Peter King Releases Power Rankings in May. . .and That's Not the Funniest Part
by Christopher Gates on May 17, 2010 6:11 PM CDT
in Minnesota Vikings
Email
PrintYes, in his Monday Morning Quarterback column for today, SI.com's Peter King decided to fill a couple of pages worth of space with a fresh set of Power Rankings. In May. Before training camps. Before mini-camps. Before Memorial Day, for crying out loud.
But, since it's football-related material, I decided to check it out, if for no other reason than to look and see where King placed the Minnesota Vikings. You remember the Vikings. . .the team that was a play or two away from the Super Bowl and might have an argument for being the best and most talented team in the NFL? Yeah, those Minnesota Vikings. Well, you'll never guess where Mr. King has those Minnesota Vikings ranked.
"Obviously they have to be in the Top Five," you might say. And, in response, I would have to say, "Ha, ha! You would think that a team with the #2 scoring offense in the NFL and a top five defense in 2009 would be among the five best teams in the NFL. . .but you'd be wrong!"
And you might follow my laughter with, "well, if King doesn't have the Vikings in the top five, then they certainly have to be in the top ten!" And verily unto you, I would again say, "Ha, ha! You would think that a team that earned a first-round bye in the 2009 playoffs and was clearly one of the best teams in the league for the entirety of the 2009 season would be listed among the ten best teams in the NFL. . .but they're not!"
No, ladies and gentlemen. . .Peter King has determined that the Minnesota Vikings. . .12-4 in 2009, returning pretty much everybody from that team, and possessing as much talent on paper as any team out there. . .are currently the thirteenth best team in the National Football League. This means that a team that was as good as Minnesota was just four short months ago is now, apparently, not good enough to make the post-season.
And the reasoning?
13. Minnesota. Whether old What's His Name comes back or not will determine Minnesota's fate. Brett Favre or no Brett Favre, the Vikings have an offensive line in decline.
Holy crap, are you serious? An offensive line in decline? How's about "not so much." Because, see, the Minnesota offensive line that I saw had a starting left tackle and a starting left guard that played with significant injuries for the majority of the 2009 season. . .you're not going to convince me that Steve Hutchinson was 100% last year with the way he looked at times. And, oh yeah, the Vikings started two rookies on the offensive line last year. . .one of whom, Phil Loadholt, was very good for most of the year and the other, John Sullivan, showed flashes at times as well. And the Vikings' offensive line was so far "in decline" last year that the Minnesota offense scored the second-most points in the NFL (with the aid of only one defensive touchdown and two Percy Harvin kickoff returns for scores to pad the offense's total).
But if you think that's funny. . .you should see the NFC teams that King has ranked ahead of Minnesota.
His top choice in the NFL. . .and his #1 team overall. . .is none other than the Green Bay Packers. A team that Brett Favre slapped around twice last season in front of nationwide audiences. A team that registered zero sacks against Minnesota while allowing the Vikings to collect 13. A team that allowed Ben Roethlisberger to drop over 500 passing yards on them. And, if you'll recall, a team that was last seen giving up half a hundred points to the Arizona Cardinals in the NFC Wild Card playoffs.
Mr. King, sir. . .if you're going to declare a team to be #1 in the NFL, they should at least be the #1 team in their division. At this point, the Green Bay Packers are not, and nothing has happened over the last four months to make me believe that the gap between the Vikings and the Packers has even narrowed, let alone indicate that the Packers have passed the Vikings. Seriously, now, get a grip on reality here.
The other NFC teams that King has listed ahead of the Vikings? New Orleans (the only one that makes any sense), Carolina (8-8 last year, though they did beat Minnesota), the New York Giants (a team that was last seen quitting on the field and losing to the Vikings 44-7 in last year's regular season finale), the Dallas Cowboys (who were last seen getting annihilated by the Vikings in the playoffs), and the Seattle Seahawks (a team that went 5-11 last year despite playing in what might have been the weakest division in the NFL and hired a coach that has never had any success at the NFL level).
I mean, really. . .I know stuff like this is done largely to get hits and page views and stuff like that. . .but would it have killed Peter King to have based his views just a little, teeny, tiny bit in reality? There are not 12 teams in the National Football League better than the Minnesota Vikings. You'd have a hard time convincing most people that there are five teams in the NFL better than Minnesota. So, I guess we can put Peter King's name at the top of the list of folks that will be proven laughably wrong by the Vikings in 2010.
148 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
LOL
That is just hilarious. I swear, between ESPN and this Peter King fella there has got to be some kind of anti-Viking conspiracy. The Vikes never got any coverage until Favre (maybe a little for AP). The NFL hatin on the Williams Wall too.
I did actually lol at the “And, if you’ll recall, [the Packers,] a team that was last seen giving up half a hundred points to the Arizona Cardinals in the NFC Wild Card playoffs.”
I was going to do a story on that
but it was such a ridiculous list, I couldn’t bring myself to comment on it.
You are a better man than I.
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile way and you have their shoes.
HAHA
Ya i read it earlier. After i saw where we were and why, I stopped reading. I should have stopped when Green Bay was ranked 1st.
SKOL VIKINGS 2010!!
WORD!!!
Add the fuel so we can power the motors… of the likes of people like J. Allen, Edwards, and the Williams wall to knock down all these offensives lines and show Mr. Peter King shouldn’t have some teams at #1.
With the offensive line Rodgers had last year, I find it hard to imagine a whole lot of improvements were made. I know that they can not by any means be any worse than they were, but, really, a jump to #1?? Someone thinks that the Pack is back….
I think most people are trying to fuel the drama for the Vikings….. I would relate it to something of the sorts to let someone else use his article to declare that the likelihood of Favre returning is hurting the rankings of the Vikings…
Well, what do the rankings mean if they are guess ahead of all camps? Absolutely nothing… Weren’t the Packers expected to take the division last year? No disrespect to the Packers, but a lot of these so-called hot-shots are just not good at predictions….
Well, we can be assumed to be great, or we can just assume we have a lot to prove. I believe we play better when we are out there having something to prove. It seems we lost most of our games when it felt that we had the easy game… (I.e., Chicago, Carolina, etc.) —
Some games we lost were just down Physical (I.e., Steelers, Saints), but the ones mentioned as easy games were just not well planned.
Whatever floats this guys boat…. #13…….. Wow
he's not totally off base....
I certainly would have the Vikes in the top 5, unlike King, but I don’t think it is far fetched to say that we have an offensive line in decline. Go to Pro Football focus and they have the stats that supports that line of thinking (http://profootballfocus.com/forum/showthread.php?t=56)
The reality is that Birk is sorely missed and Sullivan hasn’t adequately replaced him yet. Herrera had a bad year; Hutchinson wasn’t what it was (maybe or maybe not injury related); and McKinnie was up and down. So compared to what they were – with Birk and Hutch at full strength – last year certainly suggested that the line might well be declining.
Would I put the Pack #1? No, but I do think they have a terrific QB and defense as we saw in the second half of the season. I put the vikes just a bit above them because of the explosiveness of our offense and all our weapsons (Rice, Harvin, AP).
fwiw, I’m a huge vikes fan but try and analyze things with some sense of detachment.
Yes you could make the argument that the VIkings line is in decline. For the sake of argument let’s just say King is 100% right. If the Vikings line is in decline what is the Packers line doing?
