Quote: @comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
I mean, that's great that in your alternate mindscape where stuff happened differently we are 7-0. Hurray!
Here's my mindscape: A better KOC effort and you wouldn't be 3-4. You wouldn't have barely beat arguably the two worst teams in the NFL, in fact having a chance late to lose both games. You'd have slapped them around hard.
I'm glad they played well the other night. We should be glad Brock Purdy was apparently concussed late as well, gifting us with those picks. I'm glad KOC's crappy red zone calls and our crappy red zone execution didn't end up causing a loss.
We are what our record says we are and one nice game doesn't erase 6 ugly ones.
I hope they beat Green Bay and their hot garbage junior quarterback, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they lose.
Quote: @comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
I mean, that's great that in your alternate mindscape where stuff happened differently we are 7-0. Hurray!
Here's my mindscape: A better KOC effort and you wouldn't be 3-4. You wouldn't have barely beat arguably the two worst teams in the NFL, in fact having a chance late to lose both games. You'd have slapped them around hard.
I'm glad they played well the other night. We should be glad Brock Purdy was apparently concussed late as well, gifting us with those picks. I'm glad KOC's crappy red zone calls and our crappy red zone execution didn't end up causing a loss.
We are what our record says we are and one nice game doesn't erase 6 ugly ones.
I hope they beat Green Bay and their hot garbage junior quarterback, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they lose.
"We are what our record says we are." I love that one. Sounds good, doesn't it? It would look great stitched on a pillow. Problem is it's not true. It's never true and never has been. There are always teams better than their record and there are always teams worse than their record. Because the NFL is filled with random, weird ass shit that has very little to do with coaching or the talent on the roster.
BUT...is it all that matters? Yes, it is. But it rarely gives you much insight into whether a team is good or not. Or who can beat whom any given Sunday. Especially this early. How do the 5-1 Lions lose 38-6 to the Ravens!? Who were shut down by the Steelers!? Who were blown out by the Texans!? Who were blown out by the Ravens? Who also blew out the Browns, who beat the 49ers.
I'll give you Chicago and Carolina. Vikings played like cat shit in those games. But a person with two functioning retinas should've been able to predict that the Vikings would at least play the 49ers tough if they played clean, just based on how we played in three losses to other good teams like the Eagles, Chiefs and Chargers, despite not playing clean at all in those games.
In fact, one of us did. And is $65 richer today because of it. :-)
Last 2 games @ Lamblow, the Vikings lost by > 25 points per game
Very curious to see what they bring in 23.
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
Last 2 games @ Lamblow, the Vikings lost by > 25 points per game
Very curious to see what they bring in 23.
Me as well. The Packers are very beatable, so if Minnesota is really a good team that just started badly with turnovers, this is the time to start stacking wins and prove it. Seriously, no excuses.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
I mean, that's great that in your alternate mindscape where stuff happened differently we are 7-0. Hurray!
Here's my mindscape: A better KOC effort and you wouldn't be 3-4. You wouldn't have barely beat arguably the two worst teams in the NFL, in fact having a chance late to lose both games. You'd have slapped them around hard.
I'm glad they played well the other night. We should be glad Brock Purdy was apparently concussed late as well, gifting us with those picks. I'm glad KOC's crappy red zone calls and our crappy red zone execution didn't end up causing a loss.
We are what our record says we are and one nice game doesn't erase 6 ugly ones.
I hope they beat Green Bay and their hot garbage junior quarterback, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they lose.
"We are what our record says we are." I love that one. Sounds good, doesn't it? It would look great stitched on a pillow. Problem is it's not true. It's never true and never has been. There are always teams better than their record and there are always teams worse than their record. Because the NFL is filled with random, weird ass shit that has very little to do with coaching or the talent on the roster.
BUT...is it all that matters? Yes, it is. But it rarely gives you much insight into whether a team is good or not. Or who can beat whom any given Sunday. Especially this early. How do the 5-1 Lions lose 38-6 to the Ravens!? Who were shut down by the Steelers!? Who were blown out by the Texans!? Who were blown out by the Ravens? Who also blew out the Browns, who beat the 49ers.
I'll give you Chicago and Carolina. Vikings played like cat shit in those games. But a person with two functioning retinas should've been able to predict that the Vikings would at least play the 49ers tough if they played clean, just based on how we played in three losses to other good teams like the Eagles, Chiefs and Chargers, despite not playing clean at all in those games.
In fact, one of us did. And is $65 richer today because of it. :-)
We are what our record says we are, IMO. It's fine to have skepticism (2022) or optimism (2023) based on the record but at the end of the day playoff seeding gets decided by W/L records. So it's pretty darn important.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
I mean, that's great that in your alternate mindscape where stuff happened differently we are 7-0. Hurray!
