What a Start! A Few Observations

What a fantastic way to start the year. I can't imagine a better way. There is no team or fan base I dislike more than the Green Bay Packers. They are incredibly arrogant and entitled and a reflection of their lying family-betraying immature quarterback.

I could not have scripted this start better. I know some people love close games that at least go down to the wire if not into overtime. My late great dad felt that way. Yes, those are fun but sometimes they are more of a statement of luck than of skill. I love a game we control and lead all the way through and toy with the other team like we're a cat and they are a mouse. That's what we did last Sunday.

This was a statement game, for sure.

I thought we'd lose this game and still go 11-6 this year. Now I'm upgrading to 12-.5. For what it's worth (not much at all) I also predicted we'd lose to the Eagles and thus start the year 0-2 but still finish 11-6. If we can beat the Eagles, I don't think 13-4 is impossible. Our schedule is highly amenable.

Yes, I've got the stars in my eyes and the purple Kool-Aid in my belly.

A few words of caution, though. Half the teams are 1-0. It's only the one game. The Packers this year are a lesser team in comparison to last year. This week the Packers face the Bears who were monsoon lucky to win last week. After Week Two, the Packers will be 1-1. If we don't beat the Eagles, we'll have the same record as them -- though obviously with the tiebreaker advantage (very early to even talk about that).

To maintain a clear-cut better-than-them in the public eye status, we need to win in Philly. Also, as usual, people keep moving the goal posts on Kirk. He's won Monday night games but they say the wins should not count because it was against Chicago. Well, they were better for those two games than they are today and it is incredibly hard for Vikings to win in Chicago which has so haunted us. Don't take those wins from Kirk!

We need the win in Philly to publicly validate Kirk -- though the pundits can shove it where the sun does not shine. It's funny, if he plays poorly and we win, he'll be a winner whose put his Monday night "jitters" to bed. If he plays lights out but we still lose, then they'll say he still isn't ready for the big stage. Pundits. Such simplistic thinkers.

Speaking of simpletons, CBS Sports got rid of Jason LaCanfora. I was a hater of his for quite a while. If teams did not feed him info, he pretended he had inside info that made the team look bad. No on on the Vikings would give him the time of day so he often trashed them, trashed ownership, everyone. He did the same to the Baltimore Ravens because they would not let his lying mouth in the building. The Ravens are a well-run org but he would trash them terribly.

LaCanfora's lies and sour attitude and vindictive selfishness will not be missed. Remember how he always said Cousins was a waste of money? But he never had a different solution at QB, did he? He also publicly advised the Vikings to make Dalvin Cook the highest paid RB in the NFL -- just months after telling the Titans not to resign Travis Henry because he was only a running back. He said Vikings ownership should pay Cook the most money in the NFL because ownership was already throwing money all over and wasting it so they may as well (words to that effect). LaCanfora would have possibly been the NFL's all-time worst GM if any team was fool enough to let him do it.

I did not want to spend any time on Zimmer in this post as I think we are all tired of beating up an old man who cannot fight back. It was not my intention. We moved on and it was the right move. The win Sunday did not validate that firing Zimmer was the right thing to do. It was the right move in and of itself no matter what happened on Sunday. It was time to move on. The win Sunday only serves to begin to validate that we hired the right head coach. Just a start.

I bring up Zimmer because many people are buying into or promoting a false story line. They claim poor offense and a run-first offense were why Zimmer was let go. Incorrect. As per offense, he was more or less the same all 8 years and, in fact, his latter years were more effective offensively. It was poor defense, his field of expertise, that did him in. Our offense the last two years was better in yards per game than the Packers offense over that same time span. Yet the Packers are supposedly offensive geniuses. And Shanahan in SF is called an offensive "mind" or genius and yet openly says he is run first. As was Pete Carroll even with Russell Wilson. Other HCs who are run-first? Smart guys. Zimmer is run-first (even though he actually was not)? He's a dinosaur!

