Jump to content



Recent headlines from The Baltimore Sun

Photo
- - - - -

Anyone watching the Eagles @ Vikings can see


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 02:47 PM

...that the win last week over the Vikings was no gimme the way some people are saying. They are an explosive team with Cassel and his WRs. And they're doing it without Peterson and Gerhardt.



#2 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63,680 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 08:53 AM

The Vikings are 4-9-1, that speaks for itself


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#3 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 11:05 AM

The Vikings are 4-9-1, that speaks for itself

No. It doesn't.



#4 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63,680 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 11:06 AM

No. It doesn't.

Yeah it does. Especially when you have the top RB in the league


Edited by bmore_ken, 16 December 2013 - 11:06 AM.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#5 ivanbalt

ivanbalt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,624 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 11:41 AM

The Vikings are 4-9-1, that speaks for itself

 

I think the Vikings are better now that they aren't starting a different QB each week.  Their defense is still pretty bad.



#6 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63,680 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 11:49 AM

I think the Vikings are better now that they aren't starting a different QB each week.  Their defense is still pretty bad.

Yep. 31st in the league and allowing 30 PPG. And the offense is 30th in points scored. They may be better with Cassel but it's still a bad team


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#7 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 12:16 PM

Yeah it does. Especially when you have the top RB in the league

Yet again you demonstrate the "simple minds for simpleminded solutions" principle. They are a different team with Cassel than with Ponder. But you can't seem to recognize that. So what else is new?



#8 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63,680 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 12:36 PM

Yet again you demonstrate the "simple minds for simpleminded solutions" principle. They are a different team with Cassel than with Ponder. But you can't seem to recognize that. So what else is new?

I realize you have a reading comprehension problem so I'll explain my previous post in 3rd grade language. I said

 They may be better with Cassel but it's still a bad team
 

 

Now what that means to you 3rd graders(hopefully I've dumbed it down enough for you to get it) is that the offense seems to be better under Cassel, it still however is not a good team. A team consists of three parts, offense, defense, special teams. The Vikings have one of the worst defenses in the league, so it is not a good team.


Edited by bmore_ken, 16 December 2013 - 12:37 PM.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#9 Dub

Dub

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:09 PM

The Vikings are 4-9-1, that speaks for itself

 

You are what your record says you are.



#10 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:34 PM

You are what your record says you are.

Not necessarily. Especially when major changes at QB have taken place over the course of the season.



#11 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:36 PM

I realize you have a reading comprehension problem so I'll explain my previous post in 3rd grade language. I said

Now what that means to you 3rd graders(hopefully I've dumbed it down enough for you to get it) is that the offense seems to be better under Cassel, it still however is not a good team. A team consists of three parts, offense, defense, special teams. The Vikings have one of the worst defenses in the league, so it is not a good team.

They were good enough to beat the division leading Eagles, who have one of the better offenses in the NFL. So again...logic goes out the window when dealing with simple minded folks like yourself.



#12 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63,680 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:47 PM

They were good enough to beat the division leading Eagles, who have one of the better offenses in the NFL. So again...logic goes out the window when dealing with simple minded folks like yourself.

They gave up 30 points to the Eagles. Their defense is allowing 30 point a game. Unless Cassel turns into Peyton Manning over night this would still be a bad team


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#13 Dub

Dub

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:59 PM

Not necessarily. Especially when major changes at QB have taken place over the course of the season.

 

Yes, necessarily. Playoff seedings are determined by......records.

 

It is not decided by a BCS committee or a board. The saying goes, if you play more then 1 QB, then you really do not have a QB. Cassell is a back-up for a reason. He will continue to be a back-up, or Vikings will win 5-6 games again next year.



#14 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 02:03 PM

The Vikings were a one dimensional team because of Adrian Peterson. HE was the face of the offense/franchise. Without him, and with Cassel in vs Ponder, they are a different team. Also, Patterson has matured as the season has progressed, and he's much more of a weapon now than at the beginning of the year. Either you see that, or you don't. But to insist that they are the same team now, because of their record, because of how they were for the first part of the season, is ridiculous. They are a dangerous team, and they proved it. That is the point.

 

And closer to home...last year the Ravens were NOT the same team after they fired Cameron and inserted McKinnie at LT and moved Oher to RT, despite what their record was at the time. To a lesser degree, the Ravens are NOT the same team now that Pitta is back. To try to establish causality by looking at W/L records is simply false. It's a nice little sound bite, but it's one of those "simple solutions for simple minded people". The truth is much more complex than that.


Edited by OriginalColtsFan, 16 December 2013 - 02:45 PM.


#15 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63,680 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:24 PM

The truth is much more complex than that.

No it isn't. A team with 4 wins after week 15 is a bad team no matter how you slice it


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#16 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:30 PM

No it isn't. A team with 4 wins after week 15 is a bad team no matter how you slice it

Again...simple solutions/reasoning for simple-minded people.



#17 jamesdean

jamesdean

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,331 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 06:31 PM

Like a lot of teams in the NFL, the Vikings have a horrendous defense.  Cassell's played well and has put points on the board but it's pretty tough for any offense to keep up with a defense that's as bad as Minnesota's.  Actually, the 2013 season is beginning to remind me of the steroid period in baseball.  It's whoever bludgeons the opposition the most with points usually wins in the end and the record says the Vikings have failed in that category 9 times.



#18 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 07:04 PM

Like a lot of teams in the NFL, the Vikings have a horrendous defense.  Cassell's played well and has put points on the board but it's pretty tough for any offense to keep up with a defense that's as bad as Minnesota's.  Actually, the 2013 season is beginning to remind me of the steroid period in baseball.  It's whoever bludgeons the opposition the most with points usually wins in the end and the record says the Vikings have failed in that category 9 times.

1. Their D is poor.

2. The games prior to Cassel taking over have nothing to do with the games after he took over on offense. As has already been pointed out. And for years, the Saints had a horrible defense but a very potent offense. They were the inverse of the Ravens -- who had a very potent defense and an anemic offense. The way the rules have changed, potent offenses are more likely now to beat potent defenses. The teams that succeed are the ones who have balance on both sides of the ball, but still who tilt towards the offense.

 

That's why the Chiefs are not as strong as their record appears. (A perfect example of teams that are NOT necessarily what their records says they are. You have to factor in strength of schedule, injuries and/or when they occur, and other factors as well, including, but not limited to, weather, etc. For example, it's been discussed that Manning does not play as well in cold weather. So given the fact that we're heading into the coldest part of the season, it's reasonable to suggest that what Manning did in the early part of the year has less relevance to the projected success of his team than what he's going to do now.)


Edited by OriginalColtsFan, 16 December 2013 - 07:52 PM.


#19 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63,680 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 04:56 PM

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Cincy 42-Cassell and the Vikes 14. Yet another Epic Fail!!!!! by OCF


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#20 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,352 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 07:05 PM

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Cincy 42-Cassell and the Vikes 14. Yet another Epic Fail!!!!! by OCF

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users