Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote:Sigh... bad situational awareness by Bridgewater on that play.

It was. But we should have kicked it on 3rd down. If he completes a pass and the receiver doesn't get OB, they'd never get the kick away, and if it's short of a first down, they can't spike it cuz it's 4th down.

Skoltastic_Voyage wrote: he did good mostly today WTF are you talking about?

Trying to be sarcastic.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:OK, have at it, Teddy sucks, hes why we lost, find another QB NOW, get it all out of your system, you even have a few extra days for it.

Teddy had an average game, much better than last game. But he has to throw it away there if he senses any pressure up front. Poor decision...but still, the Vikings played great. Good for them to know they hung with Arizona. Builds confidence for the next game.

Skoltastic_Voyage wrote: he did good mostly today WTF are you talking about?

No, I mean theres going to be a SLEW of people posting on how this loss was all on Teddy. Doesnt matter he played a decent game.

What an excruciating loss that simply did not need to happen at all.

If there weren't 3 fumbles in scoring position, the score would have been 29-23. Got to hold on to the damn ball.

Tough loss but at least we didn't embarrass ourselves like we normally do on prime time.

Mothman wrote:Sigh... bad situational awareness by Bridgewater on that play.

Out of all of the bad that happened on that play...why single out Teddy?

DK Sweets wrote:GOD #### DAMMIT

WHY RUN A #### PLAY THERE?

WHY!?

To try and get Walsh closer. I have no problem with them running a play there but Bridgewater has to understand, in that situation, the defense will be coming after him and the clock is running. If the play isn't there immediately, he has to throw that ball away.

It was a good game, much better than the Vikes usual primetime and nationally televised performances. I'm impressed with how prepared they looked and how hard they played they need to learn from their mistakes but a loss like this is easier to swallow than a debacle like the one we saw Sunday.

For all you Teddy haters he had better stats than Palmer tonight.

Teddy outplayed Palmer (an MVP candidate) with a worse oline and Teddy was on the road. Our players just fumbled more. And David Johnson outplayed Adrian Peterson.

DK Sweets wrote:Out of all of the bad that happened on that play...why single out Teddy?

I misread your post. My response is down thread...

Mothman wrote: To try and get Walsh closer. I have no problem with them running a play there but Bridgewater has to understand, in that situation, the defense will be coming after him and the clock is running. If the play isn't there immediately, he has to throw that ball away.

It was a good game, much better than the Vikes usual primetime and nationally televised performances. I'm impressed with how prepared they looked and how hard they played they need to learn from their mistakes but a loss like this is easier to swallow than a debacle like the one we saw Sunday.

I was in the boat of a close game is a good loss in this situation, but to lose how we just did that's off the table.

dead_poet wrote: How about bad "block" by Kalil or play call?

That doesnt really work into his agenda that Teddy lost the game for us.

DK Sweets wrote:Out of all of the bad that happened on that play...why single out Teddy?

Kalil wiffed bad on the play. Teddy was doing what he was told.