2008 NFC North Preview

[HMFFL]

Minnesota Vikings (11-5)
In 2008, they may not be as good as historically great defenses such as that of the 1985 Bears or 2000 Ravens, the Vikings figure to have the best defense in the NFL. Jared Allen is the perfect addition to this team. He should benefit by a strong interior defense (and vice versa). The expected wins keep creeping higher despite the questions at quarterback, but whomever the Vikings ultimately settle on as the answer to those questions could mean plus or minus a few wins. The Vikings average 25.3 points per game (#9 in the NFL) and allow 18.1 points (#1) against a schedule featuring seven games against 2007 playoff teams.

Green Bay Packers (9-7)
Apparently, Brett Favre retired. That's going to make a difference for this team. However, the numbers think the Packers will still be in the playoffs. This may be the most difficult team to project because it is so difficult to figure Favre's impact on things like yards after the catch and the success of the running game. The defense is too good and Ryan Grant is too promising for the Packers to completely fall out of the hunt. The Packers average 24.9 points per game (#11) and allow 21.8 points (#12) against a schedule featuring six games against 2007 playoff teams.

Detroit Lions (6-10)
Wait, Jon Kitna was talking about losses in his prediction, right? Maybe he meant that the team would be favored to win or lose by a touchdown or less in ten games. The Lions average 20.6 points per game (#25) and allow 27.0 points (#25) against a schedule featuring seven games against 2007 playoff teams.

Chicago Bears (6-10)
While no one really has any idea what this team is trying to do on offense, the defense is not getting any younger. In 2008, most teams at the bottom of NFL divisions seem to have some kind of plan or reason for hope. Unless Matt Forte becomes the next Walter Payton, Chicago seems to be a team that may fall even further after 2008. The Bears average 19.9 points per game (#30) and allow 25.7 points (#23) against a schedule featuring six games against 2007 playoff teams.

Link

[Next Coming]

The Vikings is everybody's sexy pick right now. In the past that would make me worry but they have a winning formula.

They run the ball better than anyone in the league and the stop the run better than anybody in the league. There's not going to be a lot of people that's going to beat them in the trenches.

Tavaris Jackson just needs to be a caretaker and make plays when asked. Brad Childress is on the hot seat he needs to win now.

[Icness]

Bears fans are really not going to like my season prediction. I hinted at it in my last piece and already two sycophants told me to eat my own feces. It should be posted by the end of the week.

Green Bay is one of the hardest teams to predict, what with the uncertainty at QB and leadership.

I like the Vikings, but they are one OL injury (Hutch or Birk) away from being in trouble. They are built the way I would construct a team though.

Detroit has very real potential to surprise. Best WRs in the division, cake early schedule, vastly improved secondary, more toughness on the OL. I really don't see how they have not improved enough to at least tread water at 7-9 again. The RB position is iffy, but they will at least try to run the ball this year. Firing Mike Martz = major addition by subtraction, and I say that as a guy who loved his hiring.

[CBS7]

I can see why someone would predict the Bears to struggle but if their defense is healthy I think they will surprise a lot of people. I'm surprised they won 7 last year with the way the defense was playing.

[kingofthecourt67]

How the Vikings do will be dependent on Tavaris Jackson. Sure they won't be a passing team by any means, but Jackson will need to be able to manage the game and not turn the ball over.

[Da Schwab]

Giving the Bears 6 wins next year is incredibly generous.

[HMFFL]

Detroit has very real potential to surprise. Best WRs in the division, cake early schedule, vastly improved secondary, more toughness on the OL. I really don't see how they have not improved enough to at least tread water at 7-9 again. The RB position is iffy, but they will at least try to run the ball this year. Firing Mike Martz = major addition by subtraction, and I say that as a guy who loved his hiring.

Cake from the start? So, your saying Detroit opens the season off with a win on the road?

[CBS7]

Giving the Bears 6 wins next year is incredibly generous.

After winning 7 last year with a defense that was incredibly ravaged by injuries, explain how? I assume you think they'll win 3 or 4?

[studcrackers]

well if you're going to rely on devin hester to win games for you then yea i think you'll struggle to win 6

[Da Schwab]

well if you're going to rely on devin hester to win games for you then yea i think you'll struggle to win 6

Exactly my point.

[CBS7]

You seem to be forgetting how good the Bears' defense is when its healthy.

[Da Schwab]

I know their D is terrific when healthy, but I'm not sure they can dominate as much as they would need to, to win 6 games. Only one team has ever pulled off being successful while barley having a shred of an offense and a great D.

I'm not sure if you're expecting Earl Bennett and Marty Booker to set the world on fire, with either Orton or Rex at the helm; or if you're hoping Matt Forte will be the savior for an offense that may struggle to score 250 points this season.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Im surprised so many are picking the Vikings over the packers.
Yea there is a chance Rodgers will fall apart but I think there is a greater chance that he will hold his own since he has even better recievers this year with the addition of Nelson and a year of maturity from jenning and jones. Theres even a small chance Rodgers could be better than Favre was last year. He has a stronger arm (im talking about now, favre had one of the best), and is more mobile, and wont make as many dumb decisions as favre.

[CBS7]

I know their D is terrific when healthy, but I'm not sure they can dominate as much as they would need to, to win 6 games. Only one team has ever pulled off being successful while barley having a shred of an offense and a great D.

I'm not sure if you're expecting Earl Bennett and Marty Booker to set the world on fire, with either Orton or Rex at the helm; or if you're hoping Matt Forte will be the savior for an offense that may struggle to score 250 points this season.

I never mentioned our offense once. I'm saying with a healthy defense and special teams this team isn't going to win just 4-5 games.

In 05 our team scored 260 points, including 5 defensive TDs, and was 29th in total offense, but went 11-5, before Devin Hester.

[CBS7]

Im surprised so many are picking the Vikings over the packers.
Yea there is a chance Rodgers will fall apart but I think there is a greater chance that he will hold his own since he has even better recievers this year with the addition of Nelson and a year of maturity from jenning and jones. Theres even a small chance Rodgers could be better than Favre was last year. He has a stronger arm (im talking about now, favre had one of the best), and is more mobile, and wont make as many dumb decisions as favre.

Favre had one of his best seasons last year, not including the Giants game. I think its ridiculous to expect, or even think there is a possibility, Rodgers will be even close to what Favre was last year.

[rilamann]

If the Bears stay healthy play good football and ''suprize some people'' they will go 6-10.Bears are probably a 3-13 maybe 4-12 type of team.

As for the Vikes it appears they are going to be the most overrated team going into this season,if they go 9-7 they should have a parade.

The Lions are still the Lions which means they wont be a factor after week 5.

Baring injury to Aaron Rodgers the Packers will take the division once agian.

Packers 12-4
Vikings 8-8
Lions 6-10
Bears 4-12

[Da Schwab]

12 wins for the Packers? Are you sure about that?

I'm not sure there are too many teams in the entire NFC that have the capability to win 12 games next season.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Im surprised so many are picking the Vikings over the packers.
Yea there is a chance Rodgers will fall apart but I think there is a greater chance that he will hold his own since he has even better recievers this year with the addition of Nelson and a year of maturity from jenning and jones. Theres even a small chance Rodgers could be better than Favre was last year. He has a stronger arm (im talking about now, favre had one of the best), and is more mobile, and wont make as many dumb decisions as favre.

Favre had one of his best seasons last year, not including the Giants game. I think its ridiculous to expect, or even think there is a possibility, Rodgers will be even close to what Favre was last year.

Yea, Favre had a great year but I dont think that there is 4 game difference between the 2. Not to mention that Rodgers have better players than Favre did last year.

To me
Rodgers+Nelson+full year of ryan grant+Getting rid of Bubba and having TEs who can catch the ball+plus another year of the same young line growing=Favre

[rilamann]

Yea Schwab I dont think the Packers are going to miss all that much without Favre.Im going 12-4 or maybe 11-5 but definatly in that ballpark provided the team stays relatively healthy.Ecspecially Rodgers obviously,if Rodgers goes down the Packers could be in trouble unless Brohm steps in and is shades of Favre in 1992.

Favre had a great year obviously and was a big part of our success,but the Packers success last season wasnt just due to Favre.

That success in addition to Favre's great play was due to a very solid young and quickly improving defense as well as offensive playmakers all over the field.

I realy belive Mike Mccarthy is one of the best coaches in the game already and Ted Thopmson (Packers gm) has built a rock solid team on both sides of the ball thats going to continue to improve and compete at a high level/chmapionship level week in and week out.

Not to take anything away from Favre and im as big a Favre fan as you'll find but I actually think all the playmakers the Packers have on offense kinda made Favre look good last season.And thats not sour grapes because Favre retired,I was saying that during the season last year.

I also think Rodgers is actually a better fit at QB for the Packers with the way the Packers offense is set up.I dont think that is by accident either,Ted Thompson has built the offense around Rodgers the last couple years because he understood obviously that Favre wasnt going to play forever.

Dont get me wrong im not saying Rodgers will be better than Favre im just saying the way the team is set up Rodgers might actually be a better fit for the personel we have.

Favre would give you that spectacular highlight play every week,Rodgers might only give you a handful of those all saeason.But Rodgers will methodically pick teams apart in the short passing game and wont take as many chances as Favre thus throwing less picks than Favre.The offense might not be as spectacular with Rodgers as it was with Favre but it might be more efficient.Also,Rodgers has a solid abilty to scramble which could be a big positive factor in the Packers offense.

The thing with Favre was that he was always hit or miss.Take the NFC title game for example last season.

Favre was either going to complete a spectacular long overtime pass (ala Greg Jennings in the Broncos MNF) that probably would have sent the Packers to the SB and would make a highlight we'd see over and over agian for the next 20 years.

Or he was going to throw a pick and be the goat,which is what happened.

If Rodgers is in there he probably methodically gets us in FG range and we win the game

[Wizards2Lottery]

I like Aaron Rodgers a lot more than Jackson and I think the Packers offense is better than the Vikings.

I'm predicting a Detroit division title just because I can.