This hits just keep on coming
Gave up 51 sacks (Worst in the NFL) Gave up 93 hits on the QB (7th worst)
While at first the running game looks okay if you narrow the stats to actual run blocking IE eliminate the QB scramble and other Non- Running backs the Pack’s running stats are about league average. 374 att 1,561 Yards 4.17 YPC and 15 TD’s
Clifton (34), Taucher (33), Wells (29) each have only completed a full 16 games ONCE in the last 4 years, and though they might have years left, they are unarguably at thier peak now or on the down side, from here on out.
Pretty much the definition of offensive line in decline.
they did however pick up Baluga which means they have better depth than we do
As well most of those sacks came when Tauscher and the other guy were injured. I wonder how we’d do with load and McKinney out.
It's a lot easier to love the Vikings when they win...
Depth? McKinnie hasn’t missed a game due to injury in 8 years. Not to mention he’s younger then either of the them by two years.
Tauscher was basically out of football for four games last year, has had two knee reconstructions, is older, and hasn’t played a full season in two years.
Clifton’s been getting injuried more and more recently too.
You can’t predict injuries all the time but odds are pretty good that both the “starting” tackles for GB will miss time. Bulaga hasn’t played an NFL game yet, who knows what his impact will be. They better hope he brings more then the 7.5 sacks that Colledge/Lang combo gave up to Jared Allen.
Yeah, your probably right in saying it’s likely either Clifton or Tauscher go down. I think it’s more likely to be Clifton because he struggled badly with minor injuries all last year. Tauscher actually looked pretty good but he is like 32.
Even if both went down we could potentially be ok. Lang started a couple games at RT for us, and he actually did a pretty good job. Who knows how Buluga will be at LT though. For our sake hopefully he can do ok cause I’d bet money that Clifton will be hurt at some point this year.
by packallday555 on May 19, 2010 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions
you are partially right
well remember those issues with their offensive line performance were concentrated in the first half of the season. The second half of the season their line performed much better.
I would argue that the offensive line is not one of the Packer strengths also. However, they do have a much more mobile QA (gotta give rodgers that) which can mask some of those issues.
and, as pointed out below, they used the draft to get a potential starter. For reasons that totally escape me, the Vikes just don’t seem to see the line as a priority. Check out King’s article gain..he has posted a rebuttal to some Vikes fans showing how the average yards per run has declined for each of the past three years. The running game is much less effective than it was and many believe it is OL related.
The thing is
that “being in decline” means headed downward. Your argument is that they declined last year. Those are different. If you think they’ll get worse this year, I’d be interested to hear that argument.
If he doesn't change his rankings by Sept,
post them in the Vikings locker room to get their blood boiling.
At least Peter has a fitting first name.
The best news we could have gotten
King is famous for wrongness. If only he’d put us at 32 we’d be a guaranteed SB winner.
hey guys come on
he is an expert, we should trust every word he says because some idiot wanted to pay him for his incoherent ramblings. I mean come on guys, like he is super smart and all, and winning games and stats doesn’t mean anything, only what team has the coolest mascots.
The Packers have a ‘mascot’?
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on May 17, 2010 9:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Peterking reminds me of a packers fan who claims he or she is an expert like King lol
peter king reminds me of this person on yahoo football board packers.this person KGB say she is an expert on football and peter king is her favorite.well it is a he but last year on profile says it’s a she.his I.D. on packers message board is ( iagreewteddyt).now if you want a laugh go to the yahoo football message board and see what kind of expert he is lmao.
*Poke*
’Ello everyone,
I’m a bit new here, and yes, I am a Saints fan. And no, I am not a troll, which you will find if you give me a chance. If you offer me some respect for myself and my opinions, I’ll return the favor.
Anyways…
I will admit that 13 is rather low to be ranking you guys, but I would be hesitant rank you in the top five. This isn’t because of bias, for the following reasons: Your starting cornerbacks. (Both aging, one with a serious injury.) Brett Favre, if he comes back at all, will be rather old. He’ll still be effective, but I don’t think he can give you the magic he did last year. Your offensive line isn’t the best in the NFL. Hutchinson is one of the best guards in the NFL, if he’s healthy, but losing Birk was a big blow, and quite frankly, I’m not overly impressed with any of the other members of your line.
Those are some important pieces that you’re either not great in, or are fast going down in. You do have some very, very talented pieces of the puzzle set in other places, but I would still rank it as follows.
1# Colts
2# Saints
3#Packers
4#Jets (Probably too high, but I don’t plan on betting against that defense.)
5#Cowboys
6#Vikings
7#Bengals
8#Chargers
9#Ravens
10# Don’t really like anyone else.
If the Williams Wall case happens to go in your favor, I would swap you with the "Boys, thus bumping you into the top 5. However, I don’t think it will end well for either the Williams or Will Smith. Just my gut feeling.
~Jabba
Yeah, I agree too
I think the vikings are going to regress a bit. The Vikings came on top in a lot of close calls that I don’t think will bounce their way this year. Nothing personal, but I don’t think the Vikings are going to be that great this year.
Hey Jabbadatim
The Vikings had a couple of thing go their way last season, but it was the Saints that had all the luck. I don’t think they can repeat that this year. Threre aren’t enough rabbit’s feet in the world to make it happen.
The Vikings pounded most of their opponents. They’ll be “running up the score” next season. You can bet on that.
by JethroBoViking on May 17, 2010 9:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Okay, if you want to play the "luck" card,
Can you show me how the Saints had “All the luck?” I’m talking specific examples, if you have the time to put them out. I’ve asked other people to explain how they had all this luck, and to date, they have all answered with smoke and wind. Is there something there that actually points to the fact that the Saints were really just lucky? I’ll give you a pass on the injuries the Saints had, lets talk luck in games. Unless you would like to bring up injuries, I have no problem with that.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 17, 2010 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Um, there was a little onside kick in the super bowl?
They can say they were clever to call it, but the fact is it bounced directly off of a WR’s face for what should have been an easy catch.
Not to a mention a bizarre series of a fluky unforced fumbles in a certain conference championship game. You can say it reflects poorly on the Vikes, but you can’t say that somehow the Saints caused Peterson to fumble a handoff while we were inside your ten yard line about to put the game away in the first half. Did the Saints cause that fumble through telekinesis somehow?
by princelyfrank on May 17, 2010 11:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't forget some of the regular season luck
Opponents missing easy chip-in field goals…
An interception that ended up being stripped again by the offense and a turnover again.. Just weird luck…
Call it luck if you want
But that is exactly the mentality that was apparently forced into the team last year with all the ball stripping drills. I will say that was a crazy play but i think it was also a fantastic play by Meachem to see that ball in the D’s hands and rip it back out.
Football is easy if you're crazy as hell
Well what might be said better is this
You had a lot of close games last year. More than we did for sure. Now you did win them but you had a very easy schedule (so did we) Your defense is suspect and I think this year you’ll have a much tougher schedule (other than your own conference). I don’t see you winning all of those games again this year. I still see you making it to the playoffs though as atlanta and carolina don’t really have the tools to top you.
It's a lot easier to love the Vikings when they win...
