Packers still have best offense in North with Rodgers

[Packnut]

Scouts Inc. is breaking down each division in a roundtable discussion, with each scout offering his pick for the best offense and defense as well as the most important offseason move in the division. Here's the scouts' look at the NFC North.


Which team has the best offense in the NFC North?
Jeremy Green: I'm not sure a team has ever had a first-ballot, Hall-of-Fame quarterback retire and still had the best offense in its division, but that is the case with the Green Bay Packers. Even though there are questions about new starter Aaron Rodgers, who has never started an NFL game, the other pieces are in place. Green Bay has a solid interior offensive line with good depth, a running back who fits the system in Ryan Grant and three playmaking receivers outside in Donald Driver, Greg Jennings and James Jones. Rodgers does not have to be phenomenal, he just has to drive the bus, take care of the ball and allow his teammates to make plays.


Gary Horton:Picking the Packers without Brett Favre is risky, but the other three teams in the division have even more offensive flaws. This is a West Coast spread attack with a lot of varied personnel groupings, and Green Bay has a lot of talent. The playbook won't change and the zone-blocking run game should be improved from a year ago.



Keith Kidd: This was a tough call between the Vikings and Packers. Even though Rodgers will experience growing pains, the Packers still have a very talented supporting cast that should help in the transition from Favre to Rodgers. Head coach Mike McCarthy emphasizes a short, high-percentage passing attack out of multiple spread groupings to set up the run. The Packers have a talented receiving corps led by Driver, Jennings, Jones and second-round pick Jordy Nelson. The Packers also have a good young corps of running backs in Grant and Brandon Jackson, and a deep and talented offensive line.



Matt Williamson: While I respect the Vikings' running game a great deal and Lions WRs Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams could end up being the best receiving duo in the league by season's end, Green Bay still has the best offense in the NFC North. Rodgers was a first-round pick for a reason and he has learned from the best. Green Bay has an excellent offensive line, an effective downhill running game and more receiving weapons than it knows what to do with. The Packers will put up plenty of points and I am not sure I can say that about the other three teams in this division.




Which team has the best defense in the NFC North?
Green: Any debate about whether Green Bay or Minnesota has the best defense ended the day the Vikings acquired DE Jared Allen from the Chiefs. Adding an elite pass-rusher to the Vikings' defensive line almost seems like piling it on because they are already stout versus the run with DTs Pat Williams and Kevin Williams. The Vikings will have the most dominating front in the NFL and once again will finish the season with the No. 1-ranked run defense. Not to mention, the pressure Allen will put on opposing quarterbacks will make the Vikings' secondary much better as well.


Kidd:With the addition of Allen, the Vikings get the slight edge over the Packers and Bears. Allen should provide a huge spark to the Vikings' pass rush with his relentless style and pass-rush skills. The Vikings' run defense was ranked No. 1 in the league last season and the addition of FS Madieu Williams should also improve the range and coverage skills on the back end.



Williamson: The Vikings improved on defense this offseason despite the fact they already were an elite run-stopping unit. If I had to pick one defense as the top dog in the NFL right now, I would choose the Vikings. Everyone knows about the addition of Allen, which is huge from a production standpoint, but his presence also could make fellow DEs Brian Robison and Ray Edwards household names because Allen will command so much attention. Plus, they will lighten the load on a secondary that added two talented safeties. This group is stacked on all levels, but make no mistake, it all starts up front. As amazing as it sounds, Kevin Williams and Pat Williams might actually still be underrated, but not for long.



Kretz:The Vikings had a dominating run defense in 2007 and should continue to dominate in 2008. They have added one of the best pass-rushers in Allen as well as a quality safety in Williams. This should help them defend the pass, as teams have been forced to abandon the run and become one-dimensional passing offenses versus Minnesota.




What was the most important offseason move in the NFC North?
[+] EnlargeAP Photo/Matt Ludtke

Can Aaron Rodgers become the franchise quarterback in Green Bay?
Green: I will go with the elevation of Rodgers to the starting spot in Green Bay. The team also added a little pressure because his backup will be rookie Brian Brohm, who was the smartest quarterback in the 2007 draft class. All the pieces are still in place for Green Bay to make a Super Bowl run, but the outcome will hinge on how quickly Rodgers can take over the reins and not only run the offense, but lead this football team.


Kretz: The Vikings were last in the NFC in pass defense in 2007, due in part to the fact that teams simply couldn't run at all against Minnesota and in part because the Vikings couldn't mount a great pass rush. Trading for Allen will give them the kind of pressure off the edge that will make it hard for opposing quarterbacks to scan the coverage and find an open receiver. This could provides the Vikings with the missing piece that will give them one of the toughest defenses in the league.



