Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
They're all at Menard's looking for a fix.
They're all at Menard's looking for a fix.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
(un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
- Thread starter MadTownSioux
- Start date
- Status
bigblue_dl
Armed
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
3 Rodgers fumbles, all returned for touchdowns. It should be 4, but Mullet Man will literally take off Rodger's head, Pat Williams will pick it up instead of the football, and take it in for a touchdown.56-0 Vikes. There, now that's overconfidence.
MarkEagleUSA
C'mon Q!
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
I was going to do that too....But I wasn't sure where that line was at...
I was going to do that too....But I wasn't sure where that line was at...
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
I'm a big Pat Williams' fan, since he was a Bill and all (along with Winfield and Ted Cottrell; you're welcome, Vikings fans
). I felt I could make that remark. Well, even if I didn't feel that way, I'd have done it anyway. 
I'm a big Pat Williams' fan, since he was a Bill and all (along with Winfield and Ted Cottrell; you're welcome, Vikings fans
). I felt I could make that remark. Well, even if I didn't feel that way, I'd have done it anyway. Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
Cross-posted from the GB thread:
I'm a Vikes fan 2 weeks (and one time, 3 weeks) of the year. And I agree with you. I don't know WHAT to think. Despite Cheech's (Percy Harvin) production so far, I think the Packers' receivers are better (assuming Jennings is healthy and is playing). AP is obviously better, and I think the QBs are a wash (Favre somehow gets it done, with support of course, but Rodgers is the more talented/skilled/able-bodied at this point). Vikes' D-line is unreal. Defense is solid. GB? Tough to say. Better than last year, but that's not saying much.
Homefield doesn't exist at the Dome, but I guess that could change this year. Traditionally, there are more Packer fans there than there should be.
The line is about MN -3 right now, which in betting circles means a wash (home team gets 3 points automatically). In that aspect, I smell a trap, and that MN is actually favored by about 6.5-7.5, since WI usually bets on their team no matter what the odds are (so in this case, Vegas "wants/needs" more money to come in on MN).
I think the key for GB is to spread the D. Not necessarily downfield, but spread out, with Rodgers making a lot of screens and such. Get MN's front line to leave gaps, so the GB running game can maybe MAYBE succeed.
Cross-posted from the GB thread:
I'm a Vikes fan 2 weeks (and one time, 3 weeks) of the year. And I agree with you. I don't know WHAT to think. Despite Cheech's (Percy Harvin) production so far, I think the Packers' receivers are better (assuming Jennings is healthy and is playing). AP is obviously better, and I think the QBs are a wash (Favre somehow gets it done, with support of course, but Rodgers is the more talented/skilled/able-bodied at this point). Vikes' D-line is unreal. Defense is solid. GB? Tough to say. Better than last year, but that's not saying much.
Homefield doesn't exist at the Dome, but I guess that could change this year. Traditionally, there are more Packer fans there than there should be.
The line is about MN -3 right now, which in betting circles means a wash (home team gets 3 points automatically). In that aspect, I smell a trap, and that MN is actually favored by about 6.5-7.5, since WI usually bets on their team no matter what the odds are (so in this case, Vegas "wants/needs" more money to come in on MN).
I think the key for GB is to spread the D. Not necessarily downfield, but spread out, with Rodgers making a lot of screens and such. Get MN's front line to leave gaps, so the GB running game can maybe MAYBE succeed.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
Further proving you have no credibility on this subject. there was a reason Favre didn't win here for years but dont let facts get in the way of you pretending you know anything
Further proving you have no credibility on this subject. there was a reason Favre didn't win here for years but dont let facts get in the way of you pretending you know anything
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
Please. Every year there's way more Cheeseheads in the Dome than there should be. Some years I bet it was around 65-35 MN-GB, which is unacceptable in this rivalry IMO.
Oh wait, forgot the
Further proving you have no credibility on this subject. there was a reason Favre didn't win here for years but dont let facts get in the way of you pretending you know anything
Please. Every year there's way more Cheeseheads in the Dome than there should be. Some years I bet it was around 65-35 MN-GB, which is unacceptable in this rivalry IMO.
Oh wait, forgot the
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
he drives a forklift. And has never been to the Dome during Vikings/Packers. I've been there numerous times during one of these games. At BEST I'd say the crowd is 2/3rds Vikings fans, 1/3rd Packer fans. I'm guessing it'll be about the same this year. But to say there is no home field advantage is laughable. Hahahaha Brent, you suck.
