Vikings Message Board.Com

Eli wrote: Not saying it wasn't an amazing play and an amazing finish to a game, but it ended up being pretty meaningless. Few people other than Vikings or Browns fans would have much chance of remembering the play. The Vikings won the division that year with a 9-7 record and then went one-and-done in the playoffs.

Look at all of the other NFL teams' top plays and most occurred in winning Super Bowls or else playoff games leading to a Super Bowl win.

I remember. Not saying that it ranks up there with "the catch" but just to point out that the Vikings still were ahead by a touchdown when Anderson missed. I am still amazed that people somehow blame Anderson for that loss. I remember "the knee" from that game more than the missed FG. I still can't believe Green thought that was the best call with the most prolific offense in NFL history. We only needed a FG to win it. That was totally doable and Green blew it...

Well "the miss" is just stupid. Not only because it was a negative play, but because it wasn't that significant of a play at the time. The odds of us winning the game only dropped from like 99.9% to 98% after the miss. Yeah if he makes it we pretty much punch or ticket to Miami, but good grief people act like the miss cost us the game a la Scott Norwood's wide right in SB 25. We still led by 7 with just over 2 minutes to go for crying out loud. Atlanta still had to tie the game in regulation and beat us in OT.

Robert Griffith dropping those INT's on the Falcons ensuing game tying drive were more haunting to me. The miss is only memorable because stupid fans act like it was the last play of the game. The defense allowing Chris Chandler to drive down field, on the road, in a hostile environment like he was Joe friggin Montana, is the only thing that made the miss significant.

Reignman wrote:Well "the miss" is just stupid. Not only because it was a negative play, but because it wasn't that significant of a play at the time. The odds of us winning the game only dropped from like 99.9% to 98% after the miss. Yeah if he makes it we pretty much punch or ticket to Miami, but good grief people act like the miss cost us the game a la Scott Norwood's wide right in SB 25. We still led by 7 with just over 2 minutes to go for crying out loud. Atlanta still had to tie the game in regulation and beat us in OT.

Robert Griffith dropping those INT's on the Falcons ensuing game tying drive were more haunting to me. The miss is only memorable because stupid fans act like it was the last play of the game. The defense allowing Chris Chandler to drive down field, on the road, in a hostile environment like he was Joe friggin Montana, is the only thing that made the miss significant.

THANK YOU!

My most memorable will always be the 1975 Hail Mary screwed up by the defense. Pearson should have been double covered. Most memorable doesn't mean the most outstanding play. I know Mothman is pulling for his guy Kramer. I just can't do it. I voted for the Gary Anderson miss. That one was in the bag.....He should have made it.

Tark10 wrote:My most memorable will always be the 1975 Hail Mary screwed up by the defense. Pearson should have been double covered. Most memorable doesn't mean the most outstanding play. I know Mothman is pulling for his guy Kramer. I just can't do it. I voted for the Gary Anderson miss. That one was in the bag.....He should have made it.

And even if he had made it - The Falcons scored on their next drive. An onside kick and a FG in regulation takes us into OT (where presumably the Falcons win again!). Based on the defense in the last 2 mins of the 4th Quarter I'm not sure we had it "locked up" even if Anderson makes it. As Reignman pointed out: 99.9% chance we win then, but it was already about 98% chance we win even with the missed FG.

Just Me wrote: And even if he had made it - The Falcons scored on their next drive. An onside kick and a FG in regulation takes us into OT (where presumably the Falcons win again!). Based on the defense in the last 2 mins of the 4th Quarter I'm not sure we had it "locked up" even if Anderson makes it. As Reignman pointed out: 99.9% chance we win then, but it was already about 98% chance we win even with the missed FG.

... and it didn't help when Denny had Cunningham take a knee, which, considering the circumstances, remains one of the most conservative, ridiculous moves I've ever seen from a head coach.

