8.2Percent

John_Viveiros · Post by **John_Viveiros** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:11 pm

The reason that number is so "high" is because the whole NFC has collapsed this year. If the playoffs started today, one of the 1-2 teams would be in. In theory, we are only a single game out of the last playoff spot. No, I'm not insane. Losing what looked to be our easiest home game this season sort of knocks us down a peg, but in theory, a three-game win streak probably puts us back into contention. Of course, this team would be happy for a one-game win streak right now.

Funkytown · Post by **Funkytown** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:28 pm

Reignman wrote:Oh man, if we go 0-16 I'm done with this franchise. I couldn't handle that kind of embarrassment. I mean it's bad enough everyone is laughing at us for Ponder, we can't end up in anymore categories with Detroit.

But don't y'all want the best QB from the draft? The Lions have been SUPER successful since getting theirs.

Super.

Funkytown · Post by **Funkytown** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:28 pm

Purplemania wrote: Yeah, but Stafford isn't and never will be an elite QB..

But isn't that what you would want and expect from the #1 overall pick? I'm mostly digging at the "trade this person for picks" and the "let's lose to get a higher pick" crowd. If you can't get a sure-thing QB at #1 (and win tons and tons of games with that beast of a quarterback), then this draft thing is a lot harder than it seems, and maybe people should quit acting like it's SO easy to land an elite quarterback.

Webbfann · Post by **Webbfann** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:54 pm

Losing to win is a fool's game. Ponder won't cooperate and you can be damn sure AP and 50 other guys won't either. We don't need a great QB (though it would be nice), all we really need is solid good. We have a good team, and have had a good team for several years. All it lacks (well not all, but the most important things) are QB and coaches.

PurpleKoolaid · Post by **PurpleKoolaid** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:57 pm

I don't trust the Vikings to know what to look for in a top 10 QB. Spielman certainly doesn't know.

Demi · Post by **Demi** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:17 pm

We don't need a great QB (though it would be nice), all we really need is solid good. We have a good team, and have had a good team for several years. All it lacks (well not all, but the most important things) are QB and coaches.

And guards. And a defensive line. And a couple linebackers. And a safety. And a corner or two.

Our chance at the #1 pick according to football outsiders is 16.5. Behind only the Jaguars at 25.4%!

Will the stars finally align? Can we finally get a top pick when there might be an elite talent at QB there when we need one?

The Breeze · Post by **The Breeze** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:24 pm

Demi wrote: And guards. And a defensive line. And a couple linebackers. And a safety. And a corner or two.

Our chance at the #1 pick according to football outsiders is 16.5. Behind only the Jaguars at 25.4%!

Will the stars finally align? Can we finally get a top pick when there might be an elite talent at QB there when we need one?

I won't enjoy the ride to a record that nets us a top 5 pick...but if it happens, this draft has more than 1 blue chip QB IMO.

Raptorman · Post by **Raptorman** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:03 pm

Demi wrote: And guards. And a defensive line. And a couple linebackers. And a safety. And a corner or two.

Our chance at the #1 pick according to football outsiders is 16.5. Behind only the Jaguars at 25.4%!

Will the stars finally align? Can we finally get a top pick when there might be an elite talent at QB there when we need one?

Well currently, we would be picking 5th.

CbusVikesFan · Post by **CbusVikesFan** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:14 pm

Demi wrote: And guards. And a defensive line. And a couple linebackers. And a safety. And a corner or two.

Our chance at the #1 pick according to football outsiders is 16.5. Behind only the Jaguars at 25.4%!

Will the stars finally align? Can we finally get a top pick when there might be an elite talent at QB there when we need one?

It's no surprise to me, we are our own worst enemy........

PurpleHalo · Post by **PurpleHalo** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:15 pm

Purplemania wrote: Yeah, but Stafford isn't and never will be an elite QB..

He's good enough, he has had 40 TDs in a season , and he has had a 5,000 yard season. The Lions just need to build around him more, and when you get a QB there is a long time to do so, longer than you get trying to use a failed model of building around a RB.

PurpleHalo · Post by **PurpleHalo** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:23 pm

Webbfann wrote:Losing to win is a fool's game. Ponder won't cooperate and you can be damn sure AP and 50 other guys won't either. We don't need a great QB (though it would be nice), all we really need is solid good. We have a good team, and have had a good team for several years. All it lacks (well not all, but the most important things) are QB and coaches.

The Vikings have played the solid good QB for the better part of 40 years, with zero NFC titles. They do need a great QB, and they need to stop playing 1940s football, time to follow the NFL into the advent of the passing game.

There is zero zip zilch point in making any playoff tournaments, until they fix those issues. I will gladly suffer through 0-16 for that.

TheFoxInDetox · Post by **TheFoxInDetox** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:45 am

MelanieMFunk wrote: But don't y'all want the best QB from the draft? The Lions have been SUPER successful since getting theirs. Super.

Bagging a season for a pick looks to have worked out okay for the 2011 Colts, eh?

Not every franchise is as inept as the Detroit Lions, using them for a measuring stick is kind of silly.

Crax · Post by **Crax** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:51 am

TheFoxInDetox wrote: Bagging a season for a pick looks to have worked out okay for the 2011 Colts, eh?

Picking a QB #1 overall has worked out twice for the colts in the last while.

Funkytown · Post by **Funkytown** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:38 am

TheFoxInDetox wrote:
Bagging a season for a pick looks to have worked out okay for the 2011 Colts, eh?

Because they purposely lost those games and just didn't plain suck without Manning carrying them. Right.

NextQuestion · Post by **NextQuestion** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:40 am

I've never had the feeling we'd go 0-16 ever until this year.

Vikings Message Board.Com

8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent

Re: 8.2Percent