Vikings Message Board.Com

PacificNorseWest wrote: We would all love that. It goes the other way too though. Tyler Lockett as a rookie is already one of the better return men in the game and the Vikes have to worry about him not just on kickoffs, but punts too.

Buzz-kill.

Pretty much. He and Russell are the only threats I'd really be worried about though.

PacificNorseWest wrote:Pretty much. He and Russell are the only threats I'd really be worried about though.

And that's the rub. Russell Wilson is having a monster year. When a QB does that, it's big. It makes everyone around him play better.

This game is on the Vikings defense. If they can hold the Seahawks to 17 points the Vikes have chance. I don't see us winning in a shoot out with a hot QB like Wilson.

Unfortunately, I see a shoot out.

Seahawks 31
Vikings 17

Does everyone think that the weather is really "advantage Vikings"? I haven't posted in ages, so sorry to pop in like this...

Has ZImmer been having them practice outside? That's the only way I think this might

It's not like our roster is plump full of guys from Manitoba and Fargo. And we have only had a few really cold games with the current roster. I mean, this will be the coldest game Bridgewater plays in too, right?

Just curious what others think.

FirstAndTen wrote:Does everyone think that the weather is really "advantage Vikings"? I haven't posted in ages, so sorry to pop in like this...

Has ZImmer been having them practice outside? That's the only way I think this might

It's not like our roster is plump full of guys from Manitoba and Fargo. And we have only had a few really cold games with the current roster. I mean, this will be the coldest game Bridgewater plays in too, right?

Just curious what others think.

I agree, I don't think either team likes playing in that cold of weather, even if the Vikings have played a few cold weather games. The only way that I see it as an advantage is if the weather hampers Seattle's offense, then that would be to our advantage as the only way I think we have a chance is if it is a low scoring game.

FirstAndTen wrote:Does everyone think that the weather is really "advantage Vikings"? I haven't posted in ages, so sorry to pop in like this...

Has ZImmer been having them practice outside? That's the only way I think this might

It's not like our roster is plump full of guys from Manitoba and Fargo. And we have only had a few really cold games with the current roster. I mean, this will be the coldest game Bridgewater plays in too, right?

Just curious what others think.

In my opinion you cannot really be fully prepared for this type of weather, but I think a team can be more prepared, which I see as being a possible mental advantage. The Viking don't have a lot of experience in colder games, but they do have the previous two and I think that will help alleviate some of that mental 'shock' that hopefully Seattle feels when they step on the field this Sunday.

If you assume a mental advantage then the hope is the fans are a rowdy bunch and if the Vikings are able to set the tone early, the crowd may get involved before Seattle's even woken up yet. That's still a stretch when you're talking about two-time NFC Champs. This postseason is different than their road the previous two seasons, so it's something to look for.

In terms of the game, I think it somewhat levels the ability with which the Seahawks and Russell can throw. He's obviously the better quarterback out of him and Teddy and with potential complications from a rock hard and slick ball, it may level out that advantage, even if it's just a little bit. The weather theoretically should also favor the team with the better run game. Both are good, but it's now an uncertainty with Seattle as Rawls is out and Marshawn is just coming back. We don't know what Marshawn looks like. This has to be a difficult game for him to come back to even though it is a game that used to suit his style of play. Thatw as the old Marshawn though and even pre-injury he hadn't been quite the same as what are used to from him. For that, I give the edge to Minnesota.

Special teams should be a huge factor in this game.

Purple Reign wrote: I agree, I don't think either team likes playing in that cold of weather, even if the Vikings have played a few cold weather games. The only way that I see it as an advantage is if the weather hampers Seattle's offense, then that would be to our advantage as the only way I think we have a chance is if it is a low scoring game.

I think some of it has to do with the fact that Lynch didn't look great this year before he went out and even with him coming back I would be surprised if he comes in at full speed. I think he'll have rust. If they don't get the running game going it means depending on the passing game, which can struggle in weather like this.

This line of thinking is also dependent on our running game doing much better.

