Vikings Message Board.Com

Er, at the risk of appearing overly anal retentive, I'd point out some of us prognosticators seem to be leaving a 5-10% chance of someone unexpected—the Badgers? The Spartans? The Memphis Maniax?—swooping in to steal the 2016 NFC North title:

40% Vikes, 40% packers, 5% bears 5% lions

35% vikings, 40% packers, 15% bears,and 5% on lions.

45% Vikings, 45% Pack, 2.5% each to the Lions and Bears.

To be fair, if (say) the Indianapolis Colts make a run at the NFCN crown this year, they will certainly have the advantage of the element of surprise.

Also don't sleep on the Schwäbisch Hall Unicorns gunning for on-field (and in-division-standings) revenge for having their star wideout stolen from them.

...On second thought, go ahead and sleep on the Unicorns; Germany's seven hours ahead of CDT.

Rieux wrote:Er, at the risk of appearing overly anal retentive, I'd point out some of us prognosticators seem to be leaving a 5-10% chance of someone unexpected—the Badgers? The Spartans? The Memphis Maniax?—swooping in to steal the 2016 NFC North title:
To be fair, if (say) the Indianapolis Colts make a run at the NFCN crown this year, they will certainly have the advantage of the element of surprise.

Also don't sleep on the Schwäbisch Hall Unicorns gunning for on-field (and in-division-standings) revenge for having their star wideout stolen from them.

...On second thought, go ahead and sleep on the Unicorns; Germany's seven hours ahead of CDT.

The Colts are switching conferences? Wow.

Rieux wrote:Er, at the risk of appearing overly anal retentive, I'd point out some of us prognosticators seem to be leaving a 5-10% chance of someone unexpected—the Badgers? The Spartans? The Memphis Maniax?—swooping in to steal the 2016 NFC North title:
To be fair, if (say) the Indianapolis Colts make a run at the NFCN crown this year, they will certainly have the advantage of the element of surprise.

Also don't sleep on the Schwäbisch Hall Unicorns gunning for on-field (and in-division-standings) revenge for having their star wideout stolen from them.

...On second thought, go ahead and sleep on the Unicorns; Germany's seven hours ahead of CDT.

HA!

I was thinking the Bucs would come back to the division, which accounted for my ghost 5%.

Yeah, that's the ticket!

The split between the Vikings and the Fudge Packers should be very similar. Same as last year, both teams have got better all over the field.
For me its
40% Vikes
40% Chutney Ferrets
15% Bears
5% Lions

However, you injure Rodgers and its more like this:

70% Vikings
15% Tunkies
10% Da' Bears
5% Lions

So i think our off season mission is clear. Get Clay Matthews to feed Aaron with some of that chunky soup and he gets a very severe long lasting (but eventually harmless) case of food poisoning. 17 weeks should do.

Texas Vike wrote: HA!

I was thinking the Bucs would come back to the division, which accounted for my ghost 5%.

Yeah, that's the ticket!

Man I used to hate the Bucs so bad! That stupid pirate ship would fire every time they scored a touchdown. It was horrible watching Mike Alstott and Warrick Dunn tear through our defense.

PLEASE! The return of the Bucs would be great for the Vikes. You could just pencil in 2 extra wins every year. I miss them, I like their stadium, and their old school helmet with the pirate with a dagger clenched in his teeth. Our division is too small without them.

I agree with Chicagopurple, I loved playing the Bucs. My grandparents moved to St. Pete when I was a kid, so it somehow made me feel contacted to them. Probably even more than that, it was fun to see the warm weather games there in November. I was watching from home in MN on the TV as gloomy November was being its oppressive self, so the sunshine was welcome. Also, for as long as I can remember they sucked (they were nicknamed "the Yucks" after all) and were usually an easy win.

PLEASE! The return of the Bucs would be great for the Vikes. You could just pencil in 2 extra wins every year. I miss them, I like their stadium, and their old school helmet with the pirate with a dagger clenched in his teeth. Our division is too small without them.

I wouldn't be surprised if we don't get another team in the next 3-5 years.

St louis could end up with another team since the rams left. I don't know if it will be
the Buc's or not.. but I could see an expansion team or two before to long.

chicagopurple wrote:PLEASE! The return of the Bucs would be great for the Vikes. You could just pencil in 2 extra wins every year. I miss them, I like their stadium, and their old school helmet with the pirate with a dagger clenched in his teeth. Our division is too small without them.