Moll: The most important offseason move the Vikings' acquiring one explosive player on each side of the ball. Getting one of the most explosive pass-rushing defensive ends in Allen should help improve a glaring weakness on Minnesota's defense. Plus, snatching a dangerous receiver from a division rival in former Bears WR Bernard Berrian gives the Vikings the deep threat they have needed for a long time.



Ribary: It has to be the retirement of Favre. It's hard to imagine the Packers without him, but this day has been a long time coming. While this could change the whole balance of power in the division, I have a feeling Green Bay will survive the transition and start a new identity without No. 4. The Packers also did the right thing drafting Brohm for competition and insurance.



Williamson: Of course it is Favre's retirement. When any all-time great, let alone a quarterback who was playing at a high level, hangs up his cleats it is extremely important. Green Bay and its fans will have to go on without No. 4, but the Packer's offense will still be very dangerous with Rodgers leading the way. He has been groomed for this day and his very good supporting cast will allow for a reasonably smooth transition. Rodgers will be the best quarterback in the NFC North by midseason.



Scouts Inc. watches games,

[Packnut]

It would seem even with all the Viking love from the experts around the country, GB is still the favorite in the NFC North.

[Gunakor]

I must have missed something. When did Green Bay recently aquire an offensive line that was both talented and deep? Talented, maybe, well they might be headed in that direction, and with a little more development might just become very adequate. Deep? Sorry, I don't see it. The OL has no depth behind the starters unless the rookies show something special. Otherwise expect to see MM shuffling guards and tackles around to fill in for injured starters once again this year.

[Patler]

I must have missed something. When did Green Bay recently aquire an offensive line that was both talented and deep? Talented, maybe, well they might be headed in that direction, and with a little more development might just become very adequate. Deep? Sorry, I don't see it. The OL has no depth behind the starters unless the rookies show something special. Otherwise expect to see MM shuffling guards and tackles around to fill in for injured starters once again this year.

You could actually say they are deep at guard. Does it really matter who plays, Colledge, Coston or Barbre? Is there a big change if two of them start and not Spitz? Is there a big drop-off from Wells to Spitz? When there is little change in performance from one player to another, that can be considered depth, even if none are great.

However, I see no depth yet at tackle, just replacements. I would expect a big drop-off if Clifton or Tauscher was out for an extended period of time.

That being said, some people seem to like the packers young linemen. I hope they are right. There might be a surprise cut or two in that group.

[mngolf19]

It would seem even with all the Viking love from the experts around the country, GB is still the favorite in the NFC North.

While it may seem easy to some, Pack still has to prove they can't and Vikes have to prove they can. So hence... I like the odds though. :)

[Gunakor]

I must have missed something. When did Green Bay recently aquire an offensive line that was both talented and deep? Talented, maybe, well they might be headed in that direction, and with a little more development might just become very adequate. Deep? Sorry, I don't see it. The OL has no depth behind the starters unless the rookies show something special. Otherwise expect to see MM shuffling guards and tackles around to fill in for injured starters once again this year.

You could actually say they are deep at guard. Does it really matter who plays, Colledge, Coston or Barbre? Is there a big change if two of them start and not Spitz? Is there a big drop-off from Wells to Spitz? When there is little change in performance from one player to another, that can be considered depth, even if none are great.

However, I see no depth yet at tackle, just replacements. I would expect a big drop-off if Clifton or Tauscher was out for an extended period of time.

That being said, some people seem to like the packers young linemen. I hope they are right. There might be a surprise cut or two in that group.


You make a good point looking at it from that perspective. But looking at it from your perspective, if the guard position is deep then are any of them very talented? I guess some people are singing praises about our linemen that I don't think they've earned yet. I for one will not sing along until they show me they can handle a full season, or that thier improvement from last year will carry over into this year. Remember they were starting to gel at the end of '06 too, then looked very poor to begin '07. They looked descent, maybe even on the fringe of good at the end of '07, so we'll see if that carries over into '08.

[RashanGary]

Based on last year and how things seem to be going, this is what I see:


Packers Offense > Vikings Offense
Vikings Defense > Packers Defense
Packers ST's > Vikings ST's
Packers depth and abilty to win with injuries > Vikings

Overall is a slight edge to the Packers.

