You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive. Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

[ktarinze]

I know, I know it hurts but I have to ask it. Which one was more disappointing. For me it is easily 2009 but to be fair I didn't see the 1998 one. Became a vikings fan in 2000, but anyways what do you guys think
_________________
Don't even know what to think about the vikings anymore.

[vikingsrule]

I started watching in 1996, so the 1998 loss was far more devastating to me. That team was incredible, much better than the 2009 team.

[Worm Guts]

1998 and it's not close for me.

[joeybrowner47]

for me 2009 was worse. as good as the 98 team was it was still one dimensional. we had an amazing offense and a suspect defense. the 09 team was solid from top to bottom.

[ArcticNorseman]

Coming from the perspective of vividly remembering the last 3 SB losses, 1998 was the worst of any NFC Championship game. In that game, Deny Green laid down.

That defense wasn't great and the running game was gimping along. Yes, it sucked that Anderson missed the kick, but with that WR corps, Green needed to end it regulation instead of OT.

In 2009, the turnovers killed the team. So, the comparison to me, what's worse? Poor execution on the field?

Or, horrible coaching removing any chance of player execution?

[Worm Guts]

The 2009 team looked pretty suspect at the end of season and was an underdog against the Saints. The 98 team dominated everybody and were 10 point favorites against the Falcons.

[ktarinze]

We had so many turn overs in that game and so many mistakes. That int by farve killed me. If we don't have 12 men in the huddle we could of ran it and who knows what peterson would of done. These are all the things I remember from that game.

1. The turn over before half where AD and farve messed up the hand off. if we get a field goal there we win the game.

2. The int not the Porter one but the other one.

3. Benard Berrian fumbling while we were driving.

4. 12 men on the field.

5. The int.

6. The dropped int in OT. (I still don't know how you freaking drop that)

These things make it worse to me.
_________________
Don't even know what to think about the vikings anymore.

[PrplChilPill]

Worst thread evar!



So sad, so utterly sad.

1998 team was awesome, and they got chickenpoop after the turnover right before the half. Now, the d was hurt, and may have struggled in the SB. Man, they both hurt. I cannot wait until this thread gets off the first page and I don't have to think about this!
_________________
Wins are a team stat, not a QB stat

[disaacs]

This vote shouldn't even be close...the 1998 team. While another poster makes a valid point that the 2009 team was more solid overall, the offense of the 1998 team would have destroyed the better 2009 defense, while the 1998 defense could hang with the far less explosive 2009 offense. We're talking about a 1998 offense that was far more explosive than any previous offense before it, and I'd argue a better offense than the Rams offense that succeeded it (it actually wasn't the greatest show on turf).
_________________


Thx to Lil Uno!

[VikeADunn]

I have to vote 2009 because I was older and more involved with the team.

I cried in 1998 when I was 6 though
_________________


[quote="tylerdouglass"]VikeADunn, you're my hero.[/quote]

2013 Adopt-A-Viking: DT Sharrif Floyd
Tk: 2 Sk: Stf: PD: 2 FF/FR:

[Worm Guts]

By 2009 I had been jaded by 1998,2000 and the last game of 2003. I expected to lose.

[ktarinze]

[vikesnewcoach11]

The sad thing is I still think (not just because Im a vikings fan) that the vikings were the best teams in the league both years. I said '09 because I really thought we would of beaten the colts...If we were to play denver in '98 that would have been a battle
_________________

[disaacs]

[ktarinze]