We still have a chance

[tmscr]

You are NOT seriously saying that the Vikings would be the same team with Aaron Rodgers at QB this year as they have been with Ponder!

I can't disagree with points you've made about highly drafted QBs that have gone bust. Or that there have been great QBs taken in later rounds. No doubt about that.

But in the NFL, the best teams have the best QBs. Period! End of story. Trying to argue that having a truly elite QB - with no other roster changes - wouldn't make the Vikings a better team is crazy.

A QB like Rodgers or Brees would probably not be enough to make this current Viking squad a Super Bowl team but it would be a heck of a good start. I've said it many times; a true franchise QB makes a lot of other holes on your team seem much smaller.

of course i'm not suggesting that the vikings would be the same team with a better QB. but the ultimate goal is to win the super bowl, is it not? the best teams in the league have the best QBs, AND a great supporting cast that is (more often than not) solid on all tthree sides of the ball, and is well coached and disciplined. the vikings have a long ways to go before they reach that level, and losing games to take a risk and burn a draft pick on an iffy prospect would only be a detriment to future success.

[majorm]

With our current coaches a QB like Rodgers or Brees would make us a 6-7 win team at best. Part of the success of a Rodgers or Brees is the game plans and playcalling. Both of those suck for the Vikings right now IMO

I think you'd be stunned to see how much better Musgrave's play-calling would look with a trigger man that is actually capable of pulling the trigger. Ponder's limited game makes for a very limited playbook. There are passes that Brees and Rodgers make look easy that they won't even attempt with Ponder because he can't make the throws.

[im4mnvikes]

You are NOT seriously saying that the Vikings would be the same team with Aaron Rodgers at QB this year as they have been with Ponder!

I can't disagree with points you've made about highly drafted QBs that have gone bust. Or that there have been great QBs taken in later rounds. No doubt about that.

But in the NFL, the best teams have the best QBs. Period! End of story. Trying to argue that having a truly elite QB - with no other roster changes - wouldn't make the Vikings a better team is crazy.

A QB like Rodgers or Brees would probably not be enough to make this current Viking squad a Super Bowl team but it would be a heck of a good start. I've said it many times; a true franchise QB makes a lot of other holes on your team seem much smaller.[/quote]


With our current coaches a QB like Rodgers or Brees would make us a 6-7 win team at best. Part of the success of a Rodgers or Brees is the game plans and playcalling. Both of those suck for the Vikings right now IMO[/quote]

I think you'd be stunned to see how much better Musgrave's play-calling would look with a trigger man that is actually capable of pulling the trigger. Ponder's limited game makes for a very limited playbook.[/quote]


I pray every night and hope each Sunday to see that LOL

[The Breeze]

The Packers O-line is decimated with injuries...hence Rodgers is injured.

You have to be able to protect your QB regardless of who he is.

It also helps to have guys that are able to get to the opposing QB regardless of who he is...see Giants, New York vs Packers, Green Bay as they ended their 15-1 season.


Entering his fourth season, Sanchez already has more playoff wins than Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees combined had at this point in their respective careers. He is tied for the second most postseason wins in NFL history,http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1239 ... -most-heat


I want a great QB, but not at the expense of a great team. We have neither at the moment....reaching for a questionable QB would not be a good idea...nor would be passing on a stud.

[tmscr]

The Packers O-line is decimated with injuries...hence Rodgers is injured.

You have to be able to protect your QB regardless of who he is.

It also helps to have guys that are able to get to the opposing QB regardless of who he is...see Giants, New York vs Packers, Green Bay as they ended their 15-1 season.


Entering his fourth season, Sanchez already has more playoff wins than Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees combined had at this point in their respective careers. He is tied for the second most postseason wins in NFL history,http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1239 ... -most-heat


I want a great QB, but not at the expense of a great team. We have neither at the moment....reaching for a questionable QB would not be a good idea...nor would be passing on a stud.

perfect post

[chicagopurple]

yesssssssssss

[majorm]

of course i'm not suggesting that the vikings would be the same team with a better QB. but the ultimate goal is to win the super bowl, is it not? the best teams in the league have the best QBs, AND a great supporting cast that is (more often than not) solid on all tthree sides of the ball, and is well coached and disciplined. the vikings have a long ways to go before they reach that level, and losing games to take a risk and burn a draft pick on an iffy prospect would only be a detriment to future success.

