Vikings News Sparks Debate Over Unfair Advantage
For the second straight year, the Minnesota Vikings will head to Europe to face an AFC team. Last season, the franchise beat Aaron Rodgers and his New York Jets in London. This time, however, they won’t just return to the Twin Cities after taking care of business against the Pittsburgh Steelers in Dublin, Ireland, and instead, meet the Cleveland Browns in London seven days later.
Vikings News Sparks Debate Over Unfair Advantage
It’s unprecedented for teams to play consecutive games overseas in different cities. The Jacksonville Jaguars played a pair of contests in London last year, even in two different arenas, but playing in different cities or countries is new.
Like most news, this one sparked some controversy on the internet. Some folks consider it an advantage for the Vikings; others think it’s a burden.
Si.com’s Albert Breer noted on social media: “The Dublin/London swing could give the Vikings
an edge …
1) They save trips to Pittsburgh and Cleveland, which could’ve been bad-weather games.
2) They’ll be acclimated for the second game, far moreso than the Browns.
3) Instead of 9 “true” road games, they’ll only have 7.”
He mentioned two potential advantages. Playing at a neutral site instead of unfriendly crowds in Pittsburgh and Cleveland could or should benefit the Vikings. In addition to that, Kevin O’Connell’s operation will be used to the time zone difference by the time the second contest kicks off, whereas the Browns won’t be as adapted and might struggle with that.
Nick Camino, Cleveland’s WKYC’s anchor tweeted, “Of course, the Vikings play across the pond the week before the Browns arrive and will have adjusted to time and travel. Of course.”
Former Vikings journalist and now Broncos reporter Chris Tomasson had a comparable reaction: “With all due respect to the Vikings, seems like quite the unfair advantage in the NFC North that they in 2025 will play eight home games, seven road games and two neutral-site games while the other three division teams will play eight home games and nine road games.”
It indeed changes the NFC North a little and fewer true home games could help the Vikes. However, it should be noted that a year ago, the Packers played a road game (at Philadelphia in Week 1) at a foreign country, while the Vikings and the Bears played a home game in London. Nobody complained last year.
ESPN’s Kevin Seifert wrote in an article: “The upside of the scheduling quirk for the Vikings is that they will miss trips to Acrisure Stadium in Pittsburgh, where they’ve never won, and to Cleveland, where they have one victory since 1989.”
Minnesota has already beaten both teams overseas, the Steelers in 2013 and the Browns in 2017. Because of that trip in 2017, the club has not played in Cleveland since 2009 and probably won’t until 2033.
ProFootballTalk’s Mike Florio stated: “So, yes, although the Vikings’ schedule will be disrupted by playing two games on consecutive Sundays on foreign soil, they will entire truly hostile territory two fewer times than the rest of the division, and most of the conference.”
But the opposite opinion exists, too. A popular Vikings fan account named Vikeologist added to the debate: “People who think it’s just as simple as 2 neutral site games must think NFL players are robots and not actual humans. Being in a foreign country for nearly 2 weeks isn’t going to be easy.”
Being thrown off the routine and potentially not seeing the family for about ten days surely isn’t ideal.
Ultimately it comes down to winning games and the Vikings have been successful overseas, winning all four contests in London. Even the current regime around O’Connell is 2-0 there and has experience at making that trip.
It remains to be seen if they can extend those streaks.