Vikings VS Packers Predictions

[Fran the Man]

27 - 10 Packers

[Sinatra]

Things to consider:

Vikings beat the Texans, yes. The Packers also destroyed the Texans. The Packers are a better team than the Texans. A Vikings victory over the Texans doesn't have any real predictive quality in regards to the Packers game.

Rodgers absolutely owns domes. The Vikings would be better off playing this game in Lambeau. "Homefield" advantage isn't much of an advantage for the Vikings in this situation.

The Packers have won 9 of their last 10. That's despite missing Jennings, Nelson, Matthews, Woodson, Bulaga, Bishop and others. Jennings and Matthews are both back, and Woodson and Nelson are returning soon -- if not this week.

The Packers own Ponder. He's gotten progressively worse every time he's played them. 219 yards in the first meeting, 190 in the second, and 119 in the third. His yards per attempt have also gotten worse - 6.84 in the first game, 5.59 in the second and 4.76 in the third. He's thrown 3 touchdowns to 5 interceptions, and has yet to throw more TDs than INTs in a game against the Packers. In the last two games, he's throw 1 TD to 3 INTs. Last week over the Texans was a great win, and Ponder actually managed not to be a total liability -- but he showed nothing to think he's going to suddenly reverse a career trend and come up big against the Packers.

The Vikings have a shot. Every team does, every game. But they're still a highly flawed team with a non-factor/liability at quarterback going against a superior opponent with an excellent quarterback. The Texans, conversely, simply aren't that great right now, and Schaub isn't special.

[w_huisman]

Things to consider:

Vikings beat the Texans, yes. The Packers also destroyed the Texans. The Packers are a better team than the Texans. A Vikings victory over the Texans doesn't have any real predictive quality in regards to the Packers game.

Rodgers absolutely owns domes. The Vikings would be better off playing this game in Lambeau. "Homefield" advantage isn't much of an advantage for the Vikings in this situation.

The Packers have won 9 of their last 10. That's despite missing Jennings, Nelson, Matthews, Woodson, Bulaga, Bishop and others. Jennings and Matthews are both back, and Woodson and Nelson are returning soon -- if not this week.

The Packers own Ponder. He's gotten progressively worse every time he's played them. 219 yards in the first meeting, 190 in the second, and 119 in the third. His yards per attempt have also gotten worse - 6.84 in the first game, 5.59 in the second and 4.76 in the third. He's thrown 3 touchdowns to 5 interceptions, and has yet to throw more TDs than INTs in a game against the Packers. In the last two games, he's throw 1 TD to 3 INTs. Last week over the Texans was a great win, and Ponder actually managed not to be a total liability -- but he showed nothing to think he's going to suddenly reverse a career trend and come up big against the Packers.

The Vikings have a shot. Every team does, every game. But they're still a highly flawed team with a non-factor/liability at quarterback going against a superior opponent with an excellent quarterback. The Texans, conversely, simply aren't that great right now, and Schaub isn't special.

You're right. There is no hope. Bah HUMBUG!

SCREW THAT! Any given Sunday! LET'S SEND THOSE FUDGEPACKERS PACKING! (and lets serve this naysayer a hot steaming plate of crow!)

SKOL ! ! ! ! !

"superior opponent"? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? The Packers have looked like a hot pile of dung more often this year than in any recent year. Go back to your Cheesehole, fudgepacker.

[Mothman]

Things to consider:

Vikings beat the Texans, yes. The Packers also destroyed the Texans. The Packers are a better team than the Texans. A Vikings victory over the Texans doesn't have any real predictive quality in regards to the Packers game.

Rodgers absolutely owns domes. The Vikings would be better off playing this game in Lambeau. "Homefield" advantage isn't much of an advantage for the Vikings in this situation.

The Packers have won 9 of their last 10. That's despite missing Jennings, Nelson, Matthews, Woodson, Bulaga, Bishop and others. Jennings and Matthews are both back, and Woodson and Nelson are returning soon -- if not this week.

The Packers own Ponder. He's gotten progressively worse every time he's played them. 219 yards in the first meeting, 190 in the second, and 119 in the third. His yards per attempt have also gotten worse - 6.84 in the first game, 5.59 in the second and 4.76 in the third. He's thrown 3 touchdowns to 5 interceptions, and has yet to throw more TDs than INTs in a game against the Packers. In the last two games, he's throw 1 TD to 3 INTs. Last week over the Texans was a great win, and Ponder actually managed not to be a total liability -- but he showed nothing to think he's going to suddenly reverse a career trend and come up big against the Packers.

