Hey, it could happen!

[Rick]

It's easy to explain, it's LMIT's factoid statistical analysis sheet with LUCK as defined by the god of Chaos and a little Packer love factored in

[Badger]

It's easy to explain, it's LMIT's factoid statistical analysis sheet with LUCK as defined by the god of Chaos and a little Packer love factored in

mmmm..Beating the Vikes in the playoffs would be awesome. Are the Purple invicible????

[Rick]

Where have you been. It's the NFL, NO team is invincible.

However based on the most recent head-to-head record with the packers the Vikes have proven they are a better team than the Pack. Now that's a fact you can take to the bank

[fishyguy]

Rankings are fairly meaningless. You can see rankings that have the Vikes anywhere from 5th to 15th right now. These rankings are designed to get us looking at the web site and talking about them. LMIT picked the one that takes into consideration luck, voodoo dolls, curses and hexes, simply because it ranks the Vikings the lowest of them all and was most effective for trolling. If Sagarin or Fox Sports had ranked them lower he certainly would have posted that instead.

[LMITOUT]

That couldn't be more wrong, again.

The reason this ranking was posted is that it takes the mouthbreather aspect out of it and uses statistical analysis to calculate how different teams stack up.

As I said before, I apologize for posting something that requires an IQ score slightly higher than the number of Super Bowls the Vikings have lost to understand.

[Rick]

There you go again...

Using that fuzzy math

[zepman]

I will agree that any statistical chart will show how teams stack up against the competition...they still are no way of calculating which team is better or which team would win going head to head.

[Big Dave2]

You couldn't be more wrong, again.

The reason this ranking was posted is that it takes the mouthbreather aspect out of it and uses statistical analysis to calculate how different teams stack up.

As I said before, I apologize for posting something that requires an IQ score slightly higher than the number of Super Bowls the Vikings have lost to understand.

Unfortunately for you and your little chart thingy the measure of excellence in the NFL is a super bowl win as you and the other Packer backers keep reminding us championshipless Viking fans.

Your chart does not give us an accurate ranking of which teams are more likely to take this ultimate step.

[Steve Foss]

The reason this ranking was posted is that it takes the mouthbreather aspect out of it and uses statistical analysis to calculate how different teams stack up.

[Big Dave2]

Deleted, just in case

[fishyguy]

You couldn't be more wrong, again.

The reason this ranking was posted is that it takes the mouthbreather aspect out of it and uses statistical analysis to calculate how different teams stack up.

As I said before, I apologize for posting something that requires an IQ score slightly higher than the number of Super Bowls the Vikings have lost to understand.

Any ranking that is more than some beat writer stating his opinion takes statistics and analyzes them to varying degrees. Some may weight the different statistics differently but there is nothing to say that your selected ranking is any more accurate than another. Yes, a different way to look at it but nothing that says this is the absolute in rating systems. In the same way you can stand behind your posting of those rankings, I don't think it is unreasonable for someone else to think the theory is flawed.

To address the part of the post that says, "you couldn't be more wrong again". What part of a statistical analysis of your past posts and its content would lead anyone of us to believe this is less that you just trying to get under the skin of some? I think I will stick by my original statement. If that ranking had the Vikes in the 2nd spot, I would lay a $100 bucks that we would have never seen it.

[LMITOUT]

The part I questioned as wrong was where it was claimed that I posted the list just because the Vikings were further down in the rankings. That isn't true at all. I posted the same list when they made it up to #8 and were climbing week by week to that point. There was no "trolling" intended but rather trying to add another view to the ranking of NFL teams.....one that you don't typically see.

BTW, I had just changed the wording on that post where I said "you couldn't be more wrong" to "that couldn't be more wrong" because the same thing was implied by others as well. Didn't mean to call you out specifically.

[Shack]

No matter what list you have, what the stats from the season total up to, glide in to the playoffs, or snake in, once the playoffs start winning is the only thing that matters.

I saw Willy Wonka the other day (orig) and when they tried to calculate where the golden ticket was, I thought of this thread. Lol.

[PierBridge]

Glad my Pack was able to hold off the 49ers. At 6-4, I ain't sticking a fork in their wildcard chances just yet.

Unfortunately with the way they are playing right now they "packlers" have as good a chance as any team to win it ALL.

And if that happens we "Vikes" may as well Pack it up and move to L.A...

[Shack]

Vegas seems to have some faith in the Vikes

Quote:

NFL

Super Bowl XLIV

Event Date: Feb. 7, 2010 / Last updated Dec. 22, 2009

Team Open Current

Indianapolis 8/1 9/5

New Orleans 18/1 2/1

Minnesota 22/1 13/4

San Diego 14/1 7/1

New England 6/1 17/2

Arizona 15/1 10/1

Cincinnati 75/1 12/1

Green Bay 20/1 25/1

Philadelphia 12/1 25/1

Dallas 9/1 28/1

Baltimore 11/1 38/1

Denver 35/1 45/1

N.Y. Giants 8/1 45/1

Pittsburgh 7/1 55/1

Jacksonville 30/1 70/1

Miami 25/1 100/1

Atlanta 16/1 125/1

Tennessee 12/1 150/1

N.Y. Jets 28/1 150/1

San Francisco 40/1 250/1

Houston 40/1 250/1

Chicago 28/1 1000/1

Seattle 60/1 1000/1

Carolina 12/1 2500/1

Buffalo 50/1 10000/1

Oakland 100/1 10000/1

Washington 25/1 OFF

Tampa Bay 35/1 OFF

Cleveland 60/1 OFF

Kansas City 100/1 OFF

St. Louis 100/1 OFF

Detroit 150/1 OFF

I am unclear if cappers or a computer generated this list

[Big Dave2]

There was no "trolling" intended

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha