FanNation - The Republic of Sport

not to burst your bubble, but I think that there will be more than 3 losing teams in the NFC (Lions, Bucs, Rams), unless there will only be 4 winning records in the AFC.

I think all of your records from the NFC East are ambitious at best...

The Eagles were 9-6-1 last season with virtually the same team and ZERO major injuries...

The Giants were 11-1 with Plaxico, but 1-3 without him, not including the playoff loss...yes, the Giants have a good D, but if the D is on the field all game long, they will tire and lose games...

Yes, I am a Boys fan, but they have made significant improvements in special teams(cost them 2 games last season) and at backup QB(cost them 2 more)....

I think that Philly and Dallas both go 11-5 with the Giants 9-7.

Eli is not that great of a QB and without both his #1 and #2 guys gone in Plax and Toomer, he will not be the same.

i Still take Brett Farve over Cutler or Rodgers. they all choked at the end of the year last year but farve has a better team in basically every catagory this year not to mention the best RB in the game. all farve needs to do is throw 10-12 accuarate passeds a game so teams don't stack 8-9 players in the box and i only see the patriots beating them if farve can do that.

QUOTE(#3):

Originally posted 07:23 PM ET  08.25 by colin1991

i Still take Brett Farve over Cutler or Rodgers. they all choked at the end of the year last year but farve has a better team in basically every catagory this year not to mention the best RB in the game. all farve needs to do is throw 10-12 accuarate passeds a game so teams don't stack 8-9 players in the box and i only see the patriots beating them if farve can do that.

well that's why minny takes the division title although their qb is not as great they have a better d-fence, i didn't elaborate on that but i thought it was clear

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 05:26 PM ET  08.25 by MNSports80

not to burst your bubble, but I think that there will be more than 3 losing teams in the NFC (Lions, Bucs, Rams), unless there will only be 4 winning records in the AFC.

thanks for bringing attention to that, i'll try to fix it
thanks again

The Chicago Bears defense will dominate Brett Favre, i know the vikes have AP and he will get his rushing yards and td's.But the Bears defense will get their's too...the int.....historically the last 4 seasons the Bears Defense have studied him well and have alot of game film on Favre and have been able to defend him very well....You're prediction in the NFC North is wrong...it should read....Bears- 12-4 Packers 10-6 Vikes 9-6 Lions 7-9......GO BEARS!!!!

I for one thought you did a pretty good job. I thought some on the records were off a bit, but for the most part, I think you have the order of finish pretty much down. The only thing I really disagreed with was the Seahawks. I think they'll win a couple more games then seven. You'll probably get pounded by Cowboy's and Packer's fans. I think it's reasonable to assume the Packers will win a couple more games then last year, but they went 6-10 and I don't think they improved that much. The question with the Cowboys isn't talent, it's whether they can put it together and win after thanksgiving. Eli's not that great of a QB? Are you kidding me? I take him over Romo in a heartbeat.

For the record I am a Bears fan. I may be slightly biased but I think you flip a coin between the Vikes and us for the NFC North. I can see either one happening, as long as Favre can last the season, which is also a coin flip.

I'm sorry. I don't see the Vikings being better with Brett Farve under center. I just don't. I think that the back 4 of the Vikings is suspect as well. And both of the tackles will have to serve a suspension. I think that Green Bay will win the North. Seattle will be interesting. I don't like Jim Mora Jr. He killed Mike Vick with not allowing him to audible out of a play. No wonder Vick ran so much. I think the Saints will be closer than people think. It should be interesting in the South.

If the Williams' have to serve a suspension it will be the first four games. Browns, Lions, 49ers, Packers. I don't see how anyone can think Green Bay takes the north. 6-10 last year and they really didn't add that much. Although I think Raji will work out nicely for them. Don't wanna hear the injury excuse either, they really didn't lose anyone of consequence. No way you can blame Jim Mora Jr. for Vicks serious lack of a career, but that is a discussion for another board. Oh and I think the Panthers are being underated on the post as well. Del Homme had a decent year, he just imploded one game. With one of the best RB rotations, a good line and Steve Smith, I don't see how they go 7-9. But hey, that's why they play the games.

