Jump to content

Week 6: Packers (4-1) at VIKINGS (3-2)


swede700

Recommended Posts

Nice to see The Vikings win, and, especially, to see Laquon Treadwell making some nice catches, needed with Diggs out.  Also nice to see Murry running better, and Mckinnon really running well.  The Vikings will need him badly.  Now, with Rodgers out for 7 weeks to the rest of the season, the field is open for The Vikings to win the division, even, possibly, with a mix of Keenum, Bradford and Bridgewater at QB, and without Dalvin Cook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

Great win! It wasn’t dominant, but I never felt like the team was in danger of giving up the lead. 

This is the biggest thing. I kept seeing people say we needed to "smell blood" and not be so conservative, but I had no concerns that they might come back for the entire 4th quarter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Klomp said:

This is actually not correct though. It is about the contact location.

BYPUtR.jpg

http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2017-rules-changes-and-points-of-emphasis/

Exactly!  Treadwell was only slightly sloppy, allowing the penalty.  He directed MOST of his force from his shoulder to the opponent's shoulder, but, also, in doing so, his own helmet did make glancing contact with the Packer's helmet.  Being as the Packer was unaware of Treadwell's approach (defenceless), THAT helmet-to-helmet contact meets the "neck and above" criteria for what is not allowed , requiring that the penalty to be called when the defender is defenceless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Robb_K said:

Exactly!  Treadwell was only slightly sloppy, allowing the penalty.  He directed MOST of his force from his shoulder to the opponent's shoulder, but, also, in doing so, his own helmet did make glancing contact with the Packer's helmet.  Being as the Packer was unaware of Treadwell's approach (defenceless), THAT helmet-to-helmet contact meets the "neck and above" criteria for what is not allowed , requiring that the penalty to be called when the defender is defenceless.

I'm sorry, but a glancing tap of helmets doesn't merit an "above the neck" call to me. The brunt of the hit, the target of the hit (as the NFL put it) was below the neck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, vike daddy said:

sort of a soft win offensively, but we'll of course take it.

would have been nice to see some of those field goals be td's.

skol.

 

Especially with The Vikings at home, and so many of The Packers' starting defenders out, and The Packers demoralised and in shock due to the long-term loss of Rodgers.  The Vikings should have arisin and gone for the jugular.

Let's hope Barr and Diggs will be back next game.  I guess there's no hope for Bradford to be back for the next 2 or possibly 3 weeks.  Let's hope Teddy is ready to play, and can be activated, and start playing in 2 or 3 weeks after lots of practicing.  Let's hope Keenum and The OL get better each game, so The Vikings can survive until then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...