Poor Vikings. - Page 4

mlyons · 11-30-2009, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think his point is that the Vikings dominated yet another team. The Vikings, Saints, Colts and Patriots seem head and shoulders above everyone else in the league right now. Should make for some fantastic Conference Championship games and some boring Divisional Championship games.

I think I'd agree with that much, at least, although I'd toss the Chargers into the mix right now, as well. If the Saints win tonight it'd be really hard not to consider them on another level from the Vikings (who are a level up from everybody else in the NFC), though.

canadiancreed · 11-30-2009, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think his point is that the Vikings dominated yet another team.

Bragging about beating a team that will be lucky to finish at .500...ya...

jbergey22 · 11-30-2009, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

Bragging about beating a team that will be lucky to finish at .500...ya...

Its not so much beating them. They dominated the game start to finish. Even though the Bears are struggling its still a division rival that usually plays the Vikings tough.

The fact that the Bears had 2 yards in the 2nd half is not a good sign for the Bears. It basically means they have no pride even against a rival.

MorseMoose · 11-30-2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

Bragging about beating a team that will be lucky to finish at .500...ya...

Show me a time when a team has held an opponent - 0-16 or otherwise; to 2 yards in a half. I don't care if the Bears are terrible...a team should be able to muster up 10 yards by accident.

Skipaway · 11-30-2009, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

Show me a time when a team has held an opponent - 0-16 or otherwise; to 2 yards in a half. I don't care if the Bears are terrible...a team should be able to muster up 10 yards by accident.

In 1979, Seattle, a 9-7 team that year, lost to Los Angeles, another 9-7 team, gaining negative seven yards for the whole game.

jbergey22 · 11-30-2009, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skipaway

In 1979, Seattle, a 9-7 team that year, lost to Los Angeles, another 9-7 team, gaining negative seven yards for the whole game.

Impressive. Was Zorn the QB?

MorseMoose · 11-30-2009, 08:32 PM

Here's a good thread:

2 yards!!! - Page 2 - DaBears - Chicago Bears Message Board and Fan Blog Site

Skipaway · 11-30-2009, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Impressive. Was Zorn the QB?

Yeah, and the only first down was a Zorn pass to Largent.

Skipaway · 11-30-2009, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

I think I'd agree with that much, at least, although I'd toss the Chargers into the mix right now, as well. If the Saints win tonight it'd be really hard not to consider them on another level from the Vikings (who are a level up from everybody else in the NFC), though.

Well, so far the Saints seemed to be on a different level from the Patriots.

Erik W. · 11-30-2009, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

I'll continue to take the "poor vikings"

Best in the NFC, for shizzy.

I love me some Favre, but sorry, the Saints are better.

jaxmagicman · 11-30-2009, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

I'll continue to take the "poor vikings"

Best in the NFC, for shizzy.

Yeah, I am going to have to go with the Saints right now too.

Russ · 12-01-2009, 12:01 AM

I don't know. The Pats have kind of lost their luster. I'll take the Vikings.

jbergey22 · 12-01-2009, 12:06 AM

Saints weakness is stopping the run. Vikings will be able to exploit that. Im not sure anyone can stop the Saints offense though.

I know one thing for sure I dont want to have to go to New Orleans for the playoffs. Brees is a beast inside that dome. Need the Saints to lose and somehow gain HFA.

mlyons · 12-01-2009, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Saints weakness is stopping the run. Vikings will be able to exploit that. Im not sure anyone can stop the Saints offense though.

In a hypothetical neutral site game between the Vikings and the Saints, I could see Favre and Peterson doing really well and the Vikings scoring 27-32 points. They'd allow 35-40, though, and that'd only be an average day for the Saints' offense.

The Vikings are very, very good, but I just don't see how you can consider them better than the Saints right now.

molarmite · 12-01-2009, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

In a hypothetical neutral site game between the Vikings and the Saints, I could see Favre and Peterson doing really well and the Vikings scoring 27-32 points. They'd allow 35-40, though, and that'd only be an average day for the Saints' offense.

The Vikings are very, very good, but I just don't see how you can consider them better than the Saints right now.

So you think a defense that has given up 31 points as a high, and has only given up over 20 points one other time will let the Saints score 40? As good as the Saints offense is, I can see them scoring 30 MAX. I would say both scores hover around 30 and it would be decided on a single turnover, unfortunately it would likely be a Peterson fumble.

