PDA

View Full Version : Preseason done-- new predictions



packmanxxxi
09-04-2004, 12:14 AM
While the Vikings admittedtly looked better than the Packers, the Packers came out of it unscathed, while the Vikings lost their star runner, with his backup ( a druggie moron) out for 4 games, no matter when they are.

Just curious what the new predictions are (from those who see things for what they are without the purple shades on)

I see it now (again, barring unusual inguries ie. Favre, Moss)

Pack 11-5
Vikes 9-7
Lions 8-8
Bears 5-11

SKOL
09-04-2004, 12:17 AM
Running Back is the Vikes deepest position.
Vikes - 11-5
Lions - 9-7
Bears - 7-9
Pack - Sucks

magicci
09-04-2004, 12:18 AM
no the vikes will be fine with him out against dallas.
they have other good running backs to play that game and the way things are going it looks like smith could play a backup role in that game or get a few plays. so in my opinion every thing will go smooth

packmanxxxi
09-04-2004, 12:20 AM
Who are your back-ups again? A rookie, a guy whos suspended, and a goal line rusher? And this is the Vikings deepest position???? That doesnt say much for the Vikings.....

SKOL
09-04-2004, 12:28 AM
I suppose yours was the 4 loss vote. That shows real intelligence. :roll:

magicci
09-04-2004, 12:29 AM
we still won six games without Bennet and our depth at rb wasn't as great last year as it is now
so just a little FYI

SKOL
09-04-2004, 12:45 AM
This kid Mewelde Moore's going to be a star. Smith will play week 1. The Vikings are still targeting Bennett's return for week 2, although in reserve. Moe led the team through their 6-0 start last season. Granted the Vikes RB's aren't as deep as the Pack's, still I think we'll be just fine.

BigEasyViking
09-04-2004, 12:56 AM
First off, it appears that Bennett will only miss the opener. So how on earth would it affect more than one game. Second off, I think that our 4th stringer could run for a hundred yards a game behind our O-line. And third off, even if I was the running back we could still outscore teams just by passing to the Freak, Robinson, Burleson, and Campbell. So now what other excuses are you gonna come up with as to why the pack will win the division, when you already know that it's ours?

casper
09-04-2004, 03:04 AM
"BigEasyViking" wrote:

First off, it appears that Bennett will only miss the opener. So how on earth would it affect more than one game. Second off, I think that our 4th stringer could run for a hundred yards a game behind our O-line. And third off, even if I was the running back we could still outscore teams just by passing to the Freak, Robinson, Burleson, and Campbell. So now what other excuses are you gonna come up with as to why the pack will win the division, when you already know that it's ours?

Great post and talk about hitting the nail on the head, I am more convinced after preseason my predictions of prior to preseason..so no changes here...Packmaxxxiiiiiiiii

packmanxxxi
09-04-2004, 09:22 AM
Only miss the opener huh? Maybe you need to go to the front page of this site itself to see that your wrong there...

Viking_Spirit
09-04-2004, 09:27 AM
"packmanxxxi" wrote:

Who are your back-ups again? A rookie, a guy whos suspended, and a goal line rusher? And this is the Vikings deepest position???? That doesnt say much for the Vikings.....
First off, Smith is playing against Dallas. So, there's a game where losing Bennett isn't gonna hurt us. And, we don't know how long Bennett will be out. If he's back by the Philly game, we're set. If not, we can live one game with Moe at RB. He did a good job last year at starting RB, and he can do well again.

I'm not too worried right now.

whackthepack
09-04-2004, 09:39 AM
"packmanxxxi" wrote:

While the Vikings admittedtly looked better than the Packers, the Packers came out of it unscathed, while the Vikings lost their star runner, with his backup ( a druggie moron) out for 4 games, no matter when they are.

Just curious what the new predictions are (from those who see things for what they are without the purple shades on)

I see it now (again, barring unusual inguries ie. Favre, Moss)

Pack 11-5
Vikes 9-7
Lions 8-8
Bears 5-11


Ahmann Green has a bruised knee too, the packers injury list is longer than the Vikes your team is the walking wounded! Who are you trying to kid?

