Rank the NFC North

[RedRamage]

Okay, this might be a very short thread.

Anyone NOT figuring the NFC North standings looks like this as the end of the year?

1. Packers
2. Lions
3. Bears
4. Vikings

[T&P_Fan]

1. Lions
2. Packers
3. Bears
4. Vikings.

Stafford is the best QB in the NFL this year, that is my prediction.

[John_Brian_K]

Okay, this might be a very short thread.

Anyone NOT figuring the NFC North standings looks like this as the end of the year?

1. Packers
2. Lions
3. Bears
4. Vikings

yes

[John_Brian_K]

The Vikings will finish last and the Bears will finish behind Detroit and GB....I think the only real question here is if Detroit can get past GB.

It is possible, but right here and right now if I had to put money on it I would put it on the Packers.

[qsilvr2531]

The Packers are the clear favorite. The Lions are Bears will fight each other for the #2 spot and the Vikings are the worst team in the division. If I had to pick them right now it would go:

Packers
Bears
Lions
Vikings

[John_Brian_K]

I am surprised anyone would pick Chicago above Detroit.

[Jason_R]

I am surprised anyone would pick Chicago above Detroit.

Chicago was 7-3 before Cutler broke his thumb, then they went 1-5.

Chicago outscored us last year 50-37.

It would not at all be a surprise if Chicago finished above Detroit.

[John_Brian_K]

Chicago was 7-3 before Cutler broke his thumb, then they went 1-5.

Chicago outscored us last year 50-37.

It would not at all be a surprise if Chicago finished above Detroit.

And...Stafford broke his index finger on his throwing hand in week 10. We had 1300 more yards of offense last year, AVERAGED a TD more a game in scoring, and only gave up 200 more yards on the defensive side.

I would be shocked.

[qsilvr2531]

And...Stafford broke his index finger on his throwing hand in week 10. We had 1300 more yards of offense last year, AVERAGED a TD more a game in scoring, and only gave up 200 more yards on the defensive side.

I would be shocked.

Stafford didn't miss a start while Cutler missed the rest of the year (and they lost the only other producer in their offense in Forte as well.). The difference between mostly healthy Stafford and whatever terrible backup the Bears sent out is huge.

They are two relatively equal teams with comparable schedules. If the Lions lose Stafford for any appreciable period of time they are done. If the Bears lose Cutler they are done as well. The main difference between the two teams last year was the severity of two finger injuries. Anyone that thinks the Lions are clearly ahead of the Bears in this division is kidding themselves.

[John_Brian_K]

Stafford didn't miss a start while Cutler missed the rest of the year (and they lost the only other producer in their offense in Forte as well.). The difference between mostly healthy Stafford and whatever terrible backup the Bears sent out is huge.

They are two relatively equal teams with comparable schedules. If the Lions lose Stafford for any appreciable period of time they are done. If the Bears lose Cutler they are done as well. The main difference between the two teams last year was the severity of two finger injuries. Anyone that thinks the Lions are clearly ahead of the Bears in this division is kidding themselves.

Like what happened when he went down and Sean hill came in and won us some games? 'Team' means just that and the back up QB is a part of that 'team'. I, honestly, have not heard from anyone that thinks the Bears are as good as Detroit....especially a Detroit fan.

We play the Bears twice this year....like every year. Wanna put a little friendly wager on the HU and who will have a better record at the end of the year?

[qsilvr2531]

Like what happened when he went down and Sean hill came in and won us some games? 'Team' means just that and the back up QB is a part of that 'team'. I, honestly, have not heard from anyone that thinks the Bears are as good as Detroit....especially a Detroit fan.

We play the Bears twice this year....like every year. Wanna put a little friendly wager on the HU and who will have a better record at the end of the year?

How many games did Shaun Hill win for us last year? Are you seriously suggesting the Lions are no worse off with Hill starting compared to Stafford?

I don't bet against my teams, so no wager, friendly or otherwise. I've already made my prediction in this thread. I will point out that we went 1-1 against them last year so it really doesn't seem like a stretch to claim the 8-8 team is comparable to the 10-6 team it split head to head with the previous year.

Check out footballoutsiders for someone who thinks the Bears are significantly better than Detroit (I don't agree with them, for the record).

[John_Brian_K]

How many games did Shaun Hill win for us last year? Are you seriously suggesting the Lions are no worse off with Hill starting compared to Stafford?

