Official studs and duds Viking game

[Pugger]

I dont visit forums of any teams anymore but all i know is conversations i have with friends and what I heard living in Minnesota. It was/is awful. If I was ambitious enough I would give you a screenshot of my social media feed right now. It is hilarious and sad

There are MN fans down here and they can be insufferable at times.

 

[greengold]

Studs: 32 carries by Aaron Jones and Jamaal Williams combined. Every run, even if it resulted in zero yds, helped to save Aaron Rodgers and to establish play action.

Duds: Raven Greene being injured on a cheap shot when Vikings TE intentionally rolled his achilles.

Haven't reviewed anything as I'm still basking in this one, but, that play I did rewind a number of times. I believe it was Irv Smith. Clearly could have been called for Clipping, which I haven't seen called in years.

 

[Pugger]

Studs: 1st quarter offense
Scott
Defense
Duds: MLF for passing up a fg. He’s MM reincarnated at times, which is not good
Return team. Davis faircatching everything is a joke
No offense after q 1
TE are horrible please play somebody besides Graham

That was McCarthy bad. You take the points whenever you can.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm willing to give this offense and its WR's some more time, but Gute and MLF have to be wondering if they didn't screw the pooch by not signing a decent FA WR this past off season. I don't think drafting one was the answer, at least not for 2019. However, there were plenty of decent WR's to be had in Free Agency or trades and the Packers sat pat on a group of WR's that so far don't look all that great to me, dropped passes and not getting open very consistently.

I get it though, you have a lot of young potential on the group and then the hope that Allison can make the jump. Allison's TD catch was nice, but beyond that, Adams seemed to be the only NFL caliber WR on the field for the Packers.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That was McCarthy bad. You take the points whenever you can.

I read earlier that the 4th down thing before the half was Aaron Rodgers thinking that it was first down and that they had a first down on the previous play and due to a questionable spot, actually did not. MLF said he should have called a timeout, but Aaron ran the next play pretty quickly and they just went with it. MLF made it clear that he would have elected to try a FG.

I was at the game and am anxious to watch it again. I keep seeing way too many questionable spots. They might only be off a yard, a football, a half of football, but in the end that can be costly. I really think the NFL needs to figure out a better way at getting the spot correct.

 

[Pugger]

I read earlier that the 4th down thing before the half was Aaron Rodgers thinking that it was first down and that they had a first down on the previous play and due to a questionable spot, actually did not. MLF said he should have called a timeout, but Aaron ran the next play pretty quickly and they just went with it. MLF made it clear that he would have elected to try a FG.

I was speaking about not going for the FG earlier.

 

[AmishMafia]

My buddy texted me, he's a vikings fan. I told him I felt dirty being happy we "held them" to a FG instead of a TD. Call it like you see it. If you're not going to scrutinize every play, why just that one? It's good for controlling gambling lines and outcomes I guess. Even if it isn't, eventually it will appear to be so and will erode the confidence even more in the game. Call 'em like you see them on the field and i'm good with it. **** the Saints.

Overreaction to one call. The rules have been fine for 50+ years and one missed call by the refs and we have to change the system.

On that play, there were 2 obvious penalties on the Saints. Hands to the face and holding on Aaron Donald.

Im sure we could go through previous plays on that drive and find a few hold penalties on the Saints on every play.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I was speaking about not going for the FG earlier.

When? Guess I missed what you were referring to, my bad. I was talking about the play right before half when the Packers were faced with a 4th and 1 and Rodgers rushed up to the line and ran a quick running play to Williams that lost 2 yards. Rodgers said after the game that he thought that it was 1st down.

https://www.northjersey.com/story/s...een-bay-packers-minnesota-vikings/2338282001/

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

My buddy texted me, he's a vikings fan. I told him I felt dirty being happy we "held them" to a FG instead of a TD. Call it like you see it. If you're not going to scrutinize every play, why just that one? It's good for controlling gambling lines and outcomes I guess. Even if it isn't, eventually it will appear to be so and will erode the confidence even more in the game. Call 'em like you see them on the field and i'm good with it. **** the Saints.

Given my stance on the new PI rule, I was grinning ear to ear when I saw that play unfold. I immediately saw Cook interfering with Packer players in the endzone on the stadium replay and said "this is why the new rule works", it was very obvious offensive pass interference. The refs getting that call right, very well may have been the difference in the game, we will never know. Moreover, the reverse was done pretty quickly and assured everyone, the mistake was corrected.

