Want to argue about the NFL? Let's go ...

Stop The Vikings Love Fest

	Elsa/Getty Images

I don't believe in the Vikings. I don't believe in Brad Johnson. And I don't believe in any team from the NFC North.

Headlines across the nation laud Johnson for taking this team from the brink of the abyss to playoff contention. Technically, it's true. Johnson has been in the lineup for six straight wins to help Minnesota improve to 8-5. But the Vikings cheerleaders deserve about as much credit as Johnson does for this run. He was simply in the right place at the right time.

Poor Daunte Culpepper lost games to Tampa Bay, Chicago, Atlanta, Cincinnati and Carolina. Johnson has beaten the Giants, Detroit twice, Cleveland, Green Bay and St. Louis. The only respectable win of that group was over New York -- a game in which Minnesota's offense generated 137 total yards and no touchdowns. Quarterbacks usually get benched for games like that, while Johnson become a hero.

I have nothing against Brad Johnson. He's already proven himself in this league. I'm just not ready to label him a savior for helping the Vikes beat a bunch of teams that are thinking more about Reggie Bush than the running back they're facing in Sunday's game.

Now that I've offended Vikings fans, let's turn to the mediocre Monsters of the Midway. The Bears hit a similarly soft schedule, and threw in somewhat fluky, turnover-laden wins over the Panthers and Bucs. Chicago is 1-3 against the AFC North (with a win against a Ravens team that mailed it in its season as bad as the Rams and Lions), arguably the third worst division in that conference.

The Vikings are 1-1 against the AFC North, with a win over the Browns and a blowout loss to the Bengals. Unless I'm complete off base -- which is always a strong possibility -- Minnesota will fall hard to the Steelers on Sunday. If the Vikings and Bears were in the AFC, they might be thinking about Reggie Bush themselves right now instead of who gets the right to lose their first playoff game.

-- Andrew Perloff (12:30 p.m.)

Hey Andrew, I agree with you to a degree about the Vikings. Its true that they and Brad Johnson have not beaten and good teams (with the exception of the abberation against the Giants). However, you cannot fault the Vikings for winning those games. What is the old adage about good teams -- they win the games they are suppose to win which is exactly what the Vikes are doing. Everybody seems to praise USC for being undefeated despite not beating any real "good" teams (and don't try to claim the ND is a "good" team, The Ohio State University will prove that point for me.) Isn't this the same scenario; you win the games you are suppose to win (quality opponent or not).
-- Joe M. , Coaldale, Pa. (12:47 p.m.)

Thank you, thank you, thank you Andrew Perloff ... FINALLY someone believes in REALITY regarding the Vikes and Bears. No 2 teams in the league have benfitted more from injuries (Packers) and mismanagement (Lions).
-- Kelly , Eagan, Min. (12:51 p.m.)

I agree that they are not 2 great teams, but the schedule is what it is, with no way to change it. With that said, and with at least Chicago going to the playoffs, remember that in the NFL any team can win on a good day.
-- Billy , Mexico (12:54 p.m.)

Right on Andrew!!! I have not taken the time to look into who the Vike's played pre/post Daunte, and never have heard any other "sportsguy" bring up these games. After readin this column, I think you are absolutely correct in your assesment. Poor Daunte has to read the headline in yesterday's edition, and people start jumping on the Brad Johnson bandwagon. Right on, and thank you!
-- Brenin , Atlanta (12:57 p.m.)

What about the Bears' record against the "famed" NFC South. They've beaten the Panthers convincingly, the Tampa Bay Bucs, the Saints and will beat the Falcons on Sunday -- not too bad. How did the Vikings do against these teams? Da Bears.
-- Ryan , Chicago (12:59 p.m.)

Andrew Perloff is a bit off in his assessment. Bears are far better than people gave or give them credit for. They've won the games they should win and have won 2 games no one gave them a chance at winning (Carolina and Tampa). Yes, the offense is, well, offensive, but the defense is what makes or breaks this team. No. 1 in many categories is not the fluke of a "soft schedule".
-- Kevin T. Brown , Chicago (1:03 p.m.)

Andrew Perloff is a bit off in his assessment. Bears are far better than people gave or give them credit for. They've won the games they should win and have won 2 games no one gave them a chance at winning (Carolina and Tampa). Yes, the offense is, well, offensive, but the defense is what makes or breaks this team. No. 1 in many categories is not the fluke of a "soft schedule".
-- Kevin T. Brown , Chicago (1:03 p.m.)

I agree with you on this topic. I have no faith at all in the Vikings. I'm a Detroit Lions fan and they are pathetic and the whole division is very soft. The Vikings have 4 wins against the Lions and Packers who have a combined record of 7-19. And the Vikings are still hardly winning these games. If the vikings happen to make the playoffs they will get bounced so fast it won't be funny in the first round. The Bears do have a great Defense which is something that can keep you in any ball game. They have had some luck this year in games but on the overall, the defense deserves all the credit in the world. I'll ask you this Question whats the difference between the Bears team this year and the Super Bowl winning Baltimore Ravens of a few years back. So I have no love for the Vikes but the Bears at least play real well on Defense. And defense can win you championships.
-- Sean Pratt , Windsor, Ontario (1:04 p.m.)

"Fluky, turnover-laden wins over the Panthers and Bucs." What a ridiculous comment. Turnovers are part of the game. The Bears play a ball control style that relies on their defense to create short fields for them. Just because they don't put up 24 points in wins over good teams doesn't mean it's a fluke. Chicago wins with defense. Wins caused by defense are not flukes.
-- Kevin , Chicago (1:06 p.m.)

Being a Vikings fan, I thought you should have at least mentioned something about the defense. I realize that they are not playing the best teams out there, but give credit where it is due, and the defense deserves it. Brad Johnson has brought something that Daunte couldn't, being calm under pressure. He's not doing anything like Peyton, but the Vikes have followed Brad's lead and it is paying off.
-- Bizz Ness , Minneapolis (1:08 p.m.)

You overlooked the biggest case of overrating, which is San Diego. I keep seeing them listed high in various power ratings and suchlike. However, they tend to ignore the concept of actually winning their games! Of course they just might beat the Colts; they almost have to if they're to stay in contention after this week.
-- Bill Curtin , Washington D.C. (1:09 p.m.)

I couldn't agree more. Pointing out the teams they have beaten during their 6 game wining streak says it all. The win against the Giants was a fluke. They would lose that game 9 out of 10 times. I think you will see the Vikes get brought back down to earth this week and well, pushed into the earth by the Steelers big offensive and defensive fronts.
-- Bob R , Brunswick, Ohio (1:10 p.m.)

While I do agree that no team in the NFC North is fantastic, let's take a closer look at the NFC East. Do you actually see the Giants or Cowboys as that superior to the Vikings and Bears? Didn't think so ...
-- Mike , Chicago (1:14 p.m.)

I'm glad that someone at least brought light of the Minnesota situation. Hearing people suggest that they should trade away Culpepper is just stupid. I don't aee why any media perosn would make that suggestion. That's my take at least. My question is why arent people thinking wow these Vikings would really be a contender if they had Number Two production QB in Culpepper back?
-- Anthony Maria , Windsor, Canada (1:18 p.m.)

THANK YOU!! It's about time people address the actual performance of a QB rather than just his team's record. Has anyone else ever noticed that there are 10 other guys on offense along with defense and special teams to contribute even just a little bit towards a win!? With that said, this isn't all Brad Johnson's doing, Vick is overrated, and Tom Brady has never been as good as Peyton Manning.
-- Drew , New Orleans (1:19 p.m.)

This is the problem with rewarding a team with a weak schedule for having a poor record the previous year. This is why I'm against that practice. Seeding is at stake here, and it would be a travesty that Chicago get the other bye because of a weaker schedule, and division, than Carolina (or whoever else wins the NFC South). If Chicago played a "real" schedule, then we would see how "good" they really are. They are definitely better than the Vikings, but I don't know if they deserve the first round bye this quickly. The same thing can be said about Cincinnati in the AFC, although they are in much better shape. Put their offense and Chicago's defense together, and they would be talking about an undefeated season -- and it would STICK for all 19 games!
-- B.J. , Atlanta (1:22 p.m.)

The Vikings aren't good, but to imply that the Bears aren't good and don't have a chance to make the Super Bowl is crazy. Carolina wants no part of playing the Bears in Chicago in January. All in all, though, it doesn't matter because my Colts will tear anyone up.
-- Aaron , Indianapolis (1:28 p.m.)

I agree with your take. Talk of Mike Tice for Coach of the Year is idiotic. If I'm Wilf, I've already started the head coach interviewing process. I think the media just looks for a storyline and rides it whether or not it makes sense as in the case of these projected Super Bowl teams -- Bengals (no defense), Bears (no offense), Colts (great defense), Jaguars (can win it all with Garrard). Right. Go Steelers.
-- Teddy Bates , Montclair, N.J. (1:29 p.m.)

