Skip to content

Jared Allen’s great season getting lost in Minnesota

Arizona Cardinals quarterback Derek Anderson is sacked by Minnesota Vikings defensive end Jared Allen in overtime in Minneapolis AP

In a year when multiple quarterbacks and wide receivers are threatening to re-write the NFL passing record book, there’s a defensive player who’s on pace to set a record of his own.

Unfortunately for Vikings defensive end Jared Allen, Minnesota’s lousy season has much of the NFL world overlooking the fact that Michael Strahan’s NFL record of 22.5 sacks in a season is within Allen’s reach: Allen has 8.5 sacks through five games and is on pace for a whopping 27 sacks this season.

Sacks are too unpredictable for anyone to have much confidence that Allen can keep this pace up. But Allen, who led the league with 15.5 sacks in 2007, has been remarkably consistent in his ability to get to the quarterback: He has 52.5 sacks in his last 55 games. It’s certainly possible that Allen could have 14.5 more sacks in him this season, which would be enough to pass Strahan’s mark.

Allen had two sacks on Sunday as the Vikings beat the Cardinals, and coach Leslie Frazier said afterward that Allen is having “a really unbelievable year.” Allen may be on a last-place team, but he’s one of the best players in football.

Permalink 58 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill
58 Responses to “Jared Allen’s great season getting lost in Minnesota”
  1. halestorm74 says: Oct 10, 2011 4:33 PM

    He is a Beast. Not only is he an amazing player but he is a General on the field. True Leader.

  2. purpleguy says: Oct 10, 2011 4:34 PM

    Well, we do still have two games against the Bears so maybe he can keep it up. One difference is that Robison is putting more pressure on from the other side as opposed to that over-rated stiff Ray Edwards.

  3. ammarradhi says: Oct 10, 2011 4:38 PM

    And he is doing all this without the mullet!

  4. sikoix says: Oct 10, 2011 4:39 PM

    This guy has had a non-stop motor all season long. Robison has been playing great as well. Allen has been in this position before with the Chiefs.

  5. contra74 says: Oct 10, 2011 4:40 PM

    I love when Jared sets the tempo on the D. He is having a great year but its unfortunate that the record is what is overshadowing his accomplishments. Keep up the good work Jared!

  6. bullethead527 says: Oct 10, 2011 4:41 PM

    Trade him to the panthers, we could use him better than Vikes could….

  7. The Phantom Stranger says: Oct 10, 2011 4:41 PM

    The reason people haven’t noticed Jared’s great season is because Packer fans have been telling us for months that he’s washed up. Oh, and they also told us that Brian Robison (4.5 sacks) could never replace the immortal Ray Edwards.

  8. capslockkey says: Oct 10, 2011 4:42 PM

    Guy apparently knows how to turn it on when his team sucks. His best year was with a 4 win Chiefs team.

  9. axespray says: Oct 10, 2011 4:42 PM

    He’s a great player, all around, can drop into coverage, rush, stop the run, play tight end…

    As A Packer Fan, I gotta lay off the whole rivalry and give the man his props, I got a lot of respect for him.

    how much sacks does he need to reach 100 in his career? …like 6 or so?

  10. 28purple4mvp says: Oct 10, 2011 4:43 PM

    HE’S A BEAST!!!!!!!!!!!! 3 OR 4 ON CUTLER NEXT WEEK AND A COUPLE PLAYING THE PACK-right on target for the record

  11. fishman5656 says: Oct 10, 2011 4:44 PM

    OH Boo Hoo – buy him another drink – let him get another DWI and let’s be done with him for a year or so.

    Biggest self promoter in the world – how did the beatdown by the Chiefs feel after talking all kinds of smack last week?

  12. skidooman93 says: Oct 10, 2011 4:48 PM

    It will be interesting to see how teams plan for Jared Allen the rest of the season. He is very disruptfull at this moment but that could change if more tight ends are used in conjuction with the LT. Allen didn’t play at this level last year, and I think some of his success in 2011 is due to his medocre performance in 2010. Either way he is playing out of his mind right now. I am really anxious to see what he does to the stinkin packers and there QB.

    If the vikes had a QB from about 20 different teams there is a real good chance they would be 4-1 or 5-0. But Mcnabb is ungodly horrible. He gets worse every game, and the MN coaches are either to loyal or to stupid to realize the vikings would be no worse with and probably better with Joe Webb or even Ponder. His accuracy is dreadfull and he constantly misses wide open receivers.

  13. axespray says: Oct 10, 2011 4:48 PM

    The Phantom Stranger says:Oct 10, 2011 4:41 PM
    “The reason people haven’t noticed Jared’s great season is because Packer fans have been telling us for months that he’s washed up. Oh, and they also told us that Brian Robison (4.5 sacks) could never replace the immortal Ray Edwards.”

    Who lost to the vaunted chiefs again?

  14. btwicey says: Oct 10, 2011 4:48 PM

    Allen + AP = good building blocks

  15. canadianhonky says: Oct 10, 2011 4:48 PM

    BEAST yes… to bad he’s wears purple.

  16. nickynick04 says: Oct 10, 2011 4:49 PM

    Uhhhh……who did the Vikings play so far,,,,,,thank you an easy schedule….thats where the sacks come from

  17. damnskins703 says: Oct 10, 2011 5:01 PM

    Dude is a str8 up beast I hope he breaks gap tooth Strahan record

  18. thejuddstir says: Oct 10, 2011 5:11 PM

    The dude is phenomenal and all ya gotta do is look at him to realize that he’s not on ‘roids or HGH , wish he were on the Pats.

  19. gobills716 says: Oct 10, 2011 5:27 PM

    Has anyone every seen the video of him killing a dear with a spear? The guy is an animal, on and off the field. I’ll never understand why KC let him go.

  20. minnesotablizzard says: Oct 10, 2011 5:28 PM

    Jared has his swagger back this year, something about him was totally off last year when he cut the mullet, got married and seemed to lose the fire when he settled down in life. But that fire is back, and the old Jared Allen has shown up this year.

  21. slickster35 says: Oct 10, 2011 5:37 PM

    JA is a beast, and a Chief at heart. He and Hali could have turned into one of the best sets of DEs of all time had they stayed together.

    Again, FU Carl Peterson.

  22. The Phantom Stranger says: Oct 10, 2011 5:46 PM

    axespray says:
    Oct 10, 2011 4:48 PM
    The Phantom Stranger says:Oct 10, 2011 4:41 PM
    “The reason people haven’t noticed Jared’s great season is because Packer fans have been telling us for months that he’s washed up. Oh, and they also told us that Brian Robison (4.5 sacks) could never replace the immortal Ray Edwards.”

    Who lost to the vaunted chiefs again?
    _________________

    Congratulations on your award for most meaningless comment ever posted on PFT. What does losing to the Chiefs have to do with anything I said? So Jared Allen and Brian Robison are not good because Donovan McNabb can’t hit the side of a barn?

  23. 28purple4mvp says: Oct 10, 2011 5:47 PM

    nickynick04 says:
    Oct 10, 2011 4:49 PM
    Uhhhh……who did the Vikings play so far,,,,,,thank you an easy schedule….thats where the sacks come from

    Smoke somemore-So why are the pack and the lions and the bears not up there in sacks they play the same teams? 1 or 2 games that are different from ours? NFC NORTH THE TOUGHEST DIVISION IN THE GAME-

  24. The Phantom Stranger says: Oct 10, 2011 5:52 PM

    nickynick04 says:
    Oct 10, 2011 4:49 PM
    Uhhhh……who did the Vikings play so far,,,,,,thank you an easy schedule….thats where the sacks come from
    ____________

    Chargers (4-1), Bucs (3-2), Lions (4-0), Chiefs (2-3), and Cardinals (1-4). Combined record of 14-10.

    I assume you’re a Packer fan because you’re stupid. Who have the Packers played? Saints (4-1), Panthers (1-4), Bears (2-2), Broncos (1-4), and Falcons (2-3). Combined record of 10-14.

