I can see that fans here are not really what you would call NFL fans because they haven't obviously seen Allen play- the guy does a lot more then sacks. Right now on just about every national forum I can think of he is the clear favorite for Defensive MVP this year. The guy is an absolute frickin scary cowboy out there. To try and minimize him just makes a few of you look like idiots with Packer blinders on-watch more then the Packers.

 JA doesn't even need to be one of the best.  He is a good-great DE that filled a gaping hole on the Vikings defense.  The value of him over Erasmus James alone justifies the cost.  Unless you can somehow argue that there was someone else the Vikings could've brought in at that position for less, its not even worth discussing.  They turned a weakness into a strength, and i don't think anyone can debate that. 

Destinos2:

 I can see that fans here are not really what you would call NFL fans because they haven't obviously seen Allen play- the guy does a lot more then sacks. Right now on just about every national forum I can think of he is the clear favorite for Defensive MVP this year. The guy is an absolute frickin scary cowboy out there. To try and minimize him just makes a few of you look like idiots with Packer blinders on-watch more then the Packers.

Thank you!! My point was that by trying to minimize Jared Allen, you try to minimize the impacts of inaction of your GM that isnt willing to take risk - and GB is where they is because of it.

bp:

We have very serious gaps in far less sexy positions that should've been addressed in the off-season. But all along we were assured by TT that "we have the players needed" to be competitive this year. How's that going?

 

Which positions weren't addressed?

Punter, ok

 Oline, I already said that

?

ike1024:

etorkelson:

As for the VASTLY inferior versus just inferior argument, anytime you have 0 sacks and the opponents have 14 sacks over 2 games, you are VASTLY inferior to your opponent.

Sure, because we all know that wins are counted by sack totals.

Sorry, you're right, the NFL counts wins based on points on the scoreboard. Those show The Vikes won 30-23 and 38-26. Keep makin' excuses for TT and maybe that can become a regular thing in Green Bay.

prime311:

bp:

We have very serious gaps in far less sexy positions that should've been addressed in the off-season. But all along we were assured by TT that "we have the players needed" to be competitive this year. How's that going?

 

Which positions weren't addressed?

Punter, ok

 Oline, I already said that

?

A 3-4 pass rusher would be nice. And oh.... there was something else. Ummm... Oh, yes, you mentioned it!! The o-line. In other words - positions that would allow us to not be swept by MN.

Destinos2:

 I can see that fans here are not really what you would call NFL fans because they haven't obviously seen Allen play- the guy does a lot more then sacks. Right now on just about every national forum I can think of he is the clear favorite for Defensive MVP this year. The guy is an absolute frickin scary cowboy out there. To try and minimize him just makes a few of you look like idiots with Packer blinders on-watch more then the Packers.

That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with, destinos. 

Respectfully, do you think you'd get any major disagreement that he's the Defensive MVP of the league, or at least among the top 3, thus far? 

etorkelson:

ike1024:

etorkelson:

As for the VASTLY inferior versus just inferior argument, anytime you have 0 sacks and the opponents have 14 sacks over 2 games, you are VASTLY inferior to your opponent.

Sure, because we all know that wins are counted by sack totals.

Sorry, you're right, the NFL counts wins based on points on the scoreboard. Those show The Vikes won 30-23 and 38-26. Keep makin' excuses for TT and maybe that can become a regular thing in Green Bay.

+1. Sacks dont win games. Kickoff returns dont win games. An all-pro RB doesnt win games. A QB that doesnt get sacked doesnt win games. A pass rush doesnt win games. Kickers dont win games. It must be some other stat that wins games.

bp:

Thank you!! My point was that by trying to minimize Jared Allen, you try to minimize the impacts of inaction of your GM that isnt willing to take risk - and GB is where they is because of it.

 

How does 1 trade for 1 team working out well prove anything?  The current Vikings GM has signed 3 significant free agents(Williams, Berrian, Favre) and made 1 big trade in 3 years.   Other then that he signed some marginal free agents, only one of which has really panned out(Shiancoe).  If you want to point to a risk how about point to Brett Favre.  I'd consider that more of a risk then JA ever was.  Some of this was also a right place at the right time deal too(like getting Favre). 

bp:

Six Pack Nads:

bp:

yeah, he sucks. sheesh. So does Randy Moss, Jay Cutler and every other FA that every other team acquires. Shut up, already. Jared Allen killed us. Vikings were smarter than hell to go out and get him - and he's paid off in spades.

No one said Allen sucks. I don't recall anyone saying Moss sucked. I do recall some saying Cutler sucked.

You must be new to this forum - or your memory is faulty. In part to justify their leaderships' lack of off-season moves - all FA and trade deals are stupid according to most posters here. And - go back just a few posts - someone just said that Jared Allen is worthless unless he's lining up against GB's o-line.

Actually i said dont get me wrong hes a good player. Did you just miss that part or what? He has 7.5 sacks out of his 10.5 against the worst line in the league, all i was saying is hes having a good year against our pathetic line. Whats the big deal about saying that? It's obviously the truth to say everyone else has pretty much shut him down.

brewhas28:

bp:

Six Pack Nads:

bp:

yeah, he sucks. sheesh. So does Randy Moss, Jay Cutler and every other FA that every other team acquires. Shut up, already. Jared Allen killed us. Vikings were smarter than hell to go out and get him - and he's paid off in spades.