Packers are going to be good this year. They have the best linebackers in the conference with hawk, barnett, kampman (also dt) and mathews. not to mention their back ups chillar, popinga and bishop. as far as cb go, harris and woodson (need i say more?). safety's nick collins (pro-bowl last year) and newly aquired anthony smith from pitts. their back ups? guys who played a lot last year, atari bigby and aaron rouse. now we go to the d line with rookie bj raji. kid is going to b a stud and with him jolly and cullen jenkins. ik they're going to a new defense, but they already look damn good in it. the defense looks dynamic and capers will get his players ready.
Now on offense, you got aaron rodgers at qb, one of the most solid qb in the game. now you might say he didnt win any games in the 4th quarter, however he rarely got the chance to comeback in games because the defense allowed late 4th quarter scores. more of a product of the defense not holding the lead than anything else. Aaron also has the best wr's in the conference with driver, jennings, ruvell martin, james jones and jordy nelson. TE's? donald lee a proven quality TE and jermichael finnely, the new star. Finnely is going to be a stud in the NFL, and you might not know too much about him because last year he couldnt get the plays down. now he has them down and will do some damage with his athleticism. They also got ryan grant running the ball,(1 year removed from injury) brandon jackson his back up, quinn johnson a rookie big frame fullback. The offensive line might be the only weekness, however they look solid and also have depth in which creates competition. The Packers are going to be the surpise of the league. Nobody is giving them much chance but i can't see how they arent going to do well. they got all the pieces.

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 02:00 AM ET  08.26 by cliff. r

If the Williams' have to serve a suspension it will be the first four games. Browns, Lions, 49ers, Packers. I don't see how anyone can think Green Bay takes the north. 6-10 last year and they really didn't add that much. Although I think Raji will work out nicely for them. Don't wanna hear the injury excuse either, they really didn't lose anyone of consequence. No way you can blame Jim Mora Jr. for Vicks serious lack of a career, but that is a discussion for another board. Oh and I think the Panthers are being underated on the post as well. Del Homme had a decent year, he just imploded one game. With one of the best RB rotations, a good line and Steve Smith, I don't see how they go 7-9. But hey, that's why they play the games.

Not blaming Mora Jr for his serious lack of career. I am saying that defensive head coaches rarely like to allow their offense to do some major point scoring. I was surprised that Mora handcuffed Vick like he did. Not allowing your qb to audible out of a play is not good. As for the Panthers they very well may wind up with the number 1 pick this year. I think they may be that bad. They need a starting qb. Delhomme is not a starter to me any more.

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 02:00 AM ET  08.26 by cliff. r

If the Williams' have to serve a suspension it will be the first four games. Browns, Lions, 49ers, Packers. I don't see how anyone can think Green Bay takes the north. 6-10 last year and they really didn't add that much. Although I think Raji will work out nicely for them. Don't wanna hear the injury excuse either, they really didn't lose anyone of consequence.

You can't just look at their record last year and who they drafted to come to your conclusion about GB; you need look closer. The Packers lost 7 of their 10 losses last year by 4 points or less, chalking it up to a poor defense since they had a highly productive offense. They scrapped their passive and non-aggressive defensive scheme for an explosive 3-4 that has made mediocre offenses look downright terrible in the preseason. They are deep at LB, a position that is integral for the 3-4.

On offense, you have the same great receiving corps, a healthy O line (last year was riddled with injuries), and a healthy RB who played hurt all year last year. His late season explosiveness will now be used in the opening weeks, giving them better offensive options.

QUOTE(#13):

Originally posted 11:41 AM ET  08.26 by jonnyganas

You can't just look at their record last year and who they drafted to come to your conclusion about GB; you need look closer. The Packers lost 7 of their 10 losses last year by 4 points or less, chalking it up to a poor defense since they had a highly productive offense. They scrapped their passive and non-aggressive defensive scheme for an explosive 3-4 that has made mediocre offenses look downright terrible in the preseason. They are deep at LB, a position that is integral for the 3-4.On offense, you have the same great receiving corps, a healthy O line (last year was riddled with injuries), and a healthy RB who played hurt all year last year. His late season explosiveness will now be used in the opening weeks, giving them better offensive options.

You can't use the draft and last year's performance to judge a team? LOL, oh but you can use their preseason to judge. Much like the 4-0 Lions last year. If you are going to look closely, you'll see that they have been selling out and running all their defensive looks to get used to it quicker. They have blizted more then any other team this preseason and it's not close. Of course they look great. Almost every other team is using very vanilla packages so they don't give away film on the upcoming year. They are deep at linebacker? Really? Kampman was a great DE, whether he is a good LB remains to be seen. And from every article I've read, these young studs they've drafted the past couple years, are having a hard time cracking the starting lineup. Riddled with injuries? Do you mean Mark Tausher starting right tackle? Is that riddled? If so, then the Bears were riddled with Chris Williams out until the final few games. My favorite part of your quote though, has to be "We've made mediocre offesenses look bad in the preseason.....". Unreal. Last but not least, they've done the least of every team in that division to improve themselves. I think they'll win more then 6 games, but there's no way the leap the Bears or Vikings to get to the playoffs.

The best linebackers in the conference???? How about Briggs, Urlacher and Tiamosa

QUOTE(#14):

Originally posted 01:35 PM ET  08.26 by cliff. r

You can't use the draft and last year's performance to judge a team? LOL, oh but you can use their preseason to judge. Much like the 4-0 Lions last year. If you are going to look closely, you'll see that they have been selling out and running all their defensive looks to get used to it quicker. They have blizted more then any other team this preseason and it's not close. Of course they look great. Almost every other team is using very vanilla packages so they don't give away film on the upcoming year. They are deep at linebacker? Really? Kampman was a great DE, whether he is a good LB remains to be seen. And from every article I've read, these young studs they've drafted the past couple years, are having a hard time cracking the starting lineup. Riddled with injuries? Do you mean Mark Tausher starting right tackle? Is that riddled? If so, then the Bears were riddled with Chris Williams out until the final few games. My favorite part of your quote though, has to be "We've made mediocre offesenses look bad in the preseason.....". Unreal. Last but not least, they've done the least of every team in that division to improve themselves. I think they'll win more then 6 games, but there's no way the leap the Bears or Vikings to get to the playoffs.

Cliff, you based your GB prediction citing only their record and 1 draft pick. I am saying that is oversimplifying the GB situation and that there are other reasons why people think the Packers could take the division.

The 3-4 defense has over 100 different looks, so they aren't revealing every secret in their book in the preaseason. They are still adjusting and learning the defense as it is a complicated and completely different approach. I'd argue they are using the preseason to make sure the defense practices and learns the new defense in a game-like setting.

They are deep at LB: Veteran starters (Hawk, Barnett) are not guaranteed starting spots due to great performances by Bishop,Poppinga and Chillar. The Kampmann move is interesting and remains to be seen how it will work out.

The OL was riddled with injuries: RT Tauscher was hurt. But so was Pro-Bowl LT Clifton. And so was Wells. What resulted was an OL that shuffled every other week. This inconsistency made it difficult to get any running game going and caused some holes in pass protection.

The Packers changed their whole defense. Their achilles heel was their defense last season and they cleaned house, hired a legendary defensive coordinator. It wasn't that the defense lacked talent, they just needed much better defensive calls and schemes. They have made a gigantic effort to improve their team defensively.

I totally agree that's why they are "showing all their defensive looks". Couldn't agree more actually. They switched to a completely different defense and need to learn it during the preseason. You have to realize though, most teams aren't doing that. They are giving very vanilla looks. Dom Capers is a great cordinator, and I am sure he will turn that defense around. However, it can't be done overnight and they really didn't bring in new personal at all. You don't go from the 4-3 to 3-4 overnight and expect instant success.

I agree with you on the progress of the defense, Cliff. I guess I was trying to point out that there is a lot more to look at for the Packers. I'm not guaranteeing or even predicting that GB will win the division, I just thought it was unfair to call their run at the division ridiculous.

