If the Vikings look like a duck ...

[Mothman]

What does the Vikings dominant 30-7 blowout of Tennessee mean in the context of the Titans 26-23 win over the Steelers last night?

It couldn't possibly mean the Vikings are any good. It just means that the Steelers are worse than first thought.

It could mean both. Every game has it's own dynamic. Personally, I don't think it means anything for the Vikings since they weren't involved in it and it was an AFC game.

[Purple bruise]

[quote="Hunter Morrow"]What does the Vikings dominant 30-7 blowout of Tennessee mean in the context of the Titans 26-23 win over the Steelers last night?

It couldn't possibly mean the Vikings are any good. It just means that the Steelers are worse than first thought.

[/quote

After all of the years of football we have watched , the saying, "On any given Sunday" rings true once again. So many fans seem to discount the Viking's 4-1 record proclaiming, with the exception of the 49ers game, that they have beaten only soft teams. I call BS on that. Every one that watched the Vikes lose to the Colts should have a somewhat different "appreciation" that: #1 the Vikes could have and should have won that game on paper but beating ANY NFL team on their home field is not a "cake walk" and #2 the Colt's beating the Packers, in my point of view, validates this premise.
Once again, if we were all honest about it, few fans or talking heads would have imagined that after the beating that the Vikes gave them and the big win that the Steelers had over the Eagles, would the Titans have much of a chance to beat the Steelers.
I will go on to say that this week's game against the Skins will be no "cake walk" ( if RG plays or not). If the Vikes win I will give them a lot of credit for going into another team's home field and pulling out a win. If they lose then I will not be shocked at all because "On any given sunday"

[UltraNasty850]

Mr. Optimist raging again...

No matter what the Vikings do, they won't get the respect they deserve. I am seriously getting sick of all the negative energy. I have said this many times in many other threads.. Because our QB doesent throw up 400 yds and 4 TDs, we dont get looked at. The media also LOVES those east coast teams. Think about it, even when they are doing bad they always talk about Philly, Pittsburgh, New England, Washington, Baltimore, Jets, Giants etc... Teams like the Vikings don't get too much attention... which is fine. Id rather them talk about all those other teams.

OUR Vikings are playing good football. If we win another 6 games, we will more than likely be a playoff team. What will they say then? That we have a 4th place schedule? yeah, probably. It never ends.

Screw Lombardi. Like plenty of you have said, he hasnt watched any Vikings games.

SKOL

[Mothman]

Mr. Optimist raging again...

No matter what the Vikings do, they won't get the respect they deserve.

It seems to me like they are getting a lot of respect right now. They've been one of the big stories of the early season. They're talked about and written about everywhere and they've moved from the bottom of most power ranking lists into the the top 10. Everyone from Frazier to Ponder to Harvin, Peterson and the defense is receiving praise for how well they're performing. I'm not sure doubt about whether the team can sustain this level of success over a 16 game season represents a lack of respect. There are always going to be people who will look at the downside or be hesitant to give credit but the Vikes are receiving a healthy amount of praise and respect at the local and national level. There are inevitably some people who question the team's ability to sustain success but let's face it, it's not that unreasonable for someone to wonder just how good a 4-1 team is when they're coming off of a 3-13 season. After all, despite our excitement, a lot of us fans are still wondering if the team can sustain this great start over the course of the season.

[saint33]

for the record, Lombardi hated on the Vikings in 2009 all year long too. As did La Canfora. They are both Packer homers, like so many media members seem to be.

[dead_poet]

Minnesota Vikings surprise everyone but themselves;

That was the first thing Frazier did during this past offseason, having his coaches sit down with scouts -- before they hit the road in the late winter and early spring -- and provide absolute clarity on what the team was looking for at each position. It took about four or five hours per position, Frazier said, and the final mold included not just talent, but specific character traits.


The result, Frazier continued, is that "we approached rebuilding different than at any other time since I got here, and you're seeing the results in 2012. We had probably the best draft we've had in my time here as far as changing the culture. That's the difference, from our first year to our second year. There were so many unknowns before. We had to stay status quo to some degree. We knew we had issues, but we wanted to get by. No excuses, every team dealt with it, but it had an effect here."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... newsdriver

[Demi]

Teams like the Vikings don't get too much attention... which is fine. Id rather them talk about all those other teams.

Most of those teams have a ring in the last 50 years. Quite a few have had a decade~ of success. The only reason they talk about the Redskins is their quarterback.

But the national media should be on the bandwagon after 5 weeks, coming off the worst back to back seasons in team history.

[Hunter Morrow]

Well why not? Everybody loves a comeback and an underdog. Vikings are a slice of heartland Americana right now. SKOL.

[VikeMike]

I think the national media has been hopping on the "pleasant surprise" bandwagon since the Vikings got to 3-1. But let's face it, it's only a quarter of the season. I'm by no means hoping the wheels come off, but I'm not ready to get caught up in the excitement. I'm very, very, VERY pleased, but lets remember that we have a lot of young guys and they could have valleys as well as peaks. Let's just say I'm leaning toward cautiously optimistic. Nothing is guaranteed ... I'm just enjoying the ride as it comes and hoping for what I entered the season with: the hope for improvement.

[Purple bruise]

Nice pressers: Harvin and Allen http://www.vikings.com/media-vault/vide ... ccc9f50d9f
http://www.vikings.com/media-vault/vide ... 138e82f33a

[dead_poet]

Impressive

@TomPelissero: From the random stats department: #Vikings haven't trailed during their 3-game win streak. Held lead for 159:39 of a possible 180 minutes.

Tom Pelissero on Twitter

[Mothman]

Impressive
Tom Pelissero on Twitter

Awesome. Hopefully, they'll continue that streak tomorrow.

[John_Viveiros]

For the most part, I take the rankings with a grain of salt. What do I care if Peter King (football writer, not congressman) thinks the Vikings are the X best team in the league. The games are decided on the field. I do get annoyed when they are inconsistent with their criteria. Kind of like the 49'ers being ranked ahead of us. Why, because everyone has decided they are better. The 49'er blowout of the Bills is because the 49'ers are a strong team. The Vikes blowout the Titans, and, well, it doesn't mean much because the Titans are so weak. It's the narrative fallacy - you create a story, and unless it is completely falsified, you fit all your observations into that story line.

But it's no biggee. Again, unlike the BCS championship teams, everything is decided on the field.

At least a few analysts looked at the Vikes last year, and saw a team that was losing close, and had a point differential much closer to a 6-10 team than a 3-13 team. Bet the over on Vikes wins this year, they said. It's a bit different than the "you are what your record says you are" type of analysis, but it has its advantages.

[Sinatra]

Per DVOA, the Vikings have played the 32nd most difficult schedule in the league so far. However, the remaining games on the schedule reflect the 2nd most difficult schedule in the NFL. A regression seems reasonable, if not likely.