Rich Gannon : Vikes favorite to win NFC North

[motife]

Former NFL MVP QB Rich Gannon, optimistic that Vikings QB Tarvaris Jackson can lead his team to the top of it’s division and have a breakout year in 2008, as quoted in the (Minneapolis) Star Tribune: "I'm excited. I got a chance to go out there a little bit, and I watched — really, I wanted to look at Tarvaris and see where he has come in just the one short year — and I got a chance to watch some film and sit down with [coach Brad] Childress and really look at him, and talk about him, and evaluate him. I think he's made great strides. I think he's a very athletic guy, very gifted, and the big thing for him this year is just consistency." Gannon added: "He's got to play 16 games, he only finished 12 games a year ago, he needs to play 16 games. He needs to be more efficient and more consistent. And if he can do those two things — with the running game they have, the offensive line, they've upgraded their receivers, they're going to be better defensively — there's no reason why that team cannot win the NFC North."

[DonHutson]

Good. Let's hope Gannon takes his boring ass monotone master of the obvious routine over to the Vike's preseason broadcast booth this year.

[Packnut]

Well, I've seen all I need to see. I thank God with that D and A.P. that they have this bum playing the most important position on the field.

Gannon is selling a load of pure 100% BS. :x

[GBRulz]

The paper champions of the NFL....go Queens.

[b bulldog]

They should be the favorite in the North imo.

[MJZiggy]

Great, the Pack always seems to do well as the underdog.

[RashanGary]

The Vikings added some nice pieces this year. They are aging at some important positions as well and their QB is a big question mark.


The leagues youngest and one of last years strongest teams in Green Bay got a chance to learn on the job last year and grow in another off season. They lost a HOF QB but they do have high draft pick being groomed by a proven QB guru. The Packers look to have a solid defense, a really good offense and I think they'll have elite ST's.



Really, it's up in the air IMO. The Packers were clearly the cream of the crop last year. The Vikings added some quality pieces. The Packers lost Favre. It's too tough to call for me. It might come down to QB play and injuries.

[Bretsky]

They should be the favorite in the North imo.


I don't buy it

Unless you think TJack can be decent you should not call them the favorite

They are not that dominant to be able to pick up for weakness at the most important position on the field

[motife]

TT is probably still kicking himself that the Vikes "stole" Brad Childress from under his nose, forcing him to hire a lesser coach.

Tavaris Jackson has a chance to be another J.P. Losman if he keeps developping.

[Charles Woodson]

Of course Rich Gannon would pick the vikings...
I still hate that SOB for taking one of Bretts MVP's
but i dont buy it ethier... Yes they got a new reciever and got rid of some older ones, but they just arent complete yet

[BallHawk]

We were the 2nd best team in the NFC. The Vikings didn't even make the playoffs.

We lost Favre which is huge, but we still have a great defense, great WR, and a solid RB. The Vikings are without a doubt second, but I can't see how you can call them second, not until they get a QB.

[Bretsky]

We were the 2nd best team in the NFC. The Vikings didn't even make the playoffs.

We lost Favre which is huge, but we still have a great defense, great WR, and a solid RB. The Vikings are without a doubt second, but I can't see how you can call them second, not until they get a QB.


There lies the question

Do we have a great defense ????

[Lurker64]

I think it would be interesting to do a study of, in the ESPN era, which teams are consistently overrated and which are consistently underrated by media outlets in their preseason prognostications. I don't have time to do it though, but it wouldn't surprise me if Minnesota is in the consistently overrated column most years.

[BallHawk]

We were the 2nd best team in the NFC. The Vikings didn't even make the playoffs.

We lost Favre which is huge, but we still have a great defense, great WR, and a solid RB. The Vikings are without a doubt second, but I can't see how you can call them second, not until they get a QB.


There lies the question

Do we have a great defense ????

Ranked 11th in the league last year, but, IMO, underachieved. I can't see our defense getting any worse, barring injury. I think Cullen will be healthy and ready to go, Harrell has the potential to have an impact, Bigby and or Collins and or Rouse will be solid, Al and CW will man the corners and maybe Patrick Lee can have an impact. Kampman will be Kampman, Pickett should keep it up, Hawk can only get better, Chillar will help.

I think we can be top 10. That is great, IMO.

[Packnut]

We were the 2nd best team in the NFC. The Vikings didn't even make the playoffs.

We lost Favre which is huge, but we still have a great defense, great WR, and a solid RB. The Vikings are without a doubt second, but I can't see how you can call them second, not until they get a QB.


There lies the question

Do we have a great defense ????


The talent is there for the most part. The coaching is another story.

Jolly is the key ingredient for me. If healthy, he disrupts the passing lane with his long arms. IF Rouse can improve and take Nick's spot, I like us even better.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ranked 11th in the league last year, but, IMO, underachieved. I can't see our defense getting any worse, barring injury. I think Cullen will be healthy and ready to go, Harrell has the potential to have an impact, Bigby and or Collins and or Rouse will be solid, Al and CW will man the corners and maybe Patrick Lee can have an impact. Kampman will be Kampman, Pickett should keep it up, Hawk can only get better, Chillar will help.

I think we can be top 10. That is great, IMO.

11th in yards--which is a stupid way to rank defenses. If you look at all defensive stats (yards allowed, points allowed, sacks, turnovers, 3rd down %, rush avg, and opposing passer rating), we were a top 10 defense. We weren't great, but we were good. I expect more of the same this year.

Still, our defense was better than Minnesota's defense. Jared Allen very well could even it out. We'll see. They have some talent. They always have. I'm not sure what's the problem. Maybe coaching.

[MadtownPacker]

Rastak has been a fan since day 1 right? Maybe he is the curse.

Either way, wasn't Gannon a queen himself? Who cares what that shithead thinks. He is still probably hearing bells froo when Siragusa plopped on him in the 2002 AFC championship.

[cpk1994]

Rastak has been a fan since day 1 right? Maybe he is the curse.

Either way, wasn't Gannon a queen himself? Who cares what that shithead thinks. He is still probably hearing bells froo when Siragusa plopped on him in the 2002 AFC championship.To be fair to Rich, he did take a lot of shots to the head in his playing days. He's not totally sound upstairs.

[3irty1]

Until they get a competent QB and coach I don't see them doing anything out of the ordinary.

The Packers are still the youngest team in the league which means we can expect new stars to emerge from our roster every year as their lights go on. McCarthy is the real deal. The NFC North is ours to lose imo.

[Tarlam!]

All you people slamming the vikes, saying they have no QB and claiming the Pack is the favourite need a reality check. They made some decent moves this off season and they have a beast at RB that is no longer a rookie.

We made one significant move, and that's at the QB position. As it stands, their QB has over a season of starts, ours has zero.

I hope you are all correct in what you are saying, but at this stage, I think Gannon is making a fair appraisal. Until I actually SEE A-Rod beat another NFL team, he's just a first year starter. And we all know, first year starters struggle. I'd love for him to beat the Vikes in the opener.

I'm just glad we play them at home first and not in their place. That levels the playing field a bit. I know M3 won't be underestimating them like a lot of people here.

[Fritz]

Former NFL MVP QB Rich Gannon, optimistic that Vikings QB Tarvaris Jackson can lead his team to the top of it’s division and have a breakout year in 2008, as quoted in the (Minneapolis) Star Tribune: "I'm excited. I got a chance to go out there a little bit, and I watched — really, I wanted to look at Tarvaris and see where he has come in just the one short year — and I got a chance to watch some film and sit down with [coach Brad] Childress and really look at him, and talk about him, and evaluate him. I think he's made great strides. I think he's a very athletic guy, very gifted, and the big thing for him this year is just consistency." Gannon added: "He's got to play 16 games, he only finished 12 games a year ago, he needs to play 16 games. He needs to be more efficient and more consistent. And if he can do those two things — with the running game they have, the offensive line, they've upgraded their receivers, they're going to be better defensively — there's no reason why that team cannot win the NFC North."

I think Gannon's just saying the guy has a big penis.

It would be interesting to see who the off-season champions are every year. I believe Minnesota would rank near the top. They've been winning the NFC every January through August every year since Denny Green got there.

[Tarlam!]

I just don't get why you are so dismissive, Fritz. Have you studied film?

[Scott Campbell]

All you people slamming the vikes, saying they have no QB and claiming the Pack is the favourite need a reality check. They made some decent moves this off season and they have a beast at RB that is no longer a rookie.

We made one significant move, and that's at the QB position. As it stands, their QB has over a season of starts, ours has zero.

I hope you are all correct in what you are saying, but at this stage, I think Gannon is making a fair appraisal. Until I actually SEE A-Rod beat another NFL team, he's just a first year starter. And we all know, first year starters struggle. I'd love for him to beat the Vikes in the opener.

I'm just glad we play them at home first and not in their place. That levels the playing field a bit. I know M3 won't be underestimating them like a lot of people here.



I think the Vikes should be favored, and it plays a little bit to our advantage anyway. Let them have that target on their backs. I'm in agreement with you about their roster, and would not be surprised to see them have a very good season. I also would not be surprised to see them stink it up again, because piss poor QB play can take good teams out of a lot of games.

I think Rodgers showed more against Dallas than Jackson showed all of last year.

[Iron Mike]

The Queens win the NFC North EVERY offseason. :roll:

[Tarlam!]

Scott, I didn't watch Jackson, even when we played them. I was always watching our DEs to see if they could sack him. I did watch AP. If he stays healthy, we'll need 8 in the box to stop him. That alone will take some heat off of Jackson.

I am comforted that Harrell supposedly does the run stuffer well (at least, I think I heard that).

The Dallas game went a long way to making me an even bigger A-Rod fan, but, I aint buying his jersey in October. I'll be proudly bearing my #4 and shopping for a #80 in all likelihood!

I'm just saying, A-Rod still has a lot to prove.

[Bretsky]

All you people slamming the vikes, saying they have no QB and claiming the Pack is the favourite need a reality check. They made some decent moves this off season and they have a beast at RB that is no longer a rookie.

