Vikings better?
 

Watching the Vikings vs. the Bears games, I heard the commentators comparing our saints and the vikings an awful lot. They had good things to say about our team, yet would stress that the vikings are a tad bit better. Stating that the vikings have the run game that the saints dont or saying how balanced the saints are yet the vikings are better because of their run game. theres alot more said but some i could not remember since i watched on and off. what do you guys think? do you find it as disrespect or just a mere comparison?

Re: Vikings better?
 

BS. That's the best description I can give you. Last I checked, we are still the number one rushing offense in the league. So, how the Vikes are better is beyond me. Just remember, if Brett Favre was not on that team, and Sage Rosenfels was starting, they wouldn't be getting as much press as they are.

Re: Vikings better?
 

I know the Vikings are really good and I hate them a ton.

I remember 1987. I also remember 2000.


I think we end up with HFA, but if we don't, I want these guys and want to end their season. Something like 45-10 would be nice...


They are NOT as good of a team as we are.

Only one team can beat the Saints this year and that team is New Orleans...

Re: Vikings better?
 

Adrian Peterson is not the second coming of Sweetness. Not yet at least. He can't beat all three of our backs by himself. End of discussion.

Re: Vikings better?
 

I think the Vikes are really good just like us. Our offense is better. there defense is better(front 4 is unreal). I think whoever is the home team is proably who would win.

Re: Vikings better?
 

Vikings (11 games) = 1262 yards rushing, AP = 999 yds

Saints (10 games) = 1543 yards rushing

Re: Vikings better?
 

It just seems to me that the Vikings have done really well the last few weeks because of very poor defenses. I'm not saying that the Saints didn't play any bad defenses but I will keep a close eye on how well the Vikings play down the stretch.

Re: Vikings better?
 

Starting next week in Arizona if Kurt Warner is back.

Re: Vikings better?
 

Vikings put a butt-whipping on the Cardinals in AZ with Warner playing and the Bengals, then we can be concerned...

Re: Vikings better?
 

Hard to compare apples and oranges like this just because of match ups that are created with these other teams. The Vikings look impressive as do the Colts and the Pats are not far behind. I think we match up fairly well against these teams and do not think anyone is being disrespectful. If things continue to progress as they are we are going to see the Vikings and find out for sure about that team. Only a Superbowl will tell us how we match up against the Colts. Farve looks like he cannot make a mistake anymore. I am praying for some luck here and to get our players healthy for the playoffs. If we can come back full strength and our secondary come together after all the injuries I like our chances. Tomorrow will tell us loads.

Re: Vikings better?
 

They're entitled to their opinion but the only way to find out is to play each other heads up. The only thing that irked me what the fact they pointed out that the Vikings are better because they have a better rushing attack, which just isn't the case. There's a difference in having a better running back versus better rushing attack. Peterson is all world but when you stack he and Taylor up against our trio, we have the 4th ranked rushing attack in the NFL as opposed to the Vikings' 10th. So that comment which they made didn't make any sense. If you go to NFL.com and compare basically every offensive statistic, we are superior to them. Heck even our offensive line rates better than them.

In total defense, they're 12th and we're 16th. Their rushing defense is far superior to ours but we haven't had Ellis playing for quite awhile... which definitely hurts that number. As far as our secondaries are concerned, we take the edge on that one. I do believe even if we were completely healthy, their defense is better than ours. With that said, even the best defenses in the league have trouble stopping our #1 ranked offense. The only defense I'd be scared to play in the NFL is a completely healthy Steelers D. I just don't see us having problem putting up enough points to beat anyone else.

If we were to play head to head, it would be a great game to watch. The reason why I think we'd come out on top is the fact Favre has broken down towards the tail end of the last couple of seasons. He's always been prone to making mistakes and we now have a defense that can capitalize on it. Also as good as Peterson is, he too has trouble holding on to the football. This is the same Saints D of old... we've been making people pay when they turn the football over. And because of that, I think we'd come out on top.

They think the Vikes are a better team... fine. I think otherwise... fine. Hopefully we'll be able to meet in the playoffs and fine out.

Re: Vikings better?
 

Take a look at SOS (which is the 5th tiebreaker breaker on HFA)


Vikings opponents: 45-76 (.372)


Saints 1st 10 opponents: 41-69 (.372)
Saints beat Patriots: 48-72 (.397)
Saints lose to Pats: 49-71 (.405)


No matter what happens on MNF, the Saints have played a harder schedule...

