Divisions - NFC Norse

[ShaneFalco 0]

Det: Martz has a gazillion plays. Does anyone truly expect the mess of FU WR's to pick up this O in year !? I want some of what you are smoking! Maybe next year they could be dangerous. New QB's and that WR corps = lot's of picks.

 

Not as many picks as Favre will throw.

[swamp dog 0]

I would have to go with

THE PACK

The bears offense is just to bad to be a good team.

The Vikings, No culpepper, No Moss, No playoffs

The Lions are still rebuilding and I think they will have a good year, but not enough to make the playoffs

The Packers improved defense, there all healthy (maybe not 100%, but enough to play) and the team chemistry should be in check.

 

oh, poor child, how you set yourself up for disappointment

[nlgb1 0]

oh, poor child, how you set yourself up for disappointment

 

wow swamp...get a hold of yourself, either your an avid lions fan (sucks for you) or just a severe pessimist rebel that enjoys disagreeing with people just for the hell of it

[hoffdaddy 1]

wow swamp...get a hold of yourself, either your an avid lions fan (sucks for you) or just a severe pessimist rebel that enjoys disagreeing with people just for the hell of it

 

He's all that, and then some.

[swamp dog 0]

wow swamp...get a hold of yourself, either your an avid lions fan (sucks for you) or just a severe pessimist rebel that enjoys disagreeing with people just for the hell of it

 

i've provided solid reasons for why i think the way i do. as even a die-hard packer homer like sho almost agrees with me (the difference is he sees 3rd place for the packers and i see 4th place again), i'd say there's more evidence for my view than any view than claims first place for the packers this year.

 

pretty much anyone predicting first-place for the packers (or the lions) will be soundly ridiculed this summer.

 

cheers.

[nlgb1 0]

i've provided solid reasons for why i think the way i do. as even a die-hard packer homer like sho almost agrees with me (the difference is he sees 3rd place for the packers and i see 4th place again), i'd say there's more evidence for my view than any view than claims first place for the packers this year.

 

pretty much anyone predicting first-place for the packers (or the lions) will be soundly ridiculed this summer.

 

cheers.

 

1.i have vikes #1

2.didnt no sho nuff was packer fan, sick (im a packer addict )

3.i show no bias in anything i wrote, just maybe a lil more knowledge of my favorite team than an average NFL fan would.

4.swamp your probably the most stubborn, stuck up person ive ever seen post on this forum.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Yup...Im a Packer fan.

[nlgb1 0]

pretty funny, ive been a packer fan since 7 or 8 yrs old, starting when pack beat NE in SB...funny part, i live in MA and everybody at the house was rooting for pats to win cept for me... might take a trip up to lambeau this year and hopefully see improvements help smack around the hometown team so i can shove it in my dads face....still no idea how i became a packer fan...

[Sho Nuff 719]

pretty funny, ive been a packer fan since 7 or 8 yrs old, starting when pack beat NE in SB...funny part, i live in MA and everybody at the house was rooting for pats to win cept for me... might take a trip up to lambeau this year and hopefully see improvements help smack around the hometown team so i can shove it in my dads face....still no idea how i became a packer fan...

 

 

I grew up about 30 minutes from Lambeau with 6 season tickets in the family. But now I live in Nashville.

 

Still get back as my family is still up there so I try and catch a game just about every year. Not sure if I will make it up for one this year as I will be moving into a new house this fall.

But I will be there in the end of July/early August so I may catch a day of practice at camp or something. Have sort of an in with Ingle Martin so will try to track him down.

[nlgb1 0]

I grew up about 30 minutes from Lambeau with 6 season tickets in the family. But now I live in Nashville.

 

Still get back as my family is still up there so I try and catch a game just about every year. Not sure if I will make it up for one this year as I will be moving into a new house this fall.

But I will be there in the end of July/early August so I may catch a day of practice at camp or something. Have sort of an in with Ingle Martin so will try to track him down.

 

really? speaking of ingle martin, i think hes a better potential QB than rodgers, has all the tools, if only he had stayed at florida and not transferred to Furman we may have been able to see how he stacks up against top competition.

[listen2me 23 1,545]

Gotta go with Swamp on this one. Who else here knows more about losers than Swamp?

