Skip to main content

 

Originally Posted by CAPackFan95:

This is why the NFL needs to balance morning/afternoon games.

 

10 games in morning, 3 in afternoon. The scores of the 3 afternoon games 38-7, 27-0, 13-0.

 

Spread it out like 7/6 NFL, not 10/3.  Get your **** together.  

 

Freesafety does not approve of this message.

 

Actually, the Bores and Loins are fairly similar. Both rosters are stocked with aging vets who are under-achieving, to say the least. No depth, not a lot going on in the pipeline, and a mess of a salary cap.

 

I scoffed at the talking heads who predicted before the season started that the Spermheads would be our competition for the Division. Now, I'm not so sure...

So how "good" are the Vikings? They lose to what has proven to be an atrocious SF team, then turn around and beat the winless Kittens and the Chargers, with a good pass rush to make Rivers' and Stafford's lives miserable. According to something in the Strib today, I think it was said by Tarkenton, the Vikes have a better roster than GB. The only difference is that GB has ARodgers. I find that hard to believe, but it's hard to get a good read on this Vikes team...

Please let me know when the Viking O-Line got "better" than ours? Or when their WR's got better than ours? or their DB's?

 

Ridiculous statements by people/teams with sincere Packer envy problems.

 

Plus they said it themselves, we have the ULTIMATE difference maker & oh BTW...he covers up a lot of flaws.

Neither SDG or DET have much for running game. Neither SDG or DET have a QB that can move well. Based on the first 3 weeks the Vikes look like a 7-9 or 8-8 team at best. They still have 2 vs the Packers, and they have @DEN, vs KAN, @DET, @CHI. vs SEA, @ATL, @ARI, and @OAK. 

 

 

Last edited by H5

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×