Quote: @holmanjp said:
@ greediron said:
@ holmanjp said:
@ greediron said:
Why is it funny?
They got suckered in, Kirk went on a nice little streak playing bad teams.
Then when the big boys ended up on the schedule. Kirk was, well let me put it this way. Kirk was Kirk.
Funny as in how hypocritcal they are. They didn't get suckered, they are just hype mongers.
Kirk and the offense was playing pretty well with a partial game hiccup here and there. And you realize KC didn't play the last game against Chicago, right?
Sorry I missed your post while the media was on the KC bandwagon.
I will now look for those posts you made saying they were wrong at the time.
I can admit they almost had me defending him, or should I say trusting him?
I used a little common sense, and told myself I would wait until he beat a
playoff caliber team before I gave him the benefit of the doubt
What did I say to make you think I thought he played against the Bears?
I don't consider the Bears the Big Boys.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with another poster.
he said if MN would have wanted to beat the Bears they would have.
Why didn't they do that last year to make the playoffs?
Packers twice, Hawks, Chiefs, during reg season.
Gives me no reason to believe he can perform well against the likes of
Saints, 49rs, Pack and most likely Ravens.
I'm not laying all the blame on Kirk, Zim has just as bad of a track record against good teams.
They are a match made in heaven, keeps fans from being able to pin point the real culprit.
Makes me wonder why I bothered to reply? Same grating post as always.
I believe Cousins had a pretty good game, or at least half a game against the Hawks. If you followed the bouncing ball, I never got too high on Cousins. He was playing well, but had a few clunkers. I will save you the research time, my biggest praise for him was that even during those clunkers, he didn't fold. It took a half sometimes, but Stef and Cousins always seemed to find a way to finish strong, Denver, Seattle and others.
Quote: @greediron said:
Sports media is all about hype. They build people and teams up and then tear them down. That's their formula.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ holmanjp said:
@ greediron said:
@ holmanjp said:
@ greediron said:
Why is it funny?
They got suckered in, Kirk went on a nice little streak playing bad teams.
Then when the big boys ended up on the schedule. Kirk was, well let me put it this way. Kirk was Kirk.
Funny as in how hypocritcal they are. They didn't get suckered, they are just hype mongers.
Kirk and the offense was playing pretty well with a partial game hiccup here and there. And you realize KC didn't play the last game against Chicago, right?
Sorry I missed your post while the media was on the KC bandwagon.
I will now look for those posts you made saying they were wrong at the time.
I can admit they almost had me defending him, or should I say trusting him?
I used a little common sense, and told myself I would wait until he beat a
playoff caliber team before I gave him the benefit of the doubt
What did I say to make you think I thought he played against the Bears?
I don't consider the Bears the Big Boys.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with another poster.
he said if MN would have wanted to beat the Bears they would have.
Why didn't they do that last year to make the playoffs?
Packers twice, Hawks, Chiefs, during reg season.
Gives me no reason to believe he can perform well against the likes of
Saints, 49rs, Pack and most likely Ravens.
I'm not laying all the blame on Kirk, Zim has just as bad of a track record against good teams.
They are a match made in heaven, keeps fans from being able to pin point the real culprit.
Makes me wonder why I bothered to reply? Same grating post as always.
I believe Cousins had a pretty good game, or at least half a game against the Hawks. If you followed the bouncing ball, I never got too high on Cousins. He was playing well, but had a few clunkers. I will save you the research time, my biggest praise for him was that even during those clunkers, he didn't fold. It took a half sometimes, but Stef and Cousins always seemed to find a way to finish strong, Denver, Seattle and others.
I thought your reply was valid, right up to this part "And you realize KC didn't play the last game against Chicago, right?"
Again what part of my comment would lead you to ask this?
So either you were fishing for a reply or confused about who I thought are good teams.
Lazy media isn't doing their homework. Saints are down 2 players on their D-Line. 4 of their worst 5 Defensive performances have come since Week 12. Their 2nd best CB is Eli Apple.
Teams with good DTs have been stuffing the run and getting pressure on Kirk. NO doesn't have that. They will need to load the box to stop Cook. GB didn't have to with Z Smith & Clark. Stefanski was trying to throw GB out of something they weren't even doing.
I'm not certain Minnesota can't run against a loaded box against this team. But if they can't there will be much more space for Diggs, Thielen, Smith and Rudy to operate against their suspect Secondary. And Jordan is their only bona fide pass rusher. Cousins' numbers against the blitz are nearly as good as Brees, so they won't want to bring extra pressure unless they have no choice.
Very even game. NO on fire on Offense but the Defense is slumping. Vice versa for Minnesota. Brees is next to last on taking deep shots too. The Saints will want to attack short and intermediate, which actually works to Minnesota's advantage since Zimmer won't have to play Harry and Ant deep like he did against the Hags.