 

[Pugger]

When? Guess I missed what you were referring to, my bad. I was talking about the play right before half when the Packers were faced with a 4th and 1 and Rodgers rushed up to the line and ran a quick running play to Williams that lost 2 yards. Rodgers said after the game that he thought that it was 1st down.

https://www.northjersey.com/story/s...een-bay-packers-minnesota-vikings/2338282001/

Yes, I hear Rodgers took the blame for that.

At another point in the game we missed on converting a 3rd and short within FG range. It wasn't a gimme FG but it was within Crosby's range. MFL decided to go for it on 4th down and we got stuffed and turned the ball over on downs. I wasn't pleased that we passed on potential points seeing we hadn't done much since the first Q.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes, I hear Rodgers took the blame for that.

At another point in the game we missed on converting a 3rd and short within FG range. It wasn't a gimme FG but it was within Crosby's range. MFL decided to go for it on 4th down and we got stuffed and turned the ball over on downs. I wasn't pleased that we passed on potential points seeing we hadn't done much since the first Q.

Well we can only hope that the Packers work on and improve their short yardage offense, because frankly they stunk on picking up 1-2 yards on 2nd, 3rd and 4th down most of the day. Until they can figure out a way to consistently do that, MLF should never pass on a FG of 50 yards or less.

 

[Mondio]

Given my stance on the new PI rule, I was grinning ear to ear when I saw that play unfold. I immediately saw Cook interfering with Packer players in the endzone on the stadium replay and said "this is why the new rule works", it was very obvious offensive pass interference. The refs getting that call right, very well may have been the difference in the game, we will never know. Moreover, the reverse was done pretty quickly and assured everyone, the mistake was corrected.

quickly? the stands were grumbling for 5 minutes at least. at first, everyone wondered why they weren't lining up to kick. Nobody had clue.

There was nothing quick about it. and why just this play? what about the 10 leading up to it? Why this play and not the roughing against Denver that moved the Bears into FG striking distance? only big plays count?

you love this one, what are you going to do when they get it wrong? or a receiver gives a little push off like happens 345 times a game and they call it on us in the endzone in the playoffs?

 

[Mondio]

Well we can only hope that the Packers work on and improve their short yardage offense, because frankly they stunk on picking up 1-2 yards on 2nd, 3rd and 4th down most of the day. Until they can figure out a way to consistently do that, MLF should never pass on a FG of 50 yards or less.

This is why I don't care that Jones got 100 yards, we still can't ****ing run when we need to. We can't and teams know it.

 

[GleefulGary]

This is why I don't care that Jones got 100 yards, we still can't ******* run when we need to. We can't and teams know it.

We're much better at running than we were last year. It's almost like we've faced two really good defenses!

 

[Curly Calhoun]

Stud: Mike Pettine.

The defense that had been a liability for years has started the season by giving up 19 points in two games. Defense is now a strength.

Dud: GB's offense all but disappeared after the first three scores. Perhaps a work in progress, and perhaps in part due to the quality of the defenses the Pack was up against, but it needs to be corrected. I'm optimistic it will be, but I haven't seen it yet.

 

[GleefulGary]

Kevin King isn't getting enough credit here. Actually, Jaire isn't either.

Diggs and Thielen are really, really good. Our CB's had a big role in shutting them down. Not an easy task.

Y'all love to ***** about King, show him a little love, huh?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This is why I don't care that Jones got 100 yards, we still can't ******* run when we need to. We can't and teams know it.

Exactly and I concur. I know a lot of people are fired up about Jones and his 100 yard game and some of the things he has done in the past, but I look at Cook and say to myself "now THAT is a RB I would love to have". Not saying Jones is a bad back at all, but like you said, the Packers need a guy that can pick up the tough yards, yards that even though the defense is knowing you are going to run, they can't stop you. A RB that isn't gaining most of their yards, because the defense is more concerned about stopping the pass and is willing to give up some rushing yards to do it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Y'all love to ***** about King, show him a little love, huh?

I knew you would be saying something like this after the game. You still don't understand do you? Most of us aren't hating on King for what he does when on the field, as a matter of fact, most of us love what he can do on the field. What many of us are concerned about is the fact that he can't seem to stay ON the field.

