BG Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 I'll take any sort of thrashing here. Call me a homer, but at least try to explain to me why the Minnesota Vikings are the darlings of the NFL right now. They underachieved as usual last season. Granted, Moss' departure seems to give people this idea that they mean business when in fact their owner has shown more of a propensity to meddle and disrupt the team on a personell basis (*edit: even though he is gone ). I also know that TO's actions in Philly are the focus of most of the NFL, but why are they not scrutinized at all? I will wholeheartedly admit that I like the way they handled this offseason. I would have made most of the moves they made. It would have been tough to get rid of Moss, but the cap space they save enables them to field a better defense in the future. This year they have bought themselves a defense, drafted a gifted WR and given their lame duck coach one more chance. Why are they not guilty of having a 'fantasy' owner? Because they can score points? What is it? If they underachieve, which they will, they will most likely be referred to as a team on the rise or a team that had a strong season but fell short. Why (the kicker here ) were the Skins so ridiculed when they did this exact same thing in 2000? Bruce Smith and Deion may have seen better days, but they were still on paper players who bolstered a defense that held us back the previous year. The rest of the moves we made with our D that year were solid. The only possible failed move was bringing Jeff George in. However, we needed a solid back-up if BJ went down. Not just a decent back-up, but one that could provide a spark and take us down a stretch if neccesary. So the Vikings get a decent LB in Harris (in a lopsided trade), pay a ton of $ for Smoot a season after paying a ton of $ for Winfield(both very decent corners, but not quite the best), sign Pat Williams (prolly the best acquisition they made), traded for Cowert, who has some injury issues, but is talented and then sign Sharper. Bring in Travis Taylor as FA and draft Williamson with the 7th pick. Alot of moves in one offseason. However, when we do it, we are trying to 'buy' our way to the superbowl. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 They beefed up their defense, they have that WR that stepped up last year (i forgot his name) plus the rookie troy williamson...they'll be good this year. Bruce Smith and Deion were two really high profile players and we overpaid for them compared to where they were in their careers. You're also forgetting Jeff George, Mark Carrier, etc. If their acquisitions flop, they'll be ridiculed. However Snyder is a high profile owner. the more in the public eye, the more scorn you're willing to have thrown your way for when you overpay for over the hill players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 because they traded away their #1 star to bring in help for the defense very simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 If they were a playoff team last year and they made (as you even admit) very good moves to shore up some weaknesses...why wouldn't they be hyped to have a good season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sith lord Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Your guess is as good as mine. You can actually throw in the Falcons, Lions and the Raiders in the group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Raiders darlings? Surely you jest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Your guess is as good as mine. You can actually throw in the Falcons, Lions and the Raiders in the group. Falcons = cause of vick Lions = good young core group of players Raiders = Moss is there now...good 1-2 punch with Porter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayLewis Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Vikings still gonna make playoffs. but i dont think Daunte Cupepper is as good as last year stats. he didnt run the ball last year so he could get his QB ratin to 108. but i do think if he was on the colts he could proably get at least 40 TDs, Colts are a great offense team. you could throw ramsey and Boller in there and at least get an 85 QB rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 because they make the playoffs... the hating will end when the winning starts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 The answer to your question is that the owner was not perceived negatively by the press. The press' antipathy for Snyder colored all judgments about the Redskins. Believe me, if the 6-2 Redskins in 2000 had continued to play well and avert the major injuries they suffered, there were would have been a lot of people having to eat crow. The fact the team finished 8-8 and out of the playoffs caused a big sigh of relief from the likes of Clayton and Pasquarelli. In regards to the Vikings, I think the national media feels sorry for the team and fans because of the team's long history of coming close but never getting the ring. Also, having to put up with the tantrums of Randy Moss gives them some sympathy votes. The press has stepped back with its vitriol after Gibbs was hired, but there is still a lot of latent hostility against Snyder and the team in spite of Gibbs' reputation as a good guy. This team has to win under Gibbs with Snyder being seen as a quiet partner for the Redskins to start getting positive press for a change. But, in my mind, I really don't give a rat's ass. I would much rather have a team that is a clear underdog and unfavored pick than being an overhyped frontrunner The last thing we need is to have the team overhyped and the younger players reading in the newspapers how great they are. That can be a team killer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Had Mike Tice not made it into the playoffs last year (which the Vikes did by the skin of their teeth), he would have been gone. Moss is gone and they have a lot of new bodies...expect a melt-down by week 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Workin hard in their retirement..... BG, I think the answer to that is two sided. On one hand, I think when it comes to the 'Skins we all have a bit of a persecution complex. I'm not saying that there hasn't been undue criticism of our front office, our owner, and our players--but it's not as though people pride themselves on the ability to defame the 'Skins. As far as the Vikings as darlings, the reason, at least as I can see it (coming from someone who has been relatively tuned out for the last month), it's probably at least partially to due with the fact that the NFL media has one (or a couple) teams that they all jump on as being either a "sleeper" or a "great team" or with a "genius coach" (HAH, Mike Martz!). It provides a little focus to the coverage and gives them all something to talk about before the real football gets started. I think the Seahawks of last year are another example of this kind of thing. Give it a month or so, and the Vikings, especially if they are 2-2 or something comparable will have faded from the forefront. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 cus the viking have some success in the past couple of years, and it was their defense that was typically their weekness. now, their mossless, but have williamson, burleson, and robinson, their defense looks much better (on paper, we'll have to see how they gel) and overall, people think that their defense will completely change, and their offense will remain the same, even if there's no randy moss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted August 22, 2005 Author Share Posted August 22, 2005 I'll definitely buy into Bulldog's and Ihearts' theories. That makes sense. However, it was widely known that the big contract #'s given to the older guys on the Skins in 2000 would never be met. It was their last chance to make a run at a title. Bruce Smith being the sole exception. Trying not to hate hard, because as I said before, I like the moves they made. I don't think it will get them a SB, let alone a trip to the NFC championship, but I do think they deserve a bit of criticism. It does seem a bit apparent that hating on the Vikings is like hating on Bambi. It's just not pc. My cousin hates Greg Gumble in much of the same fashion. Just dislike for no reason at all. Strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 We tried to buy a SB; people hated, we failed; people cheered. No matter what we do we'll be ridicluled. I'm just hoping sooner or later we can find a way to make everyone eat crow. The Yankee's are in the same boat right now. Look at the Pats, they had a team full of no names until they started winning SB's. I think the Skins are finally headed in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.