I've found that the Vikings rarely meet expectations for me in the regular season. They usually perform either way better or way worse than I expect.Detroit. I still wonder about the defense and think they have a defined ceiling with Goff at QB, but that should still be one of the best offenses in the league. Minnesota was ludicrously lucky last year, and I think Green Bay will be better this year than what the consensus seems to be, but I don't like their chances more than Detroit.
QB - Kirk.
I...don't think that's at all obvious yet.Packers.
Love is ready and well, he's obviously the most competent QB of the QBs in that division, by virtue of the other teams' incompetence at that position.
It isn't a high bar to beat Goff, Cousins, and Fields in terms of trigger pulling.I...don't think that's at all obvious yet.
I understand the spirit of your post but I don't know that competent is the correct word. Goff and Kirk are nothing if not competent, but not much more than that (particularly in Goff's case). If you want to bet on the upside of Love, I get it, but I wouldn't be so sure Love will be any better than Kirk or Goff this year. And I say that as someone who is increasingly talking myself into the Packers being a threat to win this division.Packers.
Love is ready and well, he's obviously the most competent QB of the QBs in that division, by virtue of the other teams' incompetence at that position.
The question uses future tense. Every year, some team that sucked last year surprises people because people mis-value the "unknown" the same as "proven failure"; this extends to NHL defense prospects as well. Love does not look lost anymore, unlike his very first outing and looks like the game is not too much for his.I understand the spirit of your post but I don't know that competent is the correct word. Goff and Kirk are nothing if not competent, but not much more than that (particularly in Goff's case). If you want to bet on the upside of Love, I get it, but I wouldn't be so sure Love will be any better than Kirk or Goff this year. And I say that as someone who is increasingly talking myself into the Packers being a threat to win this division.
I think we largely agree. My only point really was that Goff and Kirk are competent, even though I (like you, it seems) don't think they are guys you can win with unless you have an absolutely stacked roster around them. Probably semantics more than anything.The question uses future tense. Every year, some team that sucked last year surprises people because people mis-value the "unknown" the same as "proven failure"; this extends to NHL defense prospects as well. Love does not look lost anymore, unlike his very first outing and looks like the game is not too much for his.
Goff is an utterly annoying QB to watch, showing flashes of talent, but is more consistently dull and predictable. Fields could develop as well, but he was really raw last season and Love has had more time.
Cousins is Cousins. I've remembered his signature from his Washington days. He will post good number, be reasonably productive, maybe show very good to elite features for half the games, but you always had the sense he was leaving plays on the table and of course, his night games are an utter disaster.
I see Love looking comfortable and able to make elite throws out there. There will be growing pains, but the ceiling is high for him.I think we largely agree. My only point really was that Goff and Kirk are competent, even though I (like you, it seems) don't think they are guys you can win with unless you have an absolutely stacked roster around them. Probably semantics more than anything.
Detroit is my sleeper pick to make the playoffs and even the divisional round.
Are we confusing our NFL and NHL terms here? NFC Norris? Typo?