That very well may happen
It’s really hard to predict this early how well they will do. The schedule is without doubt much tougher. Our defense may end up better than you think. We dumped Grant (Finally…) and added Alex Brown, an improvement, and we added some fresh talent via the draft. It’s hard to predict how it will pan out, but I think it will improve. Still, I agree, the close games will be much tougher this time around.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't think you should turn Meachems trip-and-run into just "luck"
That was more hustle and determination than luck. It was a clean strip of the ball, and tremendous effort. I don’t see where luck comes into play in that one.
I already addressed one of the chip shot field goals, but you used plural. Was there more than one I’m forgetting?
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions
Perhaps odd would be a better word than luck for that play. Meachem made a great play but I thought the intercepting player was down by contact before he got up and started running. I know the play was reviewed and upheld but I think the ref missed that part of the call or didn’t see indisputable evidence to overturn. In any event it was a nutty play and Meachem definitely showed some hustle.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions
I'll comment on luck.
Both our teams had some luck last year. We got a couple wins against Baltimore and San Fran that involved some luck. The Saints definitely had some luck in their win against Washington. A couple of other games I thought luck played a role in the Saints winning were games against STL and MIA. The Saints won 6 regular season games by 10 points or less while Minnesota won 3 by the same margin.
The elephant in the room is the NFCC game. I won’t insult you by saying the Saints were lucky to win but a few things broke their way that day. We made a ton of mistakes in that game and while some were forced by the Saints more were errors by the Vikings. I’ll admit that I’m still sour about the PI call in overtime but I refuse to discredit your team by whining. Both teams had opportunities to win the game with the ball in their hands and the Saints capitalized while the Vikings failed to.
The main reason people think the Saints were lucky last year is that they flirted with losing six or seven games last year that they ended up winning. The same could be said of the Colts as well so luck is always a factor in highly successful teams. Having watched a lot of Saints and Vikings football, I’ll say that both our teams were overdue for good luck and last year you got yours. Hopefully this year will be the Vikings turn to catch a few breaks as they’ve run out of ways to screw up at the most inopportune time.
by CanadianViking on May 17, 2010 11:41 PM CDT up reply actions
redskins
redskins make the kick saints lose. lose home field advantage , which was the factor in the nfc champ game . if saints play in dome they lose. redskins released kicker because it was a 98.8 pct making distance. to win it all you need a little luck congrats to the saints for being sb champs but to think your team didnt have lady luck on your side for some games your in denial. the vikes had their share of lady luck too last year but saints had more.
by skol viking on May 18, 2010 12:34 AM CDT up reply actions
Thanks Canadian skol
That’s what I was talking about.
I wish I had a better memory for the names, facts & figures. I know things went the Saints way quite a few times and that Redskins game really stands out.
Oh well, that’s the past. On September 9, 2010 the Saints luck will run out.
by JethroBoViking on May 18, 2010 7:28 AM CDT up reply actions
I never said that we didn't have ANY luck
Because we did. That was never my case. If you read what I was responding to..
The Vikings had a couple of thing go their way last season, but it was the Saints that had all the luck. I don’t think they can repeat that this year. There aren’t enough rabbit’s feet in the world to make it happen. The Vikings pounded most of their opponents. They’ll be "running up the score" next season. You can bet on that.
I don’t think it’s unfair for me to get the impression you were saying that the Saints were merely lucky, nothing else, So allow me to clarify. If they were that lucky, I would like to see an abnormal amount of luck.
I can’t argue that the Redskins kicker missing was extremely lucky. But again, every team has some luck, and one kicker missing an untimely kick isn’t unknown. Allow me to give you a prime example from the Saints past.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTGco82JKHo&NR=1
(Un)lucky? Sure. Unheard of? No. I’ll chalk that up to luck, but I still haven’t seen abnormal amounts.
I will argue about those fumbles. The one that AP just dropped during that drive, when you were approaching a score, that was luck. Poor execution, but still luck. Okay, I’ll admit that. What about all the others? I don’t believe there were any other “drops,” if I do remember, the other fumbles were all caused directly by contact. Unless of course, I’m not remember something, which could be the case, it’s rather early. If there was any other unforced fumble, then please remind me before I make a fool of myself.
The onside kick is rather hard to argue. You can’t deny there was a certain amount of skill and surprise involved, with the execution and the unheard of call. Of course, I can’t deny the Baskett probably should have caught it. And heaven knows what happened during the scrum the followed.
As for the amount of close games, I honestly don’t see how that translates into luck. They had some hard fought battles, and gritted it out. I haven’t ever seen anyone attribute the ability to win fair amounts of close games to luck, it just means the team can play well in the clutch.
As for the refs in the championship game, I could never convince you that the Saints weren’t lucky there, no matter how hard I tried. If that game had gone your way, along with a debatable call or two, I would argue that it’s luck too. It’s a matter of perspective. You guys got lucky with some missed calls as well, but the Saints happened to get a phantom PI call during a rather key time. I would need an entire new thread to make my case, I may put one together sometime.
Again, don’t think I’m trying to say the Saints didn’t have any luck, they did. I’m merely reacting to the impression I was given by the first post. If you guys can find enough luck, enough to make a case that the planets aligned, I’ll be more than happy to admit I’m wrong.
As for the Saints luck running out on Sept. 9th, 2010, I’m going to hold my opinion until after the preseason. I don’t tend to run my mouth before then, in case of key injuries or the such. I don’t like eating crow, so I minimize my chances lawl.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 7:55 AM CDT up reply actions
I think it was P. Harvin
He went for a reach for extra yardage as he was going down, but the ball came lose.
Ya, the contact was around his legs… But he was still going to reach for more yards, and he lost control of the ball..
I don’t think a Saint player wrapping his arms up around some guys legs forced him to fumble as the player is attempting to go for more yards by a reach.
@Deek
This one? With Berrian?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcCeDna7v5s
That one seems to fit what you said, except it was Berrian. If that one is it, then you can see Porter poke it free.
Or is it this one?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qs_CQPdaMps&feature=related
That was Harvin, but he was stripped, he didn’t just lose it.
Youtube doesn’t seem to want to give me a collection of the fumbles, which is rather annoying. Did I find the one you were talking about? If not, I’ll try and go poking through youtube again.
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 9:34 AM CDT up reply actions
I can't access youtube at the moment
I am going off of memory….
It was either Bernard or Harvin… They lost the ball when they were reaching with the ball for extra yards… As I play the play in my head, I imagine Harvin or Bernard (Whichever it was) having their legs wrapped up and as they went down reached for extra yards.
The first one I believe
Is the one you’re thinking of. Tracy Porter had Berrian by his legs, and as Berrian was trying to keep moving, Porter knocked it out, and the Saint recovered. Whenever you can access Youtube, you can give it a look to make sure.
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Thanks Jabba
I think seeing that video just cemented the idea in my head that the next jersey i get is going to be a Porter jersey. He was lights out for us in the playoffs.
Football is easy if you're crazy as hell
He was indeed
He came up with a clutch play it seemed like every time we needed one. I personally am never gonna forget the picture of him running back the pick in the Superbowl.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions
I see your point.
Luck didn’t make you a good team that won the Superbowl but with any team luck is needed to win it all.
Is there something there that actually points to the fact that the Saints were really just lucky?
I think myself and the other commenters listed three or four instances where luck played an important part in the Saints winning games last year. We’re not knocking your team for catching those breaks but the Saints did seem to have more than their fare share of luck last year.
