State of the NFC North

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3503
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by mansquatch » Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:09 am

I would not be so quick to count out the Lions. Their offense will improve from last year, especially if Burleson can remain healthy. Reggie Bush should make their rushing attack better as well. Defense is a bigger question mark for them after their poor cap management took its toll. Still any offense featuring Stafford and Megatron will be competitive.

As far as the Pack, their D might have been ranked 11th, but what we saw on game day was an entirely different story. There is a reason the coaching staff is focusing on the 569 yards the 49ers put up on them in the playoffs. You also cannot discount what Adrian Peterson did to your defense in the regular season. Also, arguably your 2nd biggest playmaker on that unit, Woodson is no longer with the team. Someone else needs to fill those shoes and right now no one knows who that is. Keep in mind that the Packer defense is predicated on the turnover, it is a high risk/high reward style of play. Against a team that protects the football, or when in a game where it doesn’t have a two score lead, the defense has issues. That being said, even without Jennings and Woodson, Rogers still makes you the favorites to win the division.

However, I do think that the loss of Jennings is bigger than most people are making it out to be. The Packer O will still be great, that won’t change unless Rogers gets hurt, but the simple truth is that your depth of pass catchers was an asset in that you could put 3 or 4 legitimate #1/#2 pass catchers on the field and most teams do not have 4 players in coverage who can stack up against that spread. Jennings was arguably the most complete player of the 4, so what is the drop off from Jennings and the new #4 guy? This means the spread of players will not be as high of quality as it was with Jennings which will make the Packers Passing attack easier to defend that it has been. Overall the offense is still going to be very good, but the offense is already carrying the majority of the load in terms of the team winning games. Thus if the offense takes a step back, even if a it is a relatively small one, that will exert more pressure on a defense that has been very porous.

I agree that the Bears are probably going to pay the piper this year. You have to wonder if some of the more unstable personalities on that team (Marchsall and Cutler) will have meltdowns at some point if they get off to a slow start. Trestman has a hard road ahead IMO.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

User avatar
PacificNorseWest
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2452
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Seattle, Wa

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by PacificNorseWest » Wed Apr 24, 2013 12:39 pm

Lions should be a dangerous team this year, for sure.
0 x

mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by mondry » Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:50 pm

I can't wait for the draft tomorrow, it'll bring an entirely new stance to this thread. As it stands, I really think every NFC north team got worse from the team last year to where we're at now with free agency. The Vikes lost winfield and harvin all the while kwill, allen, and robinson are getting older. The bears lost an old urlacher and the defense is ancient, packers lost woodson and jennings. Lions, meh don't really care about them.

If we had to play with our line ups right now I'd say it'd look like this.

Pack 9-6
Vikes 8-8
Bears 7-9
Lions 5-11

The NFC south and west are definitely the top 2 divisions now, the east and north probably tied.
0 x

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3503
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by mansquatch » Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:59 pm

Jim,

The reason I think the Bears got worse is because they lost Lovie Smith and Urlacher. Urlacher may be a shadow of himself, but he was the leader of that defense. Smith was a very well liked coach as stated by the players on that unit. Furthermore, look at the improvement Smith brought to St. Louis and then to the Bears via his presence. It is not unreasonable to think that losing these two major components to their leadership on defense will affect their productivity.

Also, there is no delusion that the Defense was the primary strength of the team when it came to winning games. As one beat writer put it last season: “The key to beating the Bears is making them score their own points.” IMO, losing Lovie Smith and Urlacher will reduce the efficacy of the defense. So the question going into 2013 is will the new defensive coach be able to fill the gap and/or will the new additions in FA and Coaching pick up the slack on the offensive side of the ball? IMO, the answer for this season is probably no. Of course their draft picks could have something to say about it as well, but that still remains to be seen. IMO, losing Smith is a big loss in terms of intangibles and defensive coaching efficacy.

Things in the division as a whole are quite murky right now. I think the Packers are a risk to have a disappointing season unless they can find some new playmakers on defense aside from Mathews. If he goes down who is their big play guy? (some injury history there) Likewise, while their WR are all good, none of them are truly “great”. So if an injury or two happens, where does the passing game go? They are the opposite of the Bears in that their offense drives their wins. So if that takes a dive so will their win total.

The Lions are probably the biggest question mark of all though. I just have no idea what team is going to show up or how their defense will end up playing this year.