Just Me wrote: And even if he had made it - The Falcons scored on their next drive. An onside kick and a FG in regulation takes us into OT (where presumably the Falcons win again!). Based on the defense in the last 2 mins of the 4th Quarter I'm not sure we had it "locked up" even if Anderson makes it. As Reignman pointed out: 99.9% chance we win then, but it was already about 98% chance we win even with the missed FG.

The odds of them recovering an onside kick, when we would have been expecting it is slim to none. If Anderson makes that kick, it takes a minor miracle for the Falcons to pull that one out.

Purpnation wrote: The odds of them recovering an onside kick, when we would have been expecting it is slim to none. If Anderson makes that kick, it takes a minor miracle for the Falcons to pull that one out.

Even with the miss it took a minor miracle for them to beat us. As I said, they had to drive the length of the field, with Chris friggin Chandler, in a very pressure packed loud hostile environment, just to tie the game. Chandler threw 2 INT's on that drive but our guys couldn't hang onto either of them. On top of that, their defense had to stop our prolific offense twice in OT. So yeah, it still took a minor miracle for them to beat us even with the miss, which is why the miss is now the most overblown play in team history.

Reignman wrote:Even with the miss it took a minor miracle for them to beat us. As I said, they had to drive the length of the field, with Chris friggin Chandler, in a very pressure packed loud hostile environment, just to tie the game. Chandler threw 2 INT's on that drive but our guys couldn't hang onto either of them. On top of that, their defense had to stop our prolific offense twice in OT. So yeah, it still took a minor miracle for them to beat us even with the miss, which is why the miss is now the most overblown play in team history.

+1

Reignman wrote:Even with the miss it took a minor miracle for them to beat us. As I said, they had to drive the length of the field, with Chris friggin Chandler, in a very pressure packed loud hostile environment, just to tie the game. Chandler threw 2 INT's on that drive but our guys couldn't hang onto either of them. On top of that, their defense had to stop our prolific offense twice in OT. So yeah, it still took a minor miracle for them to beat us even with the miss, which is why the miss is now the most overblown play in team history.

I agree to an extent, but driving down the field, and scoring a TD to tie the game isn't a "Minor miracle".

Now driving down the field, scoring a TD or field goal, recovering an onside kick when the other team completely anticipates it, and then driving down and scoring again, is very, very unlikely. He makes that kick, we win barring a quite spectacular turn of events, even more so then what actually happened.

That said, I dont blame the loss solely on Anderson, that would be silly, I just understand the chances of them scoring, recovering an onside kick, and then scoring again, were slim to none.

Purpnation wrote:

I agree to an extent, but driving down the field, and scoring a TD to tie the game isn't a "Minor miracle".

Now driving down the field, scoring a TD or field goal, recovering an onside kick when the other team completely anticipates it, and then driving down and scoring again, is very, very unlikely. He makes that kick, we win barring a quite spectacular turn of events, even more so then what actually happened.

That said, I dont blame the loss solely on Anderson, that would be silly, I just understand the chances of them scoring, recovering an onside kick, and then scoring again, were slim to none.

Atlanta did score (so lets assume that the odds for a Viking win only decreased by the chances of them recovering the onside kick and driving into field goal range). In 1998, 51 onside kicks were attempted with 16 of them being successful (Source) or 31.37%. Assuming they beat the odds, which aren't as long as what was implied, then they would take possession at or near the 40 yard line (Kickoffs were from the 30 in 1998). That means they only need move the ball about 25 yards to set up a long FG (50 yards) or 40 yards to get into 'comfortable' range. Given how our defense was playing, I see that part of the equation as the easiest for Falcons to have accomplished. Sure, the miss decreased our chances of winning, but I still don't think it was as drastic of a reduction as implied. Assuming, the Atlanta score happens and they have a 31% chance to get the ball back, I'd say it's 50/50 that the Falcons score the tieing FG. (half of 31% is 15.5%). Given the Vikings luck, that's about 15.5% too much of a chance to win. Unlikely, but not what I would call a 'slim to none.' YMMV

Something else I had forgotten. John Randle got hurt and was not on the field late in the 4th quarter. He was our best D.L. at the time. All he could do was watch it from the sidelines.