We made one significant move, and that's at the QB position. As it stands, their QB has over a season of starts, ours has zero.

I hope you are all correct in what you are saying, but at this stage, I think Gannon is making a fair appraisal. Until I actually SEE A-Rod beat another NFL team, he's just a first year starter. And we all know, first year starters struggle. I'd love for him to beat the Vikes in the opener.

I'm just glad we play them at home first and not in their place. That levels the playing field a bit. I know M3 won't be underestimating them like a lot of people here.


But the Vikings don't have a starting QB. The more I watched Jackson the less I liked him. I'm not sold on AROD either, but why call the Vikes the favorite when we were 13-3 and they were well...several games behind that.
Did their offseason activity and our lack of it mean that much ?

TT certainly has full faith in AROD or he should have made a deal with a veteran with some experience. Furthermore, if the Vikings do win the division next year the posters who are not infatuated with TT as a GM will have some legit concerns to take up with TT because MN has made some nice moves in the offseason while we sit on a load of cap space and as usual will surely frontload some deals again......making next year once again healthy.

[retailguy]

But the Vikings don't have a starting QB. The more I watched Jackson the less I liked him. I'm not sold on AROD either, but why call the Vikes the favorite when we were 13-3 and they were well...several games behind that.
Did their offseason activity and our lack of it mean that much ?

TT certainly has full faith in AROD or he should have made a deal with a veteran with some experience. Furthermore, if the Vikings do win the division next year the posters who are not infatuated with TT as a GM will have some legit concerns to take up with TT because MN has made some nice moves in the offseason while we sit on a load of cap space and as usual will surely frontload some deals again......making next year once again healthy.

But your point inherently "assumes" that we would have been 13-3 without Favre, and that's not likely. It also assumes that there will be no drop off with AROD, that he won't need time to get "up to speed". That's not realistic either.

The Vikings should have "gained" on expectations this offseason. Will it translate? Who knows...

[HarveyWallbangers]

But your point inherently "assumes" that we would have been 13-3 without Favre, and that's not likely. It also assumes that there will be no drop off with AROD, that he won't need time to get "up to speed". That's not realistic either.

Isn't that just one assumption really? Is it really an assumption? It's more that he thinks that the dropoff in Favre to Rodgers might not cost 5 victories.

[retailguy]

But your point inherently "assumes" that we would have been 13-3 without Favre, and that's not likely. It also assumes that there will be no drop off with AROD, that he won't need time to get "up to speed". That's not realistic either.

Isn't that just one assumption really? Is it really an assumption? It's more that he thinks that the dropoff in Favre to Rodgers might not cost 5 victories.

Maybe it is only one assumption, but if the victories don't drop by five, which they shouldn't, then what happens to the Vikings? They stay static? What's the basis for that? Just Tavaris Jackson? So, he's not going to improve, but AROD will? Isn't that just homerism?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Maybe it is only one assumption, but if the victories don't drop by five, which they shouldn't, then what happens to the Vikings? They stay static? What's the basis for that? Just Tavaris Jackson? So, he's not going to improve, but AROD will? Isn't that just homerism?

I think the argument is that Jackson hasn't shown anything that makes anybody think he'll be a good QB. He's gotten a chance and sucked. Rodgers just hasn't had a chance, and he looked solid in his only meaningful action in a tough environment in a big game.

[Tarlam!]

I think the argument is that Jackson hasn't shown anything that makes anybody think he'll be a good QB.


Rich Gannon and Brad childress would appear to disagree. Harv, I am not hot or cold on Jackson. I wouldn't know he was so bad, except the good posters here tell me he sucks.

In all honesty, I don't find him to be that bad any more.

[mngolf19]

Good. Let's hope Gannon takes his boring ass monotone master of the obvious routine over to the Vike's preseason broadcast booth this year.

Actually it was posted in the same newspaper that he is doing the Packer preseason games this year with Harlan.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Rich Gannon and Brad childress would appear to disagree. Harv, I am not hot or cold on Jackson. I wouldn't know he was so bad, except the good posters here tell me he sucks.

In all honesty, I don't find him to be that bad any more.

What is Childress going to say? If Jackson doesn't pan out, he's gone. Gannon appears to have gotten his opinion after talking to Childress.

It's possible Jackson becomes a good QB. I'd be surprised, but I wouldn't be shocked. I just think the chances of Rodgers being a good QB are greater. The one question about Rodgers (durability) is also a knock on Jackson. I think he's gotten injured 3 times in his 1 1/4 years of starting.

[Tarlam!]

'kay Harv. I will bow to your knowledge here.

[mngolf19]

My take on Jackson would also be that, why couldn't he improve? There's obviously room for him to improve and we all agree that players tend to improve each year over their first 2-3 if they are granted a starting positions. It's talked about here as far as Packers are concerned. Now if he does improve. Watch out!

[HarveyWallbangers]

My take on Jackson would also be that, why couldn't he improve? There's obviously room for him to improve and we all agree that players tend to improve each year over their first 2-3 if they are granted a starting positions. It's talked about here as far as Packers are concerned. Now if he does improve. Watch out!

