None of that matters. If he’s healthy, he plays. If he’s not healthy, he doesn’t play, and yes, they lose. Wanting to win the game, Lolol. Of course they want to win. You can’t risk a player playing who can’t play bc you want to win.
sorry man thats loser talk! a loss like 100% just because we are missing dak?
we have a healthy OL playing great, 2 rbs playing great, all our receiving threats, coaches calling plays well, and defense is a lot better then last year , correct?
last year with Dalton and a bunch of spare parts, we beat MN..i mean with bad teams we beat MN
you know MN the team we are playing only missing dak we beat with nothing last year.
and goes what the Vikings weakness is giving up 5ypc on the ground they are nearly dead last in all defensive rush stats..Our strength on their weakness sounds like we have a good shot to own TOP keep the ball away from their offense and when needed rush with all those weapons can do enough and not make the big mistake by game plan, weve done this in the past games this season with aggressive pass rushing defense and it falls right into place to run a lot, then use a lot of movement with screens, dump offs, quick outs etc etc short passing game and lots of running..dak has what 3 games this year at around or under 200 yards while we ran pollard and zeke down teams throats.
newsflash dak doesn't need to throw 400yards and 40 points this year to win with a balanced offense winning TOP and defense playing much better. so as pretty as blowouts have been of late its not necessary , rush can handle driving the bus..
sure are chances go down , it wont be as pretty without dak but we are capable of beating MN without dak..
its not a dang!!! automatic LOSS!