January of 2013 vs January of 2012----WHICH January brings the most optimmism in year ahead

[SkinBasket]

Greg Jennings no longer rates such status given his health last season. Clearly last season given the numbers. James Jones has earned consideration for that distinction.

Then why did you say we're losing our NO. 1 WR?

[sharpe1027]

I am less optimistic now, but I was probably unrealistic last year. I still think they'll be a playoff team and that means they have a shot at another super bowl.

[red]

i was more optimistic last year

i think we might see a slight dip this season. we might be gaining more talent through the draft and coming back from injury, but it looks like we're gonna lose A LOT of leadership (driver, jennings, woodson, and yes hawk), added to the lose of collins last year. without that leadership, i don't think we'll have what it takes to get back to the top this season

last off season i knew we were the top dogs, now it feels like we're playing catch up

[denverYooper]

Superbowl 49 champs. That's when their mostly young defense will finally come into their own and Rats will be exclaiming the virtues of Ted's defensive drafts.

Still a lotta young dudes on that unit. They need another season yet.

[Patler]

I am less optimistic. The Vikes will continue to improve, the Bears will be better. If Woodson stays, he will be another year older, if he goes, we lose that leadership. My perception is that the Packers just seem a little too satisfied and complacent, there is a hard edge missing.

I wonder about the Vikings. I think it is highly unlikely that Peterson will be able to duplicate his 2012 season, or even close to it. I think the jury is still out on whether or not they have a QB to build around, and if their HC is a guy who can lead them to the top. Was 2012 evidence of things to come, or are they really more the team of 2011, and 2012 just sort of "happened" as it does at times in the NFL?

The Bears have survived for years with ST and defense, both of which could change significantly in 2013 with aging players and coaching changes. For Trestman to make a difference on offense, and get the most out of Cutler, they have to find some O-linemen. I think the Bears will experience a year or two of decline before a possible rise under Trestman.

Talent-wise, I am more concerned about the Lions. The have a highly productive QB, perhaps with a little Cutler in him, luckily, and a WR who is becoming more and more dominant. They have a couple DL who can dominate the game. Fortunately for the Packers they have an attitude from their HC on down that will hurt them most years, in my opinion, but in any one year they could run away with things (or not!)

The steady-Eddie approach of TT and MM might be a bit boring, but it should keep them in contention year after year. Sure would be nice to hit on a high impact rookie or two in 2013.

[Fritz]

I agree with pbmax 100%. Last year at this time I was petty down about half the team. The defense was horrible. But some ground has been made in fixing it, and I think the offense will rebound to some middle position between the "O" of 2011 and that of 2012. A lot will depend on the health of not only Bulaga and Sherrod, but also the health of Nelson next year, and whether another top WR is found to go with Nelson, Jones and Cobb. Finley is the wild card.

There are still holes to fill on defense to be sure, but there is more young talent on that side than there has been in a long time. I'm not sure what to think about Tramon Williams, and the injury to Worthy is a concern for next year. I'm not sure why, but I am guardedly optimistic about Perry, and he is a guy who could give the defense a tougher edge to it.

I guess I feel better than last year, perhaps only because the team has better balance than a year ago.

I don't know if I am more or less optimistic than a year ago, but I am certainly more puzzled than I was.

I am puzzled, first of all, as to whether the two d-linemen that TT brought in are right for this defense. I was excited when Worthy was drafted, but now he's hurt and beyond that, seems ill-suited for holding his ground and eating up blockers, and seems to lack the moves to get to the QB, who, if he's Colin Krapernick, will just deke Worthy out of his shorts anyway. I feel this way because of this read option stuff. Now all of a sudden it seems you need big, blocker-eating, ground-holding tanks to keep position so that quick, fast, big-enough linebackers can track down running QB's.

I am also puzzled, unlike Joe, by this offensive line. A year ago I thought that Newhouse was improving and would be steady at left tackle, that TT had found some very solid guards, and that Bulaga would be an anchor at right tackle. I figured they'd get by with Saturday. But alas, none of this was so. Newhouse was pretty weak, although he did better at the end of the year. I don't know how much Saturday's problems affected Lang and Sitton; nonetheless, both seemed awfully easy to push around or run around pretty often. Bulaga had a terrible game in Seattle, then settled down, but did not seem like a steady rock. We have no idea what the team has in Sherrod.

And I'm puzzled by the linebackers. Hawk's steadiness seems no longer enough when the read option is emerging and quarterbacks seem faster and faster. Will Bishop return healthy? Is Nick Perry going to be fast enough to cover anyone, or fast enough to trap QB's like Griffin or Kraperdick?

I just dunno. I see the need for more defensive help via the draft - fast guys at inside linebacker, and a couple of big guys for the nose position and for defensive end.

And there seems to be a lot of calls for a safety. What about McMillian? Did he just not show enough potential?

So it seems like a receiver is needed, too, and maybe a safety, and certainly an inside linebacker, and a defensive nose tacke, and an end. And maybe another offensive lineman or two.

And the team doesn't seem to have enough time to let a few fifth, sixth, or seventh rounders (and undrafted free agents) develop slowly, as later round picks sometimes seem to.

Geez, I just read my post. Guess I'm pessimistic - today.