As I said before I’ve watched a lot of Saints football, mainly because a friend of mine is a Saints fan, and I know that the Saints and Vikings have both generally been unlucky in the past. Last year the Saints seemed to finally get the bounces to go their way more often than not. The old question of whether it’s better to be lucky or good doesn’t apply to the Saints because last year they were both.
Luck is subjective so nobody can be right or wrong about it, but there is a case to be made that the Saints won multiple games where luck played an important part.
That video of Carney brings back a pretty funny memory for me. I was watching that game with my friend that’s a Saints fan and I literally saw him go from pure joy to pure rage in seconds. I lost a hundred bucks on that lateral play but watching my usually calm friend lose his mind was priceless : )
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 9:07 AM CDT up reply actions
It very well may be
It’s my bias that causes my opinion they weren’t blessed with excessive luck. You guys did correctly point out several instances where luck was indeed involved, and I take your point. The point I was really trying to make was that the Saints had a legit team last year, not just a lucky one, The coming year will make a better argument than either of us, it will either reinforce the fact that they were really just lucky, or if they actually had a team that was worthy of the superbowl.
I didn’t watch that miracle play live, I’ve only seen the replays. I can only imagine how the Saints fans reacted to that one. All that only to blow the kick. Such horrible years we’ve had. XP
And Deek, I’m going to scuttle off and see if I can find the Harvin play you’re talking about, and if I can, get a post in before class.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions
OK. maybe "all the luck" was a little off base
But, you are the one that came to this site putting the Vikings at #6 on your list.
I’m sure the following stats have been typed a thousand times on this and other sites. Here we go again.
NFC Championship Vikings Vs Saints
Total yards Vikings – 475 Saints – 257
Rushing Vikings – 165 Saints – 68
Passing Favre – 310 Brees – 197
I think a lot of the DN faithful think that the Vikings handed the Saints that game.
Also, Saint’s 2008 season. 8-8, Vikings 2008 season 10-7
Did the Saints get that much better from the year before, or was a little luck involved? You be the judge.
by JethroBoViking on May 18, 2010 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Stats dont lie
But what is missing is the fact that we had considerable advantage in the special teams play. And by considerable i mean lopsided like crazy. Let me elaborate in analyzing the total return yardage:
Vikings (returns – yards)
Punt Returns: 3-15
Kick off Returns: 2-33
Interception Returns: 0-0
Saints (returns – yards)
Punt Returns: 1-0
Kick off Returns: 6-183
Interception Returns: 2-29
That leaves you with 523 and the Saints with 469 total yards. Not so lopsided. With the kind of field advantage we were able to achieve with special teams, voupled with better field position as a result of the turnovers, it’s logical that less yards were accumulated to score points.
Football is easy if you're crazy as hell
This is true.
I think this game was a big reason why we signed a kickoff specialist this year to get more touchbacks and improve our coverage teams which were pretty good in most of the other games we played last year. Fact is that we were tied after regulation after losing the turnover battle 6-1.
The game was and is very frustrating from our perspective because 3 of our turnovers cost us between 9 and 21 points and I believe 2 others led directly to 14 of the Saints points. Then the overtime happened where we were penalized twice and their were four reviewed plays that went the Saints way.
I won’t whine that we were robbed as we made too many mistakes and your team capitalized on them. I will link you to a Youtube video that illustrates our frustration with OT that I stumbled onto today while watching the fumble vids that Jabbadahut linked previously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRd5jkJ1dEo&NR=1
That OT coupled with our many mistakes made this a tough loss to swallow. Usually in a close loss I can brush off the one or two what-if scenarios as par for the course but this game had about ten of those moments for me.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I will admit that the phantom PI was uncalled for
There was nothing there, at all. The fourth down dive by PT, though, the ball broke the first down marker, that was the original call, and there wasn’t anything there to overturn it. I still think it crossed, despite people saying it didn’t. The high-low hit on Favre was very questionable, and we were lucky we didn’t get flagged.
The officials missed calls on both sides, it wasn’t the best of jobs done by the crew. The Saints were the ones that happened to capitalize on the missed calls. I can see how it is hard to swallow the loss, it would have been hard for me as well. I would much prefer the game next year to be called better, because the championship game could have had a much different ending depending on how the calls went.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Nice reply.
You are one of the few Saints fans that acknowledges the poor reffing without resorting to calling us whiners. Objectively speaking I know that the OT reviews were mostly in that grey indisputable area but it was hard to take that many in a row going to one team.
The first pass was a catch while I think the second one moved enough when it touched the ground to be incomplete. The PT dive was enough for a first if you discount the loss of possession when he loses the ball for a second. Again it’s three grey area calls so what can you do?
The PI call is the one call I see as being just plain wrong. Anyway thanks for being classy and unbiased. Both our teams should be near the top of the conference again so maybe we’ll see two rematches next year with some better officials. I nominate Mike Carey’s crew for the job as I think he’s currently the best ref in the league.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Thank you.
And thank you for not being like the hundreds of other Viking “fans” around the internet who do actually whine, without even knowing what they whine about. I’ve enjoyed myself so far. From what I can see, you guys don’t make assumptions without having something to back it up, and are willing to actually discuss it, instead of chanting insults about the refs and the Saints players. Looking forward to next year and my stay here.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions
No problem man.
It’s always nice talking to football fans that know their stuff and can shed their team biases. Congrats on the SB win even though I’m jealous.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks
You guys shouldn’t have to wait too much longer for your SB. Too much talent. All you need in a QB of the future and you have a good shot at a dynasty run, with all of you current talent and young difference makers. Sidney Rice? Percy Harvin? Adrian Peterson? Jared Allen? That much talent verges on sickening for an opposing fan, and I’m just starting.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Um... how? Is complimenting your team whining?
Jealousy, maybe. But whining?
by Jabbadahut99 on May 20, 2010 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions
What exactly are you trying to do?
I’ve been nothing but respectful as of yet, I don’t see any reason for you to be taking shots at me. Are you trying to bait me or something?
by Jabbadahut99 on May 20, 2010 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions
you're cool, jabba...
salty just fell out of the stands and is running around on the field again….security will handle it.
in the future there will be no war...there will only be rollerball.
Every game played
EVERY ONE WITHOUT EXCEPTION HAS PLAYS NOT CALLED. Its meaningless to say that. Some of the plays not called were blatantly dirty.
That’s somewhat misleading though. The 4 touch backs are essentially a 20 yard return each time. So it would be 6-113. eg the first kick off was to the 3 Roby returns 21 yards to the 24. That’s 21 yards of return yardage but only gives a 4 yard advantage over a TB. It was an advantage but not as big as it would appear at first blush.
True
But the turnover and resultant field position also shorten the field considerably. Either way. The two offenses are scary good. And i can’t see them declining in the coming year. Two many weapons on both sides.
Football is easy if you're crazy as hell
Here is a stat from jethrophet's new post
and it’s a dismal statistic for Vikings fans. Saints pass protection #4. Vikings pass protection #14. Still, Brett Favre and the Vikings were one good play away from the Super Bowl. Kind of makes my heart ache for Favre. What an obstacle to have to overcome.