Because I have seen things with him that QBs don't typically improve at once they get to the pros. I think he's inaccurate on throws over 15 yards. He doesn't display a natural feel for the game. He could possibly learn that, but the Vikings want to win now. I'm not sure he'll get the time to improve that. If he doesn't improve this year, Childress could be gone and he may not be the starter next year.

His athletic ability is virtually the same as Rodgers (according to combine numbers). Both have good escapability. His arm strength is about the same as Rodgers (maybe slightly less arm strength). Both have enough arm strength on most throws. They aren't elite, but good enough. From what I've watched of Rodgers (mostly preseason), he seems much more accurate than Jackson. That might be the least valued and most important aspect of a QBs game. Also, Jackson isn't dumb, but Rodgers is top notch in the intelligence department. ARod's learning curve wasn't as large as Jackson's learning curve (Rodgers coming from Cal and Jackson from Alabama State), and he's had an extra year in the offense to learn (since he was drafted the year before Jackson). Both have durability concerns.

[HarveyWallbangers]

If I had to guess how the season will play out for both teams, I'd guess both teams disappoint slightly. I think the two teams are similarly talented. I think the Packers are deeper and more balanced. I think the Vikings have more star power. I think Rodgers will show he's capable of being a good NFL QB, but he'll get nicked up and the Packers will lose some games because of it. I think we're destined to have an injury prone QB after having Favre. I see the Packers going a tad above .500. I see about the same for Minnesota, and more than anything I think it will be their QB and coaching holding them back. I think it's quite possible that all four teams end up within a few games of each other, and the division winner has an 8-8 or 9-7 record.

Unlike what bulldog says, I think the Packers are deeper and could handle injuries better than Minnesota. If the Packers lose their best OL (Clifton? Tauscher?), they could get by. The Vikings would have a very hard time replacing Hutchinson. If the Packers lost their best WR (Driver? Jennings?), they could get by. The Vikings would have a harder time replacing Berrian. Although I like Chester Taylor, I think the Vikings offense will need Peterson to be an elite RB to approach the top 10 in offense. The Packers would have a tough time replacing Grant, but they have the ability to change their game plan and still get by. Losing a top DL would hurt the Packers, but they showed last year that they could get by without a starter or two. I think the Vikings would really suffer if they lost either of their top 3 DL. I think it's more important for Minnesota's top players to stay healthy.

[mngolf19]

My take on Jackson would also be that, why couldn't he improve? There's obviously room for him to improve and we all agree that players tend to improve each year over their first 2-3 if they are granted a starting positions. It's talked about here as far as Packers are concerned. Now if he does improve. Watch out!

Because I have seen things with him that QBs don't typically improve at once they get to the pros. I think he's inaccurate on throws over 15 yards. He doesn't display a natural feel for the game. He could possibly learn that, but the Vikings want to win now. I'm not sure he'll get the time to improve that. If he doesn't improve this year, Childress could be gone and he may not be the starter next year.

His athletic ability is virtually the same as Rodgers (according to combine numbers). Both have good escapability. His arm strength is about the same as Rodgers (maybe slightly less arm strength). Both have enough arm strength on most throws. They aren't elite, but good enough. From what I've watched of Rodgers (mostly preseason), he seems much more accurate than Jackson. That might be the least valued and most important aspect of a QBs game. Also, Jackson isn't dumb, but Rodgers is top notch in the intelligence department. ARod's learning curve wasn't as large as Jackson's learning curve (Rodgers coming from Cal and Jackson from Alabama State), and he's had an extra year in the offense to learn (since he was drafted the year before Jackson). Both have durability concerns.

Harv that last part is why I think he can. If using Rodger's extra year of experience in the offense helps him, same should go for Jackson. (key being should) I'll also add this note, I would put the backups this year(Frerotte and Booty) above what they had last year if Jackson fails or gets injured. And like you said, they want to win now so Jackson's leash this year may be short.

[Fritz]

I just don't get why you are so dismissive, Fritz. Have you studied film?

Simple. As I said, every year since Denny Green arrived, it seems like the "experts" pick the Queens to go all the way. And every year - with one exception, when the heavily favored Queens got beat by the Falcons, I believe, in the NFC Championship - there's a roar about Minnesota being the cream of the crop, their offseason moves, etc. And we all know how the season ends up, most of the time. It may be the Bears, but it ain't the Queens.

So I am dismissive of Minnesota's annual off-season championship.

[motife]

McCarthy's coaching got Favre playing some of the best football of his entire career.

I will be SHOCKED if Aaron Rodgers is not a more than adequate starter. Drafting Brohm and Flynn should keep Rodgers practicing at his best.

If Brohm shows talent, Rodgers has to play at his best also.

My impression of Rodgers is that he will play within the offense, which is very well coached and designed. His mobility is outstanding and should convert a LOT of third down plays.

Tavaris Jackson doesn't show anything resembling great potential. He's inaccurate, doesn't seem to have field grasp, and Childress appears to me to be a lackluster coach NOT respected by the team.

The Vikings btw had the best run defense in the NFL last year. It's their pass defense which is highly suspect. If they go another year with Sharper starting it's not going to improve.

I think Jared Allen is very over-rated. I wouldn't consider trading Aaron Kampman for him in a million years. Allen's character is questionable, which when mixed with HUGE signing bonuses could potentially mean a big dropoff.

p.s Rice is a good WR, scarier to me than Wade, but the Vikes 2nd leading WR last year was.. Robert Ferguson... Their starting WR's combined for 8 TD's last year.

Jackson threw 9 TD's with 12 interceptions. That's horrible.

[b bulldog]

One of the biggest reasons why the Vikes Pass D was suspect was the lack of a legit passrusher. They solved that problem with maybe the best DE in the game. In reegards to the depth question, the Packers would be done if they lost Grant, they have nobody behind him. The Packers would also struggle at the WR position iof they lost Jennings imo. The games he is hurt or knicked up, the O seems to struggle. The Packers have no depth at corner or at DE. This is called salary cap football, plain and simple. The BVikes biggest question is their QB but with their D and the beast they have at RB, I'll make them my favorite. AP is the best player in the North and might be the best player in the NFC at years end.

[RashanGary]

You have to expect some drop off from the Packers.

The bad
1. We lost what is supposed to be the greatest player ever.
2. The schedule is harder than last years
3. We didn't have many injuries last year

The good
1. The Packers have a lot of continuity
2. They have a lot of improving young players. We should see improvement from within


Overall, I think the Packers should gel into a more well rounded, complete team but of all of the 10's of thousands of players that have played football in the NFL, what is the chance we replace the greatest of thousands with one chance? Odds are pretty slim. If you believe Favre is the greatest of greats and that he carried this team on his back, the Packers are absolutely screwed. We'll find out. I'm not as optimistic as I was last year. Right now I"d have to guess about 9 wins, but I'll up it if Rodgers looks great early.

[Lurker64]

I think that Allen is far from the best DE in the game. He's certainly one of the more productive sack artists, but that's largely because he will give up contain in order to gamble for sacks. This pays off (with sacks) sometimes, but a savvy offensive mind can scheme around it. He's decent against the run, but Allen's discipline leaves much to be desired IMO.

[HarveyWallbangers]

In reegards to the depth question, the Packers would be done if they lost Grant, they have nobody behind him. The Packers would also struggle at the WR position iof they lost Jennings imo.

Not really, we were like 6-1 before Grant got meaningful carries last year. Do you really think that we aren't much better equipped to handle the loss of Jennings than the Vikings would be to lose Berrian? We still have Driver, Jones, Nelson, and Lee. The Vikings would have Rice, Wade, Ferguson, and Shiancoe.

Our depth is better than the Vikings on the DL. Minnesota would love to have a guy like KGB as their third pass rusher. In fact, some Viking fan friends of mine, jokingly ask me when Green Bay is going to cut KGB, so the Vikes can pick him up. Corner is a sore spot for both teams. I'd still take Patrick Lee, Tramon Williams, Will Blackmon, and Jarrett Bush over Charles Gordon, Marcus McCauley, Benny Sapp, and something called Dee McCann.

[Iron Mike]

I think that Allen is far from the best DE in the game. He's certainly one of the more productive sack artists.

OK, how many of those sacks were accrued against some of those shitty teams in the AFC West??? :roll:

[HarveyWallbangers]

I won't say that Allen isn't a good DE. I don't think he's the best in the NFL, but he's probably in the top 5. I don't think I'd trade Kampman for him. But because of Allen and the trade up for Johnson, they had one pick in the first 4 rounds. Allen better be darn good to throw most of a draft away for him. I won't even say they made bad moves, but I think some Packer fans needs to chill out over their moves. We hear the same thing every year. Until they actually do it on the field, I still say the division comes down to us. Meaning I don't think the Vikings are suddenly going to win 12-13 games and just take control of the division.

[Lurker64]

I think that Allen is far from the best DE in the game. He's certainly one of the more productive sack artists.

OK, how many of those sacks were accrued against some of those shitty teams in the AFC West??? :roll:

Quite a few, and none were in the fourth quarter (despite the fact that the Chiefs lost a lot of games that were close at the start of the fourth quarter.) He's a good player, but, like all players, he's not as good as he's hyped to be.

[Iron Mike]

I think that Allen is far from the best DE in the game. He's certainly one of the more productive sack artists.

OK, how many of those sacks were accrued against some of those shitty teams in the AFC West??? :roll:

Quite a few, and none were in the fourth quarter (despite the fact that the Chiefs lost a lot of games that were close at the start of the fourth quarter.) He's a good player, but, like all players, he's not as good as he's hyped to be.

Lemme see, how did we do against the AFC Worst last year?

9/23 vs. SD W31-24

10/29 vs. DEN W19-13

11/4 vs. KC W33-22

12/9 vs. OAK W38-7

Excuse me for not shaking in my boots at the thought of having to face the Queens with the addition of Jared Allen.

Oh, BTW--how did we do against the Queens w/o Allen last year?

9/30 W23-16

11/11 W34-0

:P

Rich Gannon can stick that up his purple and black ass.

[Bretsky]

Also agree that depth wise the Packers are deeper

MN defense may be better overall if you just look at the starters

At some point I have to put some blind faith in TT and that is where it starts. If TT didn't think his youthful OL would be adequate this year he'd have used free agency to lock up one of the qualithy OG's out there. We have loads of money.

If the OG's hold up and Rodgers is at least decent, Green Bay shouldn't give 5 games to the Vikings. And putting more faith in TT, if there was a chance Rodgers was junk, TT would have used some of that huge cap space to trade for or sign a backup veternan QB.

[RashanGary]

The Vikes have a great DL and a great run game. They've paid blockbuster contracts to some of the biggest UFA free agent difference makers like, such as: Bernard Barrian, Steve Hutchinson and Jared Allen in the last two years. They have sold out to win now. If they don't win the division after we lose our HOF QB and continue to focus on the big picture then I consider the Vikings a laughable joke.

[Kiwon]

The paper champions of the NFL....go Queens.

That's right. Anything can happen once the season starts.

Favored in May doesn't mean very much. But the sports guys have to choose someone.

[mission]

i read the first line of tarlams first post and thought he was kidding

then i realized he wasnt ...


:lol:


and yes, ive "studied" film... that's why i know tj aint ever gonna be shit.

[GBRulz]

All you people slamming the vikes, saying they have no QB and claiming the Pack is the favourite need a reality check. They made some decent moves this off season and they have a beast at RB that is no longer a rookie.

We made one significant move, and that's at the QB position. As it stands, their QB has over a season of starts, ours has zero.

I hope you are all correct in what you are saying, but at this stage, I think Gannon is making a fair appraisal. Until I actually SEE A-Rod beat another NFL team, he's just a first year starter. And we all know, first year starters struggle. I'd love for him to beat the Vikes in the opener.

I'm just glad we play them at home first and not in their place. That levels the playing field a bit. I know M3 won't be underestimating them like a lot of people here.

Tar - every off-season the Queens are the declared paper champions. It's almost become comical, which is why alot of people are dissing what Gannon says.

This beast RB that you speak of .... remind me again his record against us? Yeah, well until he starts torching our ass like Moss did, I won't worry. I'm not saying he isn't good, but you guys act like he single handedly will beat us. Let's not forget who their head coach is :lol:

[woodbuck27]

TT is probably still kicking himself that the Vikes "stole" Brad Childress from under his nose, forcing him to hire a lesser coach.

Tavaris Jackson has a chance to be another J.P. Losman if he keeps developping.

Nice SLAM! :)

[MadtownPacker]

In reegards to the depth question, the Packers would be done if they lost Grant, they have nobody behind him. The Packers would also struggle at the WR position iof they lost Jennings imo.

Not really, we were like 6-1 before Grant got meaningful carries last year. Do you really think that we aren't much better equipped to handle the loss of Jennings than the Vikings would be to lose Berrian? We still have Driver, Jones, Nelson, and Lee. The Vikings would have Rice, Wade, Ferguson, and Shiancoe.
If the run game is as bad as the start of last year there is no way in hell Rodgers fuels a 6-1 start like his predecessor did last year. As it is I dont see a 6-1 start either way.

[vince]

My take on Jackson would also be that, why couldn't he improve? There's obviously room for him to improve and we all agree that players tend to improve each year over their first 2-3 if they are granted a starting positions. It's talked about here as far as Packers are concerned. Now if he does improve. Watch out!

Because I have seen things with him that QBs don't typically improve at once they get to the pros. I think he's inaccurate on throws over 15 yards. He doesn't display a natural feel for the game. He could possibly learn that, but the Vikings want to win now. I'm not sure he'll get the time to improve that. If he doesn't improve this year, Childress could be gone and he may not be the starter next year.

His athletic ability is virtually the same as Rodgers (according to combine numbers). Both have good escapability. His arm strength is about the same as Rodgers (maybe slightly less arm strength). Both have enough arm strength on most throws. They aren't elite, but good enough. From what I've watched of Rodgers (mostly preseason), he seems much more accurate than Jackson. That might be the least valued and most important aspect of a QBs game. Also, Jackson isn't dumb, but Rodgers is top notch in the intelligence department. ARod's learning curve wasn't as large as Jackson's learning curve (Rodgers coming from Cal and Jackson from Alabama State), and he's had an extra year in the offense to learn (since he was drafted the year before Jackson). Both have durability concerns.
Great post Harv.

[motife]

John David Booty is probably the answer right now at QB in Edina or Eden Prairie or wherever they are now.

Trying to "improve" Tavaris Jackson is like trying to improve Kyle Orten or Tim Couch.

or Rex Grossman.


Watch. Jon Kitna and the Lions offense will go downhill fast without Mike Martz.

It will be very odd seeing a Martz offense in S.F.

[Tarlam!]

Michele, I understand that it's the same every year. I also get that we have the superior coaching staff and front office. I get that we have a better prepared QB, better depth and and and.

I already conceded somewhere that I bow to those with more knowledge.

Still doesn't stop my waking up in a cold sweat fearing the dreaded AP, despite his 0-2 record against us.

Mark me down as the guy who doesn't want to push the Karma envelope too far this year.

[Tarlam!]

and yes, ive "studied" film... that's why i know tj aint ever gonna be shit.

So the staff coaching the Vikings would appear to disagree with that. And Harv, it's not what they are saying, it's clearly the way they have been reacting.

The real test should come for both Jackson and Grossman, BTW, when Tampa releases whoever they release at QB....

[GBRulz]

Mark me down as the guy who doesn't want to push the Karma envelope too far this year.

Then I guess it's a good thing that the poster's game isn't against MN !

[pbmax]

With due respect to Rastak, the Vikings have won the offseason buzz rankings each year since 2000. And every year they prove it meaningless.

Although Cleveland may take the title from them this year. In previous years, their only competition was the Cardinals.



The paper champions of the NFL....go Queens.

That's right. Anything can happen once the season starts.

Favored in May doesn't mean very much. But the sports guys have to choose someone.

[b bulldog]

Harv, we'll get a chance to see who is correct very early in the season on this one.

[Fritz]

John David Booty is probably the answer right now at QB in Edina or Eden Prairie or wherever they are now.

Trying to "improve" Tavaris Jackson is like trying to improve Kyle Orten or Tim Couch.

or Rex Grossman.


Watch. Jon Kitna and the Lions offense will go downhill fast without Mike Martz.

It will be very odd seeing a Martz offense in S.F.

Ah, Motife. Please do not let any of the Lions' players know that. They are very, very busy this offseason - strenuously letting reporters know that last year's offensive slide was solely due to Martz, and the reporters are dutifully repoting that never before have they seen players so glad to get rid of an assistant.

There is a huge, huge bus in Detroit. Let's see who Rod Marinelli has thrown under it so far:

His Defensive coordinator - the guy that ran the Jets' D. Name slips my mind. Some call from Packerrats for him to get hired here when MM came in. Henderson?

Hif offensive coordinator, Mike Martz.

Yet Marinelli constantly talks about "taking responsibility." Hmm. He hired these guys, and he fired them both. Woner if there's anyone else he can fire after this season. My guess is that since Kitna was a huge Martz supporter, after this season Marinelli will ditch Kitna and let the media and team assume that it was Kitna's fault the Lions sucked this year.

[Rastak]

Okay, I thought I'd give you guys my take on what the Vikings have done. They sure as hell needed to improve their WR corps and trading Williamson did that right off the bat. I'm disppointed of course, the dude was really quick both off the line and when he caught the ball. I wish he would have done the latter once in a while. Berrian is good but not top 10, but obviously a big upgrade from what was there. Rice is fun to watch and I expect he'll be a big factor in 2008.


On defense I expext Allen, Robison and the Williams sisters (as Harv correctly called them!) to kick some major ass in 2008. I believe the Vikings upgraded their safety position and should benefit from some younger CB's getting better.


Ok, now the big thing. The man we all love to either rag on or hate. Tarvaris Jackson. I have no clue what he'll do in 2008. As a person who watched every snap of the season for the Vikings, I can say he definately improved at the end of the season. His QB rating was about 83 in the last half. Is that good? Ummmm, no. Better than it was though. He played a very good game against Denver, I watched it twice. He isn't a great QB now, I admit that. He was screwed by others mistakes more than his own the last few games which is why the team upgraded the WR by getting rid Williamson. No stupid jump passes and he ran the 2 minute offense quite well.

One last thing I'll say....I have watched at least 4 or 5 sure TD's dropped the last year and a half. The guy will improve and if he has guys who catch the ball, his numbers will look alot better. I still wonder on some things myself, he isn;t very accurate long and he throws the ball too hard on short routes. He moves well in the pocket and he made some great throws on some mid range passed later in the season. That's where he can use that arm strength.

[mngolf19]

I am right with you Ras. If even the throws that Williamson dropped last year are caught by him or anyone, they likely win min 2 more games. Just having guys that will catch the ball that is thrown will make a HUGE difference.

[The Leaper]

The Packers certainly took a step back...losing a HOF caliber QB like Favre, even in his fading twilight, hurts. However, the young kids around Favre the last two years have gained a ton of confidence and experience that will prove key for allowing Rodgers to produce immediate results.

The Vikings did not hurt themselves this offseason. Getting Allen was a nice move...with the behemoths in the Viking interior DL, Allen doesn't need to be a beast against the run. He'll be allowed to do what he does best...get after the QB. However, the Vikings lack depth and have no leadership at the QB position.

Both teams should be in contention to win the NFC North right down to the final weeks of December. Both are 9-10 win teams IMO. I don't see how anyone can label either the Vikings or Packers as prohibitive favorites to win their division at this point. I think the Packers probably have a slightly greater chance to succeed (i.e. fewer weaknesses) but the Vikings have a slightly higher ceiling of potential (i.e. stronger strengths). Neither's edge is all that convincing.

[The Leaper]

I am right with you Ras. If even the throws that Williamson dropped last year are caught by him or anyone, they likely win min 2 more games. Just having guys that will catch the ball that is thrown will make a HUGE difference.

The question I have is whether or not anyone at the WR position for the Vikings has the raw physical talent to get open for passes like those which Williamson dropped. Can the Viking WRs get consistent separation? They seem like a rather pedestrian lot IMO.

To me, the lack of weapons often is the cause for a young QBs tendency for inconsistent play more than anything else. That is one reason I feel good about Rodgers...he's got high end talent to work with, which is a major plus for any QB but especially for a young guy with limited experience.

[mngolf19]

I am right with you Ras. If even the throws that Williamson dropped last year are caught by him or anyone, they likely win min 2 more games. Just having guys that will catch the ball that is thrown will make a HUGE difference.

The question I have is whether or not anyone at the WR position for the Vikings has the raw physical talent to get open for passes like those which Williamson dropped. Can the Viking WRs get consistent separation? They seem like a rather pedestrian lot IMO.

To me, the lack of weapons often is the cause for a young QBs tendency for inconsistent play more than anything else. That is one reason I feel good about Rodgers...he's got high end talent to work with, which is a major plus for any QB but especially for a young guy with limited experience.

Berrian will be asked to run Williamson's routes. He's shown he can do that at least at an avg rate. And can definitely catch better. Rice will likely be the biggest improver as he improved greatly over the year at least when he was healthy. Those guys can get open. And if teams are going 8 in the box again, I can't see any reason why they shouldn't get open.

[Tony Oday]

The biggest concern for the Vikes should be the OL this year. I mean you have an older Birk (who wants to stay however they arent extending him) 4 felonies charged against McKinnie and an unproven right side...

With a crap QB (sorry Ras but he is terrible) and some second tier WR (man think about that this used to be the strength!) this line HAS to step up however it doesnt look like it will happen.

[cpk1994]

The biggest concern for the Vikes should be the OL this year. I mean you have an older Birk (who wants to stay however they arent extending him) 4 felonies charged against McKinnie and an unproven right side...

With a crap QB (sorry Ras but he is terrible) and some second tier WR (man think about that this used to be the strength!) this line HAS to step up however it doesnt look like it will happen.McKinnie's 4 felonies may help the Vikings if his replacement is better than a turnstile in pass pro.

[Rastak]

The biggest concern for the Vikes should be the OL this year. I mean you have an older Birk (who wants to stay however they arent extending him) 4 felonies charged against McKinnie and an unproven right side...

With a crap QB (sorry Ras but he is terrible) and some second tier WR (man think about that this used to be the strength!) this line HAS to step up however it doesnt look like it will happen.McKinnie's 4 felonies may help the Vikings if his replacement is better than a turnstile in pass pro.


So now 1 == 4? Is this new math?

[wist43]

I see the Vikings as the favorite... they can run the ball, they can stop the run, they have a pretty solid overall defense - Allen should help the pass rush.

Jackson doesn't have to be the difference maker for them - Rodgers does, and he's not a difference maker. Their systems, and the personnel they have plugged into those systems, gives the edge to the Vikings.

Green Bay is status quo, or worse across the board... Lee will be picked on until he proves he can play. Rodgers will be worse than Favre. Harrell is looking like a very shaky pick at this point, the OL is shaky, and both Corners are a year older.

The Vikings should be the favorite.

[Bretsky]

I see the Vikings as the favorite... they can run the ball, they can stop the run, they have a pretty solid overall defense - Allen should help the pass rush.

Jackson doesn't have to be the difference maker for them - Rodgers does, and he's not a difference maker. Their systems, and the personnel they have plugged into those systems, gives the edge to the Vikings.

Green Bay is status quo, or worse across the board... Lee will be picked on until he proves he can play. Rodgers will be worse than Favre. Harrell is looking like a very shaky pick at this point, the OL is shaky, and both Corners are a year older.

The Vikings should be the favorite.


Our WR's are better
Our TE's may be better
The younger OL should theoretically improve
Lee will be better than Jarrett Bush.......or hopefully will
Our safeties should be at least as good
Our DL is not as good without Cory Williams....but we get Jolly back
Our QB is not as good, but the homer in me says he's far better than Jackson


I don't think we should figure the Vikings moves compared to our lack of them allows them to gain five games.

[packers11]

The Vikings will never be a favorite unless T.Jackson shows something... He looked like complete shit in my book and stats do not tell the whole story...

Most of the games I saw him he would dump it off to A.P. and his stats would get padded...

Now maybe that defense can haul ass and boost the vikings (ie. the superbowl bears with rexy at the helm) but I don't see enough playmakers on that Defense like the Bears had...

Vikings will probably fall right under the Packers with 2-3 less wins, and might make the wildcard...

[Iron Mike]

Our DL is not as good without Cory Williams....but we get Jolly back


And now that Jason Taylor's done with his dancing gig.......... 8-)

[Iron Mike]

Our DL is not as good without Cory Williams....but we get Jolly back


And now that Jason Taylor's done with his dancing gig.......... 8-)


Hmmmmm......

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8161750/Dolphins-seem-to-be-moving-on-without-Taylor