Just tell me what winning a couple of more games does for the future success of the team. It makes you feel better right after the win but does NOTHING for the good of the team long-term. And is it really any better to go 4-12 than to go 2-14? I don't think so.

The ONLY difference between going 2-14 or 4-12 is where you draft. If we have to suffer through the worst season in Viking history, I at least want to gain the only real benefit there is from it.

[tmscr]

Just tell me what good winning a couple of more games does though. It makes you feel better right after the win but does NOTHING for the good of the team long-term. And is it really any better to go 4-12 than to go 2-14? I don't think so.

The ONLY difference between going 2-14 or 4-12 is where you draft. If we have to suffer through the worst season in Viking history, I at least want to gain the only real benefit there is from it.

because my team plays 16 times a season and i enjoy watching them win as many games as possible. at this point, with the vikings remaining schedule, how many games do you honestly see them winning? 2 more? 3 if they get hot? you're talking a handful of draft spots, not 20. it's just not worth it IMO. and in the end, the players and staff aren't going to tank it anyway because all of their jobs are on the line. heck, tanking it in the NFL might get someone seriously injured. it's not going to happen.

[Mothman]

Just tell me what good winning a couple of more games does though. It makes you feel better right after the win but does NOTHING for the good of the team long-term. And is it really any better to go 4-12 than to go 2-14? I don't think so.

The ONLY difference between going 2-14 or 4-12 is where you draft. If we have to suffer through the worst season in Viking history, I at least want to gain the only real benefit there is from it.

Maybe they'll win more than a couple of games. It's not the worst season in Vikings history yet. It's not even guaranteed to be a losing season yet.

They're going to have the opportunity to improve in the draft whether they win 1 more game or 7 and the best, most impactful players aren't always found at the top of the first round.

I disagree that winning does nothing for the good of the team long-term. Winning fosters a culture of winning. Winning makes the team more attractive to free agents. Winning is good for morale, encourages players to continue working as hard as possible because it helps them believe that work is paying off. It leads to continuity which can lead to further improvement. I think winning is always good for the team.

Way too many fans have completely bailed on this Vikings team because they had a poor start and people are assuming the worst. I understand that, especially because the defense has struggled so much that the worst seems possible. However, there IS another possible outcome here, however improbable it might seem right now. Some of the younger players could get better and more comfortable in their roles, units like the OL, DL and special teams could all start playing better, close losses could become more narrow victories or even not-so-narrow victories. In other words, the youth movement this team started could begin to pay dividends and they could come out of this season with more to build on than it appears they have right now. Maybe that's just a dream but it seems worth rooting for rather than just hoping the team loses so they can have a higher draft pick to spend on QB X, Y or Z.

[Texas Vike]

Maybe they'll win more than a couple of games. It's not the worst season in Vikings history yet. It's not even guaranteed to be a losing season yet.

They're going to have the opportunity to improve in the draft whether they win 1 more game or 7 and the best, most impactful players aren't always found at the top of the first round.

I disagree that winning does nothing for the good of the team long-term. Winning fosters a culture of winning. Winning makes the team more attractive to free agents. Winning is good for morale, encourages players to continue working as hard as possible because it helps them believe that work is paying off. It leads to continuity which can lead to further improvement. I think winning is always good for the team.

Way too many fans have completely bailed on this Vikings team because they had a poor start and people are assuming the worst. I understand that, especially because the defense has struggled so much that the worst seems possible. However, there IS another possible outcome here, however improbable it might seem right now. Some of the younger players could get better and more comfortable in their roles, units like the OL, DL and special teams could all start playing better, close losses could become more narrow victories or even not-so-narrow victories. In other words, the youth movement this team started could begin to pay dividends and they could come out of this season with more to build on than it appears they have right now. Maybe that's just a dream but it seems worth rooting for rather than just hoping the team loses so they can have a higher draft pick to spend on QB X, Y or Z.

Solid Post. I especially look forward to watching our young first-round picks develop in the second half of the season.

[majorm]

Maybe they'll win more than a couple of games. It's not the worst season in Vikings history yet. It's not even guaranteed to be a losing season yet.

They're going to have the opportunity to improve in the draft whether they win 1 more game or 7 and the best, most impactful players aren't always found at the top of the first round.

I disagree that winning does nothing for the good of the team long-term. Winning fosters a culture of winning. Winning makes the team more attractive to free agents. Winning is good for morale, encourages players to continue working as hard as possible because it helps them believe that work is paying off. It leads to continuity which can lead to further improvement. I think winning is always good for the team.

Way too many fans have completely bailed on this Vikings team because they had a poor start and people are assuming the worst. I understand that, especially because the defense has struggled so much that the worst seems possible. However, there IS another possible outcome here, however improbable it might seem right now. Some of the younger players could get better and more comfortable in their roles, units like the OL, DL and special teams could all start playing better, close losses could become more narrow victories or even not-so-narrow victories. In other words, the youth movement this team started could begin to pay dividends and they could come out of this season with more to build on than it appears they have right now. Maybe that's just a dream but it seems worth rooting for rather than just hoping the team loses so they can have a higher draft pick to spend on QB X, Y or Z.

I find it difficult to ever really argue with you because you always make great points.

We just have a different feeling on this one. You're still clinging to hope that they can string together some wins that could really make a difference. I just in no way see the possibility of that with this team. Again, going 5-11 isn't going to go a long way in culitvating a "winning culture." Going 9-7 WOULD make a significant difference but they're not winning all their remaining games. You don't truly believe that any more than I do.

I'm sorry. I am already thinking about 2014 and beyond. It's not a feeling I'm proud of but it's just where my heart is at this point. I want to see REAL progress toward making this once proud franchise a proud one again. And another win or two this season doesn't help that cause in the least in my opinion.

[Mothman]

I find it difficult to ever really argue with you because you always make great points.

Thanks! That's a really nice thing to say.

We just have a different feeling on this one. You're still clinging to hope that they can string together some wins that could really make a difference. I just in no way see the possibility of that with this team. Again, going 5-11 isn't going to go a long way in culitvating a "winning culture." Going 9-7 WOULD make a significant difference but they're not winning all their remaining games. You don't truly believe that any more than I do.

Of course not but I'm really just talking about attitude. There are fans who gave up and starting rooting for draft position a month ago. I still see value in winning.

I'm sorry. I am already thinking about 2014 and beyond. It's not a feeling I'm proud of but it's just where my heart is at this point. I want to see REAL progress toward making this once proud franchise a proud one again. And another win or two this season doesn't help that cause in the least in my opinion.

You're heart is where your your heart is... I understand that. However, if I'm reading you correctly, you're looking at things in terms of the bottom line win/loss total while I'd argue that's not the only indication of the kind of real progress you mentioned above. Improved performance from the o-line, from Rhodes and Robinson, Patterson, Floyd, Fusco and even everybody's favorite player, Christian Ponder, could all help the team make real progress toward restoring Vikings pride. Every one of those players could help the Vikes win games in the future (even if Ponder only does so as a backup) and, in fact, if the team is going to get back to respectability and winning sooner rather than later, they're going to need some of those players to be good, to learn what it takes to be part of a winning team in the NFL. In that sense, winning 5 or 6 games instead of 2 could make a positive difference because if they're going to win, it will require better performances from some players who will be a part of the team next year too. Their progress is a step toward reaching the ultimate goal. It's not just about finding a QB. In the end, that's just one more step in the process, albeit an important one.

[SterlingANJ]

we need to play Freeman the rest of the year to see what he means to us and younger players

This makes sense to me!

[Mothman]

I haven't bailed on the Vikings, I still wear my jerseys on purple Fridays, I wear other Vikings apparel every Wednesday! I suck up the harassment from people who don't understand why I still pull for the Vikings. But I see no reason for the Vikings to win more than they already have. All I have to say is better luck next year.

Sad... it really disappoints me to see so many people with this attitude.

[The Breeze]

They have to develop the young guys as much as possible and get the winning attitude rolling....trouble is trying to determine whether or not the coaching staff will be back.

It's tricky investing a whole lot into this season now.

I'm rooting for specific players more than anything else at this point.