NFC North 2018 Thread

[Sugashane]

13 hours ago, SteelKing728 said:

The Packers won 3 games without Rodgers last season: Tampa Bay, Chicago and Cleveland. Those were bottom 5 teams last year (Chicago is debatable though). Without Rodgers, the Packers were a bottom 10 team who could barely beat bottom 5 teams. 

Now, they should be obviously better with Rodgers, along with a competent Tight End and corners that are worthy of making the 53 man roster, but that team looks more like a playoff team with all that added than a true SB level team.  Minnesota should still be the favorites to win the NFCN.

Right now, I expect the division to go:

Minnesota

Green Bay

Chicago

Detroit

The Bears should be much improved this year, but maybe not playoff material just yet. I see a roster and schedule that's good to go 8-8 or 9-7 with a lot of promise going forward. 

Echoed my sentiments exactly. 

[vike daddy]

On 5/25/2018 at 9:35 AM, dll2000 said:

Cool thing is I think Minnesota is at its peak. 

oh no, there are things we can, and need to, improve on:

game time clock management

kicking game

offensive line and depth

 

watch for an improvement in kickoffs though from us, both in touchbacks after we score and with long returns from Hughes, out first round choice. the rule change is in our favor, and we drafted two guys with it in mind.

 

 

[Heinz D.]

16 hours ago, SteelKing728 said:

The Packers won 3 games without Rodgers last season: Tampa Bay, Chicago and Cleveland. Those were bottom 5 teams last year (Chicago is debatable though). Without Rodgers, the Packers were a bottom 10 team who could barely beat bottom 5 teams. 

Now, they should be obviously better with Rodgers, along with a competent Tight End and corners that are worthy of making the 53 man roster, but that team looks more like a playoff team with all that added than a true SB level team.  Minnesota should still be the favorites to win the NFCN.

Right now, I expect the division to go:

If I were a betting man, I don't think any of my money would be put towards the Pack over the Vikes for the division crown. However, I still think you're kind of lumping Hundley's ineptitude in with the overall competence/incompetence of the team. Also, they have a decent in-line tight end now as well, and the improvement at corner should be big. And them having a GM unafraid to cut or sign people scares the hell out of me. 

2 hours ago, vike daddy said:

oh no, there are things we can, and need to, improve on:

game time clock management

kicking game

offensive line and depth

 

watch for an improvement in kickoffs though from us, both in touchbacks after we score and with long returns from Hughes, out first round choice. the rule change is in our favor, and we drafted two guys with it in mind.

 

 

Spielman is one of the best GMs around. As long as he's tweaking stuff, the Vikings aren't done. I do think my smaller specific window and larger general window statement is still true, though. 

[IronMike84]

On 5/25/2018 at 10:35 AM, dll2000 said:

Cool thing is I think Minnesota is at its peak.  GB and Detroit are level or declining, but Bears are in ascendancy.

Hasn't been the case in a long time.  Other cool thing is Bears are built very young.  It something that could last 3-8 years when or if it hits.

Minnesota hasn’t peaked. The window is still very open. The issue for them will come when they can’t afford to pay everybody they have. Their success is built on a very good coaching staff coupled with very good drafts.

Detroit may ascend, but it won’t be immediate. I’m a big believer in Matt Patricia potentially being more successful than past New England coaches. They’re going to build a tough, physical football team that really tests teams built for speed, but it may take a year or two for them to become a force.

Green Bay will always be a contender solely because of Aaron Rodgers but he’s going to be 35 by the end of this season. I foresee three scenarios: he gets tired of the organization failing to build around him and retires, he starts to break down physically, or they stay level (double-digit wins but unable to get over the hump). Over the past six seasons, Packers have shown an incredible interest in remaining status quo: let Rodgers do it all and who cares about anything else. It will never surprise me to see them in th NFCCG but it will always surprise me to see them in a Super Bowl.

I don’t want to comment too heavily on the Bears. We’ll see what happens. All I’ll say is that progress back towards the middle of the road is due.

[dll2000]

I meant Min is at its peak now.  Meaning last year, this year and next year.   I think decline starts then.   

[Heinz D.]

13 hours ago, IronMike84 said:

Minnesota hasn’t peaked. The window is still very open. The issue for them will come when they can’t afford to pay everybody they have. Their success is built on a very good coaching staff coupled with very good drafts.

They're going to start having their cap issues next offseason. The next couple of years comprise that small window. They have a young enough core that they'll have to reload, and not rebuild, though.