This doesn’t mean easy strolling for the Vikings either, we’ve got our own set of issues.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

User avatar
saint33
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1653
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:28 am

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by saint33 » Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:11 pm

RandallioCobb18 wrote:DJ Smith is probably going to take AJ Hawk's place sooner rather then later
I'd venture to say that's unlikely :wink:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... d-j-smith/
0 x
Image

User avatar
Eli
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7946
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:52 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by Eli » Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:21 pm

saint33 wrote: I'd venture to say that's unlikely :wink:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... d-j-smith/
Wow. Grab him. Get him on a plain before the day is finished and see how bad the knee really is.
0 x

User avatar
Skoltastic_Voyage
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 535
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by Skoltastic_Voyage » Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:33 pm

mondry wrote:I can't wait for the draft tomorrow, it'll bring an entirely new stance to this thread. As it stands, I really think every NFC north team got worse from the team last year to where we're at now with free agency. The Vikes lost winfield and harvin all the while kwill, allen, and robinson are getting older. The bears lost an old urlacher and the defense is ancient, packers lost woodson and jennings. Lions, meh don't really care about them.

If we had to play with our line ups right now I'd say it'd look like this.


Vikes 10-6
Lions 9-7
Bears 6-10
Pack 6-10 Harrison smith takes out Rogers in their first meeting


The NFC south and west are definitely the top 2 divisions now, the east and north probably tied.
fixed that for ya
0 x
My guide to being a Vikings fan:
Step 1.) Drink beer.
Step 2.) See step 1.

RandallioCobb18
Starter
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by RandallioCobb18 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:07 am

Skoltastic_Voyage wrote: fixed that for ya
:roll: :roll:

Curious, what do you think the Vikings reord would be if they lost Adrian Peterson?
0 x

PurpleJarl
Starter
Posts: 191
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by PurpleJarl » Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:36 am

So with the draft over, I feel confident in saying that the Vikings probably took the NFC north off season wise, with the Lions following, then the Packers, followed by the Bears. That isn't to say the Packers had a weak offseaon (I do think the bears had the weakest though) but simply the Lions and Vikings filled more holes. The Vikings through quality front office work (FINALLY) and the Lions through the virtue of such extended mismanagement that they could have thrown a dart at a draft board and gotten a need position. The Packers did well but I dont think they had as much room to grow better as the rest of the north. I honestly think that the Packers going for RBs is a god send for the Vikings. Even if one of them turns out to the be next AP he will still be less dangerous than AR dropping back. If their running game mooches 5-6 plays a game from the passing game it will be a significant help to the Vikings IMO.


Changing pace a bit. The Bears change in coaching staff. I think for the most part, people look at this as an issue for the Bears because, based on nothing more than my memory, I cant find stats on this anywhere! New coach regimes typcially take a year or two to really get in the swing of things, with notable execptions. So while overall this new coach might be an improvement over the Lovie smith era, in just the next season, imo its likely they will suffer a bit.
0 x

RandallioCobb18
Starter
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by RandallioCobb18 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:59 am

PurpleJarl wrote:So with the draft over, I feel confident in saying that the Vikings probably took the NFC north off season wise, with the Lions following, then the Packers, followed by the Bears. That isn't to say the Packers had a weak offseaon (I do think the bears had the weakest though) but simply the Lions and Vikings filled more holes. The Vikings through quality front office work (FINALLY) and the Lions through the virtue of such extended mismanagement that they could have thrown a dart at a draft board and gotten a need position. The Packers did well but I dont think they had as much room to grow better as the rest of the north. I honestly think that the Packers going for RBs is a god send for the Vikings. Even if one of them turns out to the be next AP he will still be less dangerous than AR dropping back. If their running game mooches 5-6 plays a game from the passing game it will be a significant help to the Vikings IMO.


Changing pace a bit. The Bears change in coaching staff. I think for the most part, people look at this as an issue for the Bears because, based on nothing more than my memory, I cant find stats on this anywhere! New coach regimes typcially take a year or two to really get in the swing of things, with notable execptions. So while overall this new coach might be an improvement over the Lovie smith era, in just the next season, imo its likely they will suffer a bit.
The thing is, Aaron Rodgers is pretty much unstoppable and that is WITH every one on the opposing D gearing up for the pass, no one has ANY respect for the Packers running game (Really embarrassing) and there is simply no need to play the run.

If one of these dudes becomes the next AP (not saying they will) then WHOA, watch out league! Look at how much A-rod schools defenses now, now imagine those Defenses WERENT playing the pass every play, as great as Rodgers is, even HE would be better if teams stopped dropping there entire squad back in coverage.

You really could say the same thing about AP and if the Vikes can get a good passing game, teams would be forced to stop loading the box for AP, which, in turn, would make AP even more spectacular then he is already, its the same deal as the Pack and Rodgers, just reverse.

