Packers v Vikings

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: Packers v Vikings

Well the first couple years, Chilly didn't have the ammunition to compete with the Pack. Last 2 years and this year, different story. What does that calculate out to?

So, who had more talent in 2006? The guy with a team coming off a 4-12 record or the one with the team coming off a 9-7 record?

Year 1 - McCarthy did more with less.
Year 2 - McCarthy got to the NFCC before a Brett pick ended the dream.
Year 3 - Talent wise it was probably even, but it was a distracted transition year. Childress got the team to 10-6 with great talent minus a good QB. Better QB play might have meant a run at the Super Bowl.
Year 4 - Childress got to the NFCC before a Brett pick ended the dream. The teams had almost identical records with pretty equal talent. Minnesota got the benefit of one home game in the playoffs--which the Packers did not. Injuries early in the year might have played a factor. McCarthy got the team to 11-5 despite horrible OL play the first 8 games. Better OL play might have meant an NFC North title and a run at the Super Bowl.

Year 5 and beyond will further prove which coach is better and which team is more talented in the long haul.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Re: Packers v Vikings

You might be on to something there. MM certainly isn't the calm laid back Mike Sherman, but I do remember MIN being really jacked up for the games last year. The schedule could certainly be more balanced with a colder weather game.

Don't buy it. We're plenty jacked up for games. This team is light years ahead of where they were under Sherman. We just need more of that swagger that comes with winning. McCarthy has done a lot to bring more physicality to the team. I think he sees the Steelers defense, and he thinks that their physicality is the main ingredient for their success. He wants a tough, hard nosed, hard working defense.

I was referring exclusively to the MIN-GB games. I think overall you are totally correct, but in those two games, MIN was energized and GB was flat.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Packers v Vikings

I think they're very close. I'd argue the biggest difference is coaches. Chilly gets them up for these games and MM doesn't.

I think they are almost identical in "big games". To me, the biggest games are playoff games, against each other, and against Chicago. McCarthy is 10-9 in those games. Childress is 8-11.

Well the first couple years, Chilly didn't have the ammunition to compete with the Pack. Last 2 years and this year, different story. What does that calculate out to?

Oh fer

[mngolf19]

Re: Packers v Vikings

Well the first couple years, Chilly didn't have the ammunition to compete with the Pack. Last 2 years and this year, different story. What does that calculate out to?

So, who had more talent in 2006? The guy with a team coming off a 4-12 record or the one with the team coming off a 9-7 record?

Year 1 - McCarthy did more with less.
Year 2 - McCarthy got to the NFCC before a Brett pick ended the dream.
Year 3 - Talent wise it was probably even, but it was a distracted transition year. Childress got the team to 10-6 with great talent minus a good QB. Better QB play might have meant a run at the Super Bowl.
Year 4 - Childress got to the NFCC before a Brett pick ended the dream. The teams had almost identical records with pretty equal talent. Minnesota got the benefit of one home game in the playoffs--which the Packers did not. Injuries early in the year might have played a factor. McCarthy got the team to 11-5 despite horrible OL play the first 8 games. Better OL play might have meant an NFC North title and a run at the Super Bowl.

Year 5 and beyond will further prove which coach is better and which team is more talented in the long haul.

Harv, you can't possibly think that coming off of the retarded ownership of McCombs left anything behind for Chilly? He had to clean house, change schemes. No matter the records that first year, Pack had a more talented team.