Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Return of Touchdown, Interception, and Yards Jesus.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Renji View Post
    yea right, he was only the leader in sacks despite missing two games and playing on an atrocious team. He wont make the Pass rush and the Pass defense better...wtf are u talking about?
    Oh, he'll improve the team but I doubt the Vikings "make Favre retired after week 1". That team was spanked by the Packers last year and adding a few pieces isn't going to change that.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Duster View Post
      Oh, he'll improve the team but I doubt the Vikings "make Favre retired after week 1". That team was spanked by the Packers last year and adding a few pieces isn't going to change that.
      dude there is sth in this world, maybe you havent heard of it, but its called:

      exaggeration

      v. ex·ag·ger·at·ed, ex·ag·ger·at·ing, ex·ag·ger·ates
      v.tr.
      1. To represent as greater than is actually the case; overstate: exaggerate the size of the enemy force; exaggerated his own role in the episode.
      2. To enlarge or increase to an abnormal degree: thick lenses that exaggerated the size of her eyes.

      Comment


      • #18
        On ESPN they were talking about the possiblity of Favre playing for the Vikings if he gets reinstated and then released.
        Favre + 08 Vikings = Lombardi

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Duster View Post
          Oh, he'll improve the team but I doubt the Vikings "make Favre retired after week 1". That team was spanked by the Packers last year and adding a few pieces isn't going to change that.

          It's not just what we did. It's who the Packers lost. Without Favre, you are an 8-8 team.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by yo123 View Post
            It's not just what we did. It's who the Packers lost. Without Favre, you are an 8-8 team.
            Packers are still a better team top to bottom than the Vikings, even without Favre. Add in the fact that Rodgers is likely going to be better than Jackson, and I can't see the Vikings staying in the race for the NFC North with the Packers.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by yo123 View Post
              It's not just what we did. It's who the Packers lost. Without Favre, you are an 8-8 team.
              Just ignore ignorant people when they post.

              Anyway, if Favre does come back, just think of that QB depth chart. It is insane!!!!


              Originally posted by Halsey
              I don't have to watch it to know it was not interesting.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Duster View Post
                One player isn't going to change the disgraceful team the Vikings have put on the field the past few seasons, especially when that player is an idiot off-the-field and he's going to the land of the party boat.
                This guy is obviously off, however; ever since the Vikings made that trade Vikings fans have been acting like they're the Patriots. Very annoying.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Duster View Post
                  Packers are still a better team top to bottom than the Vikings, even without Favre.

                  Thats just false.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by GB12 View Post
                    This guy is obviously off, however; ever since the Vikings made that trade Vikings fans have been acting like they're the Patriots. Very annoying.


                    Not really. I hate the hype we are getting. I don't think we are a Super Bowl team. I think we can get to the playoffs and win one or two games, but we still have too many holes. I do however think we are the team to beat in the division.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by yo123 View Post
                      Thats just false.
                      How are the Vikings better? Did you watch them play last season? AD and a good defence were all they had. The Packers had an elite offence, defence, and special teams.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by yo123 View Post
                        Thats just false.
                        Really?

                        RB
                        OL
                        WR/TE
                        DL
                        LB
                        DB
                        K
                        P


                        Please, point to one and tell me where the Packers are weak.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by yo123 View Post
                          Not really. I hate the hype we are getting. I don't think we are a Super Bowl team. I think we can get to the playoffs and win one or two games, but we still have too many holes. I do however think we are the team to beat in the division.
                          This reminds me of Cards fans who thought they were a playoff team every season because of a handful of players they acquired. A team that could only be described as bad last year is suddenly the team to beat in the division? Over last year's youngest team that went to the NFC Conference championship? Yes, Favre is a loss but that offence is still leagues better than what the Vikings are going to put on the field.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Duster View Post
                            How are the Vikings better? Did you watch them play last season? AD and a good defence were all they had. The Packers had an elite offence, defence, and special teams.


                            If you honestly think they still have an elite offense without Favre your kidding yourself.

                            AD himself makes it a pretty solid offense, and T-Jack made solid improvements throughout the season. The offense doesn't need to be great if you have the kind of talent we have on D.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Duster View Post
                              This reminds me of Cards fans who thought they were a playoff team every season because of a handful of players they acquired. A team that could only be described as bad last year is suddenly the team to beat in the division? Over last year's youngest team that went to the NFC Conference championship? Yes, Favre is a loss but that offence is still leagues better than what the Vikings are going to put on the field.

                              We were one game away from the playoffs last year, that's hardly "bad." I don't see how the addition of one of the best pass rushers in the game can't put us over the top, when that was the only thing holding us back from being a top 3 defense.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Duster View Post
                                Packers are still a better team top to bottom than the Vikings, even without Favre.
                                QB - Even (Yeah Jackson sucks, but no one on the Packers are proven in the least bit)
                                RB - Vikings (All-Day)
                                WR - Packers (With 4 #1 WRs on their roster, they are sure to have the best passing game in the league =D)
                                OL - Even (Chad Clifton is one of the league's underrated LTs and the Packers pass blocking is top-notch. It is even just because of how sick the the run-blocking is for the Vikings)
                                DL - Vikings (The best 4-3 DL now that Strahan retired)
                                LB - Packers (Quality on all fronts here)
                                DB - Packers (The Packers sport two quality CBs, but if Al Harris plays like he did in the NFC Championship game, their secondary will struggle. The Vikings have some very nice youth in Griffin and McCauley, but they really need consistency for their secondary to be better than the Packers.)

                                Ok, quick run down on my comparisons of the 2 teams. They are actually fairly even when you compare the teams, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Vikings finish with a better record than the Packers.


                                Originally posted by Halsey
                                I don't have to watch it to know it was not interesting.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information