20 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

I meant Min is at its peak now.  Meaning last year, this year and next year.   I think decline starts then.   

A lot of young guys, though. Cousins isn't even that old, and I don't anticipate him going anywhere else, at least for quite some time. 

[beardown3231]

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

They're going to start having their cap issues next offseason. The next couple of years comprise that small window. They have a young enough core that they'll have to reload, and not rebuild, though.

A lot of young guys, though. Cousins isn't even that old, and I don't anticipate him going anywhere else, at least for quite some time. 

Look at who's a free agent next year- Barr, Richardson, Diggs, Forbath, Hunter. This year is very Super-Bowl-or-Bust for them because I expect them to take a step back in 2019 since they likely lose 2-3 of those guys. The good news, for them, is that they're absolutely loaded. I think it'll end up being Saints vs. Chargers in the Super Bowl, but Minnesota has as good of a shot as anyone.

[dll2000]

55 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

They're going to start having their cap issues next offseason. The next couple of years comprise that small window. They have a young enough core that they'll have to reload, and not rebuild, though.

A lot of young guys, though. Cousins isn't even that old, and I don't anticipate him going anywhere else, at least for quite some time. 

Cap issues and I think Cousins is a middling QB.  He can be good with a stacked team which they have now, most middling QBs are. 

Once they start to lose pieces in 2 -3 years he won't be able to carry or elevate them and they may be a competitive team, but not a SB contender.  Hard to maintain quality depth drafting at near end of every round.

Tom Brady and Belichick made it look somewhat easy, but its not.   Amazingly enough they even lost a number of high picks over years to shenanigans and kept on keeping on. 

One thing to have a reliable ace starter, another thing to have that guy come out and maintain his health year after year so you know he is going to be there.   Such an advantage.  Then they ***** about his trainer.  LOL.   They should give that guy a medal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dll2000]

Female dog is a swear?  My bad.   Substitute - 'complain' for the ***** you see above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Arthur Penske]

On 5/27/2018 at 11:27 PM, SteelKing728 said:

The Packers won 3 games without Rodgers last season: Tampa Bay, Chicago and Cleveland. Those were bottom 5 teams last year (Chicago is debatable though). Without Rodgers, the Packers were a bottom 10 team who could barely beat bottom 5 teams. 

Now, they should be obviously better with Rodgers, along with a competent Tight End and corners that are worthy of making the 53 man roster, but that team looks more like a playoff team with all that added than a true SB level team.  Minnesota should still be the favorites to win the NFCN.

Right now, I expect the division to go:

Minnesota

Green Bay

Chicago

Detroit

The Bears should be much improved this year, but maybe not playoff material just yet. I see a roster and schedule that's good to go 8-8 or 9-7 with a lot of promise going forward. 

And with Rodgers the Packers were 4-1 while the vikes were 3-2 with two of the teams the vikings beat being bottom 5 teams, Tampa bay and Chicago that you mentioned. It's clear the Packers were on par with the vikes with Rodgers last year, perhaps even better, and the vikes were not "favorites to win the NFCN" until Rodgers went down. One would expect that to be the case in 2018 as well with Chicago improving as well.

[Spartacus]

2 hours ago, ArthurPensky said:

And with Rodgers the Packers were 4-1 while the vikes were 3-2 with two of the teams the vikings beat being bottom 5 teams, Tampa bay and Chicago that you mentioned. It's clear the Packers were on par with the vikes with Rodgers last year, perhaps even better, and the vikes were not "favorites to win the NFCN" until Rodgers went down. One would expect that to be the case in 2018 as well with Chicago improving as well.

The sheer ineptitude of Brett Hundley really swayed people into thinking the Packers are not talented. They have some talent on both sides of the ball. In the end though it will come down to health and especially stacking injuries on important position groups. 

Last year the packers could barely put an NFL backfield together. King, House, Randall, Rollins, Brice, Burnett, Goodson, Waters all went down in the backfield last year or dealt with nagging injuries. That's a lot of secondary contributors including the #1 #2, and #3 CBs, #1 Safety and #3 Safety, and valuable CB back ups as well. 

We had games starting Lenzy Pipkins at corner. That's just extremely bad luck. That doesn't even mention the previous GMs total lack of trying to improve the situation through trade of FA or the offenses being totally useless with Hundley.  

[beardown3231]

19 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

The sheer ineptitude of Brett Hundley really swayed people into thinking the Packers are not talented. They have some talent on both sides of the ball. In the end though it will come down to health and especially stacking injuries on important position groups. 