 

 

[donhaas 18]

the lion have had no shortage of "exceptional drafts" in recent years. until it translates to the field, it means nothing. don't count your chickens before they're hatched.

 

Stop comparing the worst franchise in the history of the NFL to the best franchise in the history of the NFL.

A Packer exceptional draft is much different from a Millen exceptional draft.

 

HTH!!!

[Sho Nuff 719]

really? speaking of ingle martin, i think hes a better potential QB than rodgers, has all the tools, if only he had stayed at florida and not transferred to Furman we may have been able to see how he stacks up against top competition.

 

Yup...Ingle married one of my friend's cousins. Actually pretty close...the guy is going up for the preseason game against the Titans.

[Let Da Big Dog Eat 37]

the lion have had no shortage of "exceptional drafts" in recent years. until it translates to the field, it means nothing. don't count your chickens before they're hatched.

 

Uh, EXACTLY when has Millen had an "exceptional draft?" I'll save you the trouble. NEVAH!

[swamp dog 0]

Uh, EXACTLY when has Millen had an "exceptional draft?" I'll save you the trouble. NEVAH!

 

millen's gotten post-draft day grades of "A" more than not. i'm not talking about looking back at it two years down the road and having hindsight: i'm talking about how his drafts were talked about by the media in the spring and summer immediately after the drafts.

 

just like the packers this year.

 

espn was absolutely orgasmic over what he did two years ago when he raped cleveland for 2nd round pick for moving down one spot, still getting the guy he wanted anyway in roy williams, then using the cleveland pick to trade back up in the first round to draft kevin jones, and then using their own 2nd round pick on teddy lehman.

 

in fact, i believe millen, at the time, got some "A+" grades for all of that.

 

and i remember some talking heads bashing him at the time for taking the "injured" and "troubled" shaun rogers in the second round. go figure.

 

hence my point.

 

hope that was helpful.

[JREarly 0]

Green Bay????

 

Detroit????

 

 

it won't be either of those two teams. I really think it will be Chicago unless the Vikings really step it up. The Vikes have great potential but it will probably take them a year or 2.

[Walter34 3]

millen's gotten post-draft day grades of "A" more than not. i'm not talking about looking back at it two years down the road and having hindsight: i'm talking about how his drafts were talked about by the media in the spring and summer immediately after the drafts.

 

So essentially, you are saying that a draft grade is not based on the GM's ability, but rather how the Mel Kipers, the uneducated pundits and masses cheer or jeer the moves? A GM is a professional and should know better than reporter hacks. It is their job to know better and to also know better than the 31 other GMs. Immediately after a draft, the only basis for a grade is how a draft relates to some kind of consensus ranking. The highest grades are those that follow the herd like sheep.

 

How would you grade the teams that pluck out the mid and late round gems? Those that get pro bowlers from their 1st round picks instead of busts? You cant, because you never go beyond the grades 3 days after the pick.

 

If I'm hiring an employee, do I judge this employee on what others have said or do I perform my due dilligence and hire or not hire this indivisual based on my evaluation?

 

Drafts are graded more accurately after the fact when hunches and half-assed, uninformed opinions are thrown out the window. Based on the actual reality of performance, a true grade reflecting reality is only made after the fact. The moves and decisions that the GM made are proven to be correct or wrong only after the fact.

 

Detroit drafted Charles Rogers instead of Andre Johnson. They followed the herd instead of understanding who was the better WR. It was Millen's job to evaluate and make the correct decision. He didn't make the roght call regardless of what Mel said.

 

You can cherry pick with the selections of Shaun Rodgers, Roy and Kevin, but as a whole, Millen has failed miserably as a drafter.

 

HTH

[harken34 0]

Vikings? Detroit? Come on! Its gotta be da Bears! I can't believe you said Detroit.

 

 

Bears won't win it. The VIKINGS WILL

[swamp dog 0]

So essentially, you are saying that a draft grade is not based on the GM's ability, but rather how the Mel Kipers, the uneducated pundits and masses cheer or jeer the moves? A GM is a professional and should know better than reporter hacks. It is their job to know better and to also know better than the 31 other GMs. Immediately after a draft, the only basis for a grade is how a draft relates to some kind of consensus ranking. The highest grades are those that follow the herd like sheep.