Come on Jabba & Grumps. Switch sides and support the old man. He needs to go out on top.
by JethroBoViking on May 18, 2010 9:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I put the Vikings at 6 on my list
Because that is where I think they fit as of right now. This is a very early ranking, and when you take into account that you still don’t know if Favre will be back, you still don’t know if the Williams Wall will be suspended, you won’t have one of your starting corners at the start of the season, and you still don’t have an offensive line that made me go “wow” last year, 6 isn’t all that unreasonable. It’s early. I haven’t seen your rookies yet. I haven’t seen how a year will effect your young linemen. I haven’t seen if Favre will come back. Depending on how things go, you may move up or down. You could go as high as 2, or as low as 10.
And thank you Grumps, for those figures. I couldn’t have put it better.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions
A 12 man on the field penalty that was not caused by the Saints
Just some flukey miscommunication that had it not happened, Longwell had at least an 80% chance of hitting that FG and the Vikings would have gone onto the Super Bowl. Their is your luck, its how it goes sometimes, but it was your rabbits foot.
Don’t act like you wouldn’t be just as bitter if it happened to the Saints.
Favre's ankle, Starcaps BS and hopefully a busy Piston offseason, oh my. Go Netherlands/Holland/Dutch Soccer(no its not Football)! Also, Lesnar, Lesnar, Lesnar!!!!!!!
You can take it as luck
It depends on your perspective. I personally don’t see how a self inflicted penalty can be blamed on the Saints luck. You shot yourself in the foot, you pay the price. If you see it differently, so be it. You may be right. I this point, I really don’t care if it’s luck or not. We’ve sucked so many years I can’t count them anymore. We were the Aints forever. If it is indeed luck that got us to the SB, I’ll take it. I’d rather luck than another season where we fail again. If we don’t win another SB for the rest of time, I won’t care. We won it once, I’m happy. I’m done arguing over if they deserved it or not.
And I never said I wouldn’t be bitter if the Saints had lost. If you look..
“I can see how it is hard to swallow the loss, it would have been hard for me as well.”
That’s me a few posts back. I’m not dumb enough to think that it wouldn’t sting for me too.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 19, 2010 7:58 PM CDT up reply actions
You got a SB, all that really matters for sure.
I’d take it too, anyway possible. Congrats! Can’t hate on Brees, so it is nice to see him with a ring. I don’t think he threw any INTs(90% sure) in the playoffs and admittedly that ain’t luck. Its damm good.
Favre's ankle, Starcaps BS and hopefully a busy Piston offseason, oh my. Go Netherlands/Holland/Dutch Soccer(no its not Football)! Also, Lesnar, Lesnar, Lesnar!!!!!!!
Regardless of who your team is.....
Vince Lombardi once defined “luck” as being the thing that happens when opportunity and preparation meet.
Good teams take advantage of breaks that go their way. Mediocre teams don’t.
All teams get lucky breaks and unlucky breaks during the course of a season. We only remember those that play a role in changing the outcome of the game. The Saints got a lucky break when the Redskins missed a chip shot field goal. But, they still had to score a touchdown in the final seconds of the game in order to take it to overtime. Had the Redskins been playing the Bills on that day, they would have probably still won after missing the field goal.
Welcome,
Most people on this site will talk to fans of any team that is respectful and somewhat rational : ) We’ve had a rash of Saints fans lately with a few being rational like yourself but a couple of others that were just into chest-thumping and trash-talk. So again, welcome to the conversation and you have correctly identified a couple of our weak areas.
Offensive line and Cornerback are definitely our main problem areas but I do believe both should be a little better this year. Four out of our 5 starters on the O-line were injured at various times last year and two were first year starters. I won’t say that a return to health and added experience means the line will be great but I am optimistic that some improvement will occur. At corner Winfield is healthy again and we have added Lito Sheppard and drafted Chris Cook to fill in for Griffen while he recovers. Again I’m not positive we improved at this position but I don’t think we regressed.
Here’s my top 10
- Colts
- Vikings
- Chargers
- Saints
- Cowboys
- Patriots
- Ravens
- Packers
- Jets
- 49rs
Note: Ranked the Chargers above the Saints based on their weaker division. Weak division is also why San Fran made my list. I think the Jets and Bengals fall back some this year and Miami is my surprise team in the AFC.
by CanadianViking on May 17, 2010 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions
I am a packers fan
Just to make it clear that this is far better based on fact over speculation that the Packers could be on paper the number one offense next year and have a great defense though the cracks on the o-line and the horrifying special teams and lack of depth at DB are something paper can not tell you.
To be honest
I thought about putting the Packers at 5 or 6 but dropped them to 8 because of your injured and aging DB’s and your O-line issues. Your team is solid and I expect a tough competition for the division with us winning it by a slim margin : ) Kinda funny that both our teams main questionable areas (O-line and DB) are the same.
by CanadianViking on May 17, 2010 9:50 PM CDT up reply actions
The Chargers look like they should be a dominating team
But they just don’t seem to be able to put it together when they need to. Thus, I finally just put them lower than I normally do. The only other one I would disagree with was the Patriots at 6#. It is hard to bet against a team with Brady on it, but that’s what I’m doing. Welker was injured, and I have no idea how he will be like when he gets back. Moss just didn’t seem like Moss at times last season , and the defense was rather porous. In another year, if Brady can keep going, they will be back, but I think they will be sleeping this year, building for the next, while the Jets tussle with the Phins for the division. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Miami pulled off something crazy, I like what they’ve done with their team.
Besides the Pats, I can easily see the rest of your top ten happening.
And thanks for the welcomes. :)
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 17, 2010 9:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Just my 5 minute take on things.
Chargers are probably a little high on my list but I think the weakness of their division coupled with their strength gives them a good chance of being a #1 or #2 seed. Patriots should be a little lower but I couldn’t put the Jets or Ravens ahead of them because of Brady who should be better with his knee being 100% this year.
The four teams I believe improved the most this offseason are Miami, Baltimore, San Fran, and Seattle. AFC East and NFC West should be the most interesting division battles as I see a three way race in both.
by CanadianViking on May 17, 2010 10:00 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree that Miami, Baltimore, and SanFran will probably be much improved,
But Seattle caught me a bit by surprise. What do you see in this team? I see a good draft, but will the first year coach Carrol be able to mold his draft and his current talent into anything this season? I see a bright future to be sure, what do you see in the team for the present? I honestly haven’t kept tabs on them as much as I probably should, so I’m a bit curious.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 17, 2010 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions
I included Seattle mainly because of their draft and division.
Seattle isn’t that far from the quality team they were a few years ago. Injuries have killed them in recent seasons and I think their draft was one of the best this year. The major question with them is Hasselbeck’s health as I think most of their team is better this year. They have great linebackers, a revamped running game, decent WRs, and Okung should help solve the problem that Walter Jones late career injuries caused.
The main reason I included them is that the NFC west is so weak that a little improvement could lead to a division title. Arizona losing Warner leaves three mediocre teams and one really bad team in the division. San Fran is my early favorite to win the division but Arizona and Seattle winning it wouldn’t be a big surprise. When Hasselbeck is healthy he’s the best QB left in a bad division and I think that coupled with their draft gives them a good chance at winning the West.
All that being said, whoever wins the NFC west this year will probably be no better than the 5th or 6th best team in the conference.
by CanadianViking on May 17, 2010 11:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Meh Hasselbeck was a good QB when he had a dominant line, and an MVP running back. It’s a long shot that he regains his form at 35, with an inferior team. Not that they aren’t going in the right direction but Arizona has more talent and more proven NFL coaching, despite losing Warner. SF has question marks but certainly less then Seattle.