Re: Vikings better?
 

the vikings defense is all condensed into 3 stud defensive linemen

however......we have arguably the best offensive line in the league even with goodwin and a backup LT

drew is arguably the most elusive QB in the league when hes in the pocket

drew has better pocket awareness than any QB they have played

our running game is better than any other team they have played.......our QB is better than any other QB they have played

our defense is better than any other defense they have played

our record is better than theirs and our schedule is tougher than theirs

the ONLY reason they are getting so much credit is because of brett favre

let me re-iterate that.....the vikings are the beneficiaries of a scrub schedule and are beating up on a terrible nfc north(can you believe the packers are 7-3? lmao)

the only reason they are getting so much press....so much respect......so much credit is because of brett favre.......they have only beaten 1 good team and that was by a last second field goal against baltimore

the other good team they played? the steelers beat them by 10

Re: Vikings better?
 

To say that the Saints do not have a run game is senseless. The Saints run the ball more than they pass it. I think we are hearing from game announcers who have not done their homework.

We do not have that one great running back, like Adrian Peterson, but we have an excellent running game. The Vikings, I suspect, use the run as much as they do because of Brett Favre's age. He had an age-related meltdown last season with the Jets, and the Vikings don't want another one.

The Saints and the Vikings have to face one another head on to finally answer this question. Both great teams. I would guess that whoever is at home will win.

Re: Vikings better?
 

true agree with that its only because of bret.

Re: Vikings better?
 

true our backs are amazingly talented.

Re: Vikings better?
 

i feel our front 4 is pretty sick but we need sed back.. hargrove is amazing.. i think adding in mcray in the middle would add some valuable pass rush.

Re: Vikings better?
 

i rest my case.

Re: Vikings better?
 

yes true indeed. kurt will rip them up. and plus chicago's line is a joke.

Re: Vikings better?
 

good analysis frederick. true only a ring and our biggest test will tell us how good we truly are. although we did have some hard games prior to the tampa game.

Re: Vikings better?
 

Yes, AP does have more yards than any one of our backs, but that's because our backs share. Bell and Thomas have around 1100 combined if I'm not mistaken. Bush also has roughly 250 in both rushing and receiving I believe.

Re: Vikings better?
 

Doesn't matter who people think is better. Both are good teams in the NFC but the toughest test is tmmrow night for the Saints against NE. A team in which I don't think Minnesota can beat or any other team in the NFC. We will see about the Saints tommorow night though.

Re: Vikings better?
 

coudn't agree with you any less. our rushing attack is indeed one of the best. i mean even are receivers, hence henderson and meachem have a couple of rush yards thanks to our reverses. but i do agree by what you mean. they do have two talented backs but we have 3 and we have receivers that can run a bit too.. the only players im impressed with from the viks are receivers, them being sydney rice and percy harving. as for AP i feel he is still one of the best but has been running mediocre compared to our 3 backs.

Re: Vikings better?
 

good point canton.

Re: Vikings better?
 

in my opinion with the way bret is playing seems ageless. he actually has been passing quite frequently. i believe he almost broke a career high today. but agree with the excellent rushing attack that our team possess.

Re: Vikings better?
 

yup thats why they call our backs the three headed monsters.. our backs are amazingly talented. yes AP may be the best. but our backs combined are the best tandem not wait, trio in the NFL. yes reggie bush is part of this "trio" lol.

Re: Vikings better?
 

yes tomorrow will indeed be a test.

Re: Vikings better?
 

Ur exactly right... Oh & let's NOT 4-get how many times a game Peterson fumbles.
He had 2-3 fumbles yesterday & those dumba$$'$ wanna try & say there a better team... lol, plzzzzzzzzz!!! I PRAY we see them in the
Conf. Chapionship.... I cross my fingures on that wish!!!:pokechop:

Re: Vikings better?
 

Of course they are. Because Joe Buck and Troy Aikman say so.

Re: Vikings better?
 

These announcers are fools and just spout the junk that the home fans want to hear. If we were playing in that game, they would have said we were much better.

Minny has played a cupcake schedule, needed last second hail marys to beat sub .500 teams, and needed missed FG's to beat a so-so Ravens team. And they lost to the Steelers, who before Ben and Troy went down were a favorite to repeat in the SB.