[Partial]

Based on last year and how things seem to be going, this is what I see:


Packers Offense > Vikings Offense
Vikings Defense > Packers Defense
Packers ST's > Vikings ST's
Packers depth and abilty to win with injuries > Vikings

Overall is a slight edge to the Packers.

I would reverse offense and defense personally.

[PackerPro42]

I love how the "experts" ,besides these guys, think that the acquisition of two players in Jared Allen and an above average WR in Berrian will vault the Vikings to Super Bowl status. I don't doubt that Allen will help out when it comes to pass rushing downs but I predict that Berrian will be a huge disappointment this year which will ultimately put the Vikings back in the same boat they were last year relying on Adrian Peterson to be a stud. Though that's a viable option, I'd rather have the Packer's more well rounded offense and their defense that can actually stop the pass.

[sharpe1027]

Based on last year and how things seem to be going, this is what I see:


Packers Offense > Vikings Offense
Vikings Defense > Packers Defense
Packers ST's > Vikings ST's
Packers depth and abilty to win with injuries > Vikings

Overall is a slight edge to the Packers.

Packers coaching and development (even with our DB coach) > Vikings coaching and development.

Packers leadership > Vikings leadership

Vikings artificial turf and freak plays against the Pack in the Dome = Lambeau advantage

A solid edge to the Packers.

[mngolf19]

Just to give perspective from the Vikes side.

I see Pack D < Vikes D
I see unknown on O. Will Jackson improve as all players do at this point and will Rodgers step in without missing a beat. They both have the potential, they both are ?'s. So I'll call it even for now.
ST's very close but I'll give Pack slight edge. Don't go completely by stats.
And leadership. Well, gotta go with Pack on this. One thing I'll add though. Childress is showing he can learn, and from the Pack side we'll see how the leadership is now that Favre is gone. If things don't go as hoped for here then.....

[Charles Woodson]

Based on last year and how things seem to be going, this is what I see:


Packers Offense > Vikings Offense
Vikings Defense > Packers Defense
Packers ST's > Vikings ST's
Packers depth and abilty to win with injuries > Vikings

Overall is a slight edge to the Packers.

I would reverse offense and defense personally.
I can kinda see where your coming from, but i have to disagree on this one.
AP doesnt vault the Vikings offense over ours. Especially if Grant keeps improving. I mean, we have a better QB and far superior WR's Their Offensive line is better, but i still say as a unit ours is better.
The D is more even imo. They have a better front 4, we probably have a better LB, and i think we have a slightly better secondary.

[Packnut]

Just to give perspective from the Vikes side.

I see Pack D < Vikes D
I see unknown on O. Will Jackson improve as all players do at this point and will Rodgers step in without missing a beat. They both have the potential, they both are ?'s. So I'll call it even for now.
ST's very close but I'll give Pack slight edge. Don't go completely by stats.
And leadership. Well, gotta go with Pack on this. One thing I'll add though. Childress is showing he can learn, and from the Pack side we'll see how the leadership is now that Favre is gone. If things don't go as hoped for here then.....

Rating Jackson even with Rodgers is just freakin mind-boggling. Tavaris Jackson is a BRUTAL NFL QB. Time and experience will not change that. Most teams stacked the box against him last season and he still could'nt even put up average numbers.

I understand you Vikings fans need hope, but come on. Look at it this way. You have a good D and a great run game. Hell, 2 out of 3 ain't bad...... :lol:

[SMACKTALKIE]

Based on last year and how things seem to be going, this is what I see:


Packers Offense > Vikings Offense
Vikings Defense > Packers Defense
Packers ST's > Vikings ST's
Packers depth and abilty to win with injuries > Vikings

Overall is a slight edge to the Packers.

I did'nt realize the ability to win with injuries was a measurable factor.

I agree with your assessment of the offenses and defenses.

I think with the additions of Benny Sapp, Tyrell Johnson, Michael Boulware, and Maurice Hicks, along with Heath Farwell and Vinny Ciurciu the Vikings special teams may be equal to the Packer's special teams.

[mngolf19]

Just to give perspective from the Vikes side.

I see Pack D < Vikes D
I see unknown on O. Will Jackson improve as all players do at this point and will Rodgers step in without missing a beat. They both have the potential, they both are ?'s. So I'll call it even for now.
ST's very close but I'll give Pack slight edge. Don't go completely by stats.
And leadership. Well, gotta go with Pack on this. One thing I'll add though. Childress is showing he can learn, and from the Pack side we'll see how the leadership is now that Favre is gone. If things don't go as hoped for here then.....