Could you imagine Aaron Rodgers and Adrian Peterson on the same. :ganja: :ganja: :ganja: :ganja:
0 x

PurpleJarl
Starter
Posts: 191
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by PurpleJarl » Mon Apr 29, 2013 11:41 am

RandallioCobb18 wrote: The thing is, Aaron Rodgers is pretty much unstoppable and that is WITH every one on the opposing D gearing up for the pass, no one has ANY respect for the Packers running game (Really embarrassing) and there is simply no need to play the run.

If one of these dudes becomes the next AP (not saying they will) then WHOA, watch out league! Look at how much A-rod schools defenses now, now imagine those Defenses WERENT playing the pass every play, as great as Rodgers is, even HE would be better if teams stopped dropping there entire squad back in coverage.

You really could say the same thing about AP and if the Vikes can get a good passing game, teams would be forced to stop loading the box for AP, which, in turn, would make AP even more spectacular then he is already, its the same deal as the Pack and Rodgers, just reverse.

Could you imagine Aaron Rodgers and Adrian Peterson on the same. :ganja: :ganja: :ganja: :ganja:

Oh yes, that obviously would be amazing/terrify. My point is that, while none of these runners are touted as AP caliber its possible they will be passable and give Macarthy more faith in the running game which in turn would siphon the barest minimum from the passing game. While more balanced over all I would see this as a slight advantage for the Vikings.
0 x

mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by mondry » Mon Apr 29, 2013 11:51 am

RandallioCobb18 wrote: The thing is, Aaron Rodgers is pretty much unstoppable and that is WITH every one on the opposing D gearing up for the pass, no one has ANY respect for the Packers running game (Really embarrassing) and there is simply no need to play the run.

If one of these dudes becomes the next AP (not saying they will) then WHOA, watch out league! Look at how much A-rod schools defenses now, now imagine those Defenses WERENT playing the pass every play, as great as Rodgers is, even HE would be better if teams stopped dropping there entire squad back in coverage.

You really could say the same thing about AP and if the Vikes can get a good passing game, teams would be forced to stop loading the box for AP, which, in turn, would make AP even more spectacular then he is already, its the same deal as the Pack and Rodgers, just reverse.

Could you imagine Aaron Rodgers and Adrian Peterson on the same. :ganja: :ganja: :ganja: :ganja:
This line of thinking seems obvious but is generally incorrect. In 2009, Peterson only ran for about 1300 yards and there were still 8-9 men in the box on every 1st and 2nd down. What changes is the passing game statistics dramatically increased with Favre and because the offense can move the ball more efficiently towards the end zone, Peterson's TD's dramatically went up. No one in their right mind is going to not focus on Peterson though, with just a tiny bit of help from Ponder he'll run for 200 yards (did it twice against the pack) incredibly easy. That's a losing amount of yardage (most of the time) to give up while they're FOCUSING on Peterson so you can't give him any less attention, EVER.

It's similar with Rodgers as well, think back to Peyton Manning in his prime during his Indy days. You still focused on Peyton and the passing game because if you didn't, you often lost and hey, even if you did, you still often lost. If they bring in Edgerrin james, he's going to have a good time because no one can afford to focus on him and so he runs for 1,709 yards back in the 2000 season. James averaged 4.4 yards per carry and his longest run was only 30 yards the entire season, he's no where near Peterson in talent / ability but the yardage comes anyway because no one could afford to deal with him over Peyton.

Point is, if the Vikings improve the passing game, or the Pack improve the running game, it's not going to benefit AD or Rodgers or change much of anything, instead the passing game will benefit for the Vikings and the running game will benefit for the Pack. If you guys can get anyone who's even remotely decent, so like half as good as AD, he'd be a 1500 yard rusher most likely. However, Rodgers will still receive the attention, teams will still drop 6-7 guys in coverage, probably have an extra CB out there meaning one less LB to tackle said RB and that's what makes it useful. So no, the pack running the football would not help us at all, once their back improves, we saw a little bit of that in 2011 when we couldn't fully lock down the run with just our front 7 and the pack (and other teams) could do whatever they wanted.
0 x

User avatar
Skoltastic_Voyage
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 535
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by Skoltastic_Voyage » Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:08 pm

RandallioCobb18 wrote: The thing is, Aaron Rodgers is pretty much unstoppable and that is WITH every one on the opposing D gearing up for the pass, no one has ANY respect for the Packers running game (Really embarrassing) and there is simply no need to play the run.

If one of these dudes becomes the next AP (not saying they will) then WHOA, watch out league! Look at how much A-rod schools defenses now, now imagine those Defenses WERENT playing the pass every play, as great as Rodgers is, even HE would be better if teams stopped dropping there entire squad back in coverage.