And our offense will be fine our back-ups would be starters on a lot of teams, and our D will be far superior to the pack!!!!!!! :salute: :salute:

Vikes 12 - 4
Lions 9 - 7 (tie breaker most points after splitting with the pack)
pack 9 - 7
Lions 5 - 11

ItalianStallion
09-04-2004, 10:05 AM
Bennett potentially missing a few games certainly doesn't help but Onterrio is there for the opener if not more (pending his appeal, which seems to have the NFL thinking), Moe is very solid and consistent and had excellent games while starting last year. Mewelde has shown me alot but mostl ikely is not ready to go against starting Defenses in the league, at least not on a consistent basis.

WE have the depth packman, but don't look for our offense to cost us too many games this season. I am more worried about our LBs and special teams.

So...How bout Mike McKenzie :), wasn't he guaranteed to be in camp by most fans. I guess he really doesn't want to play for the PAckers, can't say I don't blame him.

triedandtruevikesfan
09-04-2004, 10:28 AM
Once again eternally optimistic TNT is not worried at all. Few reasons... while we may not have our starting RB for the first game our depth is fine at the position. O. Smith will be in that game as will Moe, who is a very consistent rb. I'm very impressed with Moore also. Granted he is unproven but what I seen from him in preseason makes me believe that he is definately going to be an NFL star.

And even if we had no game at RB, we still have great WR's and TE's. So as IS just said... its the D that worries me... and that doesn't keep me up at night either. They are unproven, but I think they will prove to be good this season.

Viking_Spirit
09-04-2004, 10:31 AM
Anyone know the scoop on Bennett and when Onterrio is serving his suspension?


BTW someone come talk to me in the chat, im very bored

triedandtruevikesfan
09-04-2004, 10:32 AM
I would if I could VS but I can't get into the new chatroom at work

whackthepack
09-04-2004, 10:32 AM
"packmanxxxi" wrote:

While the Vikings admittedtly looked better than the Packers, the Packers came out of it unscathed, while the Vikings lost their star runner, with his backup ( a druggie moron) out for 4 games, no matter when they are.

Just curious what the new predictions are (from those who see things for what they are without the purple shades on)

I see it now (again, barring unusual inguries ie. Favre, Moss)

Pack 11-5
Vikes 9-7
Lions 8-8
Bears 5-11


Unscathed thats what you said? right

GB Packers
Position Name Injury Status

QB Tim Couch Arm Questionable Fri. vs Ten. 9/1
C Mike Flanagan Knee Probable Fri. vs Ten. 8/30
RB Ahman Green Knee Questionable Fri. vs Ten. 8/31
LB Torrance Marshall Hmastring Questionable Fri. vs Ten. 8/28
TE David Martin Knee Questionable Fri. vs Ten. 8/28
CB Michael Hawthorne Back Questionable Fri. vs Ten. 8/28
CB Mike McKenzie Holdout Questionable Fri. vs Ten. 8/28
DB Chris Johnson Undisclosed P-U-P list. 8/30
DT James Lee Arm Out indefinitely. 8/25
T Brennan Curtin Knee Out for the season. 8/24


I think that is far more injuries than the Vikes have!!!
Unscathed?
:bootyshake: :bootyshake: :bootyshake: :bootyshake: :bootyshake:

cheesefree
09-04-2004, 12:10 PM
"packmanxxxi" wrote:

While the Vikings admittedtly looked better than the Packers, the Packers came out of it unscathed, while the Vikings lost their star runner, with his backup ( a druggie moron) out for 4 games, no matter when they are.

Just curious what the new predictions are (from those who see things for what they are without the purple shades on)

I see it now (again, barring unusual inguries ie. Favre, Moss)

Pack 11-5
Vikes 9-7
Lions 8-8
Bears 5-11

I see somebody's wearing green shades and getting high on cheese gas. The Packers couldn't win the division on their own last year, and they won't be getting any gifts from the Vikings this year.

Packers finish an irrelevant 3rd behind the division champion Vikes and #2 Detroit.