I have different feelings about the Bucs. I'm glad they're gone. The Bucs were always able to beat the Vikings in important games. I've always viewed the Bucs as the Vikings Achilles heel (not to mention Loadholt injured his Achilles last year vs the Bucs). Mike Alstot, Cadillac Williams, Shaun King, I get bad feelings when hearing these names.

How about this for continued disrespect. ESPN thinks the Packers are the defending NFC North champs.

https://twitter.com/Vikings/status/732618997527547904

cromulus wrote:How about this for continued disrespect. ESPN thinks the Packers are the defending NFC North champs.

https://twitter.com/Vikings/status/732618997527547904

Damm really
I guess consider the source...

They had no respect for us last year, on a home turn that really wasn't home, and we beat the Packers for the Division title. Ofc they want to play that down because the Packers are one of the privileged team. A few years of us kicking them around should change that. But we need a new punter and kicker (not choker) for that to happen. Blame anyone you want, Walsh should have nailed that kick, and until he does, we will be a secondary team in a lot of people eyes.

it's not disrespect. don't forget how handily the packers kicked our a$$es in the first meeting. even in a "down" year they still won 10 games, a road playoff game, and were close to beating the cards on the road. imo they are still the favorites in the division and are a favorite to win the conference. we have to show that we can put together two good seasons before we can start complaining about how we are represented in power rankings/polls.

Jordysghost wrote:Ok, you know what is indicative of something? Statistics. Do you have any? I do. For most of the year the Packers were ranked higher then the Vikings on the Defensive side of the ball, the Packers finished the league with a top 5 secondary and a rushing D that led the league in YPG, only our poor performance against Arizona in leua of our top two cornersw knocked them out of the top 7 to 12th in overall D in the league, but the above statistics still remain.

Statistics? WTF are you talking about? While neither team was stellar, the Vikings beat the Packers in nearly every possible defensive statistical category last season. According to NFL.com, the Pack did not have a top 5 secondary and did not have a rushing D that led the league in YPG.

Here are some key defensive stats for the 2015 regular season from NFL.com:

Pts per game allowed:
Vikings - 18.9 (5th)
Packers - 20.2 (12th)

Yds per game allowed:
Vikings - 344.2 (13)
Packers - 346.7 (15)

Yds per play allowed:
Vikings - 5.4 (14)
Packers - 5.5 (17)

Rushing yds per play allowed:
Vikings - 4.3 (21)
Packers - 4.5 (26)

Rushing yds per game allowed:
Vikings - 109.2 (17)
Packers - 119.1 (21)

What am I missing?

ChicagoViking wrote: Statistics? WTF are you talking about? While neither team was stellar, the Vikings beat the Packers in nearly every possible defensive statistical category last season. According to NFL.com, the Pack did not have a top 5 secondary and did not have a rushing D that led the league in YPG.

Here are some key defensive stats for the 2015 regular season from NFL.com:

Pts per game allowed:
Vikings - 18.9 (5th)
Packers - 20.2 (12th)

Yds per game allowed:
Vikings - 344.2 (13)
Packers - 346.7 (15)

Yds per play allowed:
Vikings - 5.4 (14)
Packers - 5.5 (17)

Rushing yds per play allowed:
Vikings - 4.3 (21)
Packers - 4.5 (26)

Rushing yds per game allowed:
Vikings - 109.2 (17)
Packers - 119.1 (21)

What am I missing?

Raptor had pointed out the rushing ypg, I had been looking at 'Postseason" rushing ypg when I said that, my mistake, as I said, Raptorman pointed that out a page or two back.

The secondary spent most of the year in the top 3 before the AZ game without Shields and Randall knocked them out of the top 5, still, I was just a ranking off, I thought they finished 5th not 6th.

Idk what your point is, those stats for the most part support what I was saying, I wasnt stating the Packers D to be better then the Vikes, simply that the Vikes D clearly wasnt on such an exaggerately different level than some have tryed to insinuate (Again, the statistics that added seem to be imply this), the Packers were actually ranked higher then the Vikes up until sometime around week 6-8 if I recall correctly. (Which I only state because you seem to misunderstand my comment in the quote you quoted)