The division I didn't take into account
I concur with your assessment. I also forgot the Warner is gone, which puts Arizona in a much tougher path to the top of the division.
~Jabba
by Jabbadahut99 on May 18, 2010 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions
The thing to understand
We don’t have a problem with Saint fans or Packer fans or Bear fans or fans of any other particular team.
We have a problem with assholes. That’s all, really. If you’re not an asshole, you won’t have any problems here.
So, with that I say, “Welcome!”
The Daily Norseman - The greatest Vikings' site on the Internet!
by Christopher Gates on May 17, 2010 9:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I've seen this movie before....
Peter King is just confused. Those are really the preseason rankings. The Packers are always the best team in the preseason. If I remember correctly the exact same thing happened last year. The Packers were the consensus favorite, then went ahead and won the preseason super bowl. Aaron Rodgers was so happy, he was twirling all over the place.
He had the saints at like 27 last year at this time.
I wouldn’t worry about it to much.
It's a lot easier to love the Vikings when they win...
But now that we have signed Ryan D'Imperio,
so I am sure Peter King will move us up a few notches. (sly grin and smirk on my face)
2010 Top 10 Power Rankings
1. Vikings
2. Ravens
3. Saints
4. Colts
5. Jets
6. Cowboys
7. Eagles
8. Patriots
9. Falcons
10. Texans
Brett Favre is the Greatest QB in NFL History, Bar None!
Brett Favre will be back in 2010, 100% Guaranteed!
Brett Favre will lead the Vikings to a Victory in Super Bowl XLV, Guaranteed!
by REVENGE4FAVRE on May 17, 2010 9:40 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
hehehe...
Nice, R4F! no Packers on the list!!
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on May 17, 2010 11:40 PM CDT up reply actions
+1 SB!
Ravens have improved in the offseason and Flacco will be a year better. I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see them represent the AFC in the SB.
Favre's ankle, Starcaps BS and hopefully a busy Piston offseason, oh my. Go Netherlands/Holland/Dutch Soccer(no its not Football)! Also, Lesnar, Lesnar, Lesnar!!!!!!!
Could you imagine...?
Vikings vs. Ravens in the Superbowl?
It would be North Division vs. North Division
Purple vs. Purple
Flacco vs. Favre
It would be a nice Superbowl to watch that is for sure.
Yeah
I was going to post something about his disappointing ranking of us. The thing is that he’s far more Vikings friendly than his counterpart, Don “I live in Madison so now I love the fudge-Packers” Banks. Sad. :(
That is why Peter is a trash journalist. Do you seriously see this guy around in five years. Nope, he will be begging for change outside of football stadiums. The guy knows absolutely nothing about sports
"You thought you could beat my team, but yours decided to go have ice cream. Bow to my awesomeness" Brad Childress
Packers are going to be tough
But # 1 is too high. And of course, there is no way we are # 13. Based on how we finished the year how can he say we were in decline? Because of one game where the Saints had a great D plan? If anything, we were getting better based on experience working together.
I will say this our O Line is much worse than I thought
And Loadholt who I thought was doing a decent job really wasn’t. He was 26th in the league for rushing yards off of his side.
It's a lot easier to love the Vikings when they win...
That really only tells part of the picture.
You have to consider AP’s running style, as well as the fact that we are going to run more to the McKinnie-Hutchinson side than we are going to run to the Loadholt-Herrera side. Being 26th in the league for rushing yards off his side just means that we didn’t run to that side a lot.
Now if it were yards per rush attempt to his side of the line, that would be a more accurate measurement.
Besides, he was a rookie. I think he did pretty damn good for a rookie RT. We can’t expect him to be Willie Colon in his first year, give him a break.
actually we don't run more to McKinney's side.
We run mostly up the middle 51%. LLV and I are working on a piece about the line which will hopefully fill in some of the dark murkiness that surrounds it. All in all though I was suprised at how poorly it looks. But then that’s what LLV is for to put a bright shiny spin on it :D
It's a lot easier to love the Vikings when they win...
I've been checking out ProFootballFocus lately on this.
In 2007-2008 our line was top ten in run-blocking and in the mid-20’s for pass-blocking. In 2009 our line was fourth in pass-blocking and dead last in run-blocking. I’m not sure if I buy all of their rating methods, but these rankings show a pretty dramatic change in either our lines area of strength or a change in approach. I’ll be interested in seeing the piece you and LLV are working on as I’m a little perplexed about our O-line.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions
I check that website out quite a bit. I’m still not decided on it either. It’s cool that they do rankings for basically everything you could think of but I’d like to know how they come up with those rankings.
by packallday555 on May 18, 2010 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions
They apparently try to grade every play by every player to come up with their rankings but while some of their rankings make perfect sense, others seem to be way off base. I think part of the problem must be in giving individual grades to a team sport. Plus stats are always just part of the whole picture. The site is interesting though.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, totally agree on the part about individual stats. It’s cool to see them but like you mentioned, football is a team sport, and a certain individual’s success or failure could depend on some of the guys around him.
by packallday555 on May 18, 2010 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions
this is a pretty good one: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol
and this one too: http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats
i noticed we rank 31st in getting stuffed at the line. but we’re kinda middle of the pack on a lot of stats.
in the future there will be no war...there will only be rollerball.
Also unlike other sports football has reactive defense that has much more imput on a given play. Its tough to adjust ratings to account for down and distance, formations and playcalling. Though some like Football Outsiders attempt to do it I’m not sure its of quantitative value, more of qualitative.
I’ve taken a few statistical courses years ago and the main thing I learned is that stats are really malleable and are often influenced by methodology. Basically stats say what the person who analyzed them wants them to say unless the input data is really simple. Applying stats to football as a whole is nearly impossible because of the moving parts and outliers involved. Man, I just wrote a lot that basically boils down to the fact that stats that aren’t simple don’t work very well.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions
You’re right. Every argument made is supported by statistics including all the ones that turned out to be wrong. Its more evident in scientific fields like medicine where incorrect conclusions based on what was believed to be rock solid statistical analysis turn out to be false.
Personally I thought the line was bad at run blocking and mediocre at pass blocking. Injured starters and rookies are the story probably. The question is how will they do healthy and with a year of experience.
where did you get this stat?
He was 26th in the league for rushing yards off of his side.
in the future there will be no war...there will only be rollerball.
We started 1 rookie. Sullivan was not a rookie. Though the Hutch and Mckinnie were pretty banged up.
Funny story… I ran into Steve Hutchinson in my town yesterday. It was weird because I couldn’t figure out where I knew him from. He knew I recognized him, and it looked like he was going to walk over and say something, but I walked out the door because I didn’t want to be “Hey, I know you… But who are you?”.
What confused me was he was not with any other Vikings, he was with that Guy Fieri guy from the Food Network… So I was trying to figure out what movie or TV show this 6’5" 300+lb guy was in, rather than go with the obvious thought which was “Football player”.
With Favre: 1st or 2nd.
Without Favre: 6th or 7th.
He should have put Miami and the Jets a little higher as well.
hahahaha
all of these viking haters out there. This will only put more fule on the fire for the vikings to prove everyone wrong. Skol vikings!!!!
