Raptorman said:
I think coaching had a bit to do with that win. Vikings fans just don't seem to understand that coaching and special teams are just as important, if not more, than all-star players. example: Brett Favre in 2005 vs. Brett Favre in 2007. think the coaching had anything to do with the difference in performance? These Viking fans "can't find much wrong in the coaching". I'll tell you this, if the Vikings had a half-way decent QB, and competent coaches, they could win quite a few games. But I don't sweat the Vikings, because they have neither. Sure, the games against the Packers will be close, they (almost) always are, but the Vikings have proven they don't have what it takes to win games week after week after week.
So by this standard then, if the Packers go 8-8 in 2008 is it the coaching or the QB? Everyone assumes Childress is a bad coach. But tell me this, if MM had a 2nd year QB instead of a HOF QB last year, do you really think the Packers would have been 13-3? I don't. MM had the advantage of having a HOF QB when he took the job. Very few new head coaches have to deal with a QB that has less then 2 years on the job. And if they do, they do not do so well. If Miami win 6 games this year I will be surprised. I'm not saying Childress is any better or worse them MM, just that MM was in a better position to be successful sooner because of Favre.
It's hard to say. It is what it is. You can "what if" till your blue in the face (or purple!) :wink:
Fact is, we were 13-3.
Will we be that good this year? It could happen.
Childress had one of the best RB's in football last year, wouldn't you say? Yet that wasn't enough to make the Vikings 13-3.
Once again, ONLY time will tell as to whether or not Rodgers is the "real deal" or an imposter.
I myself think he will do fine. He has a pretty darn good supporting cast around him.