Superman(DH23) Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 18 hours ago, FrantikRam said: I'll be picking the Vikings. They had a disappointing year last year, but they're still one of the best rosters in the NFL. Take away QB and they are significantly better than the Bears and Packers rosters top to bottom. I like Cousins more than Trubisky and I don't think Rodgers will quite be able to overcome the talent disparity. Hahahahahahahahahah Hahahahahahahahahahahahah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 13 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said: I'd be excited about Kubiak. Dalvin will have a top 5 RB season if he's healthy. If the OL has enough talent to actually improve. That remains to be seen but I like what they have O'Neill and Bradbury was a good pick. Reiff is steady. Kline and Elflein shouldn't be starting but will likely have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 If the Bears stay healthy it's still their division to lose. It's going to be much closer than it was last year but they're still the team to beat in that division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrantikRam Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 3 hours ago, Pool said: If the Bears stay healthy it's still their division to lose. It's going to be much closer than it was last year but they're still the team to beat in that division. If all the teams stay healthy, I can't see an argument for the Bears being a better team than the Vikings. I can see an argument saying it's a toss up, but not that the Bears are the team to beat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 2 minutes ago, FrantikRam said: If all the teams stay healthy, I can't see an argument for the Bears being a better team than the Vikings. I can see an argument saying it's a toss up, but not that the Bears are the team to beat. Bears beat them pretty easily playing a lot of backups in a must win game for the Vikings in week 17 after beating them in their previous meeting as well. I'm not sure how you can rank the Vikings ahead of the Bears. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrantikRam Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 Just now, Pool said: Bears beat them pretty easily playing a lot of backups in a must win game for the Vikings in week 17 after beating them in their previous meeting as well. I'm not sure how you can rank the Vikings ahead of the Bears. Who ranked the Bears ahead of the Vikings last year? Who won or lost those head to head games doesn't mean much to me. In terms of talent, the Vikings have more of it than the Bears looking up and down their rosters. This time last year the Vikings and Eagles were thought to be locks to be good - they won 17 games between them. The Bears are the most logical candidate to come down - for multiple reasons.. 1. They play in a division with ARodgers, and the Vikings - only division to possibly field three contenders 2. Repeating that performance on defense will be nearly impossible 3. Trubisky is a question mark 4. Offensive talent is questionable at best - questions at WR and RB - last year it looked like the system is what made the offense "good", which needs to be air-quoted because ranking 21st in yards is NOT good. Ranking 9th in points is good, but when your defense gets turnovers at a near record pace, it's going to help your points scored 5. Schedule - the Vikings were on the road for New England, LA Rams and Seattle - the Bears got those three teams at home. The Vikings also had to play the Saints and Eagles while the Bears got TB and NYG (even though they lost). The Vikings went 1-4 in those five games while the Bears went 3-2 - if you flip it, I'm confident the records flip too, in which case the Vikings win the division at 10-5-1 while the Bears are 10-6 - even with the Bears sweeping them. To further this point, let's look at how teams outside the NFCW fared against the NFCW last year: Chargers - 3-1 Chiefs - 2-2 Broncos - 2-2 Raiders - 1-3 Vikings - 2-2 Packers - 1-3 Lions - 1-3 Bears - 4-0 The Rams were 7-1 at home, while Seattle is always a tough place to play - the Chargers, Chiefs and Vikings all had to come to both LA and Seattle - the Chargers beat Seattle, but didn't have far to travel - the teams that did have far to travel didn't win a game in LA or Seattle. Winning in the NFL takes some luck - that is taking nothing away from the Bears for last year. But this year is different, and last year everyone hyping up the Eagles and Vikings in the off-season should be a lesson for us. Their odds to win the division reflect this - it's a toss up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 17 minutes ago, FrantikRam said: Who ranked the Bears ahead of the Vikings last year? Who won or lost those head to head games doesn't mean much to me. In terms of talent, the Vikings have more of it than the Bears looking up and down their rosters. This time last year the Vikings and Eagles were thought to be locks to be good - they won 17 games between them. The Bears are the most logical candidate to come down - for multiple reasons.. 1. They play in a division with ARodgers, and the Vikings - only division to possibly field three contenders 2. Repeating that performance on defense will be nearly impossible 3. Trubisky is a question mark 4. Offensive talent is questionable at best - questions at WR and RB - last year it looked like the system is what made the offense "good", which needs to be air-quoted because ranking 21st in yards is NOT good. Ranking 9th in points is good, but when your defense gets turnovers at a near record pace, it's going to help your points scored 5. Schedule - the Vikings were on the road for New England, LA Rams and Seattle - the Bears got those three teams at home. The Vikings also had to play the Saints and Eagles while the Bears got TB and NYG (even though they lost). The Vikings went 1-4 in those five games while the Bears went 3-2 - if you flip it, I'm confident the records flip too, in which case the Vikings win the division at 10-5-1 while the Bears are 10-6 - even with the Bears sweeping them. To further this point, let's look at how teams outside the NFCW fared against the NFCW last year: Chargers - 3-1 Chiefs - 2-2 Broncos - 2-2 Raiders - 1-3 Vikings - 2-2 Packers - 1-3 Lions - 1-3 Bears - 4-0 The Rams were 7-1 at home, while Seattle is always a tough place to play - the Chargers, Chiefs and Vikings all had to come to both LA and Seattle - the Chargers beat Seattle, but didn't have far to travel - the teams that did have far to travel didn't win a game in LA or Seattle. Winning in the NFL takes some luck - that is taking