I’m sure we’ll be pretty good this year but I don’t think we deserve the #1 ranking! I don’t know why Peter King always feels the need to bring this unwanted attention to the Packers!!!
1. Colts
2. Saints
3. Vikings (assuming Favre is back)
4. Jets
5. Chargers
6. Packers
7. Ravens
8. Dolphins
9. Cowboys
10. Falcons
I’d move the Vikings down if Favre doesn’t come back (which seems doubtful).
My list - Revised
Colts
Jets
Vikings
Packers
Chargers
Ravens
Saints
Cowboys
Pats
Titans
I think the Jets will be very successful for the fact that their defense is incredibly scary. M. Sanchez is a rookie no more, and their run-game is pretty stout. L-T may bring the needed experience to potentially even boost that. Give that team some incredible receivers and they seem like a shoe-in.
Colts because P. Manning is consistent & accurate. the Colts have normally have great seasons over & over. They draft BPA to give themselves great depth.
Vikings – only if Favre is back….. I think they can beat out the NFC pretty easily. But to be honest, I think the AFC has the better teams at the moment.
Packers – I hate to say this, but Rodgers is a great QB. If you give him time to throw, he can do some damage. Keep him up-right and it’ll be a tought game for anyone. Plus they were #1 at stopping the run last year. I can see why so many people hype them up.
Chargers – They seem to be the Colts kryptonite.. The only team that has put a stop to the colts undefeated streaks..
They have been pretty consistent on being an above 500 team.
Ravens – My favorite AFC team. They did well last year… They put up a great fight with the Vikings (luckyily missed a F/G), they also had a tough division (Much like the Vikings). They have a great defense and a pretty good run-game. Joe Flacco has had a few years under his belt, so all it seems they need is a great pass-attack.
Saints – I put them so low, because, well they’re the Superbowl Champs. Something about going from 8-8 to finishing out on top makes me think that they won’t be taking the #1 seed so easily. They have a lot of tough games ahead of them and shouldn’t have any easy games. Oh, and most of all.. Brees has the Madden Curse on him this year.
Cowboys – We may have ran the score up on them, but, they seemed like a pretty solid team. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them make the playoffs again. I think maybe Romo is finally over his Dec. decline
Pats because I think they’ll make the playoffs again, but exit early.
I think the Titans may make a WC, and maybe win their first game. They were I believe, one of the few teams that were just shy of missing the playoffs.
Well we have nine teams in common on our lists.
Other than San Fran instead of Tennessee the main difference in our lists is that I like the Jets a lot less than you. Their defense is great but I still don’t like their offense. I’m not sold on Sanchez and I think the swap of Faneca/Thomas Jones/Leon Wahington for Ducasse/LT/Joe McKnight will cause their running game to slip this year. In the long run they probably made the right moves for their run-game but I think there will be a short-term drop off.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions
don't forget shonn greene, he's the jets featured guy now
LT is a pass catching option, and joe mcknight is “the other guy” in the stable.
d’brickshaw ferguson, nick mangold, braylon edwards and now santonio holmes…
it’s only on paper yet, but man, that’s hard to ignore with their defense too.
in the future there will be no war...there will only be rollerball.
Didn't forget Shonn Greene.
I just didn’t list him or the other O-linemen because they’re unchanged from last year. Braylon is talented but he’s really inconsistent and gets the drops way too often. Santonio is a quality receiver but he’s facing a suspension and seems to be a bit of a head-case. On paper they are impressive but I see them as a boom/bust type of team. Lots of hype and lots of strong personalities in NY so it’s either going to work great or blow-up.
by CanadianViking on May 18, 2010 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions
ya know, you got me thinking
edwards and holmes each could be a bad influence on each other in the city of new york. edwards does drop should-be-catches, and holmes has name recognition, but i guess he could be a little over-hyped as a receiver (remember, he dropped the first perfect pass in the end zone in the super bowl….but nice catch on the second).
still it’s an upgrade at receiver from where they were last year at this time. i guess the growth of sanchez will be a real key to all of this. he may have to deal with ego and personality flair-ups, trying to keep people happy. that’s would put some sophmore pressure on him.
i’m kinda rooting for them, just because they are something new.
in the future there will be no war...there will only be rollerball.
Lavernius Coles.
Was a beast against us a few years back. Where’d he go?
i've seen the 8-8 seasonin 2008 referenced a few times but...
the saints lost like 4-5 of those games by 5 points or less, including the one to the vikings.. they we’re a much better team then the record showed that year
Well we might have been close in a lot of games
But the end results don’t lie. Football can be a fickle bitch some times that is for sure. All that really matters is the final score. Thankfully last year we were on the winning end of those games.
Football is easy if you're crazy as hell
Isn't the avg. age of GB's tackles the same age as Peter King ?????
Brett will drive down the field on the first series . Wall or not the Saints will watch Brees limp off and the ratings will go back to normal . Who said on paper GB is the #1 OFF ? That is an admittance that Rodgers still isn’t ready to be the field general that they replaced . Maybe if he goes 500% for the next 10 years he will find a way to win in the last 2 minutes ? But not yet !!!!!
Jets got half-dissed too
#7?!? Fer crissakes, they were in AFC championship last year, in only the first year of a new coaching regime, and have had a fantastic offseason!
Even weirder (IMO) than Packers at #1 is Ravens at #2 … they’re good (I always said that here last year, even after we beat them), but I don’t know if that good.
Ravens
Are my favorite AFC team.
They are from a North division
They sport Purple
And maybe because of Joe Flacco or now the addition of Michael Oher…
They picked up boldwin
Which is what they needed a solid receiver. I like the Ravens as well and hope they go far. They are by far my favorite AFC team. Plus Flacco, reminds me of one of the best football movies ever!
It's a lot easier to love the Vikings when they win...
I guess he thinks Boldin is enough to shoot them up to the top tier..I don’t really think offense was their problem last year though. I mean, Boldin will make them better for sure but they were already ok on offense with Rice and Mason. It seemed like they struggled because that defense is getting older, and just isn’t the same as it was 2-3 years ago.
by packallday555 on May 19, 2010 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed on the Jets too. I think they should be the favorite going into next season. They probably had the best defense in the league last season, and added Cromartie and Wilson. If teams though Rex’s blitzes were hard to beat last season, they’re going to be in for a surprise this season.
Plus, their offense will likely improve with Sanchez maturing, and the addition of Holmes. That gives Sanchez, Edwards, Holmes, Cotchery, and Keller to throw too. That’s a pretty good WR corps, and that’s not mentioning their great OL and running game.
by packallday555 on May 19, 2010 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions
yea their running game was great last year
but with the release of thomas jones and leon washington i dont think lt and shonne greene can carry them.
by vikesfan4lyf on May 19, 2010 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Don’t sleep on Shonn Greene. They wouldn’t have released Jones had they not been comfortable with Greene. Keep in mind too, that in the playoffs he took over the #1 spot, and put up 304 yards on 54 carries in 3 games. He also averaged 5 yards a carry in the regular season, though he did only attempt 108 rushes.
by packallday555 on May 19, 2010 11:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Vikings Turmoil
I for one think that the Vikings brass should look to get some stability back to the orginization that they have lost over the last couple of years. The Stadium issue is now at a very bad point and all things lead to LA. the Williams wall court issues need to end adn Favre needs to say something to the team, ( I feel he will bee back )
How Ironic will it be that the Vikings for 50 years have played in the NFL in Minnesota and at 50 they end and go to LA. Our 50th year, lead by a 20 year vet granfather QB it has the makings to be an epic year, and lets just say that this story ends wit ha Superbowl, would a deal get done to keep the Vikes in Minnesota? not sure.
