2011-12 NFC North Division

[Chili]

Kyle Rudolph offensive rookie of the year. 

Vikings make the playoffs and do damage.  SKOL VIKINGS!

I think you have been hitting the Skol a little hard here....

[Mayor McCheese]

Kyle Rudolph offensive rookie of the year. 

Vikings make the playoffs and do damage.  SKOL VIKINGS!

I think you are by yourself in that corner, keep up the good fight!

[NavinRJohnson]

Packers should win the division with relative ease. After that it may come down to the Bears' and Lions' respective O-lines. Whichever team does a better job keeping their QB on his feet will likely finish second, and have a good shot at the playoffs.

[JWags85]

I think you are by yourself in that corner, keep up the good fight!

Hey, the offensive ROY is usually a TE, so he's not off there.  Oh wait...

[MerrittsMustache]

I don't know what to think about Green Bay.  On the one hand, they went 10-6 and had to win their last two even to get into the playoffs.  On the other, they were the first team since the AFL/NFL merger to never be down more than seven points in a game, and when they got their act together, strung along six victories in a row.

So it wouldn't surprise me to see them go 14-2 and repeat....and it wouldn't surprise me that they look at times like they did last year, and finish 10-6....I just don't know what to expect.

+1

The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.

Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10

[wadesworld]

+1

The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.

Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10

Have never and will never believe that argument. If they truly felt they had nothing to play for Cutler would not have ever thrown a pass, let alone been in long enough to get sacked SIX times (that number may be wrong, I'm too lazy to look it up right now). If they were just going to let the Packers win and show nothing, they would've sat the starters. Playing a "vanilla" gameplan (did the Bears ever have anything that wasn't vanilla? They are not a flashy team who does the same thing week in and week our) does not save players from injury, they are still on the field. They knew they may very well see the Packers again and did not want them getting into the playoffs, thus playing everyone all the way through. The fact of the matter is Packers vs. Bears games are ALWAYS ugly games for BOTH teams. They're rivals, it's always in cold weather, and they know each other better than they know anyone else. The NFC Championship game was just as ugly, and no Cutler in the 2nd half would not have been a difference maker. Heine played a better 2nd half than Cutler did.

10-6 is not dominating, no. But 6-0 to close put the year, going with wins AT Philli, Chi, and ATL, neutral against Pitt, and home against NYG and Chi is certainly dominating and proved they were the best team in the NFL. That's 5-0 against the 1, 2, and 3 seeds in the NFC and 2 seed in the AFC, and a win against the last team our of the NFC playoff. And oh, the Packers get 1 of the top 3 tight ends in the league back for the best QB/receiving core in the NFL and their feature tailback (although he won't be the feature back this year) to possibly give them SOME sort of running game. Not to mention Rogers missed 2 games with concussions.

And mediocre division? Are we talking about the NFC North? The 1 that had 2 teams in the NFC Championship game? The 1 that had it's 2nd place team win the Super Bowl? Interesting.

[Hards Alumni]

The Packers are easily the best team in the NFC.  12-4 or 13-3.

[MerrittsMustache]

Have never and will never believe that argument. If they truly felt they had nothing to play for Cutler would not have ever thrown a pass, let alone been in long enough to get sacked SIX times (that number may be wrong, I'm too lazy to look it up right now). If they were just going to let the Packers win and show nothing, they would've sat the starters. Playing a "vanilla" gameplan (did the Bears ever have anything that wasn't vanilla? They are not a flashy team who does the same thing week in and week our) does not save players from injury, they are still on the field. They knew they may very well see the Packers again and did not want them getting into the playoffs, thus playing everyone all the way through. The fact of the matter is Packers vs. Bears games are ALWAYS ugly games for BOTH teams. They're rivals, it's always in cold weather, and they know each other better than they know anyone else. The NFC Championship game was just as ugly, and no Cutler in the 2nd half would not have been a difference maker. Heine played a better 2nd half than Cutler did.

