Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36
  1. #31
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Vikings have cakewalk and Packers have difficult schedule...

    "SKOL" wrote:
    I'm always bugged at how the schedule makers do us no favors with bye weeks.

    Vikes play two teams coming of bye weeks, plus a team coming off a 10 day layoff (Detroit coming off Thanksgiving).


    Pack plays no teams coming off a bye, however they do play one team that is coming off an 11 day layoff when they travel to Chicago Dec. 22.

    It can be argued that one of the teams we play coming off our bye also had a bye the previous week, however it should be an advantage for the team coming off a bye that they are more rested than the other team... such as when the Pack comes off their bye, they play a team that had a game the week before... Ten, who just happens to be coming off a Monday night game... just another bogus schedule snafu in favor of the Pack.

    It sounds like I'm whining, doesn't it?
    Yes it does.
    Stop right now.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  2. #32
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Vikings have cakewalk and Packers have difficult schedule...

    "Overlord" wrote:
    Yeah, that's what I think most people see it as.
    Truth of the matter is that a lot of random things happen in a football game.
    Anybody really believe that the Giants were a better team than the Patriots (okay, I'm sure some people do, but they're wrong)?
    I do.


    And you're wrong.

    The only way to judge which team is better is for them to play - even better if it's on a neutral field.

    On a neutral field, the New York Football Giants beat the Patriots.
    Arguing anything but "The Giants are a better team" is ludicrous.

    =Z=


    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  3. #33
    BleedinPandG is offline Coach
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    969

    Re: Vikings have cakewalk and Packers have difficult schedule...

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Overlord" wrote:
    Yeah, that's what I think most people see it as.
    Truth of the matter is that a lot of random things happen in a football game.
    Anybody really believe that the Giants were a better team than the Patriots (okay, I'm sure some people do, but they're wrong)?
    I do.


    And you're wrong.

    The only way to judge which team is better is for them to play - even better if it's on a neutral field.

    On a neutral field, the New York Football Giants beat the Patriots.
    Arguing anything but "The Giants are a better team" is ludicrous.

    =Z=

    Winning simply shows which team scores more points on any given day, it is not a direct reflection of talent or which team is better.
    Take the Giants.
    They lost to the Cowboys twice last year, beat them once, which team is "better"?
    Any given Sunday any team in the NFL can beat any other team in the NFL, winning does not determine talent.


    What I do agree on is it is difficult to develop a metric for talent.
    The true measure of a man is what he'd do knowing he'd never be found out.

  4. #34
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,492

    Re: Vikings have cakewalk and Packers have difficult schedule...

    "BleedinPandG" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Overlord" wrote:
    Yeah, that's what I think most people see it as.
    Truth of the matter is that a lot of random things happen in a football game.
    Anybody really believe that the Giants were a better team than the Patriots (okay, I'm sure some people do, but they're wrong)?
    I do.


    And you're wrong.

    The only way to judge which team is better is for them to play - even better if it's on a neutral field.

    On a neutral field, the New York Football Giants beat the Patriots.
    Arguing anything but "The Giants are a better team" is ludicrous.

    =Z=

    Winning simply shows which team scores more points on any given day, it is not a direct reflection of talent or which team is better.
    Take the Giants.
    They lost to the Cowboys twice last year, beat them once, which team is "better"?
    Any given Sunday any team in the NFL can beat any other team in the NFL, winning does not determine talent.


    What I do agree on is it is difficult to develop a metric for talent.
    Nope Giants are better.

    2008 Patriots: AFC Champs
    2008 Giants: Super Bowl Champs


    Advantage: Giants

    Again... Giants were the better team last year.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  5. #35
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Vikings have cakewalk and Packers have difficult schedule...

    "BleedinPandG" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Overlord" wrote:
    Yeah, that's what I think most people see it as.
    Truth of the matter is that a lot of random things happen in a football game.
    Anybody really believe that the Giants were a better team than the Patriots (okay, I'm sure some people do, but they're wrong)?
    I do.


    And you're wrong.

    The only way to judge which team is better is for them to play - even better if it's on a neutral field.

    On a neutral field, the New York Football Giants beat the Patriots.
    Arguing anything but "The Giants are a better team" is ludicrous.
    Winning simply shows which team scores more points on any given day, it is not a direct reflection of talent or which team is better.
    Take the Giants.
    They lost to the Cowboys twice last year, beat them once, which team is "better"?
    Any given Sunday any team in the NFL can beat any other team in the NFL, winning does not determine talent.


    What I do agree on is it is difficult to develop a metric for talent.
    The Giants beat the Cowboys in Dallas in the only game that mattered in the end, did they not?

    So the Giants were "better".
    Period.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,206

    Re: Vikings have cakewalk and Packers have difficult schedule...

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "BleedinPandG" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Overlord" wrote:
    Yeah, that's what I think most people see it as.
    Truth of the matter is that a lot of random things happen in a football game.
    Anybody really believe that the Giants were a better team than the Patriots (okay, I'm sure some people do, but they're wrong)?
    I do.


    And you're wrong.

    The only way to judge which team is better is for them to play - even better if it's on a neutral field.

    On a neutral field, the New York Football Giants beat the Patriots.
    Arguing anything but "The Giants are a better team" is ludicrous.
    Winning simply shows which team scores more points on any given day, it is not a direct reflection of talent or which team is better.
    Take the Giants.
    They lost to the Cowboys twice last year, beat them once, which team is "better"?
    Any given Sunday any team in the NFL can beat any other team in the NFL, winning does not determine talent.


    What I do agree on is it is difficult to develop a metric for talent.
    The Giants beat the Cowboys in Dallas in the only game that mattered in the end, did they not?

    So the Giants were "better".
    Period.

    =Z=
    But wait, the Patriots beat the Giants in New York just a few weeks before...
    So were the Patriots the better team then, and four weeks later the Giants were the better team?
    And of course the Vikes went to New York and creamed the Giants, so the Vikes must be better too.
    But then the Vikes lost to the Packers who beat the Giants in the regular season and lost to them in the playoffs.


    You know how this goes.
    If the best team won every game, then there would be teams finishing 16-0 and 0-16 every year.
    The best team is more likely to win any game, but there is a lot of chance involved.
    Sometimes the worst team (Miami) actually beats a team that is better than they are.

    The playoffs are no different than regular season games.
    Teams win or lose based on chance as well as skill.


    So the reality is that the Patriots were the more talented team (even in the last game) and had played better all season (until the last game).
    Check out some statistical analysis that compares how good the two teams are: link.
    Or just consider that if the two teams had played again the following week, the Patriots would have been favorites.


    The Giants won the Super Bowl, and they are the NFL Champions.
    Good for them, they are champions and will get to go down in the NFL history books that way.
    They did not win the NFL Best Team award.
    When the age of the Vikings came to a close, they must have sensed it. Probably, they gathered together one evening, slapped each other on the back and said, "Hey, good job." - Jack Handey [Deep Thoughts]

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-27-2008, 08:24 AM
  2. Packers early schedule no cakewalk
    By purplepat in forum Trash the Pack
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-18-2008, 05:29 AM
  3. MOVED: Packers early schedule no cakewalk
    By ultravikingfan in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-16-2008, 10:29 AM
  4. Vikings: 'Difficult environment' slows Wilf - Stadium
    By COJOMAY in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 11-20-2007, 09:34 AM
  5. The Minnesota Vikings Have A Difficult Road Ahead
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 05-26-2006, 05:15 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •