All Things 2024-25 Vikings Regular Season Thread

Donate To GopherHole
stocker08 said:
Agree. It didn't look like a fumble to me. But it absolutely should have been intentional grounding. He "threw" it directly into the ground......where he was staring. When the throw away is behind the LOS like that.....there has to be some aspect of catchability and it wasn't even close here.
Click to expand...
Dropping the ball forward should not be considered a throwing motion IMO.

It was also crazy later on how they didn't throw a flag for facemask, then after LA complained about it, then just called a penalty without a flag ever being taken out. I get that it was the right call but after what happened with the missed facemask against them in the regular season, that's ridiculous.
 

stocker08 said:
Agree. It didn't look like a fumble to me. But it absolutely should have been intentional grounding. He "threw" it directly into the ground......where he was staring. When the throw away is behind the LOS like that.....there has to be some aspect of catchability and it wasn't even close here.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't even be against a rule that any forward pass that does not reach the line of scrimmage (when a QB is under pressure/in the grasp) ball is spotted where the throw occurred.

Probably too much ambiguity and the NFL doesn't want to minimize Offense. However, I feel as though the Defense should be rewarded when the QB just flings it anywhere to avoid the sack with zero or near zero odds of a completion for a gain.
 

GophersInIowa said:
Dropping the ball forward should not be considered a throwing motion IMO.

It was also crazy later on how they didn't throw a flag for facemask, then after LA complained about it, then just called a penalty without a flag ever being taken out. I get that it was the right call but after what happened with the missed facemask against them in the regular season, that's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It was very borderline.....but the way throwing motion is called as basically any forwardish motion.....I think it fit. Didn't really look or feel like a fumble. Which is why I think that no intentional grounding was assessed was a total joke.

The facemask penalty was also absurd.

Ope3 said:
I wouldn't even be against a rule that any forward pass that does not reach the line of scrimmage (when a QB is under pressure/in the grasp) ball is spotted where the throw occurred.

Probably too much ambiguity and the NFL doesn't want to minimize Offense. However, I feel as though the Defense should be rewarded when the QB just flings it anywhere to avoid the sack with zero or near zero odds of a completion for a gain.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they've got to figure that out or quarterbacks will begin to exploit it more. The Vikings have been screwed on that two times in two weeks now.
 

Ope3 said:
I wouldn't even be against a rule that any forward pass that does not reach the line of scrimmage (when a QB is under pressure/in the grasp) ball is spotted where the throw occurred.

Probably too much ambiguity and the NFL doesn't want to minimize Offense. However, I feel as though the Defense should be rewarded when the QB just flings it anywhere to avoid the sack with zero or near zero odds of a completion for a gain.
Click to expand...
I hate to bring intent (and thus more subjectivity) to refs, but if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. That wasn't a legit attempt at completing a pass. With how often defenders are flagged for hitting the QB wrong, it has changed how they're hitting QBs, and seems that QBs are getting a few more milliseconds to throw balls away when they are absolutely dead-to-rights. I don't know what the answer is, but plays like that don't seem to be in the spirit of the rule. I wouldn't be opposed to a rule saying that if the throwing motion hasn't started before being contacted by the defender, the ref has the ability to bring intent into the ruling.
 

forever a gopher said:
I hate to bring intent (and thus more subjectivity) to refs, but if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. That wasn't a legit attempt at completing a pass. With how often defenders are flagged for hitting the QB wrong, it has changed how they're hitting QBs, and seems that QBs are getting a few more milliseconds to throw balls away when they are absolutely dead-to-rights. I don't know what the answer is, but plays like that don't seem to be in the spirit of the rule. I wouldn't be opposed to a rule saying that if the throwing motion hasn't started before being contacted by the defender, the ref has the ability to bring intent into the ruling.
Click to expand...
"We can't define intentional grounding but we know it when we see it." That's basically how they officiate pass interference so I don't see any issue with it.
 


Ope3 said:
Houston is still playing. That's it, that's the list.
Click to expand...
Decent argument could be made for winning at Seattle (Darnold made a really nice throw too).

Maybe argument for winning at home vs Colts (8-9).


But yeah ... man, not a ton.
 

GopherGrit said:
Decent argument could be made for winning at Seattle (Darnold made a really nice throw too).

Maybe argument for winning at home vs Colts (8-9).


But yeah ... man, not a ton.
Click to expand...
I do agree, the win at Seattle was rather impressive. I put in the "still playing comment" just referring to Houston is the only team Vikings beat in 2024 that is among the NFL Teams that are in the Divisional Round.

The Seattle game and the 2022 victory at Buffalo are the most impressive road wins in the KOC era, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:

Holy shit. We knew it was bad but good Lord, this clip I found is deeply disturbing regarding the last two games:

"After being pressured a season-high 33 times by the Lions in Week 18, the Vikings offensive line was charged with allowing 32 pressures against the Rams. Left tackle Cam Robinson gave up 12 pressures and a sack, by far the worst of Minnesota’s O-linemen. Robinson had allowed 18 total pressures in Weeks 11-16 before giving up 21 in the last two games."
 

Ogee Ogilthorpe said:
We knew it was bad but good Lord, this clip I found is deeply disturbing regarding the last two games:

"After being pressured a season-high 33 times by the Lions in Week 18, the Vikings offensive line was charged with allowing 32 pressures against the Rams. Left tackle Cam Robinson gave up 12 pressures and a sack, by far the worst of Minnesota’s O-linemen. Robinson had allowed 18 total pressures in Weeks 11-16 before giving up 21 in the last two games."
Click to expand...
That does explain part of the reason that Darnold fell of the cliff.

