at first glance. But with them switching to the 3-4…. who knows.

by PurplePeopleEaters09 on Apr 17, 2009 2:15 PM CDT reply actions  

You Call That Insanity?

As long as we’re having ourselves a temporal psychosis, let’s go 7-1 in the first half of the season! We are significantly unaware (prior to the draft and the trade deadlines and the summer camp and the preseason carnival) regarding exactly who will be throwing our football and who will be catching it; however, we strongly suspect in our heart of hearts that AD is running the thing for us. Who do our opponents have to match that? The stuff that we think that we know appears to be excellent; therefore, our prediction (were it to be made on the basis of whatever the heck we perceive facts to be) might be anticipated to foretell something akin to the nearest thing we have to knowledge. Otherwise, we owe the dear readers (as foolish as they may appear to be in light of their reading this crazy stuff rather that doing their spring cleaning now) some exposition of our philosophy (which might be some loony rationale that implies that we’ve all been doomed since before our births). Damn the bobbing torpedoes, Vikings! Let’s take our boats ashore and burn the suckers, as our namesakes did in days of yore! We’ll befuddle Matt Birk by changing our defensive scheme. We’ll astound Mike Tomlin and his Terrible Towel faithful by smashing THEM in the mouth FIRST. Our opponents are mere mortals here, folks. Sisyphus outwitted a team of gods with his persistence and devil-may-care attitude. Let’s strip ourselves bare of our poor attitude. Let’s respectfully take the stance that we don’t care how many times you’ve knocked that rock from our hands in the past and made it roll back to the bottom of the heap. History was then; this, my comrades, is tomorrow land! We can learn from history by then and attain escape velocity from its gravitational field. Let’s set our sights high. What good is insanity if you don’t even use it? Let’s be wholly insane: Let’s go 7-1 or even 8-0! To paraphrase the mighty philosopher Bradshaw (Terry), light thinks it’s so fast, but darkness always gets there first.

by Elgar on Apr 17, 2009 2:52 PM CDT reply actions  

Possible WIN LOSS !

HEY: We need a quarter Back TJ and Sage are backups at best dont be surpised if we are 3-4 or 4-4 at this point and thats being positive!
JRRRR

by JRRRR on Apr 17, 2009 5:59 PM CDT reply actions  

I stand corrected!

The TRUE face of optimism!

http://vikingsmashfootball.wordpress.com/

by BeardedAxe on Apr 17, 2009 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

Frerotte is a back up at best. I’m pretty sure that even he could have the team better than 3 – 4 or 4 – 4. Good thing that QB play isn’t the only part of the game.

by Frost on Apr 17, 2009 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions  

Gonzo, I have to go against you in suggesting that the Steelers game is unwinnable.

Yes, the Steeler defense is maybe the league’s best but if we can get just a serviceable passing game going the game should be fun to watch as Pittsburgh’s offense is nothing to write home about and their O-line really felt the loss of Alan Faneca last year. Roethlisberger was under heavy pressure all the time late last year and the Cards did the same in the Super Bowl although Big Ben’s toughness and ability to somehow get the ball out stood him in well.

by VikingBillArlingtonVA on Apr 18, 2009 1:33 PM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

DN strives to be the best blog about the Minnesota Vikings on the internet, doing so with a unique blend of insight and analysis, as well as (hopefully) wit and humor. We hope you enjoy the site, and make it your home for Minnesota Vikings info!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Deathstarvikings_small
2012 Draft Player Rankings: Top 10 UPDATE 1.0

Recent FanPosts

Small
Vincent Jackson?
Deathstarvikings_small
Siefert's All NFC North Team
Beardy_small
What luck... A potential FA LT that is actually good...
Small
Vikings 2012 Starting Offensive Linemen
Vikings3_small
Patriots after Spygate, 4-4 in playoffs 0-2 in SB
Snickers_small
What I'll Be Doing Today (Super Bowl)
Sophialoren_janemansfield1_small
Interesting RGIII interview with Sports Illustrated
Small
Good News Everyone
Biggun_small
Vote:Patriots or Giants
Small
Feeling Lucky?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Triangle Of Authority

Dailynorseman_small Christopher Gates

Ted_logo_small Ted Glover

Victory__small Eric J. Thompson

Assistant Coaches

Kira_small MarkSP18

Wiggy_7_small Skol Girl

Headshot_small KJSegall