Rating Jackson even with Rodgers is just freakin mind-boggling. Tavaris Jackson is a BRUTAL NFL QB. Time and experience will not change that. Most teams stacked the box against him last season and he still could'nt even put up average numbers.

I understand you Vikings fans need hope, but come on. Look at it this way. You have a good D and a great run game. Hell, 2 out of 3 ain't bad...... :lol:

Did I rate the QB's even. No. I said they are both potential good/bad for their teams. And obviously this is a key position. I rated the O's as even. As far as Jackson being brutal, this is his 3rd year and I think I saw people talking about improvement possibilities for Packers in their 3rd year on another thread, so why not for him? All he has to do is be avg and they become a good offense. As you stated, D's stacked the box. If he's avg, they can't do that anymore and they become an offense in the top half to go along with a top 5 D.

[Packnut]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................

[SMACKTALKIE]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.

[Packnut]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.


First-good players stand out no matter what. You can make all the excuses you want about Berrian and the reasons he was in-effective. Facts are facts and even a mis-guided Viking fan should be able to grasp them. You are going to find out the hard way just how stupid giving all that money to an average WR was. The Bears are hurting big-time on offense so do you really think they would have given up on BB if he was any good?????? :idea:

Second-Saying AP is way better than Grant is also not factual. He is better yes, but not by a large margin. Let's also not forget the injury factor. AP has an injury history and that is also a FACT you cannot dis-miss.

Third- wrong again (what new). Favre was able to step up in the pocket numerous times last season. There was never a constant push from any opponent up the middle.

Fourth- Ok, let's call the LB's a draw since there is no clear cut edge. However, implying that your secondary was weak against the pass only because of the amount of attempts due to teams not running well against Minny is just plain DUMB! Teams passed alot against the Vikes cause your pass defense

SUCKED

[Partial]

Based on last year and how things seem to be going, this is what I see:


Packers Offense > Vikings Offense
Vikings Defense > Packers Defense
Packers ST's > Vikings ST's
Packers depth and abilty to win with injuries > Vikings

Overall is a slight edge to the Packers.

I would reverse offense and defense personally.
I can kinda see where your coming from, but i have to disagree on this one.
AP doesnt vault the Vikings offense over ours. Especially if Grant keeps improving. I mean, we have a better QB and far superior WR's Their Offensive line is better, but i still say as a unit ours is better.
The D is more even imo. They have a better front 4, we probably have a better LB, and i think we have a slightly better secondary.

We have a way better back 7 imo. They might have the best offensive player in the league. I'll take their O with Peterson requiring 8-9 men in the box and our D.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.


First-good players stand out no matter what. You can make all the excuses you want about Berrian and the reasons he was in-effective. Facts are facts and even a mis-guided Viking fan should be able to grasp them. You are going to find out the hard way just how stupid giving all that money to an average WR was. The Bears are hurting big-time on offense so do you really think they would have given up on BB if he was any good?????? :idea:

Second-Saying AP is way better than Grant is also not factual. He is better yes, but not by a large margin. Let's also not forget the injury factor. AP has an injury history and that is also a FACT you cannot dis-miss.

Third- wrong again (what new). Favre was able to step up in the pocket numerous times last season. There was never a constant push from any opponent up the middle.

Fourth- Ok, let's call the LB's a draw since there is no clear cut edge. However, implying that your secondary was weak against the pass only because of the amount of attempts due to teams not running well against Minny is just plain DUMB! Teams passed alot against the Vikes cause your pass defense

SUCKED

First off Berrian was an UFA. The Bears did not give up on him....He left.

Second, if you watch that half sack by Allen you speak of so often, it came on a stunt right up the middle.

Third, I'm glad you used the past tense of the word suck to describe the Vikings pass D because the addition of Allen and M. Williams will shore it up. Nothing helps the secondary like a pass rush and Williams is a huge upgrade over D. Smith at FS. Better coverage ability and range, he should allow Sharper to focus on the SS position better than last year.

[Guiness]

Third, I'm glad you used the past tense of the word suck to describe the Vikings pass D because the addition of Allen and M. Williams will shore it up. Nothing helps the secondary like a pass rush and Williams is a huge upgrade over D. Smith at FS. Better coverage ability and range, he should allow Sharper to focus on the SS position better than last year.

I don't know that you can talk about how good your pass D is going to be, because of 2 new pieces, before they take the field in anything but shorts. I'll grant you that they have a lot of Potential - but there's that 'P' word. I remember how great their pass D was going to be in '05 with Sharper and Smoot...how did that work out for ya?