I think that it will be close and if we have a few lucky breaks with a turnovers or even if the Seahawks stall some drives with penalties we might win this

It think it is important to note that after a few weeks of above average penalty calls we have leveled off and really avoided beating ourselves.

FirstAndTen wrote:Does everyone think that the weather is really "advantage Vikings"? I haven't posted in ages, so sorry to pop in like this...

Has ZImmer been having them practice outside? That's the only way I think this might

It's not like our roster is plump full of guys from Manitoba and Fargo. And we have only had a few really cold games with the current roster. I mean, this will be the coldest game Bridgewater plays in too, right?

Just curious what others think.

If a person grew up in the great white north the weather might make it easier. But I really think in this day and age it does not really matter. Unless you are the Buccaneers. I think they have 1 win in temps colder than 32 in their history.

Raptorman wrote: If a person grew up in the great white north the weather might make it easier. But I really think in this day and age it does not really matter. Unless you are the Buccaneers. I think they have 1 win in temps colder than 32 in their history.

Isn't that the only win in their team's history? (Sorry for going off topic)

ITs gonna be COLD out....therefore we are sure to win.....everyone will have to wear gloves BUT only Teddy is used to gloves.....therefore we win! woo hoo

Regardless of stats and past performances, it's all guess work and hope. I'll hope for a home-field, cold advantage, and go...

Vikings 27
Seahawks 17

I think the purple Defense will come through, and Patterson's returns will set the Vikes up nicely, that is unless he gets to the end zone first! I'd rather he actually "not" return too many kickoffs. I don't want Seattle getting on the scoreboard at all!

...wisdom-I hope!

FirstAndTen wrote:Does everyone think that the weather is really "advantage Vikings"? I haven't posted in ages, so sorry to pop in like this...

Has ZImmer been having them practice outside? That's the only way I think this might

It's not like our roster is plump full of guys from Manitoba and Fargo. And we have only had a few really cold games with the current roster. I mean, this will be the coldest game Bridgewater plays in too, right?

Just curious what others think.

Just a thought that isn't necessarily football related but as someone who has lived in North Dakota and Minnesota and now lives in the Pacific Northwest I think just being used to being out in the elements makes a difference. While most players don't live in Minnesota during the entire winter, I think spending time there gets you used to the cold where living somewhere where there aren't the frigid temperatures does have an effect. For example, my bike commute here in Portland the last few days of upper 30 degree weather was feeling balmy compared to some outdoor activities I was doing in Minnesota over vacation.

Not sure that its going to be a deciding factor but that daily lived experience in a cold climate may give them a bit of an upper hand. By how much? Who knows?

FirstAndTen wrote:Does everyone think that the weather is really "advantage Vikings"? I haven't posted in ages, so sorry to pop in like this...

Has ZImmer been having them practice outside? That's the only way I think this might

It's not like our roster is plump full of guys from Manitoba and Fargo. And we have only had a few really cold games with the current roster. I mean, this will be the coldest game Bridgewater plays in too, right?

Just curious what others think.

It's going to be cold for both teams. I see no advantage for either one of them.

That said, I think Wilson rises above Bridgewater and I don't care what weather or stadium we're talking about. Wilson has been playing like he's possessed. I'm not a Seattle fan but I have to admit Wilson is an elite QB this year.

FirstAndTen wrote:Does everyone think that the weather is really "advantage Vikings"? I haven't posted in ages, so sorry to pop in like this...

Has ZImmer been having them practice outside? That's the only way I think this might

It's not like our roster is plump full of guys from Manitoba and Fargo. And we have only had a few really cold games with the current roster. I mean, this will be the coldest game Bridgewater plays in too, right?

Just curious what others think.

The Seahawks are 1-7 lifetime below 28 degrees. The heart of their team is 0-1.

The Vikings are 2-0 in games played below 28 degrees in the past two weeks.

Whether or not that balances the game enough is up for debate, but I'd say mentally the Vikings will have a clear preparation advantage.