LoviesBears
09-04-2004, 01:43 PM
Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!

jackyl
09-04-2004, 01:46 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd

LMFAO :lol:

triedandtruevikesfan
09-04-2004, 01:46 PM
what dreamland are you living in Lovies? You're offense is for crap... you just traded your 1 semi decent WR for a defensive player. I predict the Bears or Lions to finish last... Sorry to burst your bubble but there is no way you will finish above us or... no matter how much I hate them... Green Bay

LoviesBears
09-04-2004, 01:52 PM
"triedandtruevikesfan" wrote:

what dreamland are you living in Lovies? You're offense is for crap... you just traded your 1 semi decent WR for a defensive player. I predict the Bears or Lions to finish last... Sorry to burst your bubble but there is no way you will finish above us or... no matter how much I hate them... Green Bay

Our defensive end we got from Miami is going to force Culpepper to fumble so much. Daunte is going to be hearing footsteps all day long. Why does Culpepper want to play for the bears? He's used to giving them the ball so much ha ha!

RK.
09-04-2004, 02:05 PM
The Pack will be lucky to make 8/8 this season. Its possible that O will beat the suspension or at least have it reduced. We have the best offense in the NFL and losing a player for a couple games here and there won't change that. The only question about winning games is whether the new D is as good as we all hope it is. If we lose players there then we could be hurting. We have some thin depth problems in a few positions on D.

ItalianStallion
09-04-2004, 02:16 PM
In all honesty guys I respect he Packers offense way too much to say that they will be any lower than 2nd in the division, no matter how bad their secondary will be.

As far as bears fans talking trash, win some games and get 1 GOOD WR, RB or QB and then we'll talk, you're lucky if you beat out the lions for the cellar.

casper
09-04-2004, 02:17 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!

Lovelessdare is your second sir name TEXPACK :roll:

dan3ski
09-04-2004, 02:42 PM
Well pack did you forget the Vikings had the #1 overall offense last year and it looks like that has been improved and even you must admit the DEE in Minn is much improved over last year. I saw no improvement for GB in any department.

VikingsTw
09-04-2004, 02:51 PM
All i can say is MOE IS THE MAN, i love moe the guy is not just a goal line runner u have no idea what u are talking about. Who is the running back who cranked on u in the first game last year in lambo, can u say MOE. He bayled us out of so many 3rd down situations last year its unbalievable. I think he was in the top five for one single player converting 3rd downs for his team.

Oh by the way are u watching farve throw all the INT's to the titans yeah i would get ready for the INT's to flow this year.

VikingsTw
09-04-2004, 02:52 PM
Oh wait he finally scored late in the second quarter against the titans 3rd string DB's.

whackthepack
09-04-2004, 03:32 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!


Another troll that can not lay off the crack pipe, crack kills lovie!

RandyMoss8404
09-04-2004, 03:54 PM
Uh in case you guys forgot, Moe Williams caught 65 passes and ran for respectable yardage last year, while not starting a lot of our games. He could be a 1000 yard back if he wanted to.

muchluv4smoot
09-04-2004, 04:43 PM
Does anyone else remember this same conversation last year at this time, by pack fans? What did we hear last year, "you guys have a goaline back and a rookie, yet you think your offense will still be great". I remember having the #1 offense in the NFL last year, with a goaline back and a rookie, so why are we all of a sudden in bad shape this year? Is Bennett gonna miss half the season again? NO. He is out probably 2 games and will play only a little the 3rd week against the weak bears. Onterrio is playing week 1, so we aren't in any trouble there. The one I am worried about, and was before bennett got hurt, was in phily on monday night. There is a chance we will loose that game, but there was that chance before bennett got hurt as well. The next week against the bears, bennett might play some, but if he doesn't, no worries. Before bennett got hurt, I would have said that we could be 2-1 going into our bye week and I haven't changed that thought. Phily will be a tough game, but that is the only game we have to worry about loosing without bennett and we still have a decent shot at winning that game too.

Look at our team last year at this time and compare it to this years team, we started 6-0 with a rookie RB and a golaine RB, and with a bad D. We have a much better D, a better D coordinator, 2 young WR's with more experience(burleson and cambell), and a better pass catching TE(wiggins). Looks to me like we are in a much better situation this year, than we were at this time last year. I don't remember bennett costing us any wins to start the season last year, so I will vote for zero wins, since we have a much better team this year. Seems like a no brainer to me!