 

How would you grade the teams that pluck out the mid and late round gems? Those that get pro bowlers from their 1st round picks instead of busts? You cant, because you never go beyond the grades 3 days after the pick.

 

If I'm hiring an employee, do I judge this employee on what others have said or do I perform my due dilligence and hire or not hire this indivisual based on my evaluation?

 

Drafts are graded more accurately after the fact when hunches and half-assed, uninformed opinions are thrown out the window. Based on the actual reality of performance, a true grade reflecting reality is only made after the fact. The moves and decisions that the GM made are proven to be correct or wrong only after the fact.

 

Detroit drafted Charles Rogers instead of Andre Johnson. They followed the herd instead of understanding who was the better WR. It was Millen's job to evaluate and make the correct decision. He didn't make the roght call regardless of what Mel said.

 

You can cherry pick with the selections of Shaun Rodgers, Roy and Kevin, but as a whole, Millen has failed miserably as a drafter.

 

HTH

 

 

look: we don't know how the packers draft will turn out this year--despite what the talking heads think about it.

 

that's my point. your post does nothing to add to the point i've made: there is no way to know how the packers draft this year will turn out AND, furthermore, the talking heads lauding the draft is no proof it will turn out great--just as it means nothing at this point if the talking heads are bashing a team's 2006 draft. in 2-3 years we can argue about it. millen's 2004 draft for example, started out in 2004 as being a "great draft" to last year being a red flag draft (with teddy lehman missing the entire year with injury, jones being injured and having a sub-par year, williams doing good for year 2 but also being nicked up) to...? for this year. and this year is really going to be the definitive grade for millen's 2004 draft.

 

but there's no way to know a team's final grade for a particular draft the year of that draft. hence, my word of caution to packer fans not to count their chickens just yet concerning the packers 2006 draft.

 

and you furthermore use the luxury of hindsight to make the smug pronouncement that andre johnson was the wr the lions should have drafted instead of charles rogers. at THE TIME most experts and scouts had charles rogers ranked higher than aj. aj was considerd "raw" and rogers was considered more polished.

 

thanks.

[mozzy84 0]

Bears won't win it. The VIKINGS WILL

[DrJ 0]

i simply refuted your claim that the packers, by losing a handful of close games last year, proved they are close to being a good team. that's a classic logical fallacy that i simply pointed out. it has nothing to do with the packers. as proof, i cited the record of the lions in close games.

 

refuting faulty logic doesn't mean a packer murdered someone in my family. i'm not predicting much better for the lions--and no, no lion player has murdered someone in my family, either

thank you

 

Take if from swamp, he knows on this one. Afterall, he was using the same theory to predict Lions success in 05 after all of those close games in 04.

 

look: we don't know how the packers draft will turn out this year--despite what the talking heads think about it.

 

that's my point. your post does nothing to add to the point i've made: there is no way to know how the packers draft this year will turn out AND, furthermore, the talking heads lauding the draft is no proof it will turn out great--just as it means nothing at this point if the talking heads are bashing a team's 2006 draft. in 2-3 years we can argue about it. millen's 2004 draft for example, started out in 2004 as being a "great draft" to last year being a red flag draft (with teddy lehman missing the entire year with injury, jones being injured and having a sub-par year, williams doing good for year 2 but also being nicked up) to...? for this year. and this year is really going to be the definitive grade for millen's 2004 draft.

 

but there's no way to know a team's final grade for a particular draft the year of that draft. hence, my word of caution to packer fans not to count their chickens just yet concerning the packers 2006 draft.

 

and you furthermore use the luxury of hindsight to make the smug pronouncement that andre johnson was the wr the lions should have drafted instead of charles rogers. at THE TIME most experts and scouts had charles rogers ranked higher than aj. aj was considerd "raw" and rogers was considered more polished.

 

thanks.

 

If only you applied this same logic the Lions, rather than proclaiming Millen some draft day genius every year, we'd have made some progress. You're really good at pointing out how all of your arguments are lame and baseless - when someone else uses them.

[Cdub100 3,384]

Tampa

[listen2me 23 1,545]

Packers fan here....and i'll say the Bears have the best team basically because they have a D that is just great.....no other teams have one aspect of their team being Great..they can beat the rest of the teams in the Div. with their D alone...