Delgadodawg · 12-01-2009, 01:05 PM

I give it to whichever team has home advantage if they meet in the playoffs. It would be very tough for Minnesota to go into the Superdome and come out with a win, but I think Minnesota would take the game at home.

jbergey22 · 12-01-2009, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

The Vikings are very, very good, but I just don't see how you can consider them better than the Saints right now.

Im not sure that I did say the Vikings were a better team right now. Vikings are a more complete team roster spots 1-53.

Vikings have a great offense, great run defense, great pass rush, great special teams. The Saints have a great pass offense with many weapons and an opportunistic defense that creates a lot of TOs.

Like molarmite said it would be a great game likely decided by a TO.

Vikings probably have more ways of winning the game which makes them exciting this year.

Vikings could win by passing, running, special teams. Where as the Saints are going to need to beat the Vikings by passing the ball because the Williams are a brick wall in the middle.

The game last night in which the Saints dominated the Patriots start to finish did show me that Saints arent a joke this year. Their defense has somehow improved to the point to where they can now hold good teams in check instead of just being able to outscore bad teams and give up too many points to beat good teams.

bear · 12-01-2009, 02:56 PM

The Vikings

I still have recurring nightmares seeing Hugh McElhenny stiff-arming Joe Fortunato on a sweep in the Vikes debut when they humiliated the Bears.
That was humiliation.

Losing Sunday to the Vikes wasn't humiliation. With the Bears really sucking this season it was expected. I didn't expect anything out of this Bears squad Sunday and they didn't disappoint me.

jbergey22 · 12-01-2009, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bear

The Vikings

I still have recurring nightmares seeing Hugh McElhenny stiff-arming Joe Fortunato on a sweep in the Vikes debut when they humiliated the Bears.
That was humiliation.

Losing Sunday to the Vikes wasn't humiliation. With the Bears really sucking this season it was expected. I didn't expect anything out of this Bears squad Sunday and they didn't disappoint me.

LOL Bear. You are always good for a laugh.

I was disappointed that the Bears quit. I had a feeling it would be a blowout but the fact they quit against a division rival is scary.

Skipaway · 12-01-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Vikings probably have more ways of winning the game which makes them exciting this year.

Vikings could win by passing, running, special teams. Where as the Saints are going to need to beat the Vikings by passing the ball because the Williams are a brick wall in the middle.

I don't think the Vikings have more ways of winning the game. Saints have more rushing touch downs, more passing touchdowns, more touchdown by defense, and only one fewer return touchdowns.

12-01-2009, 12:01 AM	#72
Russ All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Essex HON! Posts: 1,923 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	I don't know. The Pats have kind of lost their luster. I'll take the Vikings. __________________ If you don't love Russ, you don't love America. This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

12-01-2009, 12:06 AM	#73
jbergey22 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,481	Saints weakness is stopping the run. Vikings will be able to exploit that. Im not sure anyone can stop the Saints offense though. I know one thing for sure I dont want to have to go to New Orleans for the playoffs. Brees is a beast inside that dome. Need the Saints to lose and somehow gain HFA. Last edited by jbergey22; 12-01-2009 at 12:08 AM.

12-01-2009, 02:56 PM	#78
bear Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Chicago Posts: 18,797	The Vikings I still have recurring nightmares seeing Hugh McElhenny stiff-arming Joe Fortunato on a sweep in the Vikes debut when they humiliated the Bears. That was humiliation. Losing Sunday to the Vikes wasn't humiliation. With the Bears really sucking this season it was expected. I didn't expect anything out of this Bears squad Sunday and they didn't disappoint me. __________________ Bear's Unstable UTBA Season Four Gold Conference Central Division Champion First UTBA expansion franchise to win a conference divisional title

11-30-2009, 08:32 PM	#67
MorseMoose Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 6,023 Infractions: 1/1 (1)	Here's a good thread: 2 yards!!! - Page 2 - DaBears - Chicago Bears Message Board and Fan Blog Site

12-01-2009, 01:05 PM	#76
Delgadodawg All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Vancouver Posts: 800	I give it to whichever team has home advantage if they meet in the playoffs. It would be very tough for Minnesota to go into the Superdome and come out with a win, but I think Minnesota would take the game at home.