I don't bet against my teams, so no wager, friendly or otherwise. I've already made my prediction in this thread. I will point out that we went 1-1 against them last year so it really doesn't seem like a stretch to claim the 8-8 team is comparable to the 10-6 team it split head to head with the previous year.

Check out footballoutsiders for someone who thinks the Bears are significantly better than Detroit (I don't agree with them, for the record).

No, I am not suggesting that. Stafford is a stud. Read what I wrote.

OK, It sounded like you were fairly confident the Bears were better and would be better...I always take those bets, but I am a gambler so..

[qsilvr2531]

No, I am not suggesting that. Stafford is a stud. Read what I wrote.

OK, It sounded like you were fairly confident the Bears were better and would be better...I always take those bets, but I am a gambler so..

I read what you wrote, I guess I just don't understand it. The Lions were 3-7 with Hill in 2010 and he basically didn't play at all last year. 'Team' is a nice sentiment but if we lose Stafford (or Johnson) for any appreciable amount of time this year we aren't going to the playoffs (or finishing 2nd in the division).

[MC24]

Sure Cutler and Forte got injured but it's not like we didn't deal with any injuries either. Delmas went down, Houston went down (and you saw what happened when both are not in the lineup), Best went down, a huge part of the offense. When Stafford is in trouble, he can dump it down to Jahvid and he can usually make something out of it. Durant was injured on and off for a good portion of the season, he's not great but he's a lot better than Bobby Carpenter. Point is, good teams find ways to battle through injuries. Average/bad teams don't.

The Bears did add Marshall for Cutler but I think people overrate that acquisition. He's a solid, big target for Cutler but he has stone hands and he has never been much of a red zone target. Their defense is getting old, and while they might have a few years left in them, they are certainly not the shutdown defense of old. Did they address the offensive line? You got elite pass rushers in this division like Allen, Matthews and Suh and they didn't really improve the line. Chris Williams is their projected left tackle but he has had injury problems throughout is career and you look at their back up, J'Marcus Webb, who is terrible. So they are banking on a lot there...and Carimi was hurt last year. So both their tackles have injury problems.

I'm not acting like the Lions have no downfalls because they do, most notably their secondary but I really don't see how the Bears are better.

[qsilvr2531]

Sure Cutler and Forte got injured but it's not like we didn't deal with any injuries either. Delmas went down, Houston went down (and you saw what happened when both are not in the lineup), Best went down, a huge part of the offense. When Stafford is in trouble, he can dump it down to Jahvid and he can usually make something out of it. Durant was injured on and off for a good portion of the season, he's not great but he's a lot better than Bobby Carpenter. Point is, good teams find ways to battle through injuries. Average/bad teams don't.

The Bears did add Marshall for Cutler but I think people overrate that acquisition. He's a solid, big target for Cutler but he has stone hands and he has never been much of a red zone target. Their defense is getting old, and while they might have a few years left in them, they are certainly not the shutdown defense of old. Did they address the offensive line? You got elite pass rushers in this division like Allen, Matthews and Suh and they didn't really improve the line. Chris Williams is their projected left tackle but he has had injury problems throughout is career and you look at their back up, J'Marcus Webb, who is terrible. So they are banking on a lot there...and Carimi was hurt last year. So both their tackles have injury problems.

I'm not acting like the Lions have no downfalls because they do, most notably their secondary but I really don't see how the Bears are better.

There is a world of difference between losing anyone the Lions lost to injury and losing your starting QB. We dealt with injuries last year. We had a healthy Stafford all year. If we had no other injuries but lost Stafford for half a season does anyone really think we are a 10-6 team?

[MC24]

There is a world of difference between losing anyone the Lions lost to injury and losing your starting QB. We dealt with injuries last year. We had a healthy Stafford all year. If we had no other injuries but lost Stafford for half a season does anyone really think we are a 10-6 team?

No but we would do a hell of a lot better than whatever they did. Why? Because Mayhew is prepared while Chicago's GM wasn't.

Look at the 2008 New England Patriots. They lose the reigning MVP in Week 1 and they still go 11-5. Like I said, good teams battle through injuries and find ways to win. Bad ones don't.

Edit: And I'd like to throw this out there. This why I don't understand why people hate taking BPA in the Draft. You keep taking the best players which adds quality depth and you won't have as many issues if a star player goes down.

[MC24]

And it's not like Cutler was having some amazing season. Obviously better than the back up but personally, Forte was the bigger loss IMO. He's the best player on that offense.

[Nastradamus]

Might be true, but Cutler gets severely underrated. He always performs and rarely has any help. This is the main reason why people make so much out of the Marshall acquisition. Its not like the Bears let him wing it around like Stafford. I'm not saying he's better than or even equal to Stafford, necessarily, but he is in the category of elite, franchise QBs IMO due to the way he does it even without help.

[Buddha]

Packers
Bears
Lions
Vikings

The only thing that might change (barring injury) is the Bears jumping the Packers. The Lions defense isn't nearly as god as Chicago's, and now that they have a number one receiver to go along with a solid running game, they should be very hard to beat. The only reason to think that the Lions are better than the Bears is if you think this is the year Uhrlacher/Briggs/Tillman/Peppers fall off the cliff. But I think they have one more run in them.

[pfife]

The Bears and Lions will compete for the #2 slot in the division, and it will probably be a wild-card slot.

[T&P_Fan]

The Lions will smoother the bears this year. It is silly to suggest that the bears will be better.

I think people underestimate how good the Lions will be this year.

13-3 minimum.

[mr0zip0]

1. Packers
2. Lions
2. Bears
4. Vikings

It is too close to call right now between the Lions and Bears, and I wouldn't be shocked if either of them jumped the Packers. The only thing I would bet on in the NFC North is that the Vikings will finish last, and that is pretty obvious.

I wouldn't be surprised if the race comes down to who is the #1 seed, who is the #5 seed, and who is the #6 seed. The NFC North is really really good.

[Nastradamus]

Packers
Bears
Lions
Vikings

The only thing that might change (barring injury) is the Bears jumping the Packers. The Lions defense isn't nearly as god as Chicago's, and now that they have a number one receiver to go along with a solid running game, they should be very hard to beat. The only reason to think that the Lions are better than the Bears is if you think this is the year Uhrlacher/Briggs/Tillman/Peppers fall off the cliff. But I think they have one more run in them.

I disagree with the sentiment here. I don't think you can say they have a significantly better D than us. For one, not all of those guys need to fall off a cliff for them to decline. I think its very possible that one or 2 of them have a down year at the least and that would be a huge drop off for them. For 2, I'm not all that impressed by their talent outside those 4 guys. They were better than us last year, but the buck doesn't stop there. While they are closer to a down swing, we should be on the upswing. Suh should have a better year, Fairley and Young seem ready to step up and I think our LBs will show a big improvement. All of them were new to the team or new to their position and they didn't get much preparation with the lockout. Thats true of all players, but it seemed to affect defenses more last year and I think with the responsibilities our LBs in the wide 9 style, it was especially true for them. Our secondary will be key obviously, but an improved run D and pass rush could help them quite a bit. Also as ESPN mentioned today and as people conveniently forget, we did give up fewer pass yards than Chicago last year, fewest in the division in fact.

[Buddha]

you homers are funny.

I'm waiting for the first one of you guys to say the Lions are going 16-0.

[Porcelain God]

I'll bite (but not as big as Buddha suggests)

1. Lions
2. Packers
3. Bears
4. Vikings

Leshoure is legit, one of the three rookie CBs is league average, and T. Young grows up and takes #2 from Burleson.

[Buddha]

Come on! You know you want to say 16-0! Do it.....DO IT!

[Jason_R]

The Lions have way too many questions to answer defensively for anyone to think they are unequivocally better than the Bears. Our tacklers at the end of last season looked like they were allergic to ball carriers.

[FarFromDetroit]

The Vikings will finish last and the Bears will finish behind Detroit and GB....I think the only real question here is if Detroit can get past GB.

It is possible, but right here and right now if I had to put money on it I would put it on the Packers.

Agreed. I do think Stafford is going to have another blow up year. Doubt I'll be able to get him in the 6th round again this year.

[Hongbit]

4 Predictions for the North:


1) CJ breaks the NFL record with 24 TD receptions
2) Aaron Rodgers plays less than 6 games
3) Michael Bush turns out to be the best offseason acquisition in the division
4) The Vikings go 3-3 against the rest of the North


Lions
Bears
Packers
Vikings

[TigersSlappy]

Come on! You know you want to say 16-0! Do it.....DO IT!

16-0? You must be forgetting the playoff run.

[number20]

The Packers are the clear favorite. The Lions are Bears will fight each other for the #2 spot and the Vikings are the worst team in the division. If I had to pick them right now it would go:

Packers
Bears
Lions
Vikings

This is probably right

[Vonlenska]

you homers are funny.

I'm waiting for the first one of you guys to say the Lions are going 16-0.

+1

The Lions and Bears are pretty damned close.