Soul

I think 7-9 and 9-7 teams are all very similar. There are some 7 win teams on the way up and some 9 win teams on the way down. But there's a fairly signficant difference between 6 and 10 wins. It's not just chance. Well, but the chance could be a very easy schedule...

It's a league of parity, yeah.

Haven't started bye weeks yet, and most of them are western games. With no NY team playing in prime time, one of them always plays at 4pm. I actually prefer it this way. It'll make it easier to follow more games. Too many 12noon starts and it can be hard to keep up, even with NFLST & Superfan.

6 3pm games seems like a lot. I'm not complaining though.

Talk about double-whammies. The Vikes just got beat by the Packers, and now they have to go face an angry Peyton Manning and Freeney.

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa250/soulschizm/cubs-slug-cards.jpg

It was 4-1 Brewers and I turned football on, and I was like http://72.41.2.198/images/newHAI/Burrowing_Owl_in_Rio_Ranch_.gif Then football ended and I turned back and it was 5-4 Reds win! and I was like http://www.mayantimes.com/pictires/animal%20pictures/owl$.jpg

Then I highly suggest we go at least .500 See? That was easy.

But looking at the schedule, did they look like a better team than Minnesota, Green Bay, Philadelphia, Tennessee, Jacksonville, New Orleans, Tampa or Detroit? Detroit was a better team last year, and New Orleans was looking to be much improved. The Bears didn't look much like an improved team. All those 8 teams? Those were the home games. The only real winnable games looked to be the ones vs. Detroit, and the games at Atlanta and St. Louis. Sure, the possibility existed of stealing wins against unprepared teams, but 7 wins against that slate was asking a bit much, I think. Considering the offseason, preseason, and line issues, they looked to be one of the 4-5 worst teams in the NFC, and the rest played in the NFC West. Now? If they play like they did Sunday all year, they could sneak into the upper half of the NFC with Dallas, Philly, New York, Green Bay, Minnesota, and whoever the best team in the NFC South decides to be (NO/Carolina/Tampa). I was really down on the team, but still didn't see the 4-5 wins as likely. When Vegas had them at 8 wins, I was taking the under no question. When it moved to 6.5, it was really hard to take the under. This team is no worse than the one that won 7 games last year. And they have every single important player that played on the 2006 team. Last year's defensive letdown was clearly health related. As for that schedule, Detroit was not better. Detroit beat them, but the Bears beat GB twice and they weren't better than the Packers. New Orleans at home in December is very clearly a winnable game. Tennessee is a very similar team to the Bears, and since they play at home, I would say that's clearly winnable. And while Philly and Tampa are both definitely tough, neither was a juggernaut and both play in Chicago, either game is winnable. 7 wins was probably a good bet going in, and now that they've won a game that was a clear loss, 8-9 seems very reasonable. I worry about defensive injuries though. I worry about Mike Brown and Tommie Harris especially. It just seems like when those two guys are healthy, the center of the defense holds and teams start having difficulty against us. When they're out, we can be had. If the D stays relatively healthy Orton shouldn't need to come back from big deficits very often, and I can see the 8-9 win scenario. A few well-placed injuries to that D, and everything changes.

I was bad for a little yesterday, but after 5-10 minutes got better :) Why the sudden change? Was it Jack, Jim or something stronger? 8-) Xanax. JD's been working pretty good for me this year.

My condolences, soccer. Looks like this year will be development for Russel, McFadden.

Of course I like Ditka and Golic is okay, but Greenie is awful. Plug Tirico into Greenie's spot and you might have something.

Brewers......LOSE?!? http://spirit.nsbit.com/srsly.jpg

This is like a preseason game. And God that stadium must be horrible to watch a football game.

3rd and 1, you have the best back in the NFC, and you throw. Ok....

If they were to stop this 3rd down, they'd get the ball back with a chance to put it away.

eh, don't agree with going for two this early. now the pack gets just a fg and you're 8 down instead of 7.

That's why AP is a beast. Pack had that one stopped.

I think we'll see a pick or sack/fumble very soon. That should have been the pick right there.

And now Jackson must throw. I don't think he can do it. And Rodgers can coast with the run game. Um, advantage Pack.

The real-time view looked extremely close...not sure if he had two feet down right away. I forgot it doesn't matter if the feet are down. You have to maintain possession through your fall to the ground. Refs made the right call.

How's that not a catch?

That's one reason, but the Vikings also have maybe the best combined O and D lines in football. I agree they're strong up front. I'm watching the secondary though, and it's not good. Terrible even, on some plays. They also still aren't getting the pressure I would expect them to be able to get. If teams can toss the ball around because they can't defend it, they might project to be a solid WC team but no way would they make it to the Super Bowl.

I'm not entirely sure where they're significantly better than the Titans. Both teams have excellent defenses (Vikings maybe a little better, but not much), both have great running games (AP is better than LenDale, but Chris Johnson may swing things a bit), both have mediocre receivers (save for Berrian, adv Minn) and both have huge questions at QB. Maybe I'm being biased, but if the Vikings are big time Super Bowl contenders, why aren't the Titans? The only thing I can think of is that the Vikings are in the NFC and the Titans are in the AFC. But they're very similar teams. It's because they're in the NFC. I think you're comparison is pretty good though. I'm still not understanding what Childress is seeing in Jackson.

Better drive that time, but again they can't finish. Packers' D tightened up pretty good once they got inside the 20.