2023 Vikings Regular Season Thread

[Parfigliano]

46 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

For the middle third of the season, it looked like a 9-8 record would give the Vikes a playoff berth. It doesn’t look nearly as likely since Seattle and LA have played well. With no playoffs, the Vikings would be better off with higher draft choices. 

Playoffs.  You talkin playoffs.

[Aggies7]

51 minutes ago, Parfigliano said:

Playoffs.  You talkin playoffs.

At one point I believe our chances to make the playoffs were about 70-80%. Back when the team was 6-4 and had a presumably favorable schedule ahead of them. They’ve gone 1-4 since that time.

[Aggies7]

Unfortunately the chances for this season realistically ended when Kirk got hurt back on October 30. The team was playing so much better and was about to win their third in a row. The 2 wins with Dobbs made it look like we could get in with reasonably good play down the stretch. It just hasn’t happened. 
 

The injury bad luck was just crazy. How many season ending injuries to key guys? Jefferson missed basically half the season. It would have been pretty remarkable to make it all things considered. Another what could have been year.

[Vanimal46]

After sleeping on it, I think the best QB to lose the final 2 games is Nick Mullens. So keep playing him and tell him to let it fly all over the field. He will sabotage himself and throw 3-4 INTs. 

[Mike Sixel]

3 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

After sleeping on it, I think the best QB to lose the final 2 games is Nick Mullens. So keep playing him and tell him to let it fly all over the field. He will sabotage himself and throw 3-4 INTs. 

Ha. True. 

[Cap'n Piranha]

When we look back on the 2023 season, we will lament two things; the season ending-injury to Kirk, and every victory that came after that injury.

With Kirk, this team is 10-4 going into yesterday’s game, on a 9 game win streak, and pushing for the top seed in the NFC.

Without Kirk, any chance of postseason success vanished, making every victory after the first GB game a pyrrhic one.  Had the Vikes instead lost to ATL, NO, and LVR, we’d currently be sitting tied with WAS for the 4th pick, with an actual decent shot at the 2nd or 3rd pick.

Those 3 victories in Dobbs starts might have been fun at the time (other than the LVR game—that was never fun), but they also will probably set the franchise back multiple years.

[RpR]

21 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

When we look back on the 2023 season, we will lament two things; the season ending-injury to Kirk, and every victory that came after that injury.

With Kirk, this team is 10-4 going into yesterday’s game, on a 9 game win streak, and pushing for the top seed in the NFC.

Without Kirk, any chance of postseason success vanished, making every victory after the first GB game a pyrrhic one.  Had the Vikes instead lost to ATL, NO, and LVR, we’d currently be sitting tied with WAS for the 4th pick, with an actual decent shot at the 2nd or 3rd pick.

Those 3 victories in Dobbs starts might have been fun at the time (other than the LVR game—that was never fun), but they also will probably set the franchise back multiple years.

Or leave them where they have been for the past 47 years, no better, no worse.

[Danchat]

5 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

With Kirk, this team is 10-4 going into yesterday’s game, on a 9 game win streak, and pushing for the top seed in the NFC.

We're just going to assume that we win every single game with Kirk? Come on, it's not as if he didn't have clunkers against the Bucs, Bears, and Panthers. Let's not forget we started the year 1-4, well before the injury bug hit the roster.

[Mike Sixel]

11 hours ago, Danchat said:

We're just going to assume that we win every single game with Kirk? Come on, it's not as if he didn't have clunkers against the Bucs, Bears, and Panthers. Let's not forget we started the year 1-4, well before the injury bug hit the roster.

Only because Jefferson fumbled at the one, and a bunch of balls were tipped and picked. I doubt they win every game, but I'd put them 2 games better, for sure. 

[RpR]

3 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Only because Jefferson fumbled at the one, and a bunch of balls were tipped and picked. I doubt they win every game, but I'd put them 2 games better, for sure. 

Sounds just like Dobbs.

[Aggies7]

14 hours ago, Danchat said:

We're just going to assume that we win every single game with Kirk? Come on, it's not as if he didn't have clunkers against the Bucs, Bears, and Panthers. Let's not forget we started the year 1-4, well before the injury bug hit the roster.

The defense has been poor the last two games, but I think the bears game would have been a win, if nothing else. Probably the bengals too. Kirk is an excellent quarterback who gets an absurd amount of hatred. Now all the haters got to see what it’s like having a below average quarterback the last month or so 

[Aggies7]

Hockenson, ACL and MCL tear. Wonnum out for the year too. Stick a fork in us, we’re done. 

[Cap'n Piranha]

20 hours ago, RpR said:

Or leave them where they have been for the past 47 years, no better, no worse.

That's exactly what I'm saying.  For almost half a century, this organization has been "no better, no worse".  I'd like them to finally be truly worse, so we can actually be truly better.  You can't win a superbowl anymore without a true franchise QB; to get one of those you either have to be bad enough to get high enough in the draft to pick a blue-chip prospect (which may or may not work), or you have to get lucky and have a developmental prospect develop in a big way.  The former is much more likely to happen than the latter.

[Cap'n Piranha]

15 hours ago, Danchat said:

We're just going to assume that we win every single game with Kirk? Come on, it's not as if he didn't have clunkers against the Bucs, Bears, and Panthers. Let's not forget we started the year 1-4, well before the injury bug hit the roster.

We barely lost to the Bears, Broncos, and Bengals.  Unless you honestly think Kirk (whose stats bear out that he was playing at a borderline MVP level) would play about the same as Dobbs/Mullens, to the point that the Vikes wouldn't have gotten even one more field goal, the Vikes win all 3 of those games.  We started 1-4 because of unlucky turnovers, and a defense that hadn't figured things out yet.

[Cap'n Piranha]

3 hours ago, RpR said:

Sounds just like Dobbs.

Sure, if Dobbs was actually able to stay in the pocket, scan the defense, and push the ball downfield.  Other than those 3 things, Dobbs is exactly as good in the passing game as Kirk.

[Cap'n Piranha]

1 hour ago, Aggies7 said:

The defense has been poor the last two games, but I think the bears game would have been a win, if nothing else. Probably the bengals too. Kirk is an excellent quarterback who gets an absurd amount of hatred. Now all the haters got to see what it’s like having a below average quarterback the last month or so 

You would think after 7 games of Dobbs/Mullens, people would appreciate Kirk.  Somehow they don't.  Even though he played less than 8 games, Kirk is still 23rd in pass yards, and 18th in TDs.  On a per-game basis, the only player he's behind in either metric is Joe Flacco, who has an obligatory SSS warning.  Kirk was having a dynamite season, and there's no doubt in my mind we'd be 10-5 at worst if he never gets hurt.  Conversely, if he's injured in preseason, we're probably 5-10 at best.

[RpR]

1 hour ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

We barely lost to the Bears, Broncos, and Bengals.  Unless you honestly think Kirk (whose stats bear out that he was playing at a borderline MVP level) would play about the same as Dobbs/Mullens, to the point that the Vikes wouldn't have gotten even one more field goal, the Vikes win all 3 of those games.  We started 1-4 because of unlucky turnovers, and a defense that hadn't figured things out yet.

There are NO unlucky turn overs; there is faulty or incompetent play..

 

[RpR]

1 hour ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

You would think after 7 games of Dobbs/Mullens, people would appreciate Kirk.  Somehow they don't.  Even though he played less than 8 games, Kirk is still 23rd in pass yards, and 18th in TDs.  On a per-game basis, the only player he's behind in either metric is Joe Flacco, who has an obligatory SSS warning.  Kirk was having a dynamite season, and there's no doubt in my mind we'd be 10-5 at worst if he never gets hurt.  Conversely, if he's injured in preseason, we're probably 5-10 at best.

Wishful thinking.

[Danchat]

7 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

We barely lost to the Bears, Broncos, and Bengals.  Unless you honestly think Kirk (whose stats bear out that he was playing at a borderline MVP level) would play about the same as Dobbs/Mullens, to the point that the Vikes wouldn't have gotten even one more field goal, the Vikes win all 3 of those games.  We started 1-4 because of unlucky turnovers, and a defense that hadn't figured things out yet.