If I were a pack fan, I would be worrying more about my team and what they are going to do this season, cause they have looked like crap in a lot of areas this preseason. I have yet to see a team that looks like they are capable of winning 11 games, when watching the pack play in preseason.

packmanxxxi
09-04-2004, 07:14 PM
"muchluv4moss" wrote:

Does anyone else remember this same conversation last year at this time, by pack fans? What did we hear last year, "you guys have a goaline back and a rookie, yet you think your offense will still be great". I remember having the #1 offense in the NFL last year, with a goaline back and a rookie, so why are we all of a sudden in bad shape this year? Is Bennett gonna miss half the season again? NO. He is out probably 2 games and will play only a little the 3rd week against the weak bears. Onterrio is playing week 1, so we aren't in any trouble there. The one I am worried about, and was before bennett got hurt, was in phily on monday night. There is a chance we will loose that game, but there was that chance before bennett got hurt as well. The next week against the bears, bennett might play some, but if he doesn't, no worries. Before bennett got hurt, I would have said that we could be 2-1 going into our bye week and I haven't changed that thought. Phily will be a tough game, but that is the only game we have to worry about loosing without bennett and we still have a decent shot at winning that game too.

Look at our team last year at this time and compare it to this years team, we started 6-0 with a rookie RB and a golaine RB, and with a bad D. We have a much better D, a better D coordinator, 2 young WR's with more experience(burleson and cambell), and a better pass catching TE(wiggins). Looks to me like we are in a much better situation this year, than we were at this time last year. I don't remember bennett costing us any wins to start the season last year, so I will vote for zero wins, since we have a much better team this year. Seems like a no brainer to me!

If I were a pack fan, I would be worrying more about my team and what they are going to do this season, cause they have looked like crap in a lot of areas this preseason. I have yet to see a team that looks like they are capable of winning 11 games, when watching the pack play in preseason.

Its amazing how you talk about last year and consider it a success! You didnt make the playoffs!!!!! #1 offense... fine, you had that... but who is going to remember that? And don't say the Pack had to have help to make the playoffs balh blah blah..... they were 10-6, Vikes were 9-7... the Packer helped themselves by winning 10 games instead of 9. Did the Vikings get better this year? Probably. Did the Packers? yes- if nothing more than just returning just about every starter. Look at NE and how they did it. Same recipe.

There was an aweful lot of positive talk about Bennett to now say he doesn't make a difference. Who is going to run? Culpepper so he can fumble? Williams to run for a yard? Seriously. Name one team w/o a running game that has done anything.... Bennett's news gets worse daily. Last that was one the news here in Duluth was that he is out till the bye.

If you think its not going to make a difference, then your just plain neive. Tell me this... if the Packers were without Ahman Green, would it matter? I wouldn't be sitting here saying it doesn't. Enjoy the tough road your about to endure.... Oh yeah... hows that # 2 receiver situation coming???

LoviesBears
09-04-2004, 07:17 PM
"packmanxxxi" wrote:

"muchluv4moss" wrote:

Does anyone else remember this same conversation last year at this time, by pack fans? What did we hear last year, "you guys have a goaline back and a rookie, yet you think your offense will still be great". I remember having the #1 offense in the NFL last year, with a goaline back and a rookie, so why are we all of a sudden in bad shape this year? Is Bennett gonna miss half the season again? NO. He is out probably 2 games and will play only a little the 3rd week against the weak bears. Onterrio is playing week 1, so we aren't in any trouble there. The one I am worried about, and was before bennett got hurt, was in phily on monday night. There is a chance we will loose that game, but there was that chance before bennett got hurt as well. The next week against the bears, bennett might play some, but if he doesn't, no worries. Before bennett got hurt, I would have said that we could be 2-1 going into our bye week and I haven't changed that thought. Phily will be a tough game, but that is the only game we have to worry about loosing without bennett and we still have a decent shot at winning that game too.

Look at our team last year at this time and compare it to this years team, we started 6-0 with a rookie RB and a golaine RB, and with a bad D. We have a much better D, a better D coordinator, 2 young WR's with more experience(burleson and cambell), and a better pass catching TE(wiggins). Looks to me like we are in a much better situation this year, than we were at this time last year. I don't remember bennett costing us any wins to start the season last year, so I will vote for zero wins, since we have a much better team this year. Seems like a no brainer to me!

If I were a pack fan, I would be worrying more about my team and what they are going to do this season, cause they have looked like crap in a lot of areas this preseason. I have yet to see a team that looks like they are capable of winning 11 games, when watching the pack play in preseason.