The game will be decided by 3 simple factors: Rushing for over 100 yards (both teams win when they do it), Turnovers and Pressure without having to blitz. If both teams rush for over a hundo and don't turn it over this could be high scoring. That probably won't bode well for Minnesota. Gotta stop the run, get Dalvin his and get pressure on Brees just rushing 4.
Anything can happen but this profiles to be a close game unless Kendricks is limited or Stefanski lays another egg.
@ FSUVike I agree with a lot of what you just said. This could be a close game. But a few factors you glossed over or may not be giving enough weight to are home field and especially, coaching.
Sean Payton, whose guts I hate, has his teams ready in big games. They don't always win but they at least show up. There's a legitimate chance the Vikings lay a complete egg. Our coaches has proven that's very much in the range of outcomes.
So although the on-field matchups might be about equal, I'd give the special teams, coaching, and of course home field advantage to NO. Also I hate to bring this up but the refs will be walking on egg shells during this game due to what happened to NO in the playoffs last year, especially late. I think that favors NO as well.
Going to be an uphill battle for the Vikes. Hope we show up and rip a win!
Quote: @FSUVike said:
Lazy media isn't doing their homework. Saints are down 2 players on their D-Line. 4 of their worst 5 Defensive performances have come since Week 12. Their 2nd best CB is Eli Apple.
Teams with good DTs have been stuffing the run and getting pressure on Kirk. NO doesn't have that. They will need to load the box to stop Cook. GB didn't have to with Z Smith & Clark. Stefanski was trying to throw GB out of something they weren't even doing.
I'm not certain Minnesota can't run against a loaded box against this team. But if they can't there will be much more space for Diggs, Thielen, Smith and Rudy to operate against their suspect Secondary. And Jordan is their only bona fide pass rusher. Cousins' numbers against the blitz are nearly as good as Brees, so they won't want to bring extra pressure unless they have no choice.
Very even game. NO on fire on Offense but the Defense is slumping. Vice versa for Minnesota. Brees is next to last on taking deep shots too. The Saints will want to attack short and intermediate, which actually works to Minnesota's advantage since Zimmer won't have to play Harry and Ant deep like he did against the Hags.
The game will be decided by 3 simple factors: Rushing for over 100 yards (both teams win when they do it), Turnovers and Pressure without having to blitz. If both teams rush for over a hundo and don't turn it over this could be high scoring. That probably won't bode well for Minnesota. Gotta stop the run, get Dalvin his and get pressure on Brees just rushing 4.
Anything can happen but this profiles to be a close game unless Kendricks is limited or Stefanski lays another egg.
Very good take. Definitely have to get to Brees without the blitz. To this I would only add that the Saints don't have any other WR besides Thomas. That was also the case with the Packers who didn't have any trouble getting the ball to Adams. Difference here could be that Thomas is more the kind of receiver (big, physical) that Rhodes tends to play better against. The Saints have been filling their no-WR-but Thomas problem with Jared Cook, who's had some monster games lately. I like our safeties in that match up. Also like Kendricks v. Kamara if the injury doesn't limit him too much.
Quote: @pattersaur said:
@ FSUVike I agree with a lot of what you just said. This could be a close game. But a few factors you glossed over or may not be giving enough weight to are home field and especially, coaching.
Sean Payton, whose guts I hate, has his teams ready in big games. They don't always win but they at least show up. There's a legitimate chance the Vikings lay a complete egg. Our coaches has proven that's very much in the range of outcomes.
So although the on-field matchups might be about equal, I'd give the special teams, coaching, and of course home field advantage to NO. Also I hate to bring this up but the refs will be walking on egg shells during this game due to what happened to NO in the playoffs last year, especially late. I think that favors NO as well.
Going to be an uphill battle for the Vikes. Hope we show up and rip a win!
Zimmer has had Minnesota ready to play against Payton and Brees pretty much every time they've played. I'm sure he's motivated by the challenge of facing a friend and a future HOF QB. Kubiak and Stefanski have had 2 weeks to plan against a Defense that doesn't possess the same weapons as the ones that have given them fits this year.
If this was on the road against anyone else there is plenty of evidence that Zimmer wouldn't have an actual gameplan and his team would be flat. But the evidence for them to be prepared and ready against New Orleans is there.
Another sneaky little factor is the Starters on Defense seeing how well their backups played at home with nothing to be gained. Has to fire them up some.
Honestly, only 2 things worry me. Sean adjusting at halftime and Mike not countering and Stefanski waiting too long to go Shotgun if the team gets in an early hole or can't run the ball for some reason.
|