You really could say the same thing about AP and if the Vikes can get a good passing game, teams would be forced to stop loading the box for AP, which, in turn, would make AP even more spectacular then he is already, its the same deal as the Pack and Rodgers, just reverse.

Could you imagine Aaron Rodgers and Adrian Peterson on the same. :ganja: :ganja: :ganja: :ganja:
I think the Packers are geared for the pass, at least some of AD's yards are thanks to our OL. When Matt Flynn played for GB he set records, Rogers is just a good qb in a good system for passing.
Would AD help the Packers? Well I don't see how he could hurt. Would his addition make the Packers unbeatable? Well, we are talking about purple Jesus here but still.
0 x
My guide to being a Vikings fan:
Step 1.) Drink beer.
Step 2.) See step 1.

RandallioCobb18
Starter
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by RandallioCobb18 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:10 pm

PurpleJarl wrote:
Oh yes, that obviously would be amazing/terrify. My point is that, while none of these runners are touted as AP caliber its possible they will be passable and give Macarthy more faith in the running game which in turn would siphon the barest minimum from the passing game. While more balanced over all I would see this as a slight advantage for the Vikings.
I see what your saying, agree to disagree though.

If Lacy or Franklin turns out to even be just an alright NFL back, that would greatly improve Rodgers effectiveness.

I cant remember the stats off the top of my head, but you would actually be suprised how much the Packers run the ball, Its not as much of a discrepancy as you would think, its just, our backs have been so terrible for so long that it really doesn't serve any purpose. If our RBs can get the handoff and pound it up field for 4 or 5 yards every once in a while, that would DRASTICALLY improve our offense.

If Lacy or Franklin turns into a consistant, good solid NFL starter, teams can say goodbye to rushing four and dropping they're DBs back in coverage EVERY DAMN PLAY, and I guess my point was just that, if Rodgers is this good when teams are gearing up for him and only him, imagine how effective he would be if teams COULDNT do that, because they would get chewed up by Lacy in the ground game. I really think this is less about the Pass/Run ratio of Mccarthy's, and more about the effectiveness of said running plays. Not to mention the play action (In which Rodgers may already be the best in the league at, and given the Packers running game as of late, that is saying something.), and the fact that both of these rooks are good pass protectors.

Im thinking both of these rookie RBs of the Packers gotta be licking their lips watching tape of the Packers opponents dropping 8 back in coverage, heres hoping Lacy and Franklin can bring some BOOM to the Packers run game. (Who knows, maybe we may even be able to get some RUSHING TDs this year, hey, a fan can dream cant he? :) )
0 x

RandallioCobb18
Starter
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: State of the NFC North

Post by RandallioCobb18 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:32 pm

Skoltastic_Voyage wrote: I think the Packers are geared for the pass, at least some of AD's yards are thanks to our OL. When Matt Flynn played for GB he set records, Rogers is just a good qb in a good system for passing.
Would AD help the Packers? Well I don't see how he could hurt. Would his addition make the Packers unbeatable? Well, we are talking about purple Jesus here but still.
Yea, you clearly have no idea bruh.

Rodgers is a HOF QB in a good system, not a good QB in a good system, if you disagree, then you simply have not watched him very closely.

Dude has the most insane arm since Marino, go back in history and find someone with a more talented arm then A-Rod, seriously.

Ive watched them all, Montana, Marino, Manning, Brady, etc. etc. I can honestly say without a doubt that Rodgers is the most unbelievable of all of them.
Find me a QB that is going to spin out of a tackle, run to his left throw a LASER of his WRONG FOOT, 40 yards down the field in between to DBs for a TD.

You go ahead and try to find any QB EVER in history that can go out there and do the stuff Rodgers can do, seriosuly, go try. There is a reason people talk about this guy the way they do, he simply can do it all, wrong foot, defender hanging off his shoulder, between 3 defenders, there is nothing this guy cannot do on the field.

He has a great system, I agree. But all you have to do is watch the throws this guy makes to tell that he is a special, special talent. I understand your entitled to your opinion, but it doesnt make yours any less wrong. Montana, Staubach, Brady, none of them make the spectactular throws that Rodgers does on such and unrealistic frequency.

Hey man, AP is a great back, but im not sitting here trying to tell myself he is an alright back who is the product of a great system, he has a good system indeed, but I would have to be as foolishly blind/bias as your being to reason to myself that AP is anything less than a Hall of Famer.

I suggest the next time you watch Aaron Rodgers play, you pretend he is not a Packer, because otherwise your going to keep posting foolish bullcrap such as this, and keep making yourself look like a complete buffoon who only reads the scoring summary, instead of actually WATCHING the game, because if you actually watched him play, you would at least have a CLUE what your talking about.
0 x

Post Reply