Its amazing how you talk about last year and consider it a success! You didnt make the playoffs!!!!! #1 offense... fine, you had that... but who is going to remember that? And don't say the Pack had to have help to make the playoffs balh blah blah..... they were 10-6, Vikes were 9-7... the Packer helped themselves by winning 10 games instead of 9. Did the Vikings get better this year? Probably. Did the Packers? yes- if nothing more than just returning just about every starter. Look at NE and how they did it. Same recipe.

There was an aweful lot of positive talk about Bennett to now say he doesn't make a difference. Who is going to run? Culpepper so he can fumble? Williams to run for a yard? Seriously. Name one team w/o a running game that has done anything.... Bennett's news gets worse daily. Last that was one the news here in Duluth was that he is out till the bye.

If you think its not going to make a difference, then your just plain neive. Tell me this... if the Packers were without Ahman Green, would it matter? I wouldn't be sitting here saying it doesn't. Enjoy the tough road your about to endure.... Oh yeah... hows that # 2 receiver situation coming???

Take a hike fudgepacker.

cheesefree
09-04-2004, 07:19 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!

:laughing3: Put your crack pipe down and slowly back away from your keyboard.

LoviesBears
09-04-2004, 07:21 PM
"cheesefree" wrote:

"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!

:laughing3: Put your crack pipe down and slowly back away from your keyboard.

Viking fans have the iq of a rock but thats why they root for the vikings cause of their low iq. :lol:

cheesefree
09-04-2004, 07:31 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

"cheesefree" wrote:

"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!

:laughing3: Put your crack pipe down and slowly back away from your keyboard.

Viking fans have the iq of a rock but thats why they root for the vikings cause of their low iq. :lol:

Maybe we should all start rooting for a team that has sucked for 19 of the last 20 years like the :pukeright: Bears.

rjkvikings
09-04-2004, 07:33 PM
"cheesefree" wrote:

[Maybe we should all start rooting for a team that has sucked for 19 of the last 20 years like the :pukeright: Bears.

Makes sense to me :!:

muchluv4smoot
09-04-2004, 08:32 PM
"packmanxxxi" wrote:

"muchluv4moss" wrote:

Does anyone else remember this same conversation last year at this time, by pack fans? What did we hear last year, "you guys have a goaline back and a rookie, yet you think your offense will still be great". I remember having the #1 offense in the NFL last year, with a goaline back and a rookie, so why are we all of a sudden in bad shape this year? Is Bennett gonna miss half the season again? NO. He is out probably 2 games and will play only a little the 3rd week against the weak bears. Onterrio is playing week 1, so we aren't in any trouble there. The one I am worried about, and was before bennett got hurt, was in phily on monday night. There is a chance we will loose that game, but there was that chance before bennett got hurt as well. The next week against the bears, bennett might play some, but if he doesn't, no worries. Before bennett got hurt, I would have said that we could be 2-1 going into our bye week and I haven't changed that thought. Phily will be a tough game, but that is the only game we have to worry about loosing without bennett and we still have a decent shot at winning that game too.

Look at our team last year at this time and compare it to this years team, we started 6-0 with a rookie RB and a golaine RB, and with a bad D. We have a much better D, a better D coordinator, 2 young WR's with more experience(burleson and cambell), and a better pass catching TE(wiggins). Looks to me like we are in a much better situation this year, than we were at this time last year. I don't remember bennett costing us any wins to start the season last year, so I will vote for zero wins, since we have a much better team this year. Seems like a no brainer to me!

If I were a pack fan, I would be worrying more about my team and what they are going to do this season, cause they have looked like crap in a lot of areas this preseason. I have yet to see a team that looks like they are capable of winning 11 games, when watching the pack play in preseason.

Its amazing how you talk about last year and consider it a success! You didnt make the playoffs!!!!! #1 offense... fine, you had that... but who is going to remember that? And don't say the Pack had to have help to make the playoffs balh blah blah..... they were 10-6, Vikes were 9-7... the Packer helped themselves by winning 10 games instead of 9. Did the Vikings get better this year? Probably. Did the Packers? yes- if nothing more than just returning just about every starter. Look at NE and how they did it. Same recipe.

There was an aweful lot of positive talk about Bennett to now say he doesn't make a difference. Who is going to run? Culpepper so he can fumble? Williams to run for a yard? Seriously. Name one team w/o a running game that has done anything.... Bennett's news gets worse daily. Last that was one the news here in Duluth was that he is out till the bye.