 

I say

 

Bears-9-7

then crapshoot

 

but for the hell of it

 

Vikings 7-9

Packers 7-9

Lions 5-11

[NJJoe20 0]

Anyone who doesn't see the Bears winning this division by 2+ games is a homer.

 

I really believe the Bears can field one of the most dominating defenses in recent memory this season. Even with the questions at QB, the o-line, RB should provide enough to win 11+ games.

[swamp dog 0]

Anyone who doesn't see the Bears winning this division by 2+ games is a homer.

 

I really believe the Bears can field one of the most dominating defenses in recent memory this season. Even with the questions at QB, the o-line, RB should provide enough to win 11+ games.

 

i have a hard time believing their defense will be more dominant this year than last year. even the ravens defense didn't sustain that kind of dominance year in and year out. they were also pretty fortunate and stayed relatively healthy on defense for a good chunk of last year.

 

last year was the perfect storm for them. the defense will be good this year, of course, but i doubt we see the gaudy numbers of last year. that playoff game shold be a huge-azz red flag.

[listen2me 23 1,545]

i have a hard time believing their defense will be more dominant this year than last year. even the ravens defense didn't sustain that kind of dominance year in and year out. they were also pretty fortunate and stayed relatively healthy on defense for a good chunk of last year.

 

last year was the perfect storm for them. the defense will be good this year, of course, but i doubt we see the gaudy numbers of last year. that playoff game shold be a huge-azz red flag.

 

I sorta feel the same....but there is just no one in the division to make their D look like anything less....when the Bears play anyone else in the Div it will look like last years D...maybe when they play a team like the Panthers it will look like it took a small step back..

[Walter34 3]

Grossman and griese are an upgrade over orton who drops to number 3

 

All 22 starters return

 

All WRs had about as bad a year as they could have. Improvements expected from the top 3 with improved qb play.

 

manning Jr and manning add needed depth to secondary

 

Manning and hester improve special teams.

 

The only returning coaching staff in the divisdion

 

Bottomline is that massive injuries is the only thing that will keep the Bears away from another division crown.

[swamp dog 0]

Grossman and griese are an upgrade over orton who drops to number 3

 

All 22 starters return

 

All WRs had about as bad a year as they could have. Improvements expected from the top 3 with improved qb play.

 

manning Jr and manning add needed depth to secondary

 

Manning and hester improve special teams.

 

The only returning coaching staff in the divisdion

 

Bottomline is that massive injuries is the only thing that will keep the Bears away from another division crown.

 

walt, throw away muhammed's 2004 anomaly year, and he had a year last year that was right about his career average (certainly in the general ball park). look it up.

 

and it will take "massive" injuries?! a few key injuries and the bears, like most teams, are toast. in fact, if urlacher misses any significant time the bears will be so-so at best.

[Walter34 3]

walt, throw away muhammed's 2004 anomaly year, and he had a year last year that was right about his career average (certainly in the general ball park). look it up.

 

and it will take "massive" injuries?! a few key injuries and the bears, like most teams, are toast. in fact, if urlacher misses any significant time the bears will be so-so at best.

 

I did look it up. He has had 3 big years, not one anomoly as you consistently claim. Since being a starter in 1998, he has averaged 74 rec / 973 yards, which is about where I see him finishing this year. That;s about 200 yds over last year, so you would be incorrect in stating last year was about his average.

 

Check the numbers yourself skippy.

 

Over and above this expected improvement, I see Berrian and Bradley out distancing the 49 receptions that last years #2 and #3 combined for.

 

Even you would have to agree with that.

[swamp dog 0]

I did look it up. He has had 3 big years, not one anomoly as you consistently claim. Since being a starter in 1998, he has averaged 74 rec / 973 yards, which is about where I see him finishing this year. That;s about 200 yds over last year, so you would be incorrect in stating last year was about his average.

 

Check the numbers yourself skippy.

 

Over and above this expected improvement, I see Berrian and Bradley out distancing the 49 receptions that last years #2 and #3 combined for.

 

Even you would have to agree with that.

 

again, throwing out the 2004 season he's had 823, 585, 837, and last year's 750 since 2001. thus, last year is a helluva lot closer to what he's consistently done than is his insane 2004 year. plus he's on the wrong side of 33 and playing in an offense that would have a hard time seeing torry holt get 1000 yards.

