The Sporting News has come out with its predictions for the various divisions. They see the NFC North shaping up this way:
- Green Bay 11-5
- Chicago 10-6
- Minnesota 9-7
- Detroit 3-13
Hold on a second while I get done laughing at that Lions prediction…
Okay, now back to the Vikings. 9-7? I guess I can understand it. Nobody’s sold on Tarvaris Jackson yet. The receiver corps has issues. We don’t have a tight end. I’m not going to get too upset about such a pick.
Um…but the Bears at 10-6? Based on what? Their dynamic quarterback? Their young, never-injured defense? Their awesome receivers? Their depth at running back? Sorry but I don’t get it. Put the Bears side-by-side with the Vikings and tell me where the Bears are a game better than them. Can you even argue that the Bears have the superior defense at this point? How did they play last year? Did Brian Urlacher get a year younger? Didn’t he have surgery in the off-season?
That one puzzles me…way more than even the Packers being picked at 11-5. If Aaron Rodgers plays well? Yeah, I can see the Packers having a nice season. But if he doesn’t…forget about 11-5.
Tags: minnesota vikings, tarvaris jackson
Dunking with Wolves
Gone Puck Wild
Lightly Buzzed
Puckett's Pond
Bear Goggles On
Lombardi Ave
NFL Mocks
SideLion Report
Loading ...
On the one hand, the Vikings getting no respect is irritating.
On the other hand, it could be a very good thing for the Vikings to be underrated going into the season.
I am puzzled at what would make anyone think the Bears will be 10-6 in 2008, but why do people think the Lions will be as awful as 3-13? That's truly horrible, and it seems as excessively pessimistic as the projection for the Bears is optimistic.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like