10-6 is not dominating, no. But 6-0 to close put the year, going with wins AT Philli, Chi, and ATL, neutral against Pitt, and home against NYG and Chi is certainly dominating and proved they were the best team in the NFL. That's 5-0 against the 1, 2, and 3 seeds in the NFC and 2 seed in the AFC, and a win against the last team our of the NFC playoff. And oh, the Packers get 1 of the top 3 tight ends in the league back for the best QB/receiving core in the NFL and their feature tailback (although he won't be the feature back this year) to possibly give them SOME sort of running game. Not to mention Rogers missed 2 games with concussions.

And mediocre division? Are we talking about the NFC North? The 1 that had 2 teams in the NFC Championship game? The 1 that had it's 2nd place team win the Super Bowl? Interesting.

Sheesh. Is it tough to type with your tears all over the keyboard?

We've been over the Bears' gameplan thing before. I have my educated guess and you have your blindly loyal guess so we can just agree to disagree on that one and move on.

As for the division, Detroit and Minnesota both went 6-10 last season and IMO both will be about the same this season. Yes, the Bears went to the conference championship game last season (and would have won if Cutler was healthy), but I don't see them doing much better than .500 this season. Therefore, I believe the division is very mediocre. You're more than welcome to feel differently.



If wadesworld doesn't respond, we'll know his head exploded based on that sarcastic parenthetical.

[MU B2002]

The Packers are easily the best team in the NFC.  12-4 or 13-3.

They will be the #3 seed in the NFC behind Atlanta and Philly.

[Hards Alumni]

They will be the #3 seed in the NFC behind Atlanta and Philly.

I guess we just disagree.

[NavinRJohnson]

+1

The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season.

More accurately, they got healthier/had a complete roster at the right time, and were without a doubt the best team by the end of the year. There were some questions during the regular season to be sure, but the only people who had those questions by the end of the year were probably living in Chicago. Now they bring that same team back plus they get to add the numerous parts they lost during the year, including one of the more dominant players in the league in Finley as well as Ryan Grant.

They should walk through that division.

[wadesworld]

Sheesh. Is it tough to type with your tears all over the keyboard?

We've been over the Bears' gameplan thing before. I have my educated guess and you have your blindly loyal guess so we can just agree to disagree on that one and move on.

As for the division, Detroit and Minnesota both went 6-10 last season and IMO both will be about the same this season. Yes, the Bears went to the conference championship game last season (and would have won if Cutler was healthy), but I don't see them doing much better than .500 this season. Therefore, I believe the division is very mediocre. You're more than welcome to feel differently.



If wadesworld doesn't respond, we'll know his head exploded based on that sarcastic parenthetical.

I'm just trying to bring some reasonable talk into the "The Packers were not a dominant team last year."  Again, is 10-6 dominant?  Absolutely not.  But for all of the reasons I stated, it was clear that they were the best team in the NFL, even with 2 key starters missing from the offense, when it mattered.  Glad you can respond to my reasoning with personal attacks (not that it's really insulting, just lack of a better way to put it).

How is yours opinion an "educated guess" while mine is "blindly loyal?"  Here's a question for you, what happened in the NFC Championship game, when the Bears were no longer playing a "vanilla" game and had everything to lose (and were at home)?  The exact same thing that happened in Week 17.  You would think that by going from "vanilla" to all out, and playing at home as opposed to on the road, they would have more success.  But it was a very ugly game that the Packers were able to pull out again.  So are the Bears just somehow a team that can play "vanilla" and not try because they have "nothing to play for" and still have the exact same results when they have everything to play for?

Another question.  I ask you to please give me some reasonable explanation for this.  Jay Cutler was sacked SIX times in week 17 game.  Why in the WORLD, if the Bears are not even trying win that game, is he in the game long enough to be sacked SIX times?  You're really going to risk injury to your starting quarterback in a game that you supposedly are not even trying in during week 17, entering the playoffs?  I guess I'm just "blindly loyal" and really any team who is locked into the 2nd spot in the playoffs and cannot move up or down would play their starting quarterback long enough to be sacked SIX times if they aren't trying to win the football game.  Just explain to me with your "educated guess" how that one works.  Is Lovie that much of an idiot?  He's not trying, yet he's saying "Hey Jay, go out there, if you get sacked once, no big deal, twice, it's cool, 3 times, keep going, 4 times, alright, 5 times, you'll be OK, 6 times, let's finish this one out.  If you happen to get hurt the 7th time you are sacked, we'll be OK with Heine being our starting quarterback going into the playoffs."  I guess that must be the one.

