How many playoff contenders ....

It's a good point, but to be fair, 8 weeks ago - or 6, or less - most people would have said that Case Keenum was no better than the backups for all the rest of those teams. Some are still saying it! So it's possible a couple of those teams have someone on their bench who could step in, too. But the odds are against any one of them, and maybe only one team in a season has that experience - so yes, we are damn lucky that team is the Vikings.

I would say the Vikings and Jags are the only two potential playoff teams who could survive it THIS season.  Houston has made the playoffs the past couple years with a revolving door at QB, but not this season.  Denver was able to do it a couple years ago...

What do all those teams have in common?  A dominant defense and strong running game.  It's why I think the Vikings can become a perennial force in the NFC if we can get our QB situation settled.

@"Jor-El" said: It's a good point, but to be fair, 8 weeks ago - or 6, or less - most people would have said that Case Keenum was no better than the backups for all the rest of those teams. Some are still saying it! So it's possible a couple of those teams have someone on their bench who could step in, too. But the odds are against any one of them, and maybe only one team in a season has that experience - so yes, we are damn lucky that team is the Vikings.

Agreed. I thought exactly  the same thing. No doubt it required some luck, but that's always the case.  (We lost our starter after week 1. And consider that we lost our other starter at the beginning of last season, too. So I won't apologize for a smidgen of luck.) The Packers lost theirs in week 5 or 6. They've had their backup on the team for 3 years. And they completely folded. I suspect that's pretty much what every other team on that list would do, too.

@"Wetlander" said: What do all those teams have in common?  A dominant defense and strong running game.  It's why I think the Vikings can become a perennial force in the NFC if we can get our QB situation settled.

Agreed. Houston came into this season with Savage as their no. 1 QB.  Really?  Of course, that lasted about one-half of one game before they came to their senses and realized the rookie who is a million times better than the vet should play even in real games. But once that rookie went down . . . . Jags do not seem to care who plays QB. So long as he doesn't turn it over on every single possession, they are fine. 

Now of the ones that would have some success with their starting QB, take out their starting RB, too.  How's that going to work for them.

You gotta feel for Zim.  He's been a head coach for 4 seasons now and lost his starting QB and RB in the first halves of 3 of those 4.  OTOH, if anyone has learned how important it is to build a well-rounded team and not have a single focal point, it's Zim.

I think the Pats would find a way.  They had Garapallo (?) as their backup at the start.

@"greediron" said: I think the Pats would find a way.  They had Garapallo (?) as their backup at the start.

Yeah, not sure the normal rules apply there. Hoyer has had some success. Wasn't he the QB in Cleveland when Josh Gordon caught 1600 yards in 14 games?  May need a separate category for NE.

Was going to add the Bears, but then I remember we are talking contenders.    :)

@"dadevike" said:

@"greediron" said: I think the Pats would find a way.  They had Garapallo (?) as their backup at the start.

Yeah, not sure the normal rules apply there. Hoyer has had some success. Wasn't he the QB in Cleveland when Josh Gordon caught 1600 yards in 14 games?  May need a separate category for NE.

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"greediron" said: I think the Pats would find a way.  They had Garapallo (?) as their backup at the start.

Yeah, not sure the normal rules apply there. Hoyer has had some success. Wasn't he the QB in Cleveland when Josh Gordon caught 1600 yards in 14 games?  May need a separate category for NE.

Agreed, Belichek and company would find a way.