I don’t know what the Govener is wanting, there were anumber of solutions to get this done that would not have raised local taxes. He will be out next year and he can say that he held to his word as he tries to persue his political future. I don’t understand how a State like California that is in worse financial shape than Minn. can already have a stadium accepted and planned with out a TEAM! Don’t tell me about ’markets" a bankrupt state is the same across the board.
I just wish the Vikes would pull it together and quickly.
I would hate to be any politician..
If the Vikings won the Superbowl next year and the Vikings left Minnesota to play their next season in L.A.
I think Minnesota would have an uproar of rage……
Yeah
We can only hope. I currently LIVE in California…but I have no desire to support the “new team” if it did relocate. I know they would not keep the name so it would be like the Browns to Baltimore. At least I have one more year. And I hope that the Vikes have a great year. Any word on OL Pitts??
I’m a braves fan have been since I was a kid
by cali viking on May 20, 2010 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions
The Seahawks?
That’s just embarrassingly bad journalism. He is clearly excited about the Seahawks draft (and rightfully so) but that is a lot of faith for a 5-11 team led by Pete Carroll.
The Giants won’t make the playoffs. The Panthers have 2 rookies competing with a guy who has barely any starting experience for the QB job and lost their BEST player this offseason.
The only way this list makes ANY sense is if he is intentionally setting himself up for the next couple months of moving teams up and down the rankings with no games being played. Gotta fill pages, what better way than amending the BS you filled pages with last week.
In a way I think its a smart call
Things would have to click for the Thompsonettes, but it wouldn’t be all that crazy. If they are competitive into the playoffs, King looks cagey and wise. If they don’t, then its injuries or he’s just a year too early or whatever, yadda, yadda. People almost never look back at these guys’ track records.
Hey deek or R4F has anyone seen that article about how favre went to visit the USM baseball team and promised them if they went back to the CWS he would play another season for the vikes I don’t know but to me that sounds like it’s an easy choice for him to play 1 more year if he’s making an easy promise like that just spit balling let me know what u think +4 skol vikes!!!
Hmm..
No, I don’t recall that article…
But I think recall an article how he was telling a college football team how he may be watching them alot this year… Of something to that sort..
Which basically for people who read into it were assuming he was going to be retired..
This is Favre-Watch!, Until Sept. 9th, we won’t know if he retires or not. HAHA
He may show up on his white horse come 1/2 time at the Saints game..
Imagine if something crazy like that happened. He was signed, but never retired, didn’t show up until 1/2 time of the Saints game and just lights up the scoreboard.
Very Movie-esque like…
Scenario….
Oh man, T-Jack, he just can’t get anything done.. I miss B. Favre!! 21-0 at 1/2.. Not a great way to open the season..
1/2 time………..
Than, after the team takes the field… Getting ready for the kick-return…. All cameras are on the visiting teams entrance.. Here walks out #4 in White & Purple… Jogging out to the sideline..
the NO Crowd is dead-silent as they have this “Oh Sh1t!” expression on their faces..
Favre goes flawless and has a 100% completion % with 5+ TD passes
Final score 45-21
haha
Yea deek that would b the shit hey but that article I was telling u about it just came out it’s on the home page for the vikes on yahoo sports check it out and let me know what u think I guess he just did this yesterday let me know skol vikes!!!!
HAHA
The fate of our QB for the 2010 season relies upon the Southern Mississippi college team making it back to the finals.
Here is a quote that I love though:
“Let’s make a (fun) bet,‘’ Favre said. ’’If you guys go back to the College World Series this year — I will come back and play. How about that?
This tells me the following, Favre is not 50/50 on his return… If anything, he is leaning towards returning.. People complain about the team being held hostage, or his ego, but for all we may know is that Chilly already knows the answer!?!?
Look at what we have seen…
No QB drafted in the draft, with the exception of Webb (who was drafted ideally to be a receiver)
We looked at Ryan Perilloux or whatever his name is, who shared the same agent as Favre (Who I believe was working out…….. and giving pointers to Ryan)…..
So wait, Favre, was he working out?
Than the article comes out about the surgery, and he is saying he wouldn’t need surgery to necessarily come back. Its just bones spurs, and even if he did have the surgery the process would be minor & simple.
Now, you throw in the following: The teammates want him back, the coaching staff wants him back, and a lot of the FANS want him back. There are facebook groups that ask for his return, etc. etc.
You have a few bitter fans who are upset with him delaying a public decision, but he may already know… Remember folks, he has to retire, so as of now he is still a MN Viking.
I don’t think he could wait until the last minute to retire.. That would be found by many as being classless..
I totally
Screwed up my Quoting..
Where is the DAMN edit button?
deek some how i new after i read that article it was going to be news all over everywhere skol vikes!!!!!
Ah
I’ve only seen it on the Pioneer Press so far…
That was how it was linked from the yahoo sports page.
If it’s made it anywhere else, I have yet to read it, but already know the article since I read it myself.
And as for Brett Favre news, any news is BIG B. Favre news…
Brett could trip in his lawn while doing yard work and it’ll make the front page.
“Brett trips in his own yard doing lawn work”
(With the first sentence of the article going something like this)
Does this mean good old grandpa Favre has lost a step? Is that ankle still causing him issues? And if he can’t walk in his own yard, what makes him think he can return playing football?
Anyways, any sports writer, papparazzi willing to put together something that pitiful needs a better lifestyle and or employment. That would just be too much
OK
Who the hell is Peter King And why do we care … After all he is a Giants fan that is about to jump ship and become a Jets fan …
by VikinginCalifornia on May 24, 2010 12:27 PM CDT reply actions
Where's the accountability
This is why I’m done with journalists and analysts, and prefer to read hometown bloggers. ESPN and SI are all about headlines and NO, I say NO follow through.
Who ever takes these guys to task months after the fact by saying “You analysis was DEAD WRONG because it’s been proven that none of your assumptions were true?”
If the Vikes O-line is responsible for AP having 2,000 yards this upcoming season, along with giving up the least number of sacks (with Favre there’s no way that’d happen, I’m just sayin’), would we EVER HEAR Peter King say he was wrong?
I just choose to call him a fool, the same way I still do to this day about MERRILL HODGE, who about 5 years ago when Jamal Lewis ran for 280 or whatever yards in a game, setting the NFL record, that he guaranteed that he would run for over 300 the next week…oops. If someone said that on a Ravens Blog they would never be taken seriously again. ESPN signs an extension for that type of Skip Bayless trash…
I’m done.
by All'Aboard'The'Purple'Love'Boat on May 24, 2010 8:39 PM CDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Daily Norseman
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Roger Goodell wants Wi-Fi in every stadium
- Plaxico Burress wants to workout for the Dolphins; Dolphins don’t want Plaxico Burress
- NFLPA files collusion claim against NFL, claiming salary cap arrangement in uncapped year
- Donald Driver compared winning ‘Dancing With The Stars’ to winning Super Bowl
- Report: Most NFL players would have no problem with an openly gay teammate