Keep framing it as "Packer fans hating and *****ing on King", if that makes you feel better, but THAT is not what most of us are doing.

 

[gopkrs]

Studs:

1. Both Aarons

2. Davante Adams

3. Kirk Cousins tyvm


Half studs half duds

1. Gmo - Good TD catch but awful fumble and liability out there

2. Kevin King - bad on TD given up but good on the int late in the game


Duds:

1. Lane Taylor (AGAIN, get him out of here)

2. Corey Linsley - worst snap I ever seen

3. All TEs on this roster for doing nothing

4. Matt LaFleur who we won in spite of. Enough going conservative with leads, and enough of these awful challenges. Sick of us throwing that little red flag and wasting timeouts on plays that should be obvious won't be overturned. When are we ever going to get a HC who doesn't attempt stupid challenges?

Saying Geronimo is a liability out there is just wrong. imo. He tried for too much and fumbled. What, nobody fumbles in football? He gets open and has good hands. Unfortunately MVS does not seem to be able to get open much and he is playing where Geronimo is most effective. Ergo, MVS better step up his game.
Studs: Martinez, Clark, King, Adams, Jones

 

[GleefulGary]

I knew you would be saying something like this after the game. You still don't understand do you? Most of us aren't hating on King for what he does when on the field, as a matter of fact, most of us love what he can do on the field. What many of us are concerned about is the fact that he can't seem to stay ON the field.

Keep framing it as "Packer fans hating and *****ing on King", if that makes you feel better, but THAT is not what most of us are doing.

I wasn't talking about you?

I'd say there's a fair amount of Packer fans that genuinely don't like King. It comes through pretty clearly with all the *****ing.

 

[Mondio]

We're much better at running than we were last year. It's almost like we've faced two really good defenses!

I don't know if they're better, i didn't see anything different yesterday than I haven'ts een from this team before running the ball. They are good defenses and at least yesterday we were getting 2 or 3 or more instead of zero and minus yards.

But still, we have a good defense too, and MN was pretty much running at will near the end of the game. thank God they passed the ball a few times. When we try that, it doesn't quite work.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

quickly? the stands were grumbling for 5 minutes at least. at first, everyone wondered why they weren't lining up to kick. Nobody had clue.

Really? I saw it immediately and everyone in my section all started celebrating the fact we knew it would most likely be called. I will have to watch it again, but it sure didn't seem like it took them 5 minutes to get this right.

There was nothing quick about it. and why just this play? what about the 10 leading up to it? Why this play and not the roughing against Denver that moved the Bears into FG striking distance? only big plays count?

you love this one, what are you going to do when they get it wrong? or a receiver gives a little push off like happens 345 times a game and they call it on us in the endzone in the playoffs?

Not to bring this whole debate back to ground zero and start it up again, but I know that the refs will never get all the calls 100% correct, that is inherent in the game. However, the more calls that they can correct, especially when it involves a score, the better. Had this play happened at midfield, it probably doesn't get reviewed and we might not be talking about it, but that still doesn't make it a good thing that it was a missed call. But I don't buy the argument "they can't get them all right, so why even try to get any of the obvious ones reversed".

I do have a question for you. Did they get the call right? Was it offensive Pass Interference on Cook?

While we will never know, but had they not gotten that call correct and the rest of the game played out the same, Vikings are looking for a FG instead of a TD at the end, to win the game.

 

[greengold]

Well we can only hope that the Packers work on and improve their short yardage offense, because frankly they stunk on picking up 1-2 yards on 2nd, 3rd and 4th down most of the day. Until they can figure out a way to consistently do that, MLF should never pass on a FG of 50 yards or less.

Dexter Williams was inactive. Dexter is the smasher who generally wins on 3rd & short or goal. LaFleur is going to have to figure this one out.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Goodson was terrible.

I'm just starting to go through the replay. Yeah, that was not good for Goodson.

 

[scotscheese]

i thought it was overall a reasonable performance. the D are obv studs, imagine if they get better in the way we hope the O will.
i thought the O were steady enough, but disapointed we couldn't score again after the opening 3 scoring drives. though there were a few mistakes, there was also some good plays and catches.

confidence is growing