Last year the packers could barely put an NFL backfield together. King, House, Randall, Rollins, Brice, Burnett, Goodson, Waters all went down in the backfield last year or dealt with nagging injuries. That's a lot of secondary contributors including the #1 #2, and #3 CBs, #1 Safety and #3 Safety, and valuable CB back ups as well. 

We had games starting Lenzy Pipkins at corner. That's just extremely bad luck. That doesn't even mention the previous GMs total lack of trying to improve the situation through trade of FA or the offenses being totally useless with Hundley.  

I think they're in a situation like the Bears. Besides Rodgers, they have a lot of decent or good players- Bahktiari, Daniels, Bulaga, HHCD, Wilkerson, Graham, etc. The Bears have Trubisky, Burton, Cohen, Howard, Leno, Hicks, Floyd, etc.

Unfortunately you need stars to compete for championships, and even with Rodgers masking this for awhile, even he's been unable- outside of 1 time- to win a championship.

The argument really stems from Bears fans occasionally "wishing" our team had a "great" FO like the Packers, when in reality, they've struggled to assemble a great team, too.

[Heinz D.]

On 5/29/2018 at 10:33 AM, beardown3231 said:

Look at who's a free agent next year- Barr, Richardson, Diggs, Forbath, Hunter. This year is very Super-Bowl-or-Bust for them because I expect them to take a step back in 2019 since they likely lose 2-3 of those guys. The good news, for them, is that they're absolutely loaded. I think it'll end up being Saints vs. Chargers in the Super Bowl, but Minnesota has as good of a shot as anyone.

 

I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me on the Vikings or not. More yes than no, I suppose. That's a good SB pick/pairing. I think I had Saints and Jags in some other thread. Had Davenport winning DROY...

On 5/29/2018 at 10:36 AM, dll2000 said:

Female dog is a swear?  My bad.   Substitute - 'complain' for the ***** you see above.

That's...an odd thing for the filter to glom on to. 

55 minutes ago, beardown3231 said:

The argument really stems from Bears fans occasionally "wishing" our team had a "great" FO like the Packers, when in reality, they've struggled to assemble a great team, too.

Nothing in their old front office impressed, or frightened, me in the slightest. Now? I'm scared as hell. 

[Spartacus]

2 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

I think they're in a situation like the Bears. Besides Rodgers, they have a lot of decent or good players- Bahktiari, Daniels, Bulaga, HHCD, Wilkerson, Graham, etc. The Bears have Trubisky, Burton, Cohen, Howard, Leno, Hicks, Floyd, etc.

Unfortunately you need stars to compete for championships, and even with Rodgers masking this for awhile, even he's been unable- outside of 1 time- to win a championship.

The argument really stems from Bears fans occasionally "wishing" our team had a "great" FO like the Packers, when in reality, they've struggled to assemble a great team, too.

I agree and I think without that star power when you get injuries like what the Packers experienced there is no one to really step up and take over a game. That being said you can win with a whole bunch of good players surrounding a star at the most important position. Packers just need to get lucky with injuries for once. 

I don't think this division is nearly as settled as people like to think. The Vikings are definitely the most talented on paper right now but a lot of things can happen during the season. I wouldn't sleep on any team in the NFC north to take a big step forward and be in contention. I may be in the minority but I also think Cousins struggles behind that Vikings O line. I thought at times last year Keenum made that line look a lot better than it actually was. I don't see the same pock presence in Cousins. 

[Heinz D.]

44 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

I don't think this division is nearly as settled as people like to think. The Vikings are definitely the most talented on paper right now but a lot of things can happen during the season. I wouldn't sleep on any team in the NFC north to take a big step forward and be in contention. I may be in the minority but I also think Cousins struggles behind that Vikings O line. I thought at times last year Keenum made that line look a lot better than it actually was. I don't see the same pock presence in Cousins. 

Ehh...I don't know. I agree with you--sort of? 

The Bears could contend, it's possible, but boy would I be surprised. Detroit? I think Patricia has a better chance as a HC than Crennell, Weis, Mangini, etc., but their off-season didn't do much for me, so I'd be SHOCKED if they were in the hunt. It's a two team race, in my book, and neither team reaching the Super Bowl would be much of an upset. The season could prove me wrong ,but I doubt it. We'll see how Cousins does behind that line--I think they probably hover around average and if they maintain that, the Vikes should be okay. I can see the Packers impressing regardless of how Cousins does...