If you think its not going to make a difference, then your just plain neive. Tell me this... if the Packers were without Ahman Green, would it matter? I wouldn't be sitting here saying it doesn't. Enjoy the tough road your about to endure.... Oh yeah... hows that # 2 receiver situation coming???


I believe that bennett plays on our offense, so wouldn't it make sense to talk about how our offense did last year, without him? Are you saying we didn't make the playoffs because our offense wasn't good enough without bennett??? Or maybe just maybe our D was bad, and that might have had something to do with us not making the playoffs?

So if we went 6-0 to start last year with a golaine back and a rookie RB, why is it nieve to think we can do it again? Do we not have a much better D this year? Do we not have one of the most respected D coordinators this year? Is burleson not a much more experienced and better WR this year? Is cambell not more experienced? Is robinson not a much better WR than bates was? Is wiggins not a much better receiving TE than any TE we had last year? Do you not think daunte looks even more comfortable in linehans offense this year?

I seem to see a lot of reasons that we are a much much better football team than last year at this time, and I believe that most experts see the same thing and that is why they have picked the vikes to win the north this year.

You can call it being nieve all you want, but the fact is, we had the #1 offense in the NFL last year, without bennett, so we can do it again with him out a couple of games, No? With all of our other improvements, it looks like we shouldbe able to handle dallas pretty easy as well as chicago in week 3. Phily in week 2 is the only worry game, and that was the case when bennett was healthy.

I seem to remember you asking if bennet being out was gonna cost us some wins, and I answered no. I don't think you asked if him being out, would hurt our offense some. Sure our offense is less explosive in the running game without him, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU ASKED. Just because our offense is less explosive without him, doesn't mean we won't win. Example: 1st six games last year, one of those games being against the pack.

muchluv4smoot
09-04-2004, 09:02 PM
Here is a good way to put it for you. With bennett healthy 2 years ago, the vikes had the best rushing attack in the league that year. Last year, without bennett, we had the 4th best rushig attack in the NFL. So if you asked, will bennett not being in there hurt our offense? I would say yes, but it isn't gonna hurt us that much, or enough to cost us to loose any games. Was that not the question you asked???

duffVIkEs
09-05-2004, 01:31 PM
moe williams= domination last season to cover for bennet. if remember correctly they WON 6 GAMES in a row with williams. im sure theyll be fine.

duffVIkEs
09-05-2004, 01:34 PM
moe williams= domination last season to cover for bennet. if remember correctly they WON 6 GAMES in a row with williams. im sure theyll be fine.

ItalianStallion
09-05-2004, 02:51 PM
Let me explain something to you pacmanxxx, no one here thinks that losing Bennett has no effect on the team. But we have depth and have a good enoug O-line to get 100 yards out of any of our backs, that is why is won't COST us any games. I don't understand why you are so adamant that it will cost us games. DId you not watch any of our games last year? Bennett hardly played but we ran the ball fine. Moe had 100 yard games, Onterrio had a couple 140 yard games, and now we have Mewelde too. WE will be able to have a running game without him as we have in the past.

Last year wasn't a success because we didn't win the superbowl, but we have built on our strentghs last year and both our offense and defense should be improved. What you fail to see packman is that our offense didn't cause us to miss the playoffs last season, our defense did.

Packman if you actually did return every starter I would admit they are at least are as good as they are last year. But your defense as a whole is below average and your corners are BRUTAL. There is no basis on which to believe your defense will be better. WE actually believe sgining a top corner and losing the aged verterans at LB which were a liability last year will help us.

Anyway our RBs arn't like the PAckers. we don't have a stud RB that is he goes down there go our playoff chances. We have 4 RBs who individually are not superstars but all are solid and have very good skills.

casper
09-05-2004, 02:58 PM
"cheesefree" wrote:

"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!

:laughing3: Put your crack pipe down and slowly back away from your keyboard.

Damm chessefree worn someone first my screen wiper was not on :roll: so I have to wipe the screen off manually...I hate when that happens...coffee is everywhere...ROTFLMAO :headbang: :notworthy: :occasion5:

purplepat
09-05-2004, 03:27 PM
"packmanxxxi" wrote:

While the Vikings admittedtly looked better than the Packers, the Packers came out of it unscathed, while the Vikings lost their star runner, with his backup ( a druggie moron) out for 4 games, no matter when they are.