    And the Lions will beat the Bears tonight, making the discrepancy larger. How’s that Claymaker doing this year? With an easy schedule like that, he must have 12 sacks.

  25. normswifevera says: Oct 10, 2011 6:06 PM

    “I’ll never understand why KC let him go.”

    Because they had a great pass rusher named Tamba Hali to replace him, and trading Allen allowed them to draft both their left tackle and Jamaal Charles?

    I mean, I don’t know, I’m just guessing.

  26. pumpkinbrown says: Oct 10, 2011 6:08 PM

    Allen just needs Favre to come back in the league and lay down every time Allen gets near him. Worked for Strahan!

  27. orangeflh says: Oct 10, 2011 6:24 PM

    As a Packer fan, I can’t stand Allen. That being said, I hope he breaks Strahan’s “record.” At least it would be legitimate.

    Favre’s lay-down to Strahan was one of the rottenest things I ever saw.

  28. dirtdawg55 says: Oct 10, 2011 6:33 PM

    Will Brett Favre return to football and lie down for him for the 23rd sack, helping him break the record of 22.5 held by Strahan, who broke the previous record of 22 held by Gastineau who didn’t need Favre to lie down to get those sacks … he only needed steroids.

  29. vikefan says: Oct 10, 2011 6:37 PM

    The Phantom Stranger says:Oct 10, 2011 4:41 PM
    “The reason people haven’t noticed Jared’s great season is because Packer fans have been telling us for months that he’s washed up. Oh, and they also told us that Brian Robison (4.5 sacks) could never replace the immortal Ray Edwards.”

    Who lost to the vaunted chiefs again?
    ——————————————————–
    if you wanna go blowing your horn over beating us, ur an idiot, almost anyone can beat us, no great feat there!!….and a side note, its NOT jared allen losing games for us, its a god awful qb

  30. jordannels says: Oct 10, 2011 6:39 PM

    He is good at football

  31. glac1 says: Oct 10, 2011 6:55 PM

    He will be a nice fit in LA!

  32. thehouseofho says: Oct 10, 2011 7:46 PM

    No doubt he’s a beast and has a non-stop motor, but how many of his sacks were in the second half of games? Through all 5 games so far, the Vikings have had huge leads going into halftime. That leads to teams throwing the ball a lot more in the second half just to catch up. The more passing plays, the more chances for Allen to get a sack.

    Not to take away from what Allen’s done so far because he’s putting up some serious numbers, but it’s hard to see the Vikings continuing to get these huge leads and giving him all the more opportunities to rush the QB.

  33. johnsticle says: Oct 10, 2011 8:01 PM

    I love you, Jared Allen. My favorite player on my favorite team, next to AD that is.

  34. contra74 says: Oct 10, 2011 8:05 PM

    glac1 says:
    Oct 10, 2011 6:55 PM
    He will be a nice fit in LA!
    ———-
    What makes you think that? Youre trying to push that Vikings to LA thing?

  35. orthodoxdj says: Oct 10, 2011 8:09 PM

    He can easily beat Strahan’s real record.

  36. getweird4u says: Oct 10, 2011 8:28 PM

    @fishman,have you ever heard of chad ochojohnsontooliwitz HE sir is the biggest self promoter EVER!

  37. calloustongue says: Oct 10, 2011 8:35 PM

    It’s a shame his career was wasted in KC and now in Minnesota. He could have made a difference for a decently run organization. Same thing is happening to AP.

  38. trollaikman8 says: Oct 10, 2011 8:53 PM

    Also, never disrespect his lady friend.

  39. The Phantom Stranger says: Oct 10, 2011 9:01 PM

    thehouseofho says:
    Oct 10, 2011 7:46 PM
    No doubt he’s a beast and has a non-stop motor, but how many of his sacks were in the second half of games? Through all 5 games so far, the Vikings have had huge leads going into halftime. That leads to teams throwing the ball a lot more in the second half just to catch up. The more passing plays, the more chances for Allen to get a sack.

    Not to take away from what Allen’s done so far because he’s putting up some serious numbers, but it’s hard to see the Vikings continuing to get these huge leads and giving him all the more opportunities to rush the QB.
    ________________

    He gets most of them in the first half. You know, when the Vikings are playing well? He had one in each half on Sunday.

  40. reachmylevel says: Oct 10, 2011 9:08 PM

    Fishman, you are such tool. Jared Allen has been clean for a very long time now. He has done much to turn his life around. What have you done for charity, etc.? He does a lot without ever making a big deal about it. You sir, are a complete loser. Think before you speak!

  41. bedmanokc says: Oct 10, 2011 9:30 PM

    Dick Vermiel, believed that in order to win, you had to have these 3 things: A great halfback, a Great Left Tackle, A great Right Defensive End.

    I would argue, that Allen, is the 1st player you choose to start any new franchise. Manning, may be the only exception, but I can not think of anyone who makes a bigger difference on their team, than Jared. I know we couldn’t believe he got traded, by Herm.. I mean, Germ EdTurds

  42. waxedagain says: Oct 10, 2011 10:03 PM

    “It’s certainly possible that Allen could have 14.5 more sacks in him this season..”

    Yeah, it’s possible MDS….have you considered a career promoting the lotto?

  43. sterlingrodgers says: Oct 10, 2011 10:08 PM

    “Chargers (4-1), Bucs (3-2), Lions (4-0), Chiefs (2-3), and Cardinals (1-4). Combined record of 14-10.

    I assume you’re a Packer fan because you’re stupid. Who have the Packers played? Saints (4-1), Panthers (1-4), Bears (2-2), Broncos (1-4), and Falcons (2-3). Combined record of 10-14.”

    FYI- if the Packers were 1-4, they’re opponents would have a combined record of 14-10 also.

  44. getsome636 says: Oct 10, 2011 10:14 PM

    He plays for the Vikings…..are they still in the league? Really, who cares what is going on up there inside their tent? They are irrelevant.

  45. chibears5 says: Oct 10, 2011 11:32 PM

    If Allen falls off pace he still has 2 games against the Bears and the bums they pay to protect Cutler.

  46. vikesfansteve says: Oct 10, 2011 11:38 PM

    The Vikings are 1 game into an amazing 10 game winning streak.

  47. vikesfansteve says: Oct 10, 2011 11:40 PM

    Vikefan the Phantom stranger is a Vikings fan FYI.

  48. truthserum4u says: Oct 11, 2011 5:59 AM

    getsome636 says:
    Oct 10, 2011 10:14 PM

    He plays for the Vikings…..are they still in the league? Really, who cares what is going on up there inside their tent? They are irrelevant.

    ————————————–

    But not as irrelevant as the Packers were for over a quarter century. Another 26 years of this and Viking fans will need to talk to Packer fans to get advice on how to deal with it.

  49. getsome636 says: Oct 11, 2011 9:05 AM

    Uhhhh, truthserum4…….The Vikings have been irrelevant for 47 years, if you question that all you have to do it look at their trophy case. Of course, I suppose you would need to have a trophy case to look at.

  50. vikefan says: Oct 11, 2011 10:36 AM

    Vikefan the Phantom stranger is a Vikings fan FYI.
    ——————————————————
    yup, my mistake

    K, phantomstranger, i misunderstood the chiefs comment, what does it mean?

  51. brewdogg says: Oct 11, 2011 11:59 AM

    getsome636 says:
    Oct 11, 2011 9:05 AM
    Uhhhh, truthserum4…….The Vikings have been irrelevant for 47 years, if you question that all you have to do it look at their trophy case. Of course, I suppose you would need to have a trophy case to look at.
    ——————————————-

    So they were relevant as an expansion team for 3 seasons at 10-30, but through the next 423 wins and 45 playoff games, they have been irrelevant? Yeah, that makes sense.

    Tell, me, what “relevant” team do you cheer for?

  52. The Phantom Stranger says: Oct 11, 2011 12:04 PM

    sterlingrodgers says:
    Oct 10, 2011 10:08 PM
    “Chargers (4-1), Bucs (3-2), Lions (4-0), Chiefs (2-3), and Cardinals (1-4). Combined record of 14-10.