The Vikings have a shot. Every team does, every game. But they're still a highly flawed team with a non-factor/liability at quarterback going against a superior opponent with an excellent quarterback. The Texans, conversely, simply aren't that great right now, and Schaub isn't special.

Well, Merry Christmas to you too, Scrooge.

As you said, the Vikes have a shot. They can win this game. Ponder sure wasn't a "non-factor/liability" a few days ago in a big upset win on the road and the Vikes have a good pass rush, a great running back, a determined roster and home field advantage going for them. They can pull off this upset. Green Bay went to NY at the end of November and were crushed by the Giants. They didn't exactly dominate their 3 divisional opponents in the 3 weeks following that game either. I don't care if they put 55 points up on the hapless Titans. They're beatable and they're going to be facing a Vikings team that's eager to prove themselves and make the playoffs. The Vikes just delivered a pair of dominating performances on the road. The Packers have as much reason to be nervous about this one as the Vikings.

[w_huisman]

Well, Merry Christmas to you too, Scrooge.

As you said, the Vikes have a shot. They can win this game. Ponder sure wasn't a "non-factor/liability" a few days ago in a big upset win on the road and the Vikes have a good pass rush, a great running back, a determined roster and home field advantage going for them. They can pull off this upset. Green Bay went to NY at the end of November and were crushed by the Giants. They didn't exactly dominate their 3 divisional opponents in the 3 weeks following that game either. I don't care if they put 55 points up on the hapless Titans. They're beatable and they're going to be facing a Vikings team that's eager to prove themselves and make the playoffs. The Vikes just delivered a pair of dominating performances on the road. The Packers have as much reason to be nervous about this one as the Vikings.

Ha! Stick that in your scrooge-pipe and smoke it, Sinatra!

SKOL !

[Raptorman]

Superior opponent my butt. The Packers have won two more games than the Vikings with one of the best QB's in the league. Just think on that for a minute. Two more games. And the two games they won? The Vikings and the Bears. Take out the division games the records of the teams the Vikings and the Packers have played are dead even at 75-73-2. They have played the same teams except the Vikes played Bucs 6-9 and the Skins 9-6, and the Packers played the Saints 7-8 and Giants 8-7.

Out of teams that are currently in the playoffs, Green Bay has played 4. Houston, Indy, San Fran and Seattle. They beat Houston. The Vikings have played Houston, Indy, San Fran, Seattle and Green Bay. They beat Houston and San Fran.

Sorry, I don't consider Green Bay a "superior" team in any form.

That being said, I think the experienced QB wins this one.

Packers 30
Vikings 24

[indianation65]

The Vikings defense steps up and enjoys keeping gb from galloping to big numbers. Minnesota can pull out a nice win, two field goals add some kick.

Vikings 20
GB 17

...wisdom through anything can happen

[Sinatra]

Ponder sure wasn't a "non-factor/liability" a few days ago

Actually, that's exactly what I'd say he was. When 174 yards and a touchdown is cause for rejoicing, that just serves to illustrate how dire the Vikings' QB situation is. For point of reference, the Houston pass defense is ranked 16th. That's a middle-of-the-road pass defense.

Superior opponent my butt.

C'mon now, you're just being silly at this point. Packers: 7th ranked scoring O, 7th ranked scoring D. Vikings: 17th ranked O, 11th rank D. And as you pointed out, the teams have played comparable schedules. Even more important is the passing game, though, which dominantes the NFL now and is especially relevant in a domed game. By passer rating, the Packers have the 1st ranked O and 4th ranked D. Conversely, Minnesota has the 24th ranked O and 21st ranked D by passer rating.

The Packers started off rough -- no denying it. But 9 out of their last 10 doesn't lie. Conversely, the Vikings are 5-5 over their last 10. Oh, and the Packers have done all this with an injury list that includes Clay Matthews, Charles Woodson, Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, Cedric Benson (IR), Bryan Bulaga (IR), Desmond Bishop (IR), James Starks, Alex Green, CJ Wilson, Nick Perry (IR), Andrew Quarless (IR), DJ Smith (IR) and others -- all of those guys have missed games, and many are on IR. That's at least 8 starters, for those counting at home.

I fully believe the Vikings have a shot. But it's more of the "Any given Sunday" variety than the "We match up well with these guys" variety. The Vikings don't match up well. Frankly, the Packers are one of the worst match-ups for the Vikings. The 49'ers and Texans aren't great passing offenses (25th and 15th, respectively), and rely more on running the ball -- which helps the Vikings, since they can't pass either.