My head must still be in tact, but clearly I'm just an idiot for questioning why you'd have your starting QB in a week 17 game long enough to be sacked 6 times in a game that you're not trying to win and that can't move you up or down in the playoff race.

[mugrad2006]

+1

The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.

Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10

The thing that this comment glosses over is the massive number of injuries the Packers sustained last year to key contributors.  When healthy (in the playoffs) they did dominate.  

If bitten by the injury bug again this year, sure, they might end up 10-6 or at worst 9-7.  This doesn't make the team mediocre, it means they have depth.  I'd expect a healthy GB team to get at least 11 wins, with 12 a real possibility.  

[MU B2002]

I guess we just disagree.

Yea, I thought we were just throwing out predictions.

Loser sends the winner a Fat Tire bomber.

[MerrittsMustache]

I'm just trying to bring some reasonable talk into the "The Packers were not a dominant team last year."  Again, is 10-6 dominant?  Absolutely not.  But for all of the reasons I stated, it was clear that they were the best team in the NFL, even with 2 key starters missing from the offense, when it mattered.  Glad you can respond to my reasoning with personal attacks (not that it's really insulting, just lack of a better way to put it).

How is yours opinion an "educated guess" while mine is "blindly loyal?"  Here's a question for you, what happened in the NFC Championship game, when the Bears were no longer playing a "vanilla" game and had everything to lose (and were at home)?  The exact same thing that happened in Week 17.  You would think that by going from "vanilla" to all out, and playing at home as opposed to on the road, they would have more success.  But it was a very ugly game that the Packers were able to pull out again.  So are the Bears just somehow a team that can play "vanilla" and not try because they have "nothing to play for" and still have the exact same results when they have everything to play for?

Another question.  I ask you to please give me some reasonable explanation for this.  Jay Cutler was sacked SIX times in week 17 game.  Why in the WORLD, if the Bears are not even trying win that game, is he in the game long enough to be sacked SIX times?  You're really going to risk injury to your starting quarterback in a game that you supposedly are not even trying in during week 17, entering the playoffs?  I guess I'm just "blindly loyal" and really any team who is locked into the 2nd spot in the playoffs and cannot move up or down would play their starting quarterback long enough to be sacked SIX times if they aren't trying to win the football game.  Just explain to me with your "educated guess" how that one works.  Is Lovie that much of an idiot?  He's not trying, yet he's saying "Hey Jay, go out there, if you get sacked once, no big deal, twice, it's cool, 3 times, keep going, 4 times, alright, 5 times, you'll be OK, 6 times, let's finish this one out.  If you happen to get hurt the 7th time you are sacked, we'll be OK with Heine being our starting quarterback going into the playoffs."  I guess that must be the one.

My head must still be in tact, but clearly I'm just an idiot for questioning why you'd have your starting QB in a week 17 game long enough to be sacked 6 times in a game that you're not trying to win and that can't move you up or down in the playoff race.

I stated that the Packers were not a dominant team in the regular season. They weren't. If the Giants didn't implode Week 15 vs. Philly, Packers fans would still be complaining about how Aaron Rodgers can't win big games and holds onto the ball too long. As it turned out, the Packers got hot late in the season and won the SB. You can claim that they didn't just "get hot" that they were getting healthy and would have been that dominant all season. We'll never know, but I can have my opinion and you can have yours. Personally, I think they're the class of an average division.

Having a vanilla gameplan and "not trying to win" are very different things. You didn't understand that in January and you still don't understand it now. I'm not going to waste my time explaining it to you again. That, along with the fact that you claim that the last game of the season and the NFC Championship game were exactly the same because they were both 7-point GB wins tells me all that I need to know about your football IQ.

[wadesworld]

Nice response.  Enlighten me with your superior football IQ.  I would love to hear it.