Just curious what the new predictions are (from those who see things for what they are without the purple shades on)

I see it now (again, barring unusual inguries ie. Favre, Moss)

Pack 11-5
Vikes 9-7
Lions 8-8
Bears 5-11

Better than the Packers? The Packers looked absolutely HORRIBLE in the preseason! The Vikings first stringers on offense and defense looked virtually invincible! Did you actually see Viking RBs Mewelde Moore or even Larry Ned play in the preseason, packman? Bennett (or Smith) missing a few games early in the year won't even slow this juggernaut down slightly. I don't see how you can predict that the Packers will be two games better than the Vikings! Frankly, I'm starting to have doubts that the Packers will even finish as high as second! If McKenzie doesn't report (and in playing shape), the poor secondary play and special teams will kill the Packers this year.

A more likely finish is:

Vikings 12-4
Packers 9-7
Lions 8-8
Bears 5-11

purplepat
09-05-2004, 03:33 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

Bears finish 1st, lions 2nd and the vikes and packers tied for last where the two belong!!!

Lovie -

In the NFL, finishing 1st does not mean blowing your wad and then rolling over and falling asleep, which is what the Bears will do this season (assuming the Bears will even be able to "get it up and get it on", which is doubtful).

The Bears, despite their "improvements", are one of the four worst teams in the NFC, along with the Cardinals, 49ers, and Giants. Face it, your team just plain sucks this year.

whackthepack
09-05-2004, 08:15 PM
packmann
Its amazing how you talk about last year and consider it a success! You didnt make the playoffs!!!!! #1 offense... fine, you had that... but who is going to remember that? And don't say the Pack had to have help to make the playoffs balh blah blah..... they were 10-6, Vikes were 9-7... the Packer helped themselves by winning 10 games instead of 9. Did the Vikings get better this year? Probably. Did the Packers? yes- if nothing more than just returning just about every starter. Look at NE and how they did it. Same recipe.

There was an aweful lot of positive talk about Bennett to now say he doesn't make a difference. Who is going to run? Culpepper so he can fumble? Williams to run for a yard? Seriously. Name one team w/o a running game that has done anything.... Bennett's news gets worse daily. Last that was one the news here in Duluth was that he is out till the bye.

If you think its not going to make a difference, then your just plain neive. Tell me this... if the Packers were without Ahman Green, would it matter? I wouldn't be sitting here saying it doesn't. Enjoy the tough road your about to endure.... Oh yeah... hows that # 2 receiver situation coming???





Vikings coach Mike Tice declined to talk about Smith, but he reiterated that veteran Moe Williams will start in place of Michael Bennett, who is out with a sprained knee.

But Bennett is optimistic of his progress and his return.

"It's not as bad as everyone makes it out to be," Bennett said.

Bennett said he hopes to start jogging Monday, and he hopes to be running by the end of the week.

Asked what game he would like to start, Bennett said, "Philadelphia (Week 2




Doesn't look like it is getting worse to me, maybe you should worry about the walking wounded in Pukerville :pukeright: [/quote]

LoviesBears
09-06-2004, 09:12 PM
Viqueens stink, Go Cowboys sunday!

SKOL
09-06-2004, 10:00 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

Viqueens stink, Go Cowboys sunday!

We'll see ya after week 3 lovie dovie, but please not before. Oh wait a minute, trolls like you won't show up after a loss... so please don't come back at all.

bltizkrieg
09-06-2004, 10:03 PM
Here's my prediction as the season starts this week:

Vikings 12-4
Packers 8-6
Lions 8-8
Bears 4-12

Go Vikings! Go Home Packers!

LoviesBears
09-06-2004, 11:10 PM
My predictions
1. Bears
2. Lions
3. Peckers
4. Queens

jackyl
09-06-2004, 11:40 PM
The only time the Bears will have a chance to have a 1 in front of them all year will be the pick they earned in the '05 draft come seasons end.

cheesefree
09-06-2004, 11:52 PM
"LoviesBears" wrote:

My predictions
1. Bears
2. Lions
3. Peckers
4. Queens

You be sure and come back around Christmastime to discuss your predictions and tell us how much the Vikings suck :roll: