What the Packer, Vikings, Lions and Bears need to do.

Popcorn

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Packers

+ Offense needs to be solid, that means
- Better Interior OL play
- Running Backs need to stay healthy and consistant
- WRs need to be solid
+ DL needs to free up LBs
+ Better Run Defense
+ Maintain good pass coverage
+ LBs need to stop run and defend pass

If they do as such I see: 10-6 if not I see 5-11. As of now I see 7-9

Vikings
+ Offense needs to be consistant
+ OL needs to gel
+ RB need to be 1000+
+ Defensive Line must get pressure inside
+ LBs need to defend pass
+ Secondary needs to step it up
+ NEED TO PLAY FROM WEEK 1 NOT WEEK 8

If we do as such I see 12-4, if not I see 6-10. As of now I see 7-9

Lions
+Martz needs to make Kitna a 3000+ passer (which he can)
+ RB needs to stay Healthy
+ WRs need to show some of that great talent
+ OL needs to not suck
+ Defensive Line needs to continue to be solid inside and get better outside
+ Secondary needs to improve

If they do as such I see 13-3, if not I see 3-13. As of now I see 6-10

Bears
+ Grossman needs to improve
+ RBs need to be consistant
+ WRs need to step it up
+OL needs to do better
+Defense needs to keep it going

If they do as such I see 11-5, if not I see 6-10. As of now I see 9-7


Bears
Vikings*
Packers*
Lions


* Based on intra-divison play, can be switched.
 

PackerSacker54

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
706
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Not bad. The Bears O-line is not really needing much improvement which explains why Thomas Jones rushed for 1335 yards on a team everybody knew was going to run the football.
If each team does what you state needs to be done I see the individual records being more like this.
Bears= 12-4
Vikings 10-6
Lions 9-7
Packers9-7
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
I'll go with the 9 -7 Packers. I think that might be one more than they get, but I could see it happening.

Lions, I think that's about 2-3 more than they get.

Vikings, I could see it happening, but I'm thinking more 8 - 8 ... 9 - 7 at best for them. I wouldn't be surprised for 10 wins though.

Bears, you've GOT to be kidding me. (sorry, i disagree) 10 - 6 at best maybe 11 - 5 if Vasher players all 16 games.
 

thetombradyhater

Cheesehead
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
989
Reaction score
0
Location
<a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=42.957176+-
Mucho Parity.

And that seems pretty accurate a little high for Lions, I don't think unless Mike Martz performs a MIRACLE they are going to get to 13 wins. I don't think that the Bears are to good, I mean last year could be like in 2001 when the Bears won the divison but then the next year sucked. I am not saying they will but I think they most likely will not reach 11 wins again
 
OP
OP
P

Popcorn

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
thetombradyhater said:
Mucho Parity.

And that seems pretty accurate a little high for Lions, I don't think unless Mike Martz performs a MIRACLE they are going to get to 13 wins. I don't think that the Bears are to good, I mean last year could be like in 2001 when the Bears won the divison but then the next year sucked. I am not saying they will but I think they most likely will not reach 11 wins again

Martz made Kurt Warner, Marc Bulger and even briefly Ryan Fitzpatrick look like Pro-Bowl/HOF QBs. Martz is a genius. I realize my predictions are a bit high for each team but maybe its because Im tired of people always saying the NFC North Sucks.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
I agree with all of popcorn's predictions. I don't see any of these teams really being a threat for a serious Super Bowl run this season.
 

tkpckfan

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
326
Reaction score
0
the packers can do that everyone else doesnt half to. they can lose to us is what they can do
 
OP
OP
P

Popcorn

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
DePack said:
I don't see the Lions at 13-3 if the other teams don't even show up. If they played against air I see them 9-7 at best.

I can see the Lions being either very bad or very good. Thats why I put the predictions as such.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
Popcorn said:
DePack said:
I don't see the Lions at 13-3 if the other teams don't even show up. If they played against air I see them 9-7 at best.

I can see the Lions being either very bad or very good. Thats why I put the predictions as such.

You'd make a good weatherman!!! "Might rain, might be dry!" :wink: :lol:
 
OP
OP
P

Popcorn

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
cheesey said:
Popcorn said:
DePack said:
I don't see the Lions at 13-3 if the other teams don't even show up. If they played against air I see them 9-7 at best.

I can see the Lions being either very bad or very good. Thats why I put the predictions as such.

You'd make a good weatherman!!! "Might rain, might be dry!" :wink: :lol:

I dont like being wrong. :p
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
Popcorn said:
cheesey said:
Popcorn said:
DePack said:
I don't see the Lions at 13-3 if the other teams don't even show up. If they played against air I see them 9-7 at best.

I can see the Lions being either very bad or very good. Thats why I put the predictions as such.

You'd make a good weatherman!!! "Might rain, might be dry!" :wink: :lol:

I dont like being wrong. :p

LOLOLOL!!! Then......"Ride that fence, my man!!!" :lol:
 

PackerSacker54

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
706
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Zero2Cool said:
I'll go with the 9 -7 Packers. I think that might be one more than they get, but I could see it happening.

Lions, I think that's about 2-3 more than they get.

Vikings, I could see it happening, but I'm thinking more 8 - 8 ... 9 - 7 at best for them. I wouldn't be surprised for 10 wins though.

Bears, you've GOT to be kidding me. (sorry, i disagree) 10 - 6 at best maybe 11 - 5 if Vasher players all 16 games.

I don't see why the Bears can't get 1 more win than last season. The same killer defense has been upgraded along with the special teams(which was a problem area last season aloa Bobby"Bobbles"Wade) they haven't lost any key players on defense or offense and they won't have to start Kyle Orton for 14 games with only three weeks preparation. They are playing a weaker schedule also. 12-4 seems quite possible to me. I called a 10-6 season last year and they ended up 11-5. All the rival fans think that it's going to be a repeat of the 2002 season or at least they hope it is. If everyone stays healthy the Division is the Bears for the taking.
 

big3

Cheesehead
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
784
Reaction score
0
Location
Novi, MI
If all the hype out of Detroit is true I see them with a maximum 11 wins. I think they have to be at least 8 - 8 to keep a riot from happening. As they sit right now I will be ******** if they get 8 wins. I really don't expect any more than that this year.
 

pyledriver80

Cheesehead
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
0
big3 said:
If all the hype out of Detroit is true I see them with a maximum 11 wins. I think they have to be at least 8 - 8 to keep a riot from happening. As they sit right now I will be ******** if they get 8 wins. I really don't expect any more than that this year.


11 wins? I can't see that. Maybe in the next 2 years combined.
 

pyledriver80

Cheesehead
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
0
What has he done so spectacular since the Rams were in the Super Bowl. That offense doesn't scare many Defenses. Outside of Holt, the Rams were average at best.

Faulk made Martz look good. When Faulk started declining so did the Rams. Martz outthinks himself, never good in a coach.

Martz has always sucked and will continue to do so.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
thetombradyhater said:
Mike Martz turned Kurt Warner an AFL QB into a MVP and Marc Bulger into a Pro Bowl caliber player

Think so? I thought **** helped alot with that. OH well. Either way Tom Brady is still by far better than Kurt Warner.
 

calicheesehead

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
742
Reaction score
0
Location
91214
MArtz is no genius. Had a great OLine, fantastic runner and WR corp, hell even Bulger looked good. Watch how he manages the clock/game or when he decides to go for it or not. Genius...hardly...lucky few years with talent. Mooch looked good....lost talent, not so good. I'm not worried about the Martz/Millen combo.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top