<![CDATA[Saints...lose to the...Bucs??]]>That isn't the loss you need going into the playoffs. 😕

Lose next week and give us the #1 seed 🙂

]]>https://fargostreet.com/topic/18469/saints...lose-to-the...bucsRSS for NodeThu, 28 May 2026 20:45:38 GMTSun, 27 Dec 2009 21:08:30 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:18:32 GMT]]>it's the same fucking vikings.

oh well, still have a great shot at a #2 seed/bye. dallas has everything to play for vs philly AT home, while we are AT home, playing vs what might be a disintersted giants team...but of course, everytime we think theyre disinterested, they go out and play the best game of their season

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285710https://fargostreet.com/post/285710Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:18:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:50:25 GMT]]>This year looked different. It was completely different than the team that goes 6-5 and squeeks in the playoffs. I can't remember the last time we had a good chance at a #1 seed...twice. I thought Favre was the difference and his stats showed his best year of his career. I never expected the failure to come from the amazing offensive line (although the loss of our center this year was a difference), and come from our high dollar Allen and defensive line. We were allowing one of the worst running backs to eat through our defensive line last night. The failures were plentiful. Winfield has returned to be one of the slipperyest (not a word) corners that can't tackle. I openly admit that this season is over, and with losing the #2 seed now (Phili losing and us winning over the Giants is a fat chance), we aren't going to get past the first round of playoffs. Better luck next year Vikings...Hope you can do it in 2010, otherwise plan to be relocated to a new city that wants the hauntings of the Vikings.

Yes, I shed some tears writing that. haha

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285684https://fargostreet.com/post/285684Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:50:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:04:30 GMT]]>This happens every year with the vikes. Why is any one surprised? Superbowl? HAHAHAHAHAHA.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285683https://fargostreet.com/post/285683Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:04:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:54:50 GMT]]>It has nothing to do with Favre. In fact, I credit him for getting our offense going in the 2nd half. Chilly, on the other hand, is a different story. He's put good players on the field but he is not a good coach/play caller. I can't believe we rushed to sign him to an extension. We always run on 1st and 2nd down. Either way, we have bigger concerns than our offense. The defense looks pourus, at best.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285651https://fargostreet.com/post/285651Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:54:50 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:50:43 GMT]]>And thus begins the typical end of season whining from the Vikings fans.....Soon to be followed by excuses and people calling for Favre to be retired and Chilly to be fired.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285649https://fargostreet.com/post/285649Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:50:43 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:42:54 GMT]]>I guess #1 seed is played out.

I guess the Bears have a strong QB.

I guess I need a new team to give a shit about.

This is me crying inside.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285648https://fargostreet.com/post/285648Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:42:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:06:01 GMT]]>Fuck our defense and special teams. That is all.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285643https://fargostreet.com/post/285643Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:06:01 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:49:28 GMT]]>

Bp-08;297194 wrote:
idk the chargers are a strong team but the only reason the colts lost is because they pulled their starters. The saints are looking almost worse than the vikes right now.

I'd say Vikings/Eagles and probably the Chargers. Saints will need more than homefield to win...theyve dropped 2 at home.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285597https://fargostreet.com/post/285597Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:49:28 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:26:35 GMT]]>

FG2;297189 wrote:
I don't think the Colts will get there. I'm gonna go with Chargers/Vikings (in my fantasy life) and the Chargers/Saints (in real life) with the Chargers winning. :icon_puke_r:

idk the chargers are a strong team but the only reason the colts lost is because they pulled their starters. The saints are looking almost worse than the vikes right now.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285580https://fargostreet.com/post/285580Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:26:35 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:15:29 GMT]]>

Bp-08;297187 wrote:
If I was a betting man Id put my money on the eagles vs colts in the superbowl. But im not, and im a vikings fan, so its going to be the vikings vs colts in the superbowl

I don't think the Colts will get there. I'm gonna go with Chargers/Vikings (in my fantasy life) and the Chargers/Saints (in real life) with the Chargers winning. :icon_puke_r:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285575https://fargostreet.com/post/285575Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:15:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:59:25 GMT]]>If I was a betting man Id put my money on the eagles vs colts in the superbowl. But im not, and im a vikings fan, so its going to be the vikings vs colts in the superbowl

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285573https://fargostreet.com/post/285573Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:59:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:56:31 GMT]]>

Bp-08;297111 wrote:
Ya the Vikings arnt doing any better. Coming from a huge vikings fan that will give up all hope in them if they dont win out this season.

I will start by saying that I will not make excuses for the Vikings loses. They should have beat Pittsburgh, and they were very capable to offer better performances against the Cardinals and the Panthers....

The biggest difference here is that the 3 teams the Vikings lost to are either playoff teams, or the red hot Panthers (see yesterdays score against the Giants for reference).

The Saints lost to the 2nd worst team in the NFL, and a Cowboys team that simply isn't going anywhere. My point isn't that the ZOMG VIKINGS ARE GONNA WIN THE SUPERBOWL, but rather, the Saints aren't the 'perfect' team the sports writers say they are.

/rant 🙂

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285572https://fargostreet.com/post/285572Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:56:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Mon, 28 Dec 2009 09:51:49 GMT]]>lol

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285552https://fargostreet.com/post/285552Mon, 28 Dec 2009 09:51:49 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:12:44 GMT]]>loss helps alot.

we still need to take care of biznass

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285498https://fargostreet.com/post/285498Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:12:44 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saints...lose to the...Bucs?? on Sun, 27 Dec 2009 22:40:06 GMT]]>Ya the Vikings arnt doing any better. Coming from a huge vikings fan that will give up all hope in them if they dont win out this season.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/285497https://fargostreet.com/post/285497Sun, 27 Dec 2009 22:40:06 GMT