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


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