Which team has the brighter future? The Vikings or the Packers

[DirtDirtDirt]

Teddy Bridgewater is absolutely awful

And AP cant run forever

 

[Broncos6482]

No whoa, the Broncos were a great team without question, and they won the game that mattered but the Vikes were the best team in football that year and it honestly was not close. The rest of the AFC west was horrible that year not that it would have mattered. Our loss to Atlanta was the fault of the head coach not the players. I didn't really post what I did to show any disrespect to the Broncos, although Elway is probably the most overrated QB who ever played the game, but I loved TD.

 

[Broncos6482]

To answer the poll question, the Packers have Rodgers, therefore the Packers have the brighter future.

 

[MISKO]

I have to go with the pack on this one , I like zimmer and think he will make the team competitive for years to come ... .but the vikes still need a SB caliber QB and teddy aint it , AP isnt going to last much longer either .. their D is up and cumming.. get a good qb and that will make this conversation more interesting

 

[flyerhawk]

I can't believe the Vikings got 8 votes.

 

[Nosferatu]

I can't believe the Vikings got 8 votes.

One of those was me, I just couldn't bring myself to vote for the Packers even in a meaningless poll on tHoop...

 

[packfancjh]

I would be surprised if AP is still producing in 2-3 years whereas Rodgers will still be beating them like AP did his kid. AP is that team. Packers no question

 

[The Derski]

Honestly, the Vikings have the better coaching staff, better defense, better RB's, and a better o-line. I'm being a homer here but honestly it's very rational. What say all you guys?

Even AP be like

 

[Manster7588]

I can't believe the Vikings got 8 votes.

I don't think this poll went quite like the OP thought it would.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

I don't think this poll went quite like the OP thought it would.

Any team comparison, should start and possibly end at te QB position

In the NFL, is there is a huge disparity at QB, there's no reason to drill down further into the team com
IMO

 

[Manster7588]

Any team comparison, should start and possibly end at te QB position

In the NFL, is there is a huge disparity at QB, there's no reason to drill down further into the team com
IMO

OK, but I'm pretty sure the OP thought the vote outcome would have been reversed. And why did he place the poll then disappear?

 

[cdumler7]

I would be surprised if AP is still producing in 2-3 years whereas Rodgers will still be beating them like AP did his kid. AP is that team. Packers no question

See this is where I would disagree a bit. While AP is a huge part of that team I would say that defense has a lot of young talent that seems to be getting better with each year. Harrison Smith is one of my favorite safeties in the league.

 

[cdumler7]

Any team comparison, should start and possibly end at te QB position

In the NFL, is there is a huge disparity at QB, there's no reason to drill down further into the team com
IMO

If that is the case then how do the Broncos win the Super Bowl this past season with some of the worst QB play in the entire league? While I do agree a great QB covers up a ton of bad on any team I don't think that a conversation just ends at that point.

 

[flyerhawk]

If that is the case then how do the Broncos win the Super Bowl this past season with some of the worst QB play in the entire league? While I do agree a great QB covers up a ton of bad on any team I don't think that a conversation just ends at that point.

The Broncos defense was playing at an extremely high level at the end of the season last year.

IMO, I consider their win to be very similar to the Giants win in 2008.

 

[cdumler7]

The Broncos defense was playing at an extremely high level at the end of the season last year.

IMO, I consider their win to be very similar to the Giants win in 2008.

Hmmm so you are comparing a wild card team that didn't win their division to a team that was a #1 seed? Also the Giants had the 17th ranked defense that year where the Broncos stayed top-5 the entire season. I get the idea that both defenses showed up huge in the playoffs and were a big reason their team won the Super Bowl but the Broncos defense did so much more throughout the entire year compared to that of the Giants. Throw in the Giants actually had an average to above average offense that year.

 

[flyerhawk]

Hmmm so you are comparing a wild card team that didn't win their division to a team that was a #1 seed? Also the Giants had the 17th ranked defense that year where the Broncos stayed top-5 the entire season. I get the idea that both defenses showed up huge in the playoffs and were a big reason their team won the Super Bowl but the Broncos defense did so much more throughout the entire year compared to that of the Giants. Throw in the Giants actually had an average to above average offense that year.

The Giants defense came on very strong at the end of 2007. They had some injuries earlier in the season.

I'm not arguing that the two defenses were equally good.

 

[cdumler7]

The Giants defense came on very strong at the end of 2007. They had some injuries earlier in the season.

I'm not arguing that the two defenses were equally good.

I'm just trying to understand beyond the fact that both defenses played great in the post season that they are comparable. I mean Giants offense was vastly superior to that of the Broncos this past season and the Broncos defense was vastly superior to that of the Giants if we are looking at the entire season.

I guess you could say both were lead by a Manning at QB.

 

[Manster7588]

Hmmm so you are comparing a wild card team that didn't win their division to a team that was a #1 seed? Also the Giants had the 17th ranked defense that year where the Broncos stayed top-5 the entire season. I get the idea that both defenses showed up huge in the playoffs and were a big reason their team won the Super Bowl but the Broncos defense did so much more throughout the entire year compared to that of the Giants. Throw in the Giants actually had an average to above average offense that year.

The Giants defense came on very strong at the end of 2007. They had some injuries earlier in the season.

I'm not arguing that the two defenses were equally good.

One thing very similar is The Brothers Manning both won SB's because of their teams defense.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

If that is the case then how do the Broncos win the Super Bowl this past season with some of the worst QB play in the entire league? While I do agree a great QB covers up a ton of bad on any team I don't think that a conversation just ends at that point.

The Broncos were a total outlier last season

That situation is in like the one percentile of what happens in today's NFL

 

[flyerhawk]

I'm just trying to understand beyond the fact that both defenses played great in the post season that they are comparable. I mean Giants offense was vastly superior to that of the Broncos this past season and the Broncos defense was vastly superior to that of the Giants if we are looking at the entire season.

I guess you could say both were lead by a Manning at QB.

The Giants scored 373 points. The Broncos scored 355.

Both teams featured extremely good defensive lines that were playing about as good as you could hope for. Both had aging vets playing well(Strahan, Ware) and a young stud pass rusher(Umenyura, Miller).

Of course there are differences but that is the comparison I was thinking of.