 

i should hope the bears 2 and 3 wrs combine for more than 49 receptions. but that improving doesn't necessarily mean more wins. it simply means more receptions. things tend to even out over a roster. there will be players stepping up--and there will be players who did well last year falling off. it's faulty logic to assume that everything else from last year that was great will remain to that same level of greatness--and the stuff that wasn't so great (offense) will rise up and the bears (or any team) will be that much better. if that's the case, the bears will go undefeated (or lose 1 or 2 games at the most). that simply isn't going to happen.

 

much like the red wings feasting on the central, the bears really aren't as good as their record last year or their first-place finish indicates. good enough to contend for the nfcn? certainly. but the bears wouldn't finish even .500 in the nfce.

 

cheers.

[Jay 0]

Time will tell. I think the Packers had a draft that will be the foundation for years to come. I project the following starters from this Packer draft.

 

Hawk (immediately)

Colledge (immediately)

Spitz (immediately)

 

Hodge (could be as early as this year)

Jennings (probably next year)

Blackmon (in 2-3 years at corner)

 

I even like the possibilities of some of the later picks contributing eventually. Johnny Jolly was projected as

a first day pick before the foot injury. Rodgers could make the team as a returner and Martin

could make it as a #3 QB.

[swamp dog 0]

Time will tell. I think the Packers had a draft that will be the foundation for years to come. I project the following starters from this Packer draft.

 

Hawk (immediately)

Colledge (immediately)

Spitz (immediately)

 

Hodge (could be as early as this year)

Jennings (probably next year)

Blackmon (in 2-3 years at corner)

 

I even like the possibilities of some of the later picks contributing eventually. Johnny Jolly was projected as

a first day pick before the foot injury. Rodgers could make the team as a returner and Martin

could make it as a #3 QB.

 

jay:

 

is blackmon hurt? if so, how badly? (i know you're not projecting him as a starter for 2-3 years...i was just curious about it as i thought i heard something about him getting hurt at a mini-camp). do you really see colledge and spitz as immediate starters? not sure i agree there...but who knows.

[Jay 0]

Yeh, Blackmon hurt his foot. I heard it could be a couple of months. He was pretty raw at corner anyway, since he had been playing WR, but getting hurt isn't going to help him develop any quicker. He was considered a top notch (first round) corner before converting to WR. I'm very optimistic about his possibilities. He is extremely athletic.

 

Colledge has been running with the first team since the first mini-camp. There is no doubt that he will start this year. Spitz has passed Coston and Klemm and is currently slotted with the first team. He could certainly lose the job, but he was with the first team at the last OTA.

[eloerts 0]

Bears 10-6

Vikes 9-7

Lions 7-9

Pack 7-9

 

I expect this to be a very competitive division. IMO the Bears are the team to beat, solid all around defense, good offensive line, good rb's and average qb's and wr's

 

Minn IMO has some health issues, if BJ goes down (no pun intended) and throw in Birk for his anual injury then the teams chances of winning just got a lot less. Defensively they shuld be pretty good, Smoot has added some size by way of muscle, Winfeild is solid and so are the safeties. LBs are athletic but tend to over react. Greenway should be fun to watch to see how he devlopes.

 

Lions..same old story here, they seem to have all the puzzle pieces but cant figure out how to put it together. Love there wr's and a very good rb.

 

Pack, well they still have Favre. A. Green needs to stay healthy and the wr's IMO are the weakest link. Def. is solid but the downfall this year will be a lack of depth at rb and little production out of the wr position. Oh and this is Favre's last year...I think?

[Sho Nuff 719]

Bears 10-6

Vikes 9-7

Lions 7-9

Pack 7-9

 

I expect this to be a very competitive division. IMO the Bears are the team to beat, solid all around defense, good offensive line, good rb's and average qb's and wr's

 

Minn IMO has some health issues, if BJ goes down (no pun intended) and throw in Birk for his anual injury then the teams chances of winning just got a lot less. Defensively they shuld be pretty good, Smoot has added some size by way of muscle, Winfeild is solid and so are the safeties. LBs are athletic but tend to over react. Greenway should be fun to watch to see how he devlopes.

 

Lions..same old story here, they seem to have all the puzzle pieces but cant figure out how to put it together. Love there wr's and a very good rb.