In 2010 and 2011, the Vikings played the Packers very tight in Green Bay, only to turn around and get boat-raced in Minnesota. This year, the Vikings again managed to keep it relatively close in Green Bay. However, the trend shows that a close game in Green Bay is meaningless for Minnesota's chances in Minnesota. We'll see if the trend holds true. I think it will.

[Raptorman]

Actually, that's exactly what I'd say he was. When 174 yards and a touchdown is cause for rejoicing, that just serves to illustrate how dire the Vikings' QB situation is. For point of reference, the Houston pass defense is ranked 16th. That's a middle-of-the-road pass defense.

C'mon now, you're just being silly at this point. Packers: 7th ranked scoring O, 7th ranked scoring D. Vikings: 17th ranked O, 11th rank D. And as you pointed out, the teams have played comparable schedules. Even more important is the passing game, though, which dominantes the NFL now and is especially relevant in a domed game. By passer rating, the Packers have the 1st ranked O and 4th ranked D. Conversely, Minnesota has the 24th ranked O and 21st ranked D by passer rating.

The Packers started off rough -- no denying it. But 9 out of their last 10 doesn't lie. Conversely, the Vikings are 5-5 over their last 10. Oh, and the Packers have done all this with an injury list that includes Clay Matthews, Charles Woodson, Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, Cedric Benson (IR), Bryan Bulaga (IR), Desmond Bishop (IR), James Starks, Alex Green, CJ Wilson, Nick Perry (IR), Andrew Quarless (IR), DJ Smith (IR) and others -- all of those guys have missed games, and many are on IR. That's at least 8 starters, for those counting at home.

I fully believe the Vikings have a shot. But it's more of the "Any given Sunday" variety than the "We match up well with these guys" variety. The Vikings don't match up well. Frankly, the Packers are one of the worst match-ups for the Vikings. The 49'ers and Texans aren't great passing offenses (25th and 15th, respectively), and rely more on running the ball -- which helps the Vikings, since they can't pass either.

In 2010 and 2011, the Vikings played the Packers very tight in Green Bay, only to turn around and get boat-raced in Minnesota. This year, the Vikings again managed to keep it relatively close in Green Bay. However, the trend shows that a close game in Green Bay is meaningless for Minnesota's chances in Minnesota. We'll see if the trend holds true. I think it will.

For a point of reference, Green Bay has e 21st ranked Pass defense and the 19th ranked run defense. BTW, Packer fans are predicting that they will put up 150 yards rushing on the Vikes while hold AD to 50 yards.

I have no illusions to my Vikings team. However, the Packers are way over rated. They have Aaron Rodgers and a few good WR's and Clay Matthews. My hope is they stack 8-9 in the box like other teams have. Keep running the ball and keep it out of Rodgers hands and when he has it, take away the long ball. That's all it take to beat the Packers.

[admvp]

Actually, that's exactly what I'd say he was. When 174 yards and a touchdown is cause for rejoicing, that just serves to illustrate how dire the Vikings' QB situation is. For point of reference, the Houston pass defense is ranked 16th. That's a middle-of-the-road pass defense.

C'mon now, you're just being silly at this point. Packers: 7th ranked scoring O, 7th ranked scoring D. Vikings: 17th ranked O, 11th rank D. And as you pointed out, the teams have played comparable schedules. Even more important is the passing game, though, which dominantes the NFL now and is especially relevant in a domed game. By passer rating, the Packers have the 1st ranked O and 4th ranked D. Conversely, Minnesota has the 24th ranked O and 21st ranked D by passer rating.

The Packers started off rough -- no denying it. But 9 out of their last 10 doesn't lie. Conversely, the Vikings are 5-5 over their last 10. Oh, and the Packers have done all this with an injury list that includes Clay Matthews, Charles Woodson, Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, Cedric Benson (IR), Bryan Bulaga (IR), Desmond Bishop (IR), James Starks, Alex Green, CJ Wilson, Nick Perry (IR), Andrew Quarless (IR), DJ Smith (IR) and others -- all of those guys have missed games, and many are on IR. That's at least 8 starters, for those counting at home.

I fully believe the Vikings have a shot. But it's more of the "Any given Sunday" variety than the "We match up well with these guys" variety. The Vikings don't match up well. Frankly, the Packers are one of the worst match-ups for the Vikings. The 49'ers and Texans aren't great passing offenses (25th and 15th, respectively), and rely more on running the ball -- which helps the Vikings, since they can't pass either.