To respond to Kevin and his thought that being a No. 1 defense in many categories can't be a fluke of a "weak schedule." Check out who is leading the NFL in pass defense. It's the Packers, and if that doesn't prove that a soft schedule (against all those all star QBs in the NFC North), I don't know what does.
-- Troy , St. Paul, Min. (1:32 p.m.)

Unbelievable, until last week every analyst is singing the Bears praises, they have one loss against a typically tough Steelers team on the road and now at 9-4 with the best D in the league they are overrated? The Bears do what they want which is run the ball and play D ... and last I checked 9-4 is pretty good, what's the Patriots record again?
-- Ryan , Chicago (1:34 p.m.)

No, these aren't the strongest of teams, however a win is a win. I don't like the term "fluke" to make an argument. I assume then, that no other team has won this way? Or is any team that forces turnovers and takes advantage of situations a "fluke" team. Also, as bad as the NFC North is, it isn't much different than the AFC East, where NE hasn't beaten many good teams either - well there were a couple of "fluke" wins in there I guess.
-- Tom , Minneapolis (1:37 p.m.)

Yeah Andrew, Pepp had 12 interceptions, Brad Johnson 2. Turnovers don't matter at all in the NFL. It has nothing to do with Brad. How could I have been so stupid?
-- John E. Kage , Denver (1:39 p.m.)

Adrew Perloff's assumptions are a little off kilter. As a Bears fan I was delighted to see the struggles of the Vikings in the early part of the season, but I commend the job Tice has done the last few weeks, even though he hasn't necessarily saved his job. The Bears are a dominating defensive unit that carries an entire team, although fighting injuries and a setback in Pittsburgh. They should make a decent run into the playoffs, but are a year or two off from -- dare I say it -- THE SUPER BOWL.
-- Colllan , Waterloo, Ind. (1:49 p.m.)

It's such a 'weak' argument to 'dis' a team because they have a weak schedule or come from a weak division. What are Bears supposed to do, lose to the bad teams on purpose? They didn't make the schedule. Why don't you look at the records of the teams they lost to. Combined those and they equal 29-23. That tells me they're not losing to the teams they are supposed to beat.
-- Mike Thomas , Houston (1:54 p.m.)

The Vikings, Bears and San Diego are all overrated. Lets wait to see them get bounced (if they make it) in the playoffs before they even get settled. The Vikes are choke-artist, the Yankees can outscore the Bears and San Diego is just BIG NAMES. The Seahawks will run the NFC bracket come January.
-- John E. Kage , Lakeridge, Va. (1:58 p.m.)

I completely agree that the Bears are overrated. Especially that defense. It seems everyone has unanamously agreed that they're the best defense in the NFL this year. They're good but hardly THAT good. Out of all the teams they've played this season, only 2 of them are currently in the top half of the league in offensive yards per game ( Bengals and Redskins), and they lost both of those games. Even the Texans could put up some pretty good defensive numbers against that cupcake of a schedule.
-- Josh Viney , Madison, Wisc. (2:08 p.m.)

Let's see, Perloff ... Bears are 9-4 and Vikings are 8-5 and they stink ...P ats are 8-5 getting helathy playing the Jets and Buffalo and they are instantly great again. Pittsburgh goes on a three-game bender and slogs out an ugly win at home in the snow and they are contenders again. What coast you living on, I wonder ...
-- Chris J. , Phoenix (2:13 p.m.)

Andrew Perloff, I don't believe in you, but I do beleive in the Chicago Bears. There are only haters out their, they never get respect. However Chicago Bears will make it to the playoffs and hopefully this is the start of the Chicago Bears Reign.
-- Marc S. Baker , Chicago (2:18 p.m.)

Minnesota will win it's last three games and win at least one playoff game. Ben Roethlissoverated and Kyle Orton aren't going to be striking fear in anyone at the Metrodome. And let's face it, with five new starters on D, it has taken them time to gel. And gel, they have. They'll prove their worth these last three weeks.
-- Brian , San Diego (2:27 p.m.)

I agree about the Vikings which is sort of sad considering I'm from Minnesota, but the Bears? The Bears are a Super Bowl contendor. They did not have a "soft schedule" at all. How could you say the Bears are overrated when they have the #1 defense in the league. Orton stepped up a little bit last week, too.
-- Dan R , Minneapolis (2:44 p.m.)