 

Pack, well they still have Favre. A. Green needs to stay healthy and the wr's IMO are the weakest link. Def. is solid but the downfall this year will be a lack of depth at rb and little production out of the wr position. Oh and this is Favre's last year...I think?

 

 

There is no way all the teams end up with records like that.

 

Smoot can add the size he wants...will not help him not get burnt...which is what he is good at. Tank is an average safety as well (that coming from a guy who follows the Titans pretty close as well). Lays some nice hits...but coverage and overall tackling is lacking. They are a defense that will take alot of chances...the gambles paid off last season...will they this year? Agreed that the health of Birk is big...as is McKinnie improving some. Hutch is good, but that line was just plain bad last season.

[Timinator 0]

I think this division is up for grabs with the Bears having an inside track.

 

Any of the other three teams could get hot or find some fluke chemistry.

 

As a Packer fan, I like to see the team through rose-colored glasses until they prove me wrong. (Second Quarter, Week 1?!) The defense is solid and the offense has enough tools when healthy. I see Sherman leaving as a bigger step forward than McCarthy arriving.

 

Should be some really competitive games.

[DrJ 0]

again, throwing out the 2004 season he's had 823, 585, 837, and last year's 750 since 2001. thus, last year is a helluva lot closer to what he's consistently done than is his insane 2004 year. plus he's on the wrong side of 33 and playing in an offense that would have a hard time seeing torry holt get 1000 yards.

 

i should hope the bears 2 and 3 wrs combine for more than 49 receptions. but that improving doesn't necessarily mean more wins. it simply means more receptions. things tend to even out over a roster. there will be players stepping up--and there will be players who did well last year falling off. it's faulty logic to assume that everything else from last year that was great will remain to that same level of greatness--and the stuff that wasn't so great (offense) will rise up and the bears (or any team) will be that much better. if that's the case, the bears will go undefeated (or lose 1 or 2 games at the most). that simply isn't going to happen.

 

much like the red wings feasting on the central, the bears really aren't as good as their record last year or their first-place finish indicates. good enough to contend for the nfcn? certainly. but the bears wouldn't finish even .500 in the nfce.

 

cheers.

 

And in each of those seasons, he missed games. He averaged 56.125 yards per game over those seasons, even though he was hurt, which comes out to 900 yards over 16. Seems Walt's predictions in the 900 yard range are right in line with that.

[Walter34 3]

again, throwing out the 2004 season he's had 823, 585, 837, and last year's 750 since 2001. thus, last year is a helluva lot closer to what he's consistently done than is his insane 2004 year. plus he's on the wrong side of 33 and playing in an offense that would have a hard time seeing torry holt get 1000 yards.

 

i should hope the bears 2 and 3 wrs combine for more than 49 receptions. but that improving doesn't necessarily mean more wins. it simply means more receptions. things tend to even out over a roster. there will be players stepping up--and there will be players who did well last year falling off. it's faulty logic to assume that everything else from last year that was great will remain to that same level of greatness--and the stuff that wasn't so great (offense) will rise up and the bears (or any team) will be that much better. if that's the case, the bears will go undefeated (or lose 1 or 2 games at the most). that simply isn't going to happen.

 

much like the red wings feasting on the central, the bears really aren't as good as their record last year or their first-place finish indicates. good enough to contend for the nfcn? certainly. but the bears wouldn't finish even .500 in the nfce.

 

cheers.

 

Your quote:

 

... was right about his career average ...

 

When proven wrong, you eliminate pre 2001 and also 2004.

 

So, essentially you cherry pick the 3 down years (injury based lower numbers) and try and pass that off as a career average?

 

You have every right to take the pessimistic approach with da Bears in your predictions, few if any listen to your rants anymore, but try and avoid misrepresenting numbers or outright lying mkay.

[DrJ 0]

Your quote:

When proven wrong, you eliminate pre 2001 and also 2004.

 

So, essentially you cherry pick the 3 down years (injury based lower numbers) and try and pass that off as a career average?

 

You have every right to take the pessimistic approach with da Bears in your predictions, few if any listen to your rants anymore, but try and avoid misrepresenting numbers or outright lying mkay.

 

The great thing is that even his cherry picked numbers support your prediction if analyzed in the proper context.

[Cdub100 3,384]

LIONS