nothing away from the Bears for last year. But this year is different, and last year everyone hyping up the Eagles and Vikings in the off-season should be a lesson for us. Their odds to win the division reflect this - it's a toss up. There's alot of excuses being made here. I'll address a few points though. Bears went 2-0 versus the Vikings last year. I don't see how you find that irrelevant. Especially with the second being a meaningless game for the Bears and a must win game for the Vikings where they beat them handily while playing a lot of backups. The Vikings do not have a far more talented roster than the Bears. It's pretty close. Vikings have a huge edge at WR and the Bears have a huge edge at O-line. Everything else is pretty close. All this talk of the Bears trending down is just that. Talk. It means nothing and at the moment is pure speculation. They could just as easily improve for a myriad of reasons. Like players getting healthier (Allen Robinson, Burton, Jackson), getting more familiar with a complex offensive system, replacing Howard with Montgomery and Davis etc. Offensive talent is not "questionable at best". That's a bad narrative. This is the best group of skill position players the Bears have had in years. Robinson, Gabriel, Miller, Burton, Cohen, Montgomery, Davis, and Patterson is a very solid group. Not spectacular but all very solid players. You can't ask for much more than that. Trubisky is just as much a question mark as Cousins. Cousins was a gigantic disappointment last year and choked multiple times in high pressure situations. Trubisky continued to improve as the season progressed and should continue to do so in his 2nd year under Nagy. Who the teams faced last year is far more irrelevant than anything else. Every team matches up differently. The Bears schedule looks to be far more difficult than last year but that can change as well. Games that look to be tough on paper right now could be much easier when they actually play. It happens every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Pool said: Bears beat them pretty easily playing a lot of backups in a must win game for the Vikings in week 17 after beating them in their previous meeting as well. I'm not sure how you can rank the Vikings ahead of the Bears. Can't really bank on last year repeating though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 minute ago, vikingsrule said: Can't really bank on last year repeating though. Of course not. Still the Bears division to lose imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TENINCH Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 Vikings also went through 2 offensive coordinators and had a terrible offensive line. Going to have some issues playing football at the end of the year dealing with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superman(DH23) Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 2 hours ago, FrantikRam said: Who ranked the Bears ahead of the Vikings last year? Who won or lost those head to head games doesn't mean much to me. In terms of talent, the Vikings have more of it than the Bears looking up and down their rosters. This time last year the Vikings and Eagles were thought to be locks to be good - they won 17 games between them. The Bears are the most logical candidate to come down - for multiple reasons.. 1. They play in a division with ARodgers, and the Vikings - only division to possibly field three contenders 2. Repeating that performance on defense will be nearly impossible 3. Trubisky is a question mark 4. Offensive talent is questionable at best - questions at WR and RB - last year it looked like the system is what made the offense "good", which needs to be air-quoted because ranking 21st in yards is NOT good. Ranking 9th in points is good, but when your defense gets turnovers at a near record pace, it's going to help your points scored 5. Schedule - the Vikings were on the road for New England, LA Rams and Seattle - the Bears got those three teams at home. The Vikings also had to play the Saints and Eagles while the Bears got TB and NYG (even though they lost). The Vikings went 1-4 in those five games while the Bears went 3-2 - if you flip it, I'm confident the records flip too, in which case the Vikings win the division at 10-5-1 while the Bears are 10-6 - even with the Bears sweeping them. To further this point, let's look at how teams outside the NFCW fared against the NFCW last year: Chargers - 3-1 Chiefs - 2-2 Broncos - 2-2 Raiders - 1-3 Vikings - 2-2 Packers - 1-3 Lions - 1-3 Bears - 4-0 The Rams were 7-1 at home, while Seattle is always a tough place to play - the Chargers, Chiefs and Vikings all had to come to both LA and Seattle - the Chargers beat Seattle, but didn't have far to travel - the teams that did have far to travel didn't win a game in LA or Seattle. Winning in the NFL takes some luck - that is taking nothing away from the Bears for last year. But this year is different, and last year everyone hyping up the Eagles and Vikings in the off-season should be a lesson for us. Their odds to win the division reflect this - it's a toss up. I honestly have no clue how you can make an argument that the Vikes roster is better than the Bears, hence my laughter above. The Vikes are better at WR, that's it. The Bears are better everywhere else on the field, like seriously. The few positions where the Vikes could MAYBE have a better player, the Bears depth just makes it a no contest. If you want to argue that the Vikes may be the better team this year, fine, whatever, but if you want to go down the roster, The Bears have one of the best in the entire league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fl0nkerton Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 Surely you'd take Kirk Cousins over Tru, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superman(DH23) Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Fl0nkerton said: Surely you'd take Kirk Cousins over Tru, right? Ehh, Cousins is what he is, and Tru has a lot of potential for growth, and looks to have big things ahead of him. But the original post I quoted specified not including QB 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Posted June 19, 2019 Share Posted June 19, 2019 6 hours ago, Fl0nkerton said: Surely you'd take Kirk Cousins over Tru, right? Absolutely. Kirk is being massively overpaid for what he is and Tru has shown the Bears can win with him behind center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReadyToThump Posted June 19, 2019 Share Posted June 19, 2019 Somebody just make a Bears vs. Vikings roster thread already lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.