Here's my mindscape: A better KOC effort and you wouldn't be 3-4. You wouldn't have barely beat arguably the two worst teams in the NFL, in fact having a chance late to lose both games. You'd have slapped them around hard.
I'm glad they played well the other night. We should be glad Brock Purdy was apparently concussed late as well, gifting us with those picks. I'm glad KOC's crappy red zone calls and our crappy red zone execution didn't end up causing a loss.
We are what our record says we are and one nice game doesn't erase 6 ugly ones.
I hope they beat Green Bay and their hot garbage junior quarterback, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they lose.
"We are what our record says we are." I love that one. Sounds good, doesn't it? It would look great stitched on a pillow. Problem is it's not true. It's never true and never has been. There are always teams better than their record and there are always teams worse than their record. Because the NFL is filled with random, weird ass shit that has very little to do with coaching or the talent on the roster.
BUT...is it all that matters? Yes, it is. But it rarely gives you much insight into whether a team is good or not. Or who can beat whom any given Sunday. Especially this early. How do the 5-1 Lions lose 38-6 to the Ravens!? Who were shut down by the Steelers!? Who were blown out by the Texans!? Who were blown out by the Ravens? Who also blew out the Browns, who beat the 49ers.
I'll give you Chicago and Carolina. Vikings played like cat shit in those games. But a person with two functioning retinas should've been able to predict that the Vikings would at least play the 49ers tough if they played clean, just based on how we played in three losses to other good teams like the Eagles, Chiefs and Chargers, despite not playing clean at all in those games.
In fact, one of us did. And is $65 richer today because of it. :-)
it isnt? try bringing that up at the end of the year when they are handing out playoff spots.... you are ultimately what your record says you are, being a good team with a bad record still has your team watching the playoffs from the beach. maybe teams dont play up to potential, maybe teams play poorly at times, but they are still what their record says because in the end, thats all that matters.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
I mean, that's great that in your alternate mindscape where stuff happened differently we are 7-0. Hurray!
Here's my mindscape: A better KOC effort and you wouldn't be 3-4. You wouldn't have barely beat arguably the two worst teams in the NFL, in fact having a chance late to lose both games. You'd have slapped them around hard.
I'm glad they played well the other night. We should be glad Brock Purdy was apparently concussed late as well, gifting us with those picks. I'm glad KOC's crappy red zone calls and our crappy red zone execution didn't end up causing a loss.
We are what our record says we are and one nice game doesn't erase 6 ugly ones.
I hope they beat Green Bay and their hot garbage junior quarterback, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they lose.
"We are what our record says we are." I love that one. Sounds good, doesn't it? It would look great stitched on a pillow. Problem is it's not true. It's never true and never has been. There are always teams better than their record and there are always teams worse than their record. Because the NFL is filled with random, weird ass shit that has very little to do with coaching or the talent on the roster.
BUT...is it all that matters? Yes, it is. But it rarely gives you much insight into whether a team is good or not. Or who can beat whom any given Sunday. Especially this early. How do the 5-1 Lions lose 38-6 to the Ravens!? Who were shut down by the Steelers!? Who were blown out by the Texans!? Who were blown out by the Ravens? Who also blew out the Browns, who beat the 49ers.
I'll give you Chicago and Carolina. Vikings played like cat shit in those games. But a person with two functioning retinas should've been able to predict that the Vikings would at least play the 49ers tough if they played clean, just based on how we played in three losses to other good teams like the Eagles, Chiefs and Chargers, despite not playing clean at all in those games.
In fact, one of us did. And is $65 richer today because of it. :-)
it isnt? try bringing that up at the end of the year when they are handing out playoff spots.... you are ultimately what your record says you are, being a good team with a bad record still has your team watching the playoffs from the beach. maybe teams dont play up to potential, maybe teams play poorly at times, but they are still what their record says because in the end, thats all that matters.
Hey that's what I said! :p
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
I mean, that's great that in your alternate mindscape where stuff happened differently we are 7-0. Hurray!
Here's my mindscape: A better KOC effort and you wouldn't be 3-4. You wouldn't have barely beat arguably the two worst teams in the NFL, in fact having a chance late to lose both games. You'd have slapped them around hard.
I'm glad they played well the other night. We should be glad Brock Purdy was apparently concussed late as well, gifting us with those picks. I'm glad KOC's crappy red zone calls and our crappy red zone execution didn't end up causing a loss.
We are what our record says we are and one nice game doesn't erase 6 ugly ones.
I hope they beat Green Bay and their hot garbage junior quarterback, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they lose.
"We are what our record says we are." I love that one. Sounds good, doesn't it? It would look great stitched on a pillow. Problem is it's not true. It's never true and never has been. There are always teams better than their record and there are always teams worse than their record. Because the NFL is filled with random, weird ass shit that has very little to do with coaching or the talent on the roster.
BUT...is it all that matters? Yes, it is. But it rarely gives you much insight into whether a team is good or not. Or who can beat whom any given Sunday. Especially this early. How do the 5-1 Lions lose 38-6 to the Ravens!? Who were shut down by the Steelers!? Who were blown out by the Texans!? Who were blown out by the Ravens? Who also blew out the Browns, who beat the 49ers.
I'll give you Chicago and Carolina. Vikings played like cat shit in those games. But a person with two functioning retinas should've been able to predict that the Vikings would at least play the 49ers tough if they played clean, just based on how we played in three losses to other good teams like the Eagles, Chiefs and Chargers, despite not playing clean at all in those games.
In fact, one of us did. And is $65 richer today because of it. :-)
it isnt? try bringing that up at the end of the year when they are handing out playoff spots.... you are ultimately what your record says you are, being a good team with a bad record still has your team watching the playoffs from the beach. maybe teams dont play up to potential, maybe teams play poorly at times, but they are still what their record says because in the end, thats all that matters.
Read it again.
Quote: @pattersaur said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
The team will need more of this:
https://twitter.com/danorlovsky7/status/...2601841837
That was kind of the revelation for me last night. He had the right plan to attack the Niners D and the team executed it. A really smart, effective strategy in fact. I don't know if this is just some lucky outlier or the start of some improvement because up until now, his calls and decisions have had me thinking he's the wrong guy at h.c. I guess we'll see what happens going forward. I'm reluctant to take one good game and jump on a drunken bandwagon of oh boy we're comin' now but if he called that good of a game every week we'd win 10 games or more even with the slow start.
But keep in mind the only difference betwen the 49ers game and the games against the Chiefs, Chargers and Eagles was that the Vikings didn't shoot themselves in the foot more than the other team.
Ahhh, no. KOC was not calling great games in those contests, he was looking like he didn't know what he was doing. There was a clear difference last night. Also Kirk pretty much played the game of his life.
OK, but do you only see wins and losses? it's not like Cousins didn't play well until the 49er game. No QB in the NFL threw more TDs than Kirk Cousins before the 49er game even began, despite playing one of the NFL's toughest early schedules.
And it's not like the Vikings were blown out by the Eagles, Chargers and Chiefs. They played three very good teams to the whistle despite an NFL record number of turnovers. And an argument could be made that without Hockenson's fumble against the Chargers, JJ's bizarro fumble into the end zone against the Eagles, and a totally blown DPI call against the Chiefs, the Vikings may have won all three.
Now, yes, you can play what ifs until your face is purple, but you don't play those teams to the wire by calling crap games and having a crap QB.
I mean, that's great that in your alternate mindscape where stuff happened differently we are 7-0. Hurray!
Here's my mindscape: A better KOC effort and you wouldn't be 3-4. You wouldn't have barely beat arguably the two worst teams in the NFL, in fact having a chance late to lose both games. You'd have slapped them around hard.
I'm glad they played well the other night. We should be glad Brock Purdy was apparently concussed late as well, gifting us with those picks. I'm glad KOC's crappy red zone calls and our crappy red zone execution didn't end up causing a loss.
We are what our record says we are and one nice game doesn't erase 6 ugly ones.
I hope they beat Green Bay and their hot garbage junior quarterback, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if they lose.
"We are what our record says we are." I love that one. Sounds good, doesn't it? It would look great stitched on a pillow. Problem is it's not true. It's never true and never has been. There are always teams better than their record and there are always teams worse than their record. Because the NFL is filled with random, weird ass shit that has very little to do with coaching or the talent on the roster.
BUT...is it all that matters? Yes, it is. But it rarely gives you much insight into whether a team is good or not. Or who can beat whom any given Sunday. Especially this early. How do the 5-1 Lions lose 38-6 to the Ravens!? Who were shut down by the Steelers!? Who were blown out by the Texans!? Who were blown out by the Ravens? Who also blew out the Browns, who beat the 49ers.
I'll give you Chicago and Carolina. Vikings played like cat shit in those games. But a person with two functioning retinas should've been able to predict that the Vikings would at least play the 49ers tough if they played clean, just based on how we played in three losses to other good teams like the Eagles, Chiefs and Chargers, despite not playing clean at all in those games.
In fact, one of us did. And is $65 richer today because of it. :-)
We are what our record says we are, IMO. It's fine to have skepticism (2022) or optimism (2023) based on the record but at the end of the day playoff seeding gets decided by W/L records. So it's pretty darn important.
Read it again.
|
