National Media

[Guest]

I was listening to one guy say that at some point winning all these close games would catch up to us, well there has been 11 of them and we won them all, so we have already made it well past the point of it catching up to us.  Yes, we have an awful defense, but we have had a lot of injuries on that side of the ball and are getting healthy and we have also shown some signs of improvement.  Our offense is loaded with talent, the best WR in the game and arguably the best RB, one of the best TEs and a QB who is playing at a MVP level and this offense is still learning the system and has not peaked yet.  

No one thought we would beat the Bills in Buffalo, no one expected us to win the division especially as early as we did and certainly no one expected us to a game we were trailing 33-0 in the 3rd quarter, so I think anything is possible with this team, they have proven to be the most resilient and clutch team in sports this year which is what it takes to win in the playoffs.  They can put the odds where they want them, but in a close playoff game in the 4th quarter, I will put my money on the team that is 11for 11, those are pretty good odds.  

[Guest]

@bigbone62 said:

@Chuckf said:

@bigbone62 said

@Chuckf said:
so the Vikes are 3.5 point dogs because they cannot win by a bunch of points?  but yet the Packers are a “dangerous team”.  is this the same Packer team who lost to the Same Giants team the Vikings beat this year?  Commanders? Lions?  Since when do they give style points on wins in the NFL? 

National media has absolutely zero to do with setting odds. 

I am well aware of this.  

Then why is the title of your post "national media" and your first comment is in relation to point spreads?

why do you care?  i think that 3.5 spread has a lot to do with perception.  The books want people to lay $$ a certain way and I think the media is helping them out.  were the Vikings not dogs at home against the Giants?

[Guest]

@Chuckf said:

@bigbone62 said:

@Chuckf said:

@bigbone62 said

@Chuckf said:
so the Vikes are 3.5 point dogs because they cannot win by a bunch of points?  but yet the Packers are a “dangerous team”.  is this the same Packer team who lost to the Same Giants team the Vikings beat this year?  Commanders? Lions?  Since when do they give style points on wins in the NFL? 

National media has absolutely zero to do with setting odds. 

I am well aware of this.  

Then why is the title of your post "national media" and your first comment is in relation to point spreads?

why do you care?  i think that 3.5 spread has a lot to do with perception.  The books want people to lay $$ a certain way and I think the media is helping them out.  were the Vikings not dogs at home against the Giants?

Because if people are going to continue these "woe is us, no one wikes us" posts, it would be nice if they at least cried about the correct group. Had you complained about the correct group I'd have had no reason to respond. 

[Guest]

@Mattyman said:

@comet52 said:
They're underdogs because people who risk (and win) serious money on the NFL are taking the Packers.  

And the betting community is  aware of what most Vikings fans are not.


A new GM, a rookie HC with a different defense don't win Superbowls. 


George Seifert did it in SF in 1994.


The 2022 Vikings don't resemble  the 1994 SF 49ers to me.

The odds for the super bowl don’t really matter during packer week do they?

[Guest]

Fuck the Packers…! (& yes that is the correct group ) 

[Guest]

@bigbone62 said:

@Chuckf said:

@bigbone62 said:

@Chuckf said:

@bigbone62 said

@Chuckf said:
so the Vikes are 3.5 point dogs because they cannot win by a bunch of points?  but yet the Packers are a “dangerous team”.  is this the same Packer team who lost to the Same Giants team the Vikings beat this year?  Commanders? Lions?  Since when do they give style points on wins in the NFL? 

National media has absolutely zero to do with setting odds. 

I am well aware of this.  

Then why is the title of your post "national media" and your first comment is in relation to point spreads?

why do you care?  i think that 3.5 spread has a lot to do with perception.  The books want people to lay $$ a certain way and I think the media is helping them out.  were the Vikings not dogs at home against the Giants?

Because if people are going to continue these "woe is us, no one wikes us" posts, it would be nice if they at least cried about the correct group. Had you complained about the correct group I'd have had no reason to respond. 

i think it’s actually amusing. That 15-1 Packer team a few years ago won EVERY game it seemed by the skin of their teeth as well but NOBODY called it luck back then.  Their defense was as bad or worse than the Vikings defense this year and yes I DO believe that point spread was put out there with perception in mind not the oddsmakers perception but that of the gambler.  They are working hand in hand to benefit the books, period 

[Guest]

Packer had to come back to win vs Chicago and Miami and beat a decimated Rams team in the last three weeks and now we hear Tua was concussed late in the first half yesterday and they are being crowned as “a scary team nobody wants to play”.  it’s laughable.  Rodgers didnt play overly well in any of these games, certainly not the player he was 5 years ago.

[Guest]

@Chuckf said:
Packer had to come back to win vs Chicago and Miami and beat a decimated Rams team in the last three weeks and now we hear Tua was concussed late in the first half yesterday and they are being crowned as “a scary team nobody wants to play”.  it’s laughable.  Rodgers didnt play overly well in any of these games, certainly not the player he was 5 years ago.

And, this didn't age well.  SMH

[Guest]

@Chuckf said:

@Chuckf said:
Packer had to come back to win vs Chicago and Miami and beat a decimated Rams team in the last three weeks and now we hear Tua was concussed late in the first half yesterday and they are being crowned as “a scary team nobody wants to play”.  it’s laughable.  Rodgers didnt play overly well in any of these games, certainly not the player he was 5 years ago.

And, this didn't age well.  SMH

You had me fooled.  I believed every line in your post. B)

[Guest]

@Chuckf said:

@Chuckf said:
Packer had to come back to win vs Chicago and Miami and beat a decimated Rams team in the last three weeks and now we hear Tua was concussed late in the first half yesterday and they are being crowned as “a scary team nobody wants to play”.  it’s laughable.  Rodgers didnt play overly well in any of these games, certainly not the player he was 5 years ago.

And, this didn't age well.  SMH

Hey Chuck...Not sure if you're comfortable addressing this on a forum or not?

What are your thoughts (as a player) regarding what happened with Hamlin and how the league has managed it so far? to-date it seems like the league is handling it well, I fully expect them to step in some poop at some point.