No injuries of consequence? To just list some of the bigger losses, the Packers lost Cullen Jenkins (who was having a Pro Bowl-caliber season), Ryan Pickett (main run stopper), Johnny Jolly (key backup), and Justin Harrell (when isn't he injured?) as well as Nick Barnett (middle linebacker).

On the offensive line, Tauscher was hurt as well as Chad Clifton (who manned up and played through a series of serious injuries). The interior line also had to play musical chairs all year as various lineman had to miss out on games.

Ryan Grant had yearlong issues with hamstring that made him an average running back (but still with numbers on par with the much vaunted Matt Forte).

This is hardly a comprehensive list, but let's see how well the Bears/Vikings performed if they lost two of it starting defensive lineman and two backups as well as Brian Urlacher/E.J. Henderson, never trotted out the same offensive line two weeks in a row, and Forte/A.P. didn't have his burst because of a bad hamstring.

The point though is that when the Packers lost, it was close. For those 7 games lost by 4 points or less, it wouldn't have taken much to turn the tide. If having a healthy offensive and defensive line changed matters by a field goal or so for half of those games the Packers would have been 9-7/10-6.

Look at the Packers point differential. On the season, they outscored their opponents by 39 points (the 10-6 Vikings had a +46 and the 9-7 Bears had a +45). That's hardly the hallmark of a 6-10 team.

Moreover, look back to the 13-3 team. What's different about this team and the 6-10 team of last year? Not much. Sure, Favre is gone, but Rodgers ably stepped in there. In addition, Grant was clearly not the same Grant from 2007, but that's explained by his contract holdout and season long hamstring issues. This year he's been a part of the whole preseason and has a healthy hamstring.

It was also mentioned judging teams by their drafts. The Packers received a high grade for their 2009 draft so if you want to judge them by that, then you have to concede that they've added some nice pieces in Baji and Matthews.

Finally, the Packers made a major improvement by getting Dom Capers. Everywhere he has went he's turned defenses around quickly (they've all been in the top 10 the first year). With a defense that fields 4 Pro Bowlers (Woodson, Collins, Harris, and Kampman) and number of potential Pro Bowlers (especially Jenkins and hopefully Raji), there's plenty of reason to think that Caper's track record will continue.

So, in short, the Packers were not nearly as bad as their record suggests. They were one of the most injured teams in the NFL and even then they still outscored their opponents on the season by 39 points. Moreover, getting a lot of injured players back, having a nice draft and having some draft picks develop (Finnely, the TE), as well as getting Dom Capers to coach the defense makes the Pack a dangerous team.

umm...sportsfan65, 1st of all you talk about the pack's injuries, but lets look at the Vikings roster last year, Pat Williams out for the end of the year, EJ Henderson out after week 5, they lose their leading special teams tackler and captain in Heath Farwell, Jared Allen played with an injury for 1/2 the season, their #2 reciever in Sidney Rice was injured for the season, and oh yeah, they started Gus "rhino" Ferrotte and they still had 4 more wins than the pack, and you mean to tell me that these players returning at full health and the addition of Favre (old but still about twelve times the QB of Gus) and you think the pack will win the division? that being said don't bother mentioning the Williams suspention anyone, because if you've paid attention to the news the Williams Wall case will probably be held up in court for months, maybe years, and there's a chance that Pat will have retired before the verdict is in, and i hate to tell you but you can't count out the Bears either, they have a young recieving corp that has improved from last year, and even tho i think Cutler's a crybaby who doesn't belong in this tough of a division, you can't fault his play, the Bears have suffered their fair share of injuries as well, but Packer fans seem to only want to look at their own roster and cry that the letdown was a fluke, but maybe the Packers 13-3 season was a fluke, Woodson and Harris arent getting any younger and there were a lot of pieces that came together for that magic 07 season...and if you still want to argue lets remember the 98 Vikings, and the next couple of years they just lit it up with their younger quarterback and destroyed the rest of the division didn't they...oh wait...that's right, they never showed the same signs of life after the NFC championship letdown...but that's ok, i'm sure the Pack must be different