SFC Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 If I had used the Lions instead of the Packers for my Quality assessment of a possible 2 hour game, it would have only made it a 1 hour game. Not a packer fan dont beleave the pack is back, when we play them here its the biggest game in town. U can still get tickets for face value for the lions. 1 to 2 years Farve signs with the pack and retires.Going out on a limb here and predicting the lions end the season with 2 wins for a total of 5 in three seasons. Now I know u bruise easily and never stir the pot, to help u out I will say just for u the lions are king, only in the jungle. yes short memory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMITOUT Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 Somebody please translate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 lions - lose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMITOUT Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 The Lions are the least of the Vikings worries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antero Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 Actually I watched the Lions against the Broncos last nite. They looked pretty good. Their D line was dominating ( when was the last time that word was used in a sentance with the Lions?", The 2nd yr QB looked very good, Javid Best the 1st round running back pick looked very quick and ran over a few guys too. I know this was preseason and perhaps the Donkeys did not put up much resistance but in any case the Lions may be a bit better than expected. By the way, Calvin Johnson and Suh are as good as advertised.! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PierBridge Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 All things considered. Pack 10-6Vikes 10-6Bear 8-8Lion 4-12Give or take a win or loss either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJH Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 The Lions are the least of the Vikings worries. They definitely have some "issues" right now. Its still early though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooter Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 So according to the rankings, who has the tougher schedule - Pack or Vikes? Other than division games the Pack has: Eagles, Bills, Redskins, Dolphins, Jets, Cowboys, Falcons, 49ers, Patriots, Giants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMITOUT Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Since both teams play the NFC and AFC East, the only differences are the Vikes play the Cardinals and New Orleans, while the Packers play the Falcons and 49ers. (Vikes play the #1 team last year in the NFC West and South, while the Pack play the #2 team in those divisions).It seems to be about a toss up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
we are 'the leading edge' HSO Creators Rick Posted August 24, 2010 we are 'the leading edge' HSO Creators Share Posted August 24, 2010 Only you would say playing the 1st place teams vs the 2nd place teams is a toss-up I would say the team playing the first place teams has the tougher schedule. That being said I see the NFC North as being much tougher than the over-hyped east coast teams.!!! Detroit should show real improvement as should the Bears and Packers. I am a little worried about the Vikes. The distractions and injuries are troublesome to me. Vikes 10-6 Pack 10-6 Bears 9-7 Lions 6-10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMITOUT Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 AZ doesn't have Warner anymore and SF is supposed to be tougher than last year.#1 rankings from last season doesn't mean much with major changes like Warner retiring in the offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
we are 'the leading edge' HSO Creators Rick Posted August 24, 2010 we are 'the leading edge' HSO Creators Share Posted August 24, 2010 Whatever LMIT!!! Only you could say the top teams vs second place teams is a wash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJH Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Doesn't bode well for the Vikes if you are going after Javon Walker.......Rice's injury may be more serious than they are letting on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott K Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 I think the Packers schedule is tougher, because they have to play the Vikes 2 times, and the Vikings get a couple easy ones by playing the Packers ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zepman Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 AZ doesn't have Warner anymore and SF is supposed to be tougher than last year.#1 rankings from last season doesn't mean much with major changes like Warner retiring in the offseason. Boy...what a difference a year makes huh LMIT. Your posts are so blatantly biased and anti-anything Viking it's almost as if you're being paid to stir the pot.....are you????Trying to make your own power rankings just like last year I see....you should write your own book..."The NFL as I See It"...you might sell one copy to yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMITOUT Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Nope, just realistic.Do you honestly believe that AZ will be the team they were last year without Warner and Boldin? If so, you're as delusional as the rest of the Vikings rubes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooter Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 I think the Packers schedule is tougher, because they have to play the Vikes 2 times, and the Vikings get a couple easy ones by playing the Packers ! Thats a good one!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Born2Fish Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Word is that Rice could be out the first half of the season. And Favre has pushed the Vikes into bringing in Walker.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJH Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Word is that Rice could be out the first half of the season. And Favre has pushed the Vikes into bringing in Walker.... Surprised they were able to pull him out of the casino!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zepman Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 LMIT...Vikings are without Taylor and Rice...all teams have their own issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate McVey Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 Thought I'd bring this back to the top and see what Leech thinks about his rankings now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Foss Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 I wondered when someone would Uranate all over Leechbait's rankings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate McVey Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 I figured I'd step up to the trough and let her rip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordie Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 I still think its a bit early for I told Ya so but I told ya so last year The only way the Vikes will win a superbowl is to play the twins and I'm still not sure they could pull it off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Looks like the Vikes go 14 and 2 this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now ↓↓↓ or ask your question and then register. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.