Packers/Vikings

[dknightx]

Any reason NOT to bet on the Packers? -2 (-101) at pinnacle right now

[Easy E]

I'd look at it carefully- NFC North games have a way of confounding the obvious "fade the pathetic home team" picks

[McGahee]

Other than their OL sucking, their inability to run the ball, a lousy defense, bad coach, a brutal history in domes even when they were good...I see no reason not to lay points with the Packers on the road.
And yes, I realize the irony that it's hard to tell which team I'm describing, but still...why is GB favored on the road? Give me the Vikes.

[Webster]

[ QUOTE ]
a brutal history in domes

[/ QUOTE ] you do know that that is an urban legend right?

Green is not certain and the OL actually is getting better.

The defense is not as bad as you might think.

Why is GB favored? They are playign the Vikings for God sake and Tice is bad mouthing the Packers saying the only lucky thing about this year is they get to play the Packers.

The Pack have lost 4 games by a total of 20 points with 14 of those against the Lions. Minnesota?

minus 2??? Bridgejumper has that as a "C" game for Minnesota. yuck! I can't see Minny winning.

[McGahee]

Their defense stinks, their coach stinks, and the dome thing is not an urban legend. They stink in domes.

[ QUOTE ]
Their defense stinks, their coach stinks, and the dome thing is not an urban legend. They stink in domes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been a Minnesota fan for a long time and I think Minnesota is the pick here. Minnesota usually plays extremely well after the week they lose a road game by 14+ points. Also Green Bay has been a weak road team the last couple years while Minnesota has been a strong home team the last couple of years. Also GB O-Line is one of their major weaknessed while the D-Line is one of the only parts of the Minnesota team that actaully plays well ( I know they are clost to last in rushing yards allowed but I think this is the fault of unathletic slow LB's) so I think Minnesota will be able to get some consitent pressure on Favre causing him to make some mistakes.

If a Minnesota RB is able to rush for 90+ yards and Minnesota can avoid having a -2 TO differential I like the Vikings to pull this out by 3.

Edit: I don't think I would feel safe laying points @ Minnesota with many teams in the League let alone the Packers. They are 1-1 on @ Home this year with there only loss to a TB team that turned out to be pretty good and they blew out a New Orleans that is on/off again. So I think this line is to much of a reflection of Minnesota horrible play on the road (which they have done for the last 5 years) that is causing them to be a home dog.

2nd Edit: On a side note, I am a big realist when it comes to sports not a Homer, and I have placed bets against Minnesota this year when I though they would lose (@ ATL, @CIN, @CHI) so I am not being biased based on the fact that I like the Vikings.

[jedinite]

Invoking the obvious Tice rule here. Stay away from both sides.

[ QUOTE ]
Minnesota usually plays extremely well after the week they lose a road game by 14+ points.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may be true, but it's logic for conventional circumstances, and Minnesota finds itself in highly unconventional circumstances. Not to mention they lost to Atlanta, in Atlanta by 20 in Week 4, and then - surprise! - not much of a recovery in Chicago.

[ QUOTE ]
D-Line is one of the only parts of the Minnesota team that actaully plays well ( I know they are clost to last in rushing yards allowed but I think this is the fault of unathletic slow LB's)

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, but whatever it is, the Minnesota defense has been pretty horrible. And that's the one part of the team that was supposed to improve this year. Whether it's their linebackers or not, the D is weak, whatever you think of the D-line in general.

[ QUOTE ]
I think Minnesota will be able to get some consitent pressure on Favre causing him to make some mistakes.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, but Favre showed poise against Carolina, which one would expect, because it's Favre. And my goodness, if a little bit of pressure rattles Favre, what's going to happen to Culpepper?

I'm not saying jump all over the Pack here, I'm just laying off. Until something drastic happens - suspensions to some of the players, Tice getting fired - there's just too much crap going on with this team to try to figure out what they're going to do on any given Sunday.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Minnesota usually plays extremely well after the week they lose a road game by 14+ points.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may be true, but it's logic for conventional circumstances, and Minnesota finds itself in highly unconventional circumstances. Not to mention they lost to Atlanta, in Atlanta by 20 in Week 4, and then - surprise! - not much of a recovery in Chicago.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry I should have said they play well at home after losing on the road by 14+ points. My mistake.

[ QUOTE ]
there's just too much crap going on with this team to try to figure out what they're going to do on any given Sunday.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of the most accurate statements so far in this thread.

[tolga]

By my standards, this game is about as obvious a no play as there will ever be... can you really make a strong case for either team? I can't.

my prediction= Min. wins 5-2 in overtime.

[Webster]

[ QUOTE ]
dome thing is not an urban legend. They stink in domes.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Pack is 5-4 in Domes in the last 4 years - not REALLY stinking I don't think. But you can remember what you want.

Ok so games that are in domes are obviosuly on the road for the Packers and they are 5-4. Does anyone know their record in road games overall in the last 4 years? Because if they are 20-12 on the road in the 4 years then 5-4 wouldn't look as impressive. I doubt however that the Pack was 20-12 on the road the last 4 years probably right around 16-16. I must admit that I didn't think the Packers were over .500 in a dome the last for years. However, they have beaten the Vikes 2 out the last 3 years (Actaulyl I think it might be 3 years in a row) in Minnesota.

[TheRover]

[ QUOTE ]
Invoking the obvious Tice rule here. Stay away from both sides.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Vikings are the new Saints. Just stay the [censored] away, there's plenty else to bet on.

[judgesmails]

[ QUOTE ]
Also Green Bay has been a weak road team the last couple years while Minnesota has been a strong home team the last couple of years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Green Bay was 6-2 on the road last season and 4-4 the season before.

They are 3-2 in the Metrodome the last five years.

[ QUOTE ]
the D-Line is one of the only parts of the Minnesota team that actaully plays well

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't they just switch to a 3-4 last week because injuries and the slow development of Erasamus James have left them short of enough quality DLs?

Anyway, all that said - I expect a big effort from MN. They usually play their best vs. the Packers and I will put some cash on them at +2.

[McGahee]

I'm taking a wild guess and saying you took the "last 4 years" because that's the only time period where their record looks decent in such games? Why not 3 years or 5 years?
OK so they've beaten the Lions the last few years when they were good and Detroit has stunk. They struggled all the time in the 90's when Favre was in his prime and Minn&Det were mediocre. In one of their SB years they lost to a winless Colts team in like Week 10.
I mean, whatever. I like the Vikings in this game for other reasons too. That is all.

[scott8]

The Vikings have scored only 67 points in 5 games. I think the only other offense more inept is Houston.

With everything going on in Min., I would have a hard time putting money down on the Vikings.

[hobbes9324]

Mike Tice is the new Wayne Fontes - that neverending look of "wtf just happened??"

For you younger folks - being the new Wayne Fontes is NOT a good thing.......

[NoChance]

Aren't there possible suspensions for the Vikings this week? I thought that had something to do with it. Also, Cullpepper's name is in the mix as well.

[ QUOTE ]
Aren't there possible suspensions for the Vikings this week? I thought that had something to do with it. Also, Cullpepper's name is in the mix as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

The owner hinted that he might dole out some suspensions...but there were no signs that it would be this week.

[Webster]

Well - if you want to talk history!! LOL - I think Bart Starr had some problems if you want to factor that in also!! LOL

[IHateKeithSmart]

[ QUOTE ]
Invoking the obvious Tice rule here. Stay away from both sides.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jedi - don't you have a rule that precludes you from betting any games? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

FWIW, word is that Green will be in on Sunday (that's what the locals are saying). I don't think it's a sure thing by any stretch, but I'm taking the packers.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
Any reason NOT to bet on the Packers? -2 (-101) at pinnacle right now

[/ QUOTE ]

St. Paul Pioneer Press:

[ QUOTE ]
It isn't only Vikings fans who want to know whether player suspensions will decimate the team's lineup for Sunday's game against Green Bay. Las Vegas is watching closely, too.

That's why Sunday's noon game at the Metrodome is officially off the board for bettors at Nevada sports books.

[/ QUOTE ]