When Darrisaw went down I had a huge sense of dread regarding the Vikings fortunes. They were able to adjust through December, until the they weren't.
 




Vikes far exceeded expectations which is great.
Still, would sure be fun if it was us playing tomorrow at 2. Ugh. Hurts a little more when get close and don't quite make it I guess.
 


TNGophfan said:
Have I mentioned how much I hate coaches going for 2 before they have to.
Click to expand...
Yep, and they would be up 24-21 instead of 22-21

Not only that, but they had drilled the extra point and took it off the board.
 



The Bills should figure out the Chiefs have the tush push figured out. Wow!
 

Should be 31-28 Bills now. KC would have kicked extra point after their last touchdown to be up by 4.
 

This is the Chiefs 7th AFC championship game in a row. Won 4 of the previous 6.

Reid won a COY with Philly, none with KC. Belichick won 3. Vikes have one - Bud in 1969.
 

I don’t know how that wasn’t ruled a 1st down earlier when Buffalo went for it on 4th.

 



GophersInIowa said:
I don’t know how that wasn’t ruled a 1st down earlier when Buffalo went for it on 4th.

Click to expand...
I'm so bored by QB sneaks/tush pushes, I'm inclined to side with the Defense if there is ever any doubt.
 

Ope3 said:
I'm so bored by QB sneaks/tush pushes, I'm inclined to side with the Defense if there is ever any doubt.
Click to expand...
bored with it has no say in that it was a first down.
 

kg21 said:
bored with it has no say in that it was a first down.
Click to expand...
I'm not claiming it does, just that I was totally good with the call. Tie goes to the Defense is fine by me.

If you put it at the mercy of a visual spot which is also tougher at midfield to view than the goal line with video, tough, those are the breaks. Also that yellow line isn't necessarily accurate.

I had no skin in the game as far as rooting interest or any type of action. I suppose deep down I was rooting for the Bills actually.
 

Ope3 said:
I'm not claiming it does, just that I was totally good with the call. Tie goes to the Defense is fine by me.

If you put it at the mercy of a visual spot which is also tougher at midfield to view than the goal line with video, tough, those are the breaks. Also that yellow line isn't necessarily accurate.

I had no skin in the game as far as rooting interest or any type of action. I suppose deep down I was rooting for the Bills actually.
Click to expand...
Agreed. There was nothing in the replays that warranted overturning the spot and I was rooting for the Bills.

On a side note, Cook was shredding the Chiefs, both rushing and receiving, yet I felt like the whole game he was pacing the sidelines waiting to get put back in. The Bills really need a true WR1, too.
 

Slim Tubby said:
Agreed. There was nothing in the replays that warranted overturning the spot and I was rooting for the Bills.

On a side note, Cook was shredding the Chiefs, both rushing and receiving, yet I felt like the whole game he was pacing the sidelines waiting to get put back in. The Bills really need a true WR1, too.
Click to expand...
the guy who saw the actual ball in Allen's hand ruled it an easy first down.

The guy who saw Allens back and had no clue where the ball was ruled it short.

Please explain how they went with the guy who didn't see the ball.

Total bullshit!

And just for the record, on the play in front of that, the Bills also got the first down.
 
Last edited:


kg21 said:
the guy who saw the actual ball in Allen's hand ruled it an easy first down.

The guy who saw Allens back and had no clue where the ball was ruled it short.

Please explain how they went with the guy who didn't see the ball.

Total bullshit!

And just for the record, on the play in front of that, the Bills also got the first down.
Click to expand...
You're right...the whole world is just one big conspiracy specifically targeting all of the things you want to happen.

There wasn't a single camera angle shown on TV that had the ball definitively reaching the imaginary first down line.

And if you're playing for a spot in the Super Bowl, maybe call a play that doesn't rely on a spot. KC stuffed them on that play numerous times throughout the game.
 

Slim Tubby said:
You're right...the whole world is just one big conspiracy specifically targeting all of the things you want to happen.
Click to expand...
Well it revolves around him, right???
Slim Tubby said:
There wasn't a single camera angle shown on TV that had the ball definitively reaching the imaginary first down line.

And if you're playing for a spot in the Super Bowl, maybe call a play that doesn't rely on a spot. KC stuffed them on that play numerous times throughout the game.
Click to expand...
 


Slim Tubby said:
You're right...the whole world is just one big conspiracy specifically targeting all of the things you want to happen.

There wasn't a single camera angle shown on TV that had the ball definitively reaching the imaginary first down line.

And if you're playing for a spot in the Super Bowl, maybe call a play that doesn't rely on a spot. KC stuffed them on that play numerous times throughout the game.
Click to expand...
Yeah it just so happens that a QB sneaking the ball into a sea of humanity weighing more than a ton to an imaginary line to gain is an inexact task. Go figure.
 

Slim Tubby said:
Agreed. There was nothing in the replays that warranted overturning the spot and I was rooting for the Bills.

On a side note, Cook was shredding the Chiefs, both rushing and receiving, yet I felt like the whole game he was pacing the sidelines waiting to get put back in. The Bills really need a true WR1, too.
Click to expand...
Screw the camera angles!

How did the ref who saw the ball, spot it as an easy first down have his call overturned.

It's all I'm asking.

Please do share.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom