NFC North Predictions

[mngolf19]

For those who think the Vikes are picked for first every year. Quit your BS.


THE SPORTING NEWS

1. Green Bay 11-5 predicted finish

2. Chicago 10-6

3. Vikings 9-7

4. Detroit 3-13

PRO FOOTBALL WEEKLY

1. Green Bay 9-7

2. Vikings 8-8

3. Chicago 7-9

4. Detroit 5-11

ATHLON SPORTS

1. Green Bay

2. Vikings

3. Chicago

4. Detroit

LINDY’S

1. Vikings

2. Green Bay

3. Chicago

4. Detroit

[billy_oliver880]

2. Chicago 10-6

You have got to be kidding me right? They aren't playing highschool teams. :?

[Patler]

Amazing consistency for the #4 spot! :D

[cheesner]

Packers 11-5 As AR goes, so goes the Packers. I think he will be good.
Vikings 10-6 Potentially could be a great team - but they always find a way to fall short of expectations
Lions 8-8 Millen gets contract extension of 4 yrs based on this success
Bears 6-10 getting old, offense should really suck

I know every fan sees there team as being better than they actually are, but I am surprised at the 9-7 prediction. Well, the consensus prediction was 6-10 for last season. If we again exceed expectations by the same margin, we will be doing pretty good.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Just because a few haven't picked the Vikings yet this year (wait until the ESPN boys come out with their picks) doesn't mean they haven't picked them in the past. They don't always pick them to win the division, but almost always pick them to do better than the previous year.

[b bulldog]

Last two yeaRS, EVERYONE MOST LIKELY PICKED THE bEARS.

[texaspackerbacker]

I obviously wouldn't contradict the pick of the Packers as consensus first place--probably a better record thna the predictions above.

However, that doesn't mean the Vikings will be bad. They are solid at a lot of positions and spectacular at RB. Like the Packers, a lot depends on their QB. I don't have anywhere near the confidence in T. Jackson, as I do in Rodgers. And even with the improvements the Vikings made, their receivers don't come close to the Packers. Just the same, I could see them going something like 10-6 and finishing 2 or 3 games behind the Packers.

[3irty1]

Last two yeaRS, EVERYONE MOST LIKELY PICKED THE bEARS.

I actually said last year that "The Bears would astound everyone with their shittiness." I should work for ESPN.

[b bulldog]

I'm taking the Vikings this season and kudos to you for picking the Bears to stumble last season. AP and the Vikings D will be a formidable duo.

[RashanGary]

Packers: 10-6 *beat Vikes twice* (Good offense, Good defense, Great ST's) NFCN Champs
Vikings: 10-6 (Average offense, great defense, average ST's) Wild Card
Bears: 7-9 (Horrible offense, Good defense, Very good ST's)
Lions: 4-12 (Very bad offense, Horrible defense, Bad ST's)

All in all I think the NFC North is a pretty average division with the Packers edging the Vikings with QB play, coaching and ST's. I could also see the Vikings have age/injury catch them where the Packers seem to have better young depth.

[Guiness]

Lions: 4-12 (Very bad offense, Horrible defense, Bad ST's)

I'd agree with you JH...cept, I checked, and the Lions don't play Miami 4 times. Or Atlanta either, so don't bring that up! :lol:

I know you're not supposed to kick 'em when they're down, but it's just so tempting. For the record, I hope they win 2. Against Chicago :P

[Fritz]

Is there some way the gods and gurus of football statistics can divide Special Teams into offensive and defensive, so instead of "ST's" we can write "STD's"?

[mngolf19]

Packers: 10-6 *beat Vikes twice* (Good offense, Good defense, Great ST's) NFCN Champs
Vikings: 10-6 (Average offense, great defense, average ST's) Wild Card
Bears: 7-9 (Horrible offense, Good defense, Very good ST's)
Lions: 4-12 (Very bad offense, Horrible defense, Bad ST's)

All in all I think the NFC North is a pretty average division with the Packers edging the Vikings with QB play, coaching and ST's. I could also see the Vikings have age/injury catch them where the Packers seem to have better young depth.

Vikes avg age is 26.54. Wouldn't call that old.

[Lurker64]

Vikes avg age is 26.54. Wouldn't call that old.

They're old at a key position though. When Fat Pat starts to fall off, that defense is going to be very different. He's 35 now and I don't know how good the guys they have to replace him are, but they're unlikely going to be elite as P. Williams is.

The same could probably be said about the Packers CBs though. But P. Williams might not be around much longer and IMO he's the key cog of that front seven. Whether he can play 2-3 more years is going to be important to the immediate success of that franchise.

[Tarlam!]

I'm with Bulldog. I like the Vikes this year, because of AP and, because I have turned my opinion on A-Rod. I know I am talking outta my butt and I need to wait until he has taken a snap as "THE GUY", but my glass is half empty.

I've been his biggest supporter till now, but I had a really bad prphetic dream last night. On the Upside, in my dream we win the SB after this season twice in a row.


I can't wait to be wrong and we threepeat starting this season!

[sharpe1027]

Vikes avg age is 26.54. Wouldn't call that old.

Where is that number from? It wouldn't be very useful if it was either last year's age or this year's age with all the first and second year guys that don't have a chance of making the roster.

[mngolf19]

Vikes avg age is 26.54. Wouldn't call that old.

Where is that number from? It wouldn't be very useful if it was either last year's age or this year's age with all the first and second year guys that don't have a chance of making the roster.

I calculated it myself from their birthdates on NFL.com and the roster on there doesn't give birthdates to the guys that I don't think will make the roster.

[mngolf19]

Vikes avg age is 26.54. Wouldn't call that old.

They're old at a key position though. When Fat Pat starts to fall off, that defense is going to be very different. He's 35 now and I don't know how good the guys they have to replace him are, but they're unlikely going to be elite as P. Williams is.

The same could probably be said about the Packers CBs though. But P. Williams might not be around much longer and IMO he's the key cog of that front seven. Whether he can play 2-3 more years is going to be important to the immediate success of that franchise.

I think they are planning for that Lurker. His contract only has 1 year left I believe and both have talked about it being his last. He has already been limited the last couple of years to 1st and 2nd down plus short yardage. If an obvious passing down he is out as well.

[sharpe1027]

I calculated it myself from their birthdates on NFL.com and the roster on there doesn't give birthdates to the guys that I don't think will make the roster.

Solid work. Are you sure that you are a Vikings fan?