I agree somewhat, but I think the most "overrated" contender is now New England. Look at whom they have beaten over the past 6 weeks and whom they have lost to. They aren't beating teams with winning records.
-- Mark Pachankis , Shreveport, La. (3:03 p.m.)

The one thing you seem to fail to realize is that every game is tough to win in the NFL. You can't just write off wins against teams like the Browns or Lions as total cakewalks that should't even count towards a teams' record. You still have to perform at a high level to win those games.
-- Paul , Chicago (3:11 p.m.)

I agree that topics such as "Mike Tice for Coach of the Year" and "Trade Culpepper" are idiotic. However, don't let your zeal to dispel these myths cloud your thinking too far in the other direction. Coaches everywhere beat into the ground the theme of winning the turnover battle as the key to winning football games, and that's exactly what the Vikings have done the last 6 weeks. Their defense has become opportunistic, and their QB isn't making silly mistakes. Any knowledgeable football person would love to have such "fluky" play from their team.
-- Kirk , Farmington Hills, MI (3:15 p.m.)

Sunday's game will be a true test of just how much the Vikings have improved. But to suggest that a six-game winning streak is meaninglness (regardless of the opponents) in the league is simply silly. Try to bear in mind who the Packers and Giants have beaten in that stretch of games. You better put THEM into the "I don't believe in them at all category" because both of them outright struggled against the Vikings.
-- Paul , Rochester, N.Y. (3:19 p.m.)

How can anyone make the argument of "soft schedule"? The bears play the same 14 games that the other teams in their division play. Only two games are based on the previous years record. If any team has a soft schedule, look at Indianapolis's schedule, or Seattle's schedule.
-- Shahved , Green Bay (3:22 p.m.)

I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but discussing the Bears or Vikes strength of schedule is a waste of time. As was the case last year, the NFC is a weak conference. If the Colts don't win it all this year, another AFC team will.
-- Jay , Pittsburgh (3:38 p.m.)

Andrew, you are absolutely right in your assessment. I have thought this way the whole time while the Vikings have made this run. I do, however, think there is some hope and it comes from the defensive side. The defense has played much better during this win streak than it has at the begining of the season or in the past couple of seasons. The players that were brought in this year have come together and understand their roles much better. You can argue that the teams they have stopped do not have top ranked offenses, but the fact is last year anyone of those teams would have put up big numbers against them.
-- Aaron , St. Louis (3:45 p.m.)

To be honest with you ... You're right about the Vikes and the Bears, but check everyone one out, including Indy -- they're first 8 games were "gimmes". While they may run the table, my guess is someone is going to get aggressive with them for 60 minutes in the playoffs and they'll become the "finess" Colts again.
-- Jim Backus , New York (3:57 p.m.)

First, I am the biggest Vikings fan on the east coast. Second, I am thrilled with six wins in a row. Third, you are exactly right about the Vikings. Every point you made is 100 percent right on. Essentially, all this run has done is weaken our draft position in April. You can bet we will be thinking QB in that first round.
-- Tom Wingfield , Charlotte (4:03 p.m.)

While I don't believe that Brad Johnson is the be-all and end-all of Vikings football, you have to appreciate the fact that he has taken a 2-5 team to 8-5. In any job, taking a losing project and turning it to the good is worthy of praise, not condemation. Why not the same for Brad?
-- Kris , Adams, Min. (4:07 p.m.)

Hey Andrew, There's this neat, little saying that defense wins championships, and this Bears D is the most dominating D that this league has seen since the 2000 Ravens(who won the Super Bowl).
-- Ben Burkhardt , Buffalo (4:25 p.m.)

The only problem with Andrew's article is that it applies to a lot more teams than just Minnesota and Chicago. Look at Seattle, they deserved to lose to NYG but Feely forget how to kick, they win on an interception with 5 seconds left and a 50 yard field goal against dallas and who else have they beaten? St. Louis? the Niners, Houston and Arizona? Are those not the 4 worst teams in the league right now and that counts for 7 of their 9 wins? And they have tennesee and Green Bay. That has to be the weakest schedule of an NFL team in the history of the NFL. When they play the colts they will be exposed as a fraud as well. I am a Vikings fan and I also think that Pittsburgh will win next week but why isn't anyone picking up on the fact that the hawks haven't drastically improved they just got lucky with their schedule.
-- Kevin D. , Calgary, Canada (4:38 p.m.)