Surprisingly, one person pushing forward the false narrative is Adam Thielen, at least in part. His recent talk of never having been part of such an attacking offense. Really? When he insults past Vikings offenses, he is more insulting past OCs than Zimmer. So, really, Gary Kubiak, no good? Kevin Stefanski who went on to become an HC based on offensive success with the Vikings? No good?

Let's take a fair and objective look. What can be more objective than factual numbers?

Always compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges, right?

This last game, Kirk Cousins threw for 277 yards, 2 TDS, 0 INTs, and went 23 of 32. That's great!

Last year, same game, at home versus the Packers, Cousins threw for 341 yards, 3 TDs, 0 INT, and went 25 of 35. I may be poor at math but that is an even better performance than this year. How did Cousins do so well under a dinosaur and not better under this new-fangled "attacking" offense the best that Adam Thielen has ever seen?

Oh, because it emphasized Justin Jefferson? Yes, this last game he had 9 catches, 184 yards, and 2 TDs. I'm a huge fan. But last year he had 8 catches for 169 yards and 2 TDs. Pretty similar!

In fact, interestingly, it is Thielen who appears not to do well in an "attacking" offense. Last year he had 8 catches for 82 yards and a TD. This year he had 3 catches for 36 yards and no TD. Last year KJ only caught 1 pass and this year he caught 3 passes. Well, you've got me there. Or do you? His 3 catches only totaled 14 yards and last year his 1 catch was for 19 yards. Which is the more explosive "attacking" offense?

As per run game, you know that old run-first dino Zimmer, had Cook run 22 times for 86 yards and a TD. Shame on Zmmer! Shame! Just terrible! He ran Cook that much and let him run in a TD? Shame! Whereas this year, with the brilliant offense with the attacking style we dared to run Cook 20 times for 90 yards and no TDs. See that huge difference there?

Last year we had 25 first downs.

This year we had 19 first downs.

Last year we were 9 of 13 on 3rd down conversions. Remember, we were weighed down by Zimmer!

This year, without the weight of Zimmer weighing us down and, let's face it, without all those times he stuck a foot out to intentionally trip our offensive players, we were finally able to go 4 of 13 on 3rd down conversions! Yes! Less than half as many successful third down conversions on the exact same number of attempts. That's good, right? (Please understand the sarcasm or you will think I am of lesser intellect.)

I think you get what I'm saying. We have a right to opinions but not to alternate facts. We don't need to reshape history -- or the present -- with false statements. It was time to move on from Zimmer and we did. He was a winning coach who did great here but it was time to move in a new direction. That's all we have to say. We don't need to vilify or lie. That's Packer fan activity. They throw all their players and coaches under the bus as soon as they leave them. We need to be classier than them or we'll have no class at all because we all know they don't. (Mostly. They have a few reasonable and well-behaved fans. No group is all bad. Except Nazis. And white supremacists. And the Three Stooges.)

Speaking of no class: Aaron Rodgers. My gosh! Seeing his face and demeanor and those sacks on him and that interception of him was probably nearly half the joy of the game. What a crappy person! Paid 50 million or so per year!

Those making excuses for his play (there is no excuse for his ugly personality), let's take a look. As per pass pro, his pass protection was actually nearly the same as Cousins' in that game. The sacks made it look worse but he held onto the ball too long like usual. He no longer scrambles, too fearful of injury and too self-conscious of how his bones creak like an old-time sailing ship under full wind.

Pass pro was not the difference. In fact, Cousins' pass pro was as bad or worse than previous years and its always been horrific here. Yet he still performs with excellence.

The true difference, and a valid excuse, is the WR play. Think about this: Our 3rd WR (Osborn) is better than their number 1 WR (Lazard) and he did not even play!!!!!! We also see QBs like Joe Burrow do great even without pass pro as long as they have great WRs. For this reason, I now believe a premier WR is more important even than a top LT.

Monday night is a huge game. If we can win this game then I think we'll be the top team in the North all year long and have the equivalent to a walk-off division crown. We can even be in it for top seed in the playoffs. Huge game. Best of luck to our Vikings!!!!!

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.