[MUBurrow]

I think the Packers easily win the division, with the other 3 teams all finishing within one game of .500. The Pack tho, will lose in the playoffs to a team that exposes their thin secondary in a high scoring game.

[MerrittsMustache]

Nice response.  Enlighten me with your superior football IQ.  I would love to hear it.

I don't claim to be a football expert, but I know enough to know when someone doesn't have a particularly strong grasp of the intricacies of football and football strategies. I don't mean that as an insult (though it may come across that way) because most fans are in this similar boat.

[wadesworld]

I don't claim to be a football expert, but I know enough to know when someone doesn't have a particularly strong grasp of the intricacies of football and football strategies. I don't mean that as an insult (though it may come across that way) because most fans are in this similar boat.

Then it should be pretty simple to answer what I would consider a pretty simple question: Why was Jay Cutler playing long enough to be sacked 6 times in a Week 17 game that had zero playoff implications for the Bears? If they were not doing everything they could to win that game and keep the Packers out of the playoffs, why were they doing anything that would risk their playoff success in playing all of their starters the entire game?

A more complex question is what is ever not "vanilla" about anything the Bears do?

[NavinRJohnson]

The Pack tho, will lose in the playoffs to a team that exposes their thin secondary in a high scoring game.

What makes you say their secondary is thin? They have some rookies in supporting roles, but they have one HOF player (whom I expect to have a good year), and 2 pro bowl caliber guys in the starting 4 spots. The fourth is a bit of an unknown because of the injury last year. Question marks with some of the new guys? Sure. Thin? Not sure how you can say that. Add in the quality of their pass rush,and I am not terribly concerned about the secondary. All they did last year was lead the NFC in pass yds. allowed, YPA, opp. comp %, opp QB rating, and INTs (top 2 or 3 in every other category), but yeah, feel free to go with that if you think its a weakness.

[Spotcheck Billy]

+1

The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.

Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10

stop and think about that....they had new players having to step it up to replace the constant loss of starters due to injury so yes, there was some struggling taking place during that span, even Rodgers was out in 2 games due to his concussion yet Flynn came close to beating the Pats in NE

[Jay Bee]

Freaking won the Super Bowl and still making excuses?  Stop it!  What happened is reality.

WHO DAT!  SKOL VIKINGS!  Green Bey loses at home tonight.. can't wait!

[mugrad2006]

Freaking won the Super Bowl and still making excuses?  Stop it!  What happened is reality.

WHO DAT!  SKOL VIKINGS!  Green Bey loses at home tonight.. can't wait!

Anybody else picture Jay Bee as the Minnesota version of Bill Swerski's Superfans?  Ole Swerskesson, eating his lefse and lutefisk and drinking liters of Grain Belt while yelling Skol Vikings all the time? 

[Chili]

Anybody else picture Jay Bee as the Minnesota version of Bill Swerski's Superfans?  Ole Swerskesson, eating his lefse and lutefisk and drinking liters of Grain Belt while yelling Skol Vikings all the time?  

Wearing one of the cross dressing hats like this:

[MerrittsMustache]

Then it should be pretty simple to answer what I would consider a pretty simple question: Why was Jay Cutler playing long enough to be sacked 6 times in a Week 17 game that had zero playoff implications for the Bears? If they were not doing everything they could to win that game and keep the Packers out of the playoffs, why were they doing anything that would risk their playoff success in playing all of their starters the entire game?

A more complex question is what is ever not "vanilla" about anything the Bears do?

Lovie didn't want his starters to have 2 full weeks with no action prior to their first playoff game so he went into the final week of the season planning to play the starters for an indeterminate amount of time. Considering the Bears were keeping things basic, hoping to stay healthy and trying to get Johnny Knox 1,000 yards receiving, if the Packers, with their season on the line, got ahead by a couple scores, the Bears would pull the starters. If the game was close, as it was, the Bears would leave their starters out their and try to keep GB out of the playoffs. As it turned out, the Bears left their starters in the whole game but couldn't get the W.


Are you at all familiar with the Mike Martz offense? There's not much vanilla about it. It sure isn't the Ron Turner or John Schoop offense.