Which of these would have had the best shot at a Lombardi? 75,87,98,09?
Long as we're killing time till TC:
I know they're different era's of ball...
No, I didnt forget about 41/donut, Philly debacle. Just didnt seem those teams as being in the same realm as these 4.
75 had Tark near his prime and that tenacious D. Some speak of this team as maybe the greatest of all the Vikings teams.
Opponent: 76 Steelers
87 had tremendous balance on O vs D. Who didnt luv Burnsie or Floyd Peters???
Opponent: 88 Bronco's
98...Not much more to be said here. But that team lost some key players (i.e. Randle vs AZ).
Opponent: 99 Bronco's
09...Had Favre on fire, great balance but not the weapons on O 98 had. Maybe better balanced than 98.
Opponent: 10 Colts
Hurry-up Vikings, we ain't getting any younger!
I know popular opinion will be ‘98.....Heres my case for ‘87
’87 was a strike season, the Vikings started strong, the game in Anaheim, Hassan Jones catches a hail mary from Wade Wilson for a huge win...both teams shook hands in solidarity for the strike, and games were played by replacements.....
The Scrubs who played for the Vikings lost every game.
the REAL team eventually made the playoffs despite the inept play of the scrubs.
but BECAUSE of the scrubs, we were on the road for the playoffs every week.
The Saints were chirping & we kicked the Hell outta them.
No one could have forseen what we did at Candlestick to the ‘Niners...AC went off.
At the Redskins....against Doug Williams should have been a slam dunk, but after the huge upset in San Francisco, we just couldnt get the offense going, still, it was a dog fight and yet it still came down to the final drive.
we would have KILLED the Broncos (Just like the ‘Skins did)
’98
I was SCREAMING at Robert Smith....I know hes a “fan favorite”, but for all the talk we heard about “how smart he was” he sure made some stupid choices in the NFCC. I mean C’mon....keep chewing the clock...stay in bounds.
’75
I was just a kid, but remember that they were a damn good team. The Drew pushoff & Tarkentons dad passing away....
’09
Hopeful as always, great team, but now I just wait for us to lose in some new inventive way. The late hits / bountygate added salt to the wound.
’09
Hopeful as always, great team, but now I just wait for us to lose in some new inventive way. The late hits / bountygate added salt to the wound.
Great take on Burnsies squad
Pack fans warned me all 09 Favre would break my heart...Pass across the body did just that.
My $ would go on 98 or 09 teams. I think they would have had a best shot against Colts or Bronco's...76 Steelers were at the end of their Steel Curtain era, but still damn good.
I think that 88 Bronco team had a very good D too?
The odds of all 4 of those teams not winning the Superbowl must be huge. The odds of 3 of those teams not getting to the Superbowl is astronomical.
That's a good question because I can't make up my mind on choosing one and I have seen all these teams play.
87 definitely. Would have destroyed Denver. Vikings up and coming young defense played with nothing to lose and it showed. Were never the same after that run.
'09. EVERYBODY knew going in to the conference title games that Vikings/Saints was the real SB and the AFC winner was cannon fodder.
I think if we had gone in '98 Denver still tops us. That was Terrell Davis' 2,000 yd season and Ed McDaniel blew his knee in the playoffs vs AZ. Broncos also had Rod Smith, Ed McCaffrey and Shannon Sharpe. IMHO Viking offense shows up better than ATL's did but the D still gets rolled for 30+ without McDaniel.
Hello, Purple People- this is my first post here.
It's a tough call, but I'm going with the '87 team. Wasn't that the NFCC game (vs. Washington) where 'Disco Darren Nelson' dropped the would-be game winner in the end zone as time expired?
I found it hilarious that the analysts all thought the Saints were a much better team than the Vikes, because they forgot about the 'scab' games! If you threw those out, the two teams had the same record.
2009 team would have easily beaten the Colts IMO. That team had it all except for the zebras
Interesting thing is that all of our opponents weren't dominant teams the way some of the others were (70 Chiefs, 73 Dolphins, 74 Steelers). The '88 Broncos weren't very good at all. Same with the '10 Colts.
Always felt that that '75 team was the best of the Vikings 70s teams. '98 was our best team, but the opponent would've been pretty good. '09 was banged up. I'll go '87. That team would've destroyed the Broncos much like Washington did.
@"Skoldid" said: Hello, Purple People- this is my first post here. It's a tough call, but I'm going with the '87 team. Wasn't that the NFCC game (vs. Washington) where 'Disco Darren Nelson' dropped the would-be game winner in the end zone as time expired? I found it hilarious that the analysts all thought the Saints were a much better team than the Vikes, because they forgot about the 'scab' games! If you threw those out, the two teams had the same record.Welcome @Skoldid...
I forget where I heard this, I think it was from and interview with Old Burnsie himself and it pertains to that 88 CG.
Darrin didnt just muff that pass. The DB was able to knock the ball out of his hands from behind. If they made that throw and xtra point? The game goes into OT
But that DB was able to make that play on Nelson at the goal-line at all cause AC did not run his corner end-zone route deep enough, dragging that DB with him.
Shallow route by AC? meant that db could more easily cover Nelson at the goal-line.
Football, the ultimate team game.
@"Hawkvike25" said: 2009 team would have easily beaten the Colts IMO. That team had it all except for the zebrasI thought with Favre, the Zebras would have for certain been on his side all year - and post-season.
@"kmillard" said: 87 definitely. Would have destroyed Denver. Vikings up and coming young defense played with nothing to lose and it showed. Were never the same after that run.This. Denver would have been left in the dust.