No one said Allen sucks. I don't recall anyone saying Moss sucked. I do recall some saying Cutler sucked.

You must be new to this forum - or your memory is faulty. In part to justify their leaderships' lack of off-season moves - all FA and trade deals are stupid according to most posters here. And - go back just a few posts - someone just said that Jared Allen is worthless unless he's lining up against GB's o-line.

Actually i said dont get me wrong hes a good player. Did you just miss that part or what? He has 7.5 sacks out of his 10.5 against the worst line in the league, all i was saying is hes having a good year against our pathetic line. Whats the big deal about saying that? It's obviously the truth to say everyone else has pretty much shut him down.

No. You're saying that outside of playing GB, he's ordinary. And you're wrong - whatever your motives. He's not "good". He's one of the leagues best. Kampman is "good" - in another system, he used to be one of the leagues best.

bp:

etorkelson:

ike1024:

etorkelson:

As for the VASTLY inferior versus just inferior argument, anytime you have 0 sacks and the opponents have 14 sacks over 2 games, you are VASTLY inferior to your opponent.

Sure, because we all know that wins are counted by sack totals.

Sorry, you're right, the NFL counts wins based on points on the scoreboard. Those show The Vikes won 30-23 and 38-26. Keep makin' excuses for TT and maybe that can become a regular thing in Green Bay.

+1. Sacks dont win games. Kickoff returns dont win games. An all-pro RB doesnt win games. A QB that doesnt get sacked doesnt win games. A pass rush doesnt win games. Kickers dont win games. It must be some other stat that wins games.

You're +1ing something totally out of context.

He said that the Packers were vastly inferior because of the sack differential.

I know he's too stupid to get the point, I was hoping you weren't.

The Vikings are the better team, but it's pretty obvious that they aren't "vastly superior" or both games wouldn't have come down to the 4th quarter. 

bp:

A 3-4 pass rusher would be nice. And oh.... there was something else. Ummm... Oh, yes, you mentioned it!! The o-line. In other words - positions that would allow us to not be swept by MN.

 

If there was a 3-4 pass rusher available then yes it would've. Thats a pretty specific request.  Proven 3-4 pass rushers dont come available often.  The only one last year was Terrell Suggs, and he was franchised.  He did draft 2 linebackers, one he traded up into the first round to get(aggressive, TT, no way!).  Last I checked Clay has been doing pretty well.  

ike1024:

bp:

etorkelson:

ike1024:

etorkelson:

As for the VASTLY inferior versus just inferior argument, anytime you have 0 sacks and the opponents have 14 sacks over 2 games, you are VASTLY inferior to your opponent.

Sure, because we all know that wins are counted by sack totals.

Sorry, you're right, the NFL counts wins based on points on the scoreboard. Those show The Vikes won 30-23 and 38-26. Keep makin' excuses for TT and maybe that can become a regular thing in Green Bay.

+1. Sacks dont win games. Kickoff returns dont win games. An all-pro RB doesnt win games. A QB that doesnt get sacked doesnt win games. A pass rush doesnt win games. Kickers dont win games. It must be some other stat that wins games.

You're +1ing something totally out of context.

He said that the Packers were vastly inferior because of the sack differential.

I know he's too stupid to get the point, I was hoping you weren't.

The Vikings are the better team, but it's pretty obvious that they aren't "vastly superior" or both games wouldn't have come down to the 4th quarter. 

Well, "vastly" might be a strong term - but MN has jumped way ahead of us. They are the much better team. GB may be no better than middle of the road. MN is an elite team. Time will tell.

bp:

brewhas28:

bp:

Six Pack Nads:

bp:

yeah, he sucks. sheesh. So does Randy Moss, Jay Cutler and every other FA that every other team acquires. Shut up, already. Jared Allen killed us. Vikings were smarter than hell to go out and get him - and he's paid off in spades.

No one said Allen sucks. I don't recall anyone saying Moss sucked. I do recall some saying Cutler sucked.

You must be new to this forum - or your memory is faulty. In part to justify their leaderships' lack of off-season moves - all FA and trade deals are stupid according to most posters here. And - go back just a few posts - someone just said that Jared Allen is worthless unless he's lining up against GB's o-line.

Actually i said dont get me wrong hes a good player. Did you just miss that part or what? He has 7.5 sacks out of his 10.5 against the worst line in the league, all i was saying is hes having a good year against our pathetic line. Whats the big deal about saying that? It's obviously the truth to say everyone else has pretty much shut him down.

No. You're saying that outside of playing GB, he's ordinary. And you're wrong - whatever your motives. He's not "good". He's one of the leagues best. Kampman is "good" - in another system, he used to be one of the leagues best.

Why do you need to twist everything? I mean Antwan Odom, Yes Antwan Odom had 5 sacks in a game against us this year. I dont think he's ordinary outside of the packers, i was just saying he wasn't having all that much success like he normally does outside of the packers this year.