[George Cumby]

I wonder about the Vikings. I think it is highly unlikely that Peterson will be able to duplicate his 2012 season, or even close to it. I think the jury is still out on whether or not they have a QB to build around, and if their HC is a guy who can lead them to the top. Was 2012 evidence of things to come, or are they really more the team of 2011, and 2012 just sort of "happened" as it does at times in the NFL?

The Bears have survived for years with ST and defense, both of which could change significantly in 2013 with aging players and coaching changes. For Trestman to make a difference on offense, and get the most out of Cutler, they have to find some O-linemen. I think the Bears will experience a year or two of decline before a possible rise under Trestman.

Talent-wise, I am more concerned about the Lions. The have a highly productive QB, perhaps with a little Cutler in him, luckily, and a WR who is becoming more and more dominant. They have a couple DL who can dominate the game. Fortunately for the Packers they have an attitude from their HC on down that will hurt them most years, in my opinion, but in any one year they could run away with things (or not!)

The steady-Eddie approach of TT and MM might be a bit boring, but it should keep them in contention year after year. Sure would be nice to hit on a high impact rookie or two in 2013.

Excellent points, as usual.

Ponder has shown that he can learn from his mistakes, AP won't duplicate this year and the team's success depends on the health of AP's knees. All that said, it would seem that Frazier is a steady hand on the tiller and has the team pointed in the right direction.

The Bears are old on D and their O-Line is poor, but I think Trestman makes a difference for them.

As you say, the Lions are the most talented of the bunch, they are really dangerous but because they are led by a cuckoo, they are prone to self-destruction.

I have NO complaints over the Pack's steady-Eddie approach. I have been sold on that since TT's first draft.

All that being said, the Pack are the most talented in the Division and should win it, but they could lose to ANY of their division opponents. But my concern still lingers over my perception that the team lacks that killer instinct. (OT: I agree with you on Perry, I think he will be that solid force on the opposite side; from what little I've seen, he's got what it takes.)

[pbmax]

The Packer Defense might be a situation where the drafting or development of a singular talent will decide the direction of the rest of the roster moves in the future.

If Nick Perry develops into a true pass rush threat, then pass rushers in the interior aren't as desperately important and more space eaters for 1st and 2nd down could be carried.

If they draft an ILB who is great but needs protection (like R. Lewis or the short guy from Miami a while back) that might break the logjam. If they get a 5 tech DE who can also pressure the QB, then that would point in a different direction. The confusion on defense might be the best argument to take the best player and make the rest of the replaceable parts fit around the 3 good ones.

[3irty1]

I think I feel better this January but I bet I will have felt better after last year's draft than this year's draft. Hard to say.

Although last Jan a Nick Collins return hadn't been ruled out yet had it?

[3irty1]

I wonder about the Vikings. I think it is highly unlikely that Peterson will be able to duplicate his 2012 season, or even close to it. I think the jury is still out on whether or not they have a QB to build around, and if their HC is a guy who can lead them to the top. Was 2012 evidence of things to come, or are they really more the team of 2011, and 2012 just sort of "happened" as it does at times in the NFL?

The Bears have survived for years with ST and defense, both of which could change significantly in 2013 with aging players and coaching changes. For Trestman to make a difference on offense, and get the most out of Cutler, they have to find some O-linemen. I think the Bears will experience a year or two of decline before a possible rise under Trestman.

Talent-wise, I am more concerned about the Lions. The have a highly productive QB, perhaps with a little Cutler in him, luckily, and a WR who is becoming more and more dominant. They have a couple DL who can dominate the game. Fortunately for the Packers they have an attitude from their HC on down that will hurt them most years, in my opinion, but in any one year they could run away with things (or not!)

The steady-Eddie approach of TT and MM might be a bit boring, but it should keep them in contention year after year. Sure would be nice to hit on a high impact rookie or two in 2013.

The Vikings need a hell of a draft this year to keep the mirage alive. They were extraordinarily healthy this season and still kind of sucked. I agree they might improve their team but I highly doubt they'll improve their record.

[denverYooper]

FWIW, Morgan Burnett was one of only 2 players to play every snap this year.

[pbmax]

I thought Ponder looked the part in his last few games. Might be the effect of every team following AP around like he was an ice cream truck, but still, looked like he fit the bill.

[Patler]

I thought Ponder looked the part in his last few games. Might be the effect of every team following AP around like he was an ice cream truck, but still, looked like he fit the bill.

Yes he did, but it was such a stunning reversal from the way he played in the first Packer game that I have a hard time believing it. It doesn't usually happen as dramatically as turning a switch, but that is the way Ponder performed after the first Packer game. Like night and day. Maybe he's there, but he still has a lot to prove.

[Cheesehead Craig]

There are still many here in the Twin Cities who don't buy that Ponder is the answer, including former Vikings. He definately still has a lot to prove.

[sharpe1027]

The Bears are the team that worries me the most. I think the new leadership is a big wildcard. It could go either way.

I am not convinced that kitty cats are as talented as the hype. They have some good players, but people seem to hold them out to be one of the more talented teams.

The Vikings are a one-man show. If they are very lucky, he stays healthy and productive all year. I wouldn't bet on it with how many times they are forced to give him the ball.