I think it would be pretty sad to use the words of a former player as bulletin board material. That would be like Obama using criticism from someone like Rush Limbaugh as motivation — stupid to give him the attention, and even worse to think his opinions even matter.

Why would Childress even acknowledge someone like Mark Chmura who has so little relevance to the teams today?

Vikings are good, but be realistic here Anthony.

AD is the only player that is 100% better than who the ‘96 Packers had. He is very very good. That being said, he won’t be breaking the NFL all time rushing record this year. He has been held to 55, 63, and 69 yards in 3 different games.

’96 Packers allowed 210 pts the entire season. Vikings are at 148 already, 7 games in, and Packers will score at least 20 on them this weekend.

’96 Packers lost 3 games, and only one game was close besides that (OT win vs 49ers who were very very good that year. Vikings barely won against 49ers and Ravens and lost to Steelers.

And as other people have stated, no Viking cares what Chmura says. If they aren’t pumped for this game you need them off the team.

I was just responding because it seems Anthony really does think 2009 Vikings should be feared like the ’96 Packers.

As I stated before, Vikings are good and AD is a beast, but nobody ‘fears’ this team. There are too many signs that say they are good, but not great.

As a Packer fan I can attest that Chumra is an idiot. His opinion is worthless and he is still bitter coz no one came to his side when he was caught in the hot tub of a high school girl. Really it is just envy, on Chumura’s part. Brett, Frank Winters and him used to be drinking buddies. Farve stopped the partying all the time and became a better father. I don’t think Farve will even pay attention to one word out of this idiot. Now I can see Farve looking for other material (Rodgers, McCarthy, Thompson). But I think it works both ways and the opposite is also true. I also agree that Farve is playing right now at near a level as the mid 90s….and he never had a weapon like Sidney Rice also. It should be a great game and this to me is what is so great about the football season. I hope you guys stay injury free and here’s to a good game (with the packers winning of course :)

They were good, but … come on.

This is one of those cases where, once someone says something really inane, no one will really take seriously anythng else they are saying.

Seriously… Chmura? Yes, the ‘96 team was good, but it wasn’t that good. Other than Favre getting his ONE superbowl ring, that’s not a memorable team at all. That defense was