Here's My Take

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Yes, I did see the Vikes beating the Ravens. By a missed fieldgoal in the Metrodome. If that's all the better they can do at home, what they gonna do against a real team in their territory?
No 6-0 team is a bad team. They have to be real good to go undefeated this far, don't matter who they played, or how they played.

However, I also think they're not as good as advertised. They only played 2 "tough" teams: Us and the Ravens, both at home. We're 3-2 and the Ravens are 3-3. Both were games that could've been tied or lost for one or two plays, both were close games (though Skol Guy thinks a 7 point game, in which the defeated team had still a chance to tie or win, is not a close game).

They played a good team, but nothing much, without their star player, against SF. At home too. And that game could've been lost, if it were not for Favre's and Lewis' magic pass. A 3-2 team. The rest were scrubs. All of them are, and were at the time, at the bottom of their division.

They have the upper hand in winning the division, but, as we do, they have a cupcake of a schedule. Playoffs are a different animal.
 
OP
OP
J

jrpack

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
289
Reaction score
13
I'd add the away game at Pittsburgh in there as well. I don't think that will be a cake walk, and living in Baltimore, I know how the ravens can play. That will be a tough game as well.

IMO GB's biggest problem will be Pitt and Baltimore/Flacco.
 
OP
OP
J

jrpack

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
289
Reaction score
13
No 6-0 team is a bad team. They have to be real good to go undefeated this far, don't matter who they played, or how they played.

However, I also think they're not as good as advertised. They only played 2 "tough" teams: Us and the Ravens, both at home. We're 3-2 and the Ravens are 3-3. Both were games that could've been tied or lost for one or two plays, both were close games (though Skol Guy thinks a 7 point game, in which the defeated team had still a chance to tie or win, is not a close game).

They played a good team, but nothing much, without their star player, against SF. At home too. And that game could've been lost, if it were not for Favre's and Lewis' magic pass. A 3-2 team. The rest were scrubs. All of them are, and were at the time, at the bottom of their division.

They have the upper hand in winning the division, but, as we do, they have a cupcake of a schedule. Playoffs are a different animal.

I agree with all you said, you're right, the Vikes have the upper hand right now, but they won't after Pitt and us at home. Then watch them fall apart in front of our eyes. I can hardly wait.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
I agree with all you said, you're right, the Vikes have the upper hand right now, but they won't after Pitt and us at home. Then watch them fall apart in front of our eyes. I can hardly wait.
Considering they lose next game, for us to tie we gotta win at Lambeau against them and the Ravens. Then, it'll still take them a loss from Chicago and to the Giants, because we're probably going to lose to Chicago and Pittsburgh.

There's still 10 weeks left of football, and we still play them at home. Realistically, they're one game in front of us. They have almost the same opponents as we do, except they play the Giants and we the Ravens, and you can consider the Cowboys, but I don't.

So Giants and Ravens, if things go normal, which most of the time they don't.
 

Skol guy

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
766
Reaction score
1
Yes, I did see the Vikes beating the Ravens. By a missed fieldgoal in the Metrodome. If that's all the better they can do at home, what they gonna do against a real team in their territory?
Like the packers? we are already gave them a beatdown so are the packers going to beat pittsburg at hienz field? A win is a win and brett Favre who is third in the league in QB rateing,TD passes and 3rd in interceptions allowed came back for a game winning drive for the second time this season. What were you doing watching the vikings game if the packers played at the same time? I thought you were this die-hard Packer fan. Die hards watch their own team skippy or was the product better at the dome?
 

Skol guy

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
766
Reaction score
1
Remember Frank Gore was out at the very beginning of that Viking game. The only real team the Vikes have played IMO is Baltimore and they won that by a missed FG. I know, I know, a win is a win, but if I recall, the Vikes were behind at halftime against Cleve and Detroit. GB will manhandle SF.
Ok but I think I will wait and watch the outcome before I acknowledge you as a football guru. You are right we have only played abunch of scrubs like the Packers,Lions, Browns,Niners and the rams though
 
OP
OP
J

jrpack

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
289
Reaction score
13
Like the packers? we are already gave them a beatdown so are the packers going to beat pittsburg at hienz field? A win is a win and brett Favre who is third in the league in QB rateing,TD passes and 3rd in interceptions allowed came back for a game winning drive for the second time this season. What were you doing watching the vikings game if the packers played at the same time? I thought you were this die-hard Packer fan. Die hards watch their own team skippy or was the product better at the dome?

I was talking about the Vikings trying to beat Pittsburgh @ Pittsburgh if they have so much trouble beating teams @ home in the dome. And the reason I had to watch the Vikes is because I live in Las Vegas and the local stations have their head you know where, just like espn. I'm not a pessimist, just a realist, and expect that GB will lose at Pittsburgh as well.
 

Skol guy

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
766
Reaction score
1
I was talking about the Vikings trying to beat Pittsburgh @ Pittsburgh if they have so much trouble beating teams @ home in the dome. And the reason I had to watch the Vikes is because I live in Las Vegas and the local stations have their head you know where, just like espn. I'm not a pessimist, just a realist, and expect that GB will lose at Pittsburgh as well.
yeah because we all know the rateings would be better for a 2-2 packer team against a 1-4 lions team Than an undeafeated vikings team against a 3-2 ravens team as far as national interest. Those idiot local stations in vegas
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top