We've got an returning PD that was effective last year. The only thing that could go wrong is if the CB play drops off.

[Packnut]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.


First-good players stand out no matter what. You can make all the excuses you want about Berrian and the reasons he was in-effective. Facts are facts and even a mis-guided Viking fan should be able to grasp them. You are going to find out the hard way just how stupid giving all that money to an average WR was. The Bears are hurting big-time on offense so do you really think they would have given up on BB if he was any good?????? :idea:

Second-Saying AP is way better than Grant is also not factual. He is better yes, but not by a large margin. Let's also not forget the injury factor. AP has an injury history and that is also a FACT you cannot dis-miss.

Third- wrong again (what new). Favre was able to step up in the pocket numerous times last season. There was never a constant push from any opponent up the middle.

Fourth- Ok, let's call the LB's a draw since there is no clear cut edge. However, implying that your secondary was weak against the pass only because of the amount of attempts due to teams not running well against Minny is just plain DUMB! Teams passed alot against the Vikes cause your pass defense

SUCKED

First off Berrian was an UFA. The Bears did not give up on him....He left.

Second, if you watch that half sack by Allen you speak of so often, it came on a stunt right up the middle.

Third, I'm glad you used the past tense of the word suck to describe the Vikings pass D because the addition of Allen and M. Williams will shore it up. Nothing helps the secondary like a pass rush and Williams is a huge upgrade over D. Smith at FS. Better coverage ability and range, he should allow Sharper to focus on the SS position better than last year.


The Bears are millions and millions under the cap. They have no other WR's of impact. They could have easily signed him. They did'nt. Even a Viking's fan should be able to add 2+2.............. :idea:

[HarveyWallbangers]

I didn't think Dwight Smith was too bad for the Vikings. He made plays and hit hard. Actually, I was more impressed with him than Sharper the last couple of years. Just because Minnesota signed M. Williams, doesn't mean they've upgraded the position. It's not like they signed Brian Dawkins in his prime. Most haven't considered him an upper echelon safety. He has as much chance of being a bust as being a savior.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.


First-good players stand out no matter what. You can make all the excuses you want about Berrian and the reasons he was in-effective. Facts are facts and even a mis-guided Viking fan should be able to grasp them. You are going to find out the hard way just how stupid giving all that money to an average WR was. The Bears are hurting big-time on offense so do you really think they would have given up on BB if he was any good?????? :idea:

Second-Saying AP is way better than Grant is also not factual. He is better yes, but not by a large margin. Let's also not forget the injury factor. AP has an injury history and that is also a FACT you cannot dis-miss.

Third- wrong again (what new). Favre was able to step up in the pocket numerous times last season. There was never a constant push from any opponent up the middle.

Fourth- Ok, let's call the LB's a draw since there is no clear cut edge. However, implying that your secondary was weak against the pass only because of the amount of attempts due to teams not running well against Minny is just plain DUMB! Teams passed alot against the Vikes cause your pass defense

SUCKED

First off Berrian was an UFA. The Bears did not give up on him....He left.

Second, if you watch that half sack by Allen you speak of so often, it came on a stunt right up the middle.

Third, I'm glad you used the past tense of the word suck to describe the Vikings pass D because the addition of Allen and M. Williams will shore it up. Nothing helps the secondary like a pass rush and Williams is a huge upgrade over D. Smith at FS. Better coverage ability and range, he should allow Sharper to focus on the SS position better than last year.


The Bears are millions and millions under the cap. They have no other WR's of impact. They could have easily signed him. They did'nt. Even a Viking's fan should be able to add 2+2.............. :idea:




Seriously dude, you need to do your homework. HE WAS AN UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENT!!! He was free to sign wherever he wanted to.

Here are some Wiki definitions to help you understand:

Unrestricted Free Agents
Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA) are players who have completed four or more accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They are free to sign with any club.


Restricted Free Agents
Restricted Free Agents (RFA) are players who have completed three accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They have received qualifying offers from their old clubs and are free to negotiate with any club until April 21, at which time their rights revert to their original club. If a player accepts an offer from a new club, the old club will have the right to match the offer and retain the player. If the old club elects not to match the offer, it may receive draft-choice compensation depending on the level of the qualifying offer made to the player.

The Bears tried to negotiate a contract with Berrian, he simply did not want to play for the Bears.

He CHOSE the Vikings. The Bears DID NOT LET HIM GO.

[SMACKTALKIE]

I didn't think Dwight Smith was too bad for the Vikings. He made plays and hit hard. Actually, I was more impressed with him than Sharper the last couple of years. Just because Minnesota signed M. Williams, doesn't mean they've upgraded the position. It's not like they signed Brian Dawkins in his prime. Most haven't considered him an upper echelon safety. He has as much chance of being a bust as being a savior.

I guess Leslie Fraiser really wanted this guy. He is supposedly better in the Cover 2 than Smith. Smith was/is a solid FS but Williams is a better fit for the scheme.

[Charles Woodson]

Based on last year and how things seem to be going, this is what I see:


Packers Offense > Vikings Offense
Vikings Defense > Packers Defense
Packers ST's > Vikings ST's
Packers depth and abilty to win with injuries > Vikings

Overall is a slight edge to the Packers.

I would reverse offense and defense personally.
I can kinda see where your coming from, but i have to disagree on this one.
AP doesnt vault the Vikings offense over ours. Especially if Grant keeps improving. I mean, we have a better QB and far superior WR's Their Offensive line is better, but i still say as a unit ours is better.
The D is more even imo. They have a better front 4, we probably have a better LB, and i think we have a slightly better secondary.

We have a way better back 7 imo. They might have the best offensive player in the league. I'll take their O with Peterson requiring 8-9 men in the box and our D.
Not a chance, you dont understand that even with 8-9 men in the boxs, T-Jack still blew dick. With a outstanding pack of WR's and a RB that isnt as good, but is still a top 10 in the league, idk how you beat that.

[PackerPro42]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.


First-good players stand out no matter what. You can make all the excuses you want about Berrian and the reasons he was in-effective. Facts are facts and even a mis-guided Viking fan should be able to grasp them. You are going to find out the hard way just how stupid giving all that money to an average WR was. The Bears are hurting big-time on offense so do you really think they would have given up on BB if he was any good?????? :idea:

Second-Saying AP is way better than Grant is also not factual. He is better yes, but not by a large margin. Let's also not forget the injury factor. AP has an injury history and that is also a FACT you cannot dis-miss.

Third- wrong again (what new). Favre was able to step up in the pocket numerous times last season. There was never a constant push from any opponent up the middle.

Fourth- Ok, let's call the LB's a draw since there is no clear cut edge. However, implying that your secondary was weak against the pass only because of the amount of attempts due to teams not running well against Minny is just plain DUMB! Teams passed alot against the Vikes cause your pass defense

SUCKED

First off Berrian was an UFA. The Bears did not give up on him....He left.

Second, if you watch that half sack by Allen you speak of so often, it came on a stunt right up the middle.

Third, I'm glad you used the past tense of the word suck to describe the Vikings pass D because the addition of Allen and M. Williams will shore it up. Nothing helps the secondary like a pass rush and Williams is a huge upgrade over D. Smith at FS. Better coverage ability and range, he should allow Sharper to focus on the SS position better than last year.


The Bears are millions and millions under the cap. They have no other WR's of impact. They could have easily signed him. They did'nt. Even a Viking's fan should be able to add 2+2.............. :idea:




Seriously dude, you need to do your homework. HE WAS AN UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENT!!! He was free to sign wherever he wanted to.

Here are some Wiki definitions to help you understand:

Unrestricted Free Agents
Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA) are players who have completed four or more accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They are free to sign with any club.


Restricted Free Agents
Restricted Free Agents (RFA) are players who have completed three accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They have received qualifying offers from their old clubs and are free to negotiate with any club until April 21, at which time their rights revert to their original club. If a player accepts an offer from a new club, the old club will have the right to match the offer and retain the player. If the old club elects not to match the offer, it may receive draft-choice compensation depending on the level of the qualifying offer made to the player.

The Bears tried to negotiate a contract with Berrian, he simply did not want to play for the Bears.

He CHOSE the Vikings. The Bears DID NOT LET HIM GO.

I don't think that you have to belittle anyone by questioning their knowledge of something simple like the UFA/RFA process. Of course the Bears tried to negotiate with Berrian, but do you really think that a team in the financial position of the Bears would not sign an "upper echelon" WR in Berrian? You can say that he wanted to play for the Vikings, and that may be true, but please tell me you wouldn't if you were in BB position and they offered you the money they did. I know when they signed Berrian I laughed a little bit because they dumped a ridiculous amount of money into a WR that scored 5 touchdowns last season. (I know, I know, Grossman sucks and so does their O-Line). But the fact of the matter is the acquisitions of Allen and Berrian will not get you a super bowl win. But wait, I forgot about Williams, oh god add a sub-par safety into the mix and that will definitely put a big shiny ring around your finger. :roll:

[Packnut]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.


First-good players stand out no matter what. You can make all the excuses you want about Berrian and the reasons he was in-effective. Facts are facts and even a mis-guided Viking fan should be able to grasp them. You are going to find out the hard way just how stupid giving all that money to an average WR was. The Bears are hurting big-time on offense so do you really think they would have given up on BB if he was any good?????? :idea:

Second-Saying AP is way better than Grant is also not factual. He is better yes, but not by a large margin. Let's also not forget the injury factor. AP has an injury history and that is also a FACT you cannot dis-miss.

Third- wrong again (what new). Favre was able to step up in the pocket numerous times last season. There was never a constant push from any opponent up the middle.

Fourth- Ok, let's call the LB's a draw since there is no clear cut edge. However, implying that your secondary was weak against the pass only because of the amount of attempts due to teams not running well against Minny is just plain DUMB! Teams passed alot against the Vikes cause your pass defense

SUCKED

First off Berrian was an UFA. The Bears did not give up on him....He left.

Second, if you watch that half sack by Allen you speak of so often, it came on a stunt right up the middle.

Third, I'm glad you used the past tense of the word suck to describe the Vikings pass D because the addition of Allen and M. Williams will shore it up. Nothing helps the secondary like a pass rush and Williams is a huge upgrade over D. Smith at FS. Better coverage ability and range, he should allow Sharper to focus on the SS position better than last year.


The Bears are millions and millions under the cap. They have no other WR's of impact. They could have easily signed him. They did'nt. Even a Viking's fan should be able to add 2+2.............. :idea:




Seriously dude, you need to do your homework. HE WAS AN UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENT!!! He was free to sign wherever he wanted to.

Here are some Wiki definitions to help you understand:

Unrestricted Free Agents
Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA) are players who have completed four or more accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They are free to sign with any club.


Restricted Free Agents
Restricted Free Agents (RFA) are players who have completed three accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They have received qualifying offers from their old clubs and are free to negotiate with any club until April 21, at which time their rights revert to their original club. If a player accepts an offer from a new club, the old club will have the right to match the offer and retain the player. If the old club elects not to match the offer, it may receive draft-choice compensation depending on the level of the qualifying offer made to the player.

The Bears tried to negotiate a contract with Berrian, he simply did not want to play for the Bears.

He CHOSE the Vikings. The Bears DID NOT LET HIM GO.


Ok, let me make this real simple for you. The Bears could have gave him an extension during last season. The Bears were way under the cap at the time. Then, there was a story later in the Sun Times that Berrian gave the Bears a chance to match Minny's offer. They chose not to. Now when a team who is desperate for a WR chooses to let him walk away, may-be their is a reason.

Obviously, Chicago did'nt believe Berrian was worth what the Vikes paid. I agree with them and you seem to think he's gonna make a difference. Just stick around here and you just might learn something. Berrian is nothing more than a 40 catch 700 yd WR who might score 4 or 5 td's.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Ok, let me re-phrase my comment. The fact that you rate the o's even is MIND-BOGGLING.

Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

The Packer WR's are a proven group. Add Nelson to the mix and NO ONE has as good a 4 wide set as GB does. The Packer WR's are so much better than the Vike's that it's laughable. HUGE plus to GB.

I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

Man, I cannot wait for that Monday night game to get here................


You don't think your statements through very well for a "cerebral" rat.


Like me, you live here in Bears territory and you've seen Berrian just likeI have. He's nothing special. He disappears in games. Does'nt go over the middle. Runs the go pattern and that's about it.

-I've also lived in bears territory and can tell you the bears problems on O start with the line, continue to the QB, and end with the line. Berrian was the best player on that O, and went through something like 5 or 6 QB's. He runs good routes, it's not as simple as you make it sound.



I'll give you AP over Grant, but not by a whole lot. Just close your eyes and remember Grant's 20+ yd td run in GB.

-296!!! Keep your eyes open, AD is WAY better than Grant.


Packers have a HUGE edge in pass blocking.

-If the pass rush does not come up the middle.


Vikes have the edge on the D line but GB has a much better LB's and a much better secondary.

-HUGE edge to the Vikings on D line. The Vikings LB' finished first in stopping the run, how can the packers LB's be so much better. Secondary? Still up for grabs. With the Vikings stellar run D last year the secondary numbers are misleading. When you can't run you pass.


First-good players stand out no matter what. You can make all the excuses you want about Berrian and the reasons he was in-effective. Facts are facts and even a mis-guided Viking fan should be able to grasp them. You are going to find out the hard way just how stupid giving all that money to an average WR was. The Bears are hurting big-time on offense so do you really think they would have given up on BB if he was any good?????? :idea:

Second-Saying AP is way better than Grant is also not factual. He is better yes, but not by a large margin. Let's also not forget the injury factor. AP has an injury history and that is also a FACT you cannot dis-miss.

Third- wrong again (what new). Favre was able to step up in the pocket numerous times last season. There was never a constant push from any opponent up the middle.

Fourth- Ok, let's call the LB's a draw since there is no clear cut edge. However, implying that your secondary was weak against the pass only because of the amount of attempts due to teams not running well against Minny is just plain DUMB! Teams passed alot against the Vikes cause your pass defense

SUCKED

First off Berrian was an UFA. The Bears did not give up on him....He left.

Second, if you watch that half sack by Allen you speak of so often, it came on a stunt right up the middle.

Third, I'm glad you used the past tense of the word suck to describe the Vikings pass D because the addition of Allen and M. Williams will shore it up. Nothing helps the secondary like a pass rush and Williams is a huge upgrade over D. Smith at FS. Better coverage ability and range, he should allow Sharper to focus on the SS position better than last year.


The Bears are millions and millions under the cap. They have no other WR's of impact. They could have easily signed him. They did'nt. Even a Viking's fan should be able to add 2+2.............. :idea:




Seriously dude, you need to do your homework. HE WAS AN UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENT!!! He was free to sign wherever he wanted to.

Here are some Wiki definitions to help you understand:

Unrestricted Free Agents
Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA) are players who have completed four or more accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They are free to sign with any club.


Restricted Free Agents
Restricted Free Agents (RFA) are players who have completed three accrued seasons of service and whose contracts have expired. They have received qualifying offers from their old clubs and are free to negotiate with any club until April 21, at which time their rights revert to their original club. If a player accepts an offer from a new club, the old club will have the right to match the offer and retain the player. If the old club elects not to match the offer, it may receive draft-choice compensation depending on the level of the qualifying offer made to the player.

The Bears tried to negotiate a contract with Berrian, he simply did not want to play for the Bears.

He CHOSE the Vikings. The Bears DID NOT LET HIM GO.


Ok, let me make this real simple for you. The Bears could have gave him an extension during last season. The Bears were way under the cap at the time. Then, there was a story later in the Sun Times that Berrian gave the Bears a chance to match Minny's offer. They chose not to. Now when a team who is desperate for a WR chooses to let him walk away, may-be their is a reason.

Obviously, Chicago did'nt believe Berrian was worth what the Vikes paid. I agree with them and you seem to think he's gonna make a difference. Just stick around here and you just might learn something. Berrian is nothing more than a 40 catch 700 yd WR who might score 4 or 5 td's.

Again, you are just making stuff up. The Bears desperately wanted Berrian back but did not want to get into a bidding war for him. That is the sort of leverage you have as an UFA. By living in Chitcago you should know that Jerry Angelo is cheap. The Bears are poorly run and Angelo is to blame, but again, they did not want to let Berrian go.

I also did not say he was going to make a difference, I just wanted to correct the misleading statements you made in regard to his departure from the Bears.

[Bretsky]

Regardless of how it went down the Bears were idiots for letting him go; he's better than any WR in Chicago or in MN last year.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Regardless of how it went down the Bears were idiots for letting him go; he's better than any WR in Chicago or in MN last year.

Yes. He was also the 2nd best UFA WR behind Moss. Bryant Johnson could also be considered here, but they both (Berrian and Johnson) have more upside than Porter or Walker (also UFA's during off season) at this point. The Vikings needed help at WR, and I'm not saying Berrian will be great, but he will be better than Wade, or Ferguson. The hope is that he will stretch the field and help allieveate the 8 and 9 man fronts.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Yes. He was also the 2nd best UFA WR behind Moss. Bryant Johnson could also be considered here, but they both.

When your competition is Bryant Johnson, that ain't saying much. (Although I do like Johnson, I think he'll be better than Berrian.) Of course, the Vikings paid him like he was a Pro Bowler.

[mngolf19]

Vikes had no choice. You have to try and upgrade the team and if he costs that much to make sure he comes to your team..... No he isn't a great receiver, but he doesn't have to be. If he puts up the same numbers he did in Chicago, he will be a giant upgrade over Williamson. And like I have said before, if Williamson had caught a few more balls thrown to him the Vikes would have won at least 2 more games last year. I still stand by my comparisons earlier.