After that, the 09 squad had the best chance at a win.
98 was so banged up after the NFCC game.
How about this year we go play Buffalo and give them loss #5? Or get some revenge for SB IV?
@"BarrNone55" said:@"kmillard" said: 87 definitely. Would have destroyed Denver. Vikings up and coming young defense played with nothing to lose and it showed. Were never the same after that run. This. Denver would have been left in the dust.After that, the 09 squad had the best chance at a win.
98 was so banged up after the NFCC game.
How about this year we go play Buffalo and give them loss #5? Or get some revenge for SB IV?
True story...It's 1998 and I'm at the AZ vs Vikings Divisional Round in Metrodome...
Game is well in control and I say to my buddy "it's time for Denny to start pulling starters"
Randle gets hurt the very next f'ing play
@"purplefaithful" said:@"BarrNone55" said:@"kmillard" said: 87 definitely. Would have destroyed Denver. Vikings up and coming young defense played with nothing to lose and it showed. Were never the same after that run. This. Denver would have been left in the dust.After that, the 09 squad had the best chance at a win.
98 was so banged up after the NFCC game.
How about this year we go play Buffalo and give them loss #5? Or get some revenge for SB IV?
True story...It's 1998 and I'm at the AZ vs Vikings Divisional Round in Metrodome...
Game is well in control and I say to my buddy "it's time for Denny to start pulling starters"
Randle gets hurt the very next f'ing play
Ugh
@"purplefaithful" said: Long as we're killing time till TC:I know they're different era's of ball...
No, I didnt forget about 41/donut, Philly debacle. Just didnt seem those teams as being in the same realm as these 4.
75 had Tark near his prime and that tenacious D. Some speak of this team as maybe the greatest of all the Vikings teams.
Opponent: 76 Steelers87 had tremendous balance on O vs D. Who didnt luv Burnsie or Floyd Peters???
Opponent: 88 Bronco's98...Not much more to be said here. But that team lost some key players (i.e. Randle vs AZ).
Opponent: 99 Bronco's09...Had Favre on fire, great balance but not the weapons on O 98 had. Maybe better balanced than 98.
Opponent: 10 Colts
It may have been rationalization to cope with the pain, but 98 could have been ugly against the Broncos. Randle was playing on one leg, I think Eddie Mac was hurt. Our D-line was pretty weak outside of Randle IIRC.
09 was our year. Colts were rather weak. Freeney played the first half gimpy and then basically was useless after the long halftime. Rice and Favre were hot. Harvin was a huge weapon, Adrian was still a workhorse.
I don't remember the 75 team, was only a wee lad.
@"Vanguard83" said:I was SCREAMING at Robert Smith....I know hes a “fan favorite”, but for all the talk we heard about “how smart he was” he sure made some stupid choices in the NFCC. I mean C’mon....keep chewing the clock...stay in bounds.
he was too smart. he made business decisions that day.
@"greediron" said:@"Vanguard83" said:I was SCREAMING at Robert Smith....I know hes a “fan favorite”, but for all the talk we heard about “how smart he was” he sure made some stupid choices in the NFCC. I mean C’mon....keep chewing the clock...stay in bounds.
he was too smart. he made business decisions that day.
no kidding. too bad his “business” wasnt FOOTBALL.Fundamental football here. Cant do what even HS kids should know.
Never understood the slack he gets from Vikings fans.
09 and 87 teams would have been favorites
09 would have been against Peyton but our DL was the best in the game at the time. Throw in Brett and all the weapons, would have been a good chance at a ring
87 was on a roll, finally not playing “on the road”. That defense was the best in football. A Super Bowl win here and you can add Browner and Thomas to the HOF. Most likely we never trade for Herschel either.
98 was playing a tougher team but man on that stage, that offense could have exploded. Would have been a shoot out, those Denver DBs while good were up there in age. 50/50 due to the injuries to Ed Mac and Johnny Randle
i also throw a shout out to the 2000 team. Sure they had the 41-0 freak game, but the matchup with Baltimore would have featured the strongest d vs the best o and on the flip side, an average at best O vs an average at best D. What tripped up the 2000 Super Bowl? MNF in Green Bay with a chipshot to win on 3rd down near the end of regulation, Berger fumbles the snap and then proceeds to throw a pick. He falls on it, Anderson puts the next one through, we end up 12-4 and NY comes to the dome for the NFCCG. Subsequently in overtime, the “he did what” Freeman catch ends the game.
2017 would have faced Tom Brady but the whole world would have been pulling for Minnesota to win in their own stadium
@"Vanguard83" said:@"greediron" said:@"Vanguard83" said:I was SCREAMING at Robert Smith....I know hes a “fan favorite”, but for all the talk we heard about “how smart he was” he sure made some stupid choices in the NFCC. I mean C’mon....keep chewing the clock...stay in bounds.
he was too smart. he made business decisions that day.
no kidding. too bad his “business” wasnt FOOTBALL.Fundamental football here. Cant do what even HS kids should know.
Never understood the slack he gets from Vikings fans.
He didn't have a football heart. He was talented as all get out, but injuries held him back, so when it came time to stay in bounds and take the hit, he chose to save his body.I don't think anyone gives him slack, it is one think always brought up about that game.
Sister surprised me with 1999 Super Bowl tickets as a Christmas gift knowing the Vikes were going to be there. Probably the most miserable I've been watching a live game. I thought that team could outscore anybody. 1975 was my favorite however. Fuck Drew Pearson.
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.