In 2010 and 2011, the Vikings played the Packers very tight in Green Bay, only to turn around and get boat-raced in Minnesota. This year, the Vikings again managed to keep it relatively close in Green Bay. However, the trend shows that a close game in Green Bay is meaningless for Minnesota's chances in Minnesota. We'll see if the trend holds true. I think it will.

You sell the Vikings short, in my opinion. We are also playing our best football of the year, and I'm sorry but home field advantage does matter here. There is no denying that this particular Vikings team has played far better at home, regardless of the opponent. And the Dome will be rocking Sunday; that place can get loud sometimes. If Rodgers and company are unable to take the crowd out of the game early, it'll be a factor.

Also, discussing trends against a specific team, a rival no less, is silly to me. It's a tiny small sample size, with one game at each location per season. Not enough to call it a trend. So to me, you can't site the last 2-3 seasons as a reason why this or that will happen on Sunday.

The Packers are a solid team, yes. But they are not a great team, not with all these injuries. They simply happen to be playing their best football of the season in the past month or so. That's the main thing going against us, and the reason why I don't like our chances. The Packers' best > the Vikings' best.

[Sinatra]

For a point of reference, Green Bay has e 21st ranked Pass defense and the 19th ranked run defense. BTW, Packer fans are predicting that they will put up 150 yards rushing on the Vikes while hold AD to 50 yards.

I have no illusions to my Vikings team. However, the Packers are way over rated. They have Aaron Rodgers and a few good WR's and Clay Matthews. My hope is they stack 8-9 in the box like other teams have. Keep running the ball and keep it out of Rodgers hands and when he has it, take away the long ball. That's all it take to beat the Packers.

Not sure where you're getting your stats. They're completely wrong. The Packers pass defense is ranked 12th by yards, and 4th by passer rating. Your rushing stats are also wrong, but it's not really important -- I agree that the Packers run defense is nothing special. Statistics' Source: http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/ ... on/defense

Also, if all the Packers have is Rodgers, a few good receivers, and Matthews, then it's really impressive that the Packers have won 9 of their last 10 with Jennings, Nelson and Matthews all missing numerous games during that stretch.

[Purple bruise]

Let's not discount what a choke job those 15-1 Packers pulled off at home last year
I think that the Vikes will win the game and with the Packer's less than good run defense AD will have a huge day. My main concern is Matthews. He did not play last time and he is a factor. Additionaly which J. Allen shows up.
Do not lose sight of the fact that the Packers have the most erratic PK in the league and the Vikes have the best (this could be a huge factor).
So naysayers beware the Vikes are on a roll

[Sinatra]

Also, discussing trends against a specific team, a rival no less, is silly to me. It's a tiny small sample size, with one game at each location per season. Not enough to call it a trend. So to me, you can't site the last 2-3 seasons as a reason why this or that will happen on Sunday.

And yet Vikings fans are optimistic because of one good game last week. Essentially, a one game trend. So that argument swings both ways.

I'm not selling the Vikings short. I've been spot-on about them all year. When they were 4-1 and 5-2, I said they were going to regress and would be fortunate to even make the playoffs. And I was right -- they've gone 4-4 since and have to win next week against a team they haven't beat in three years to make the playoffs.

[Raptorman]

Not sure where you're getting your stats. They're completely wrong. The Packers pass defense is ranked 12th by yards, and 4th by passer rating. Your rushing stats are also wrong, but it's not really important -- I agree that the Packers run defense is nothing special. Statistics' Source: http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/ ... on/defense

Also, if all the Packers have is Rodgers, a few good receivers, and Matthews, then it's really impressive that the Packers have won 9 of their last 10 with Jennings, Nelson and Matthews all missing numerous games during that stretch.

Actually I got them from NFL.com. But I now notice that they had the teams in reverse order for some reason. But they haven't been without at Jennings, Nelson at the same time. The fact is the Vikings are only two games back. Out of the 8 common games. The Vikings are 6-2. the Packers 5-3. Out of the non-common games, the Vikings or 0-2 the Packers are 1-1 (Skins, Buc, Saint, Giants) So that leave the division games. Vikings are 3-2 Packers are 5-0 Vikings have played 5 teams currently in the playoffs and have won 2 of those games. The Packers have played 4 teams currently in the playoffs and have won 1 of those games.

[Orion]

Historically though we put good pressure and hit and sack him a couple times. A few hard hits and McCarthy might decide it's not worth to risk Rodgers getting say a concussion especially if we're winning and GB sees that SF is blowing out Arizona and will probably win that game.