I got a late start this morning, I am usually up around 5 a.m., to make sure you dirtbags have something to read when you get to work/back from procuring government cheese and also to run my morning errands (My Super America rewards card is my 401k).
I was listening to the Power Trip morning show, as is my routine, and they were discussing a USA Today article titled ’13 NFL Teams with No Shot to make the Playoffs’. In which, Chris Chase goes through each squad and basically says yes or no to their chances with limited support.
Now, I just wrote a highly unpopular article discussing our playoff chances. I obviously think we will, and most writers have said we are either a “dark horse team” or even a popular squad to make a playoff run. Now, that first game is still fresh in people’s minds and that loss could come back to haunt us, as we do have a tough schedule, but…still… No shot? That implies no chance, and while everyone has a chance, I think ours is much better than “No shot”.
Let’s look at this “logic”:
MINNESOTA VIKINGS: (2-1), NO
If you can find seven wins on this schedule, have at it. After a probable loss to Denver next week, the Vikings have an easy stretch: Chiefs (at home), Lions, Bears, Rams and Raiders. That has 3-2 record written all over it — maybe 4-1. Then, the season ends: Packers, Falcons, Seahawks, Cardinals, Bears, Giants, Packers. Not happening.
Okay. Let’s go with his 4-1 record. The Packers? Yeah, Rodgers put up 5 TD’s on MNF. Yeah he is dating what’s her face. But, last season outside of the terrible NFC South, teams had to be about 11-5 to make the playoffs in the NFC. That’s a bit higher than usual, when the mark is about 10-6. So, starting 4-1, we need to find 6-7 wins out of the remaining 11 games.
His article doesn’t take into consideration that we play a lot of those games at home. So, you can chalk up losses at Atlanta and Arizona. But, we have 3 games remaining against the Bears and Lions. So, we simply need to find 3 or 4 more wins out of: Green Bay (twice), Seattle (at home), St. Louis (at home), at Oakland, and home against the Giants.
Notice how he ignored Oakland and St. Louis? Seems to me he counted out who he thought would make the playoffs and then went backwards and needed to make it so we couldn’t make the playoffs to simply support his lame narrative. We obviously have a good shot to win 3 games against those teams. At Oakland? St. Louis at home? Seattle at home? We can go 2-1 there. So, we need to beat either the Pack once or the Giants. Hmm…
We always get stuck with a rough schedule, but we’re used to it. This will harden us for the post-season, and if things keep going as they are, we’ll be playing a bunch of back ups anyway.
This just strikes me as lazy writing and click baitery. It worked, I’m talking about it, and I’m the laziest writer of them all. But, at least support your nonsense with viable points. He blatantly ignored the 2 games following his 4-1 start because it ruined his argument.
Fear not, fellow Vikings fans. Perhaps our team needs to be the underdog, clearly we can’t handle the spotlight and expectation of being the trendy pick (see: MNF), so. Let’s go back to being the scrappy underdog, who ends up starting the season 7-1. I’ll take it.