And you wonder why the NFL/National media caters to the popular teams....

Dallas pretty much made the Saints look like nobody last night. They have an up and coming defense. DeMarcus Lawrence is a stud and so are Byron Jones, Jalen Smith, Leighton Vander Esch and Chidobe Awuzie. Their offense with Zeke Elliott is rolling and Amari Cooper turned out to be a great trade get for them. I loved seeing the Saints slammed in the mouth, wish we could have done it the same way...
But, back to your post, Sticky...I agree, and though the league "seems" to want parody the teams you mentioned are always the ones in the spotlight no matter how they're playing. I don't see the Vikings ever grabbing the spotlight, which tells you how great my pessimistic heart feels about our chances of ever winning a SB.

The difference between the game last night and the game in Minnesota was turnovers.  Period.  Vikings defense was smothering on the Saints as well.  

@"Chuckf" said: The difference between the game last night and the game in Minnesota was turnovers.  Period.  Vikings defense was smothering on the Saints as well.  

Yup, you are right. The Vikings weren't strong enough to overcome their mistakes. The defense did a decent job that night but we spotted the Saints14 with those TOs. I do think these 2 games looked a lot different though. At no point did I feel like the Saints were ever in danger in our game. They were comfortable and the game just came to them. In last night's game they were never comfortable, not at any point. That's the difference and that's the way I wish we would have played them. I think we would have won if we had, even with the turnovers.

Zimmer had a talk with Cousins about turnovers and to Cousins credit he got the message. Can't turn it over against the great teams, you won't win. 

@"StickyBun" said: Zimmer had a talk with Cousins about turnovers and to Cousins credit he got the message. Can't turn it over against the great teams, you won't win. 

Based on his two INTs vs Chicago?  Or was it his 2 turnovers(1 INT 1 Fumble) vs the lions?  Or did Zim just finally have that turnover talk with Cousins just before facing the horrible packer D?  I'd say the saints were the last "great" team the Vikings played and in the next two games our QB turned it over 2 times each game.  If you are trying to paint the picture that Cousins got the message and didn't have any turnovers vs the pack because of a talk... I'd point to the fact that the packers are at 0 in the give away/take away stat.  Meanwhile the Bears are +14, the saints are +9, the lions are - 6(yet we still gave it to them twice).  Packer D isn't good enough to generate TOs.  The Pats are + 5 and the Seahags are +8, providing a bigger test than the 0 packers but not as much of a threat as the +14 Bears.  

I would think the Bills game would be proof enough to say...  Turnovers will allow a bad team to beat you.  Not sure why Zim waited 'til last week's Packer game to have this "talk" with Cousins but man... that wasted a lot of games this year. 

@"Bezerker88" said:

@"StickyBun" said: Zimmer had a talk with Cousins about turnovers and to Cousins credit he got the message. Can't turn it over against the great teams, you won't win. 

Based on his two INTs vs Chicago?  Or was it his 2 turnovers(1 INT 1 Fumble) vs the lions?  Or did Zim just finally have that turnover talk with Cousins just before facing the horrible packer D?  I'd say the saints were the last "great" team the Vikings played and in the next two games our QB turned it over 2 times each game.  If you are trying to paint the picture that Cousins got the message and didn't have any turnovers vs the pack because of a talk... I'd point to the fact that the packers are at 0 in the give away/take away stat.  Meanwhile the Bears are +14, the saints are +9, the lions are - 6(yet we still gave it to them twice).  Packer D isn't good enough to generate TOs.  The Pats are + 5 and the Seahags are +8, providing a bigger test than the 0 packers but not as much of a threat as the +14 Bears.  

I would think the Bills game would be proof enough to say...  Turnovers will allow a bad team to beat you.  Not sure why Zim waited 'til last week's Packer game to have this "talk" with Cousins but man... that wasted a lot of games this year. 

@"StickyBun" said:

@"Bezerker88" said:

@"StickyBun" said: Zimmer had a talk with Cousins about turnovers and to Cousins credit he got the message. Can't turn it over against the great teams, you won't win. 

Based on his two INTs vs Chicago?  Or was it his 2 turnovers(1 INT 1 Fumble) vs the lions?  Or did Zim just finally have that turnover talk with Cousins just before facing the horrible packer D?  I'd say the saints were the last "great" team the Vikings played and in the next two games our QB turned it over 2 times each game.  If you are trying to paint the picture that Cousins got the message and didn't have any turnovers vs the pack because of a talk... I'd point to the fact that the packers are at 0 in the give away/take away stat.  Meanwhile the Bears are +14, the saints are +9, the lions are - 6(yet we still gave it to them twice).  Packer D isn't good enough to generate TOs.  The Pats are + 5 and the Seahags are +8, providing a bigger test than the 0 packers but not as much of a threat as the +14 Bears.  

I would think the Bills game would be proof enough to say...  Turnovers will allow a bad team to beat you.  Not sure why Zim waited 'til last week's Packer game to have this "talk" with Cousins but man... that wasted a lot of games this year. 

Oh boy, his INT % is 1.6. Very good. My point is he got a talking to and he seemed receptive, nothing more. 

Fans that think Cousins is the issue are hilarious to me. 

But, some teams will never have a great following till they become winners. That means to have great peaks in popularity, the league must have the more become less and the less become more, more or less!!!

@"Vikergirl" said:

@"StickyBun" said:

@"Bezerker88" said:

@"StickyBun" said: Zimmer had a talk with Cousins about turnovers and to Cousins credit he got the message. Can't turn it over against the great teams, you won't win. 

Based on his two INTs vs Chicago?  Or was it his 2 turnovers(1 INT 1 Fumble) vs the lions?  Or did Zim just finally have that turnover talk with Cousins just before facing the horrible packer D?  I'd say the saints were the last "great" team the Vikings played and in the next two games our QB turned it over 2 times each game.  If you are trying to paint the picture that Cousins got the message and didn't have any turnovers vs the pack because of a talk... I'd point to the fact that the packers are at 0 in the give away/take away stat.  Meanwhile the Bears are +14, the saints are +9, the lions are - 6(yet we still gave it to them twice).  Packer D isn't good enough to generate TOs.  The Pats are + 5 and the Seahags are +8, providing a bigger test than the 0 packers but not as much of a threat as the +14 Bears.  

I would think the Bills game would be proof enough to say...  Turnovers will allow a bad team to beat you.  Not sure why Zim waited 'til last week's Packer game to have this "talk" with Cousins but man... that wasted a lot of games this year. 

Oh boy, his INT % is 1.6. Very good. My point is he got a talking to and he seemed receptive, nothing more. 

Fans that think Cousins is the issue are hilarious to me. 

Well he is part of the equation so he is going to be part of the criticism. No one is perfect. He has made some mistakes, but he has owned them. I think he is an upgrade but I think he can do better. Of course he needs an OL first.