    I assume you’re a Packer fan because you’re stupid. Who have the Packers played? Saints (4-1), Panthers (1-4), Bears (2-2), Broncos (1-4), and Falcons (2-3). Combined record of 10-14.”

    FYI- if the Packers were 1-4, they’re opponents would have a combined record of 14-10 also.
    ____________

    Okay, throw out the wins and losses opponents had against our teams. Vikings opponents are 11-9. Packers opponents are 10-10. The point is, the Vikings haven’t had an easy schedule so the guy who said Allen has a lot of sacks because of the Vikings’ easy schedule is wrong. He had three sacks against the Lions.

  53. The Phantom Stranger says: Oct 11, 2011 12:06 PM

    vikefan says:
    Oct 11, 2011 10:36 AM
    Vikefan the Phantom stranger is a Vikings fan FYI.
    ——————————————————
    yup, my mistake

    K, phantomstranger, i misunderstood the chiefs comment, what does it mean?
    _________

    It was axespray who said the Vikings lost to the vaunted chiefs. He was responding to my comment in a very odd way.

  54. getsome636 says: Oct 11, 2011 6:30 PM

    Brewdogg, I cheer for a team a little bit east of the twin cities with a substantial trophy case.

  55. brewdogg says: Oct 12, 2011 1:24 AM

    Well, that answers that. Did you know that, if the state of Minnesota were to apply the same percentage of tax revenue to education that Wisconsin does, they would save $2 billion/year? Just thought I’d throw that out while I give you a little history lesson….

    This whole trophy case thing is a deep-seated defense mechanism present in nearly all long-time Packer fans. It stems from watching a once-proud franchise finish season after season in the bottom of the standings, for nearly a quarter century, while the Vikings fought it out with Dallas to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl every year. Even when Green Bay started to field a competent team again in the 90′s, there were the Vikings, once again, to snatch the division crown off their heads and replace them as the most feared North team, and as the Packers were wasting pick after pick on failed CBs to try to catch up to the Vikings again, all their fans could say was “trophy case”. Eventually, they came to realize that they needed to tear it all down and start all over again if they wanted any hope of once again being a better team than their western rivals. Now, congratulations, you can once again say “trophy case”, but that doesn’t change the fact that all this hatred stems from a period of time where the packers were well and truly irrelevant on the NFL landscape, and the Vikings were annual playoff contenders.

    Now, let’s move on to your definition of “relevant”. If I understand you right, the only “relevant” team in any given year would be the one that won the previous year’s championship. After all, isn’t that what your relevance by trophy case argument means? So, if we assume that the Packers don’t win the Super Bowl this year, that would mean that they are just as irrelevant as the Vikings for the 2012 season, correct?

    Would you like to revise your definition of relevance yet?

    As a side note…. If you, or any of your compadres over there, are also baseball fans, let me put this out to you. If the quantity of a team’s past championships is the measure of their superiority, than I would have to say that the Pittsburg Pirates are a better team than the Milwaukee Brewers, despite the fact that the Pirates stretch of irrelevancy nearly matches that of the post-Lombardi Packers.

  56. truthserum4u says: Oct 12, 2011 6:01 AM

    getsome636 says:
    Oct 11, 2011 9:05 AM

    Uhhhh, truthserum4…….The Vikings have been irrelevant for 47 years, if you question that all you have to do it look at their trophy case. Of course, I suppose you would need to have a trophy case to look at.

    ——————————–

    Clearly you don’t have any clue as to the meaning of relevancy if you think it only means championships.

    But okay, let’s play your game.

    Using your definition then, the Packers (with only 13 championships) have been irrelevant for 78 years!! 78 freaking years getsome!

    I only had them down for 27, but hey, thanks for enlightening me. I didn’t realize they were that pathetic.

  57. cusoman says: Oct 12, 2011 12:29 PM

    I can’t wait to see #69 and #96 put #12, 6 ft under.

  58. armylz says: Oct 14, 2011 10:57 AM

    I thought his calf roping sack dance was suppose to draw a 15 yard penalty? Granted I think the NFL is going way overboard on this and should just let him play, but why is it not getting flagged?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!