He was playing well but not at a borderline MVP level, the offense was only scoring 22 points a game with him in. QBR and PFF have him in the top 7, which is more in line with how I rank him.

7 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Kirk is still 23rd in pass yards, and 18th in TDs

Part of this is because every TD save one was scored through the air, I'll lay it out:

The offense with Kirk: 18 passing TDs, 1 rushing TD (95%)

The offense without Kirk: 9 passing TDs, 6 rushing TDs (60%)

You could do the same with Jalen Hurts - he only has 20 passing TDs compared to Kirk's 18... but then you remember he has 15 rushing TDs. It doesn't matter how you score them, you get 6 points either way.

On the whole, it's 21.9 points per game with Kirk vs 19.9 without. It certainly feels worse than that, but we are forgetting how mediocre the offense was in parts of that 4-4 stretch.

 

[Vanimal46]

The ex girlfriend syndrome with Kirk is getting out of control. I heard he also has the cure for cancer but he’ll only share the secret for a 3 year fully guaranteed contract. 

[gunnarthor]

Just my two cents but this draft is loaded with enough QB prospects that I think it is likely that the Vikings can get one, if they want one.

This mock has Penix, Sanders, and McCarthy going to the second round and the Vikings taking Sanders, this one has us grabbing Nix. I know mocks aren't all that reliable but ... what the heck. And the Athletic thinks it's likely the Vikings enter the top 10 of the draft, which would make drafting a top QB much more likely.

 

[Mike Sixel]

1 hour ago, gunnarthor said:

Just my two cents but this draft is loaded with enough QB prospects that I think it is likely that the Vikings can get one, if they want one.

This mock has Penix, Sanders, and McCarthy going to the second round and the Vikings taking Sanders, this one has us grabbing Nix. I know mocks aren't all that reliable but ... what the heck. And the Athletic thinks it's likely the Vikings enter the top 10 of the draft, which would make drafting a top QB much more likely.

 

If they lose out, I think they have their choice of the fourth QB...... Who I think has a good chance of being a good QB.

[Aggies7]

I’m gonna guess about 21 teams in the league would take cousins right now to be their starting QB. Maybe more. But he’s too rich for some tastes so we’ll roll with a totally unproven rookie quarterback, probably the 4th or so best one in the draft and hope it doesn’t turn into ponder 2.0 (yay!)

🎶 don’t know what ya got, til it’s goooone 🎶

[Aggies7]

23 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

If they lose out, I think they have their choice of the fourth QB...... Who I think has a good chance of being a good QB.

 

2 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

Just my two cents but this draft is loaded with enough QB prospects that I think it is likely that the Vikings can get one, if they want one.

This mock has Penix, Sanders, and McCarthy going to the second round and the Vikings taking Sanders, this one has us grabbing Nix. I know mocks aren't all that reliable but ... what the heck. And the Athletic thinks it's likely the Vikings enter the top 10 of the draft, which would make drafting a top QB much more likely.

 

A lot of these mock drafts seem to be light on teams that would take advantage of the number of available QBs. I count no less than 5 teams that could absolutely draft a quarterback before we pick. A couple more are in that 7-8 record range where draft position is still TBD.

bears, patriots, Washington, Cardinals. The giants or jets could pick one. Then you have teams like the falcons and raiders who could be in the market. Falcons have already benched Ridder a couple times, Aidan O’Connell didn’t complete a pass after the first quarter the other day. What about the broncos? They just benched Wilson for Jarrett Stidham!! Saints? 

[Mike Sixel]

15 minutes ago, Aggies7 said:

 

A lot of these mock drafts seem to be light on teams that would take advantage of the number of available QBs. I count no less than 5 teams that could absolutely draft a quarterback before we pick. A couple more are in that 7-8 record range where draft position is still TBD.

bears, patriots, Washington, Cardinals. The giants or jets could pick one. Then you have teams like the falcons and raiders who could be in the market. Falcons have already benched Ridder a couple times, Aidan O’Connell didn’t complete a pass after the first quarter the other day. What about the broncos? They just benched Wilson for Jarrett Stidham!! Saints? 

I won't be shocked if they lose out, or if they get one. I generally agree, that more QBs will go than most are predicting, but I've been wrong on this before. 

[Aggies7]

20 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I won't be shocked if they lose out, or if they get one. I generally agree, that more QBs will go than most are predicting, but I've been wrong on this before. 

I’m bringing Kirk back if the demands aren’t too much. I’m not trading up to take anyone. And if someone is available that they like, sure go ahead and draft him. Rookies are still legally allowed to sit the bench for a year or two as far as I’m aware.
 

There are legitimate reasons to not want Kirk back. Age/coming off injury, money, lack of playoff success. I get it. I think some people have an irrational dislike for the guy that’s not rooted in much, certainly not statistically speaking. Watch the league every week. Even the best qb’s have bad games and bad stretches. I feel like some expect top 5 QB play or else a guy stinks or something. 
 

But surveying the league right now, there are probably a dozen quality quarterbacks any team would want (that includes the guys on IR). Maybe 8 are top tier and another 4-5 are solid. Then you have the other half of the league with average to poor quarterbacks. You could get to the playoffs with some of these mid level guys like mayfield and stafford, but that’s about it. You aren’t winning anything more with half the QBs in the league right now. I just have a hard time punting on a quality QB when you see how bad most of the league is at that position.

[Parfigliano]

52 minutes ago, Aggies7 said:

 

A lot of these mock drafts seem to be light on teams that would take advantage of the number of available QBs. I count no less than 5 teams that could absolutely draft a quarterback before we pick. A couple more are in that 7-8 record range where draft position is still TBD.

bears, patriots, Washington, Cardinals. The giants or jets could pick one. Then you have teams like the falcons and raiders who could be in the market. Falcons have already benched Ridder a couple times, Aidan O’Connell didn’t complete a pass after the first quarter the other day. What about the broncos? They just benched Wilson for Jarrett Stidham!! Saints? 

Wouldnt worry about the Jets.  If they draft a QB it will be the worst one available.

[gunnarthor]

3 hours ago, Aggies7 said:

I’m bringing Kirk back if the demands aren’t too much. I’m not trading up to take anyone. And if someone is available that they like, sure go ahead and draft him. Rookies are still legally allowed to sit the bench for a year or two as far as I’m aware.
 

There are legitimate reasons to not want Kirk back. Age/coming off injury, money, lack of playoff success. I get it. I think some people have an irrational dislike for the guy that’s not rooted in much, certainly not statistically speaking. Watch the league every week. Even the best qb’s have bad games and bad stretches. I feel like some expect top 5 QB play or else a guy stinks or something. 
 

But surveying the league right now, there are probably a dozen quality quarterbacks any team would want (that includes the guys on IR). Maybe 8 are top tier and another 4-5 are solid. Then you have the other half of the league with average to poor quarterbacks. You could get to the playoffs with some of these mid level guys like mayfield and stafford, but that’s about it. You aren’t winning anything more with half the QBs in the league right now. I just have a hard time punting on a quality QB when you see how bad most of the league is at that position.

I think Cousins wants three years, I'm not sure we'd give it to him. Although Jefferson wants him back. My guess is that we sign Cousins and take a non-QB in the first round and if one of Nix, Penix, Sanders, McCarthy is falling in round two, we might trade up to nab them.

[Mike Sixel]

2 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

I think Cousins wants three years, I'm not sure we'd give it to him. Although Jefferson wants him back. My guess is that we sign Cousins and take a non-QB in the first round and if one of Nix, Penix, Sanders, McCarthy is falling in round two, we might trade up to nab them.

I endorse that plan 

[nicksaviking]

23 hours ago, Aggies7 said:

I’m gonna guess about 21 teams in the league would take cousins right now to be their starting QB. Maybe more. But he’s too rich for some tastes so we’ll roll with a totally unproven rookie quarterback, probably the 4th or so best one in the draft and hope it doesn’t turn into ponder 2.0 (yay!)

🎶 don’t know what ya got, til it’s goooone 🎶

Well the Vikings probably can’t pay Jefferson and Darrisaw or Hunter and pay Cousins. So I don’t see how that team would be any more competitive.