Further proving you have no credibility on this subject. there was a reason Favre didn't win here for years but dont let facts get in the way of you pretending you know anything
he drives a forklift. And has never been to the Dome during Vikings/Packers. I've been there numerous times during one of these games. At BEST I'd say the crowd is 2/3rds Vikings fans, 1/3rd Packer fans. I'm guessing it'll be about the same this year. But to say there is no home field advantage is laughable. Hahahaha Brent, you suck.
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
Yeah, because they don't show numerous crowd shots on tv.
So 2/3 home field fans is a homefield advantage? That's really pathetic. Way to strive for that mediocrity!
Frankly, it should be 4-1 MN-GB. It is terrible that it is not.
he drives a forklift. And has never been to the Dome during Vikings/Packers. I've been there numerous times during one of these games. At BEST I'd say the crowd is 2/3rds Vikings fans, 1/3rd Packer fans. I'm guessing it'll be about the same this year. But to say there is no home field advantage is laughable. Hahahaha Brent, you suck.
Yeah, because they don't show numerous crowd shots on tv.
So 2/3 home field fans is a homefield advantage? That's really pathetic. Way to strive for that mediocrity!
Frankly, it should be 4-1 MN-GB. It is terrible that it is not.
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
there's a lot of GB fans in the nation for whatever reason. I think it's because it's the cute, trendy, Boston Red Sox team of the NFL.
there's a lot of GB fans in the nation for whatever reason. I think it's because it's the cute, trendy, Boston Red Sox team of the NFL.
Dirty
#BanBiddy
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
Except Red Sox fans don't have sex with deer.
Except Red Sox fans don't have sex with deer.
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
Unfortunately, yes. I also know how many Vikings fans sell off their tickets (many times to those drunken Sconnie fans) because the price is too good to pass up.
The original point being, there are enough Cheeseheads at these games where homefield crowd usually doesn't come into play.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if that changes this time around, but I wouldn't expect it either.
Unfortunately, yes. I also know how many Vikings fans sell off their tickets (many times to those drunken Sconnie fans) because the price is too good to pass up.
The original point being, there are enough Cheeseheads at these games where homefield crowd usually doesn't come into play.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if that changes this time around, but I wouldn't expect it either.
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
For which team?
C'mon, you have to admit, most Gopher fans would try not to sell their tix to UND/WI fans for a big game. So why MN-GB?
If the vast majority of the crowd is for the home team, it's still an advantage. Listen to how loud it gets Monday.
For which team?
C'mon, you have to admit, most Gopher fans would try not to sell their tix to UND/WI fans for a big game. So why MN-GB?
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
It's still a homefield advantage for the Vikings. Is it Lambeau? Absolutely not. But, you can't say there's not an advantage in the Dome...
Apparently you were never at a MN/WI football game at the Dome...For which team?
C'mon, you have to admit, most Gopher fans would try not to sell their tix to WI fans for a big game. So why MN-GB?
It's still a homefield advantage for the Vikings. Is it Lambeau? Absolutely not. But, you can't say there's not an advantage in the Dome...
Re: (un-) Official Minnesota Vikings 2009-2010 season thread
Very few homefields (or home arenas), if any, are Lambeau. I think we can all agree on that (whether or not we like it is irrelevant). But the Dome is not something that other teams fear.
Heinz Field, sure. Whatever field was called when the Browns were decent, yes. Even The House Of Pain (Houston Oilers), yes. The Dome? Notsomuch.
Hopefully that will start to change as the Vikings seem to be getting better in the last couple years, as the Dome can be VERY loud and maddening to an opposing team (see: the Twins' WS games). And I'm not talking spurts here and there. I'm talking full-blown batsh* crazy almost constant noise.
Apparently you were never at a MN/WI football game at the Dome...
It's still a homefield advantage for the Vikings. Is it Lambeau? Absolutely not. But, you can't say there's not an advantage in the Dome...
Very few homefields (or home arenas), if any, are Lambeau. I think we can all agree on that (whether or not we like it is irrelevant). But the Dome is not something that other teams fear.
Heinz Field, sure. Whatever field was called when the Browns were decent, yes. Even The House Of Pain (Houston Oilers), yes. The Dome? Notsomuch.
Hopefully that will start to change as the Vikings seem to be getting better in the last couple years, as the Dome can be VERY loud and maddening to an opposing team (see: the Twins' WS games). And I'm not talking spurts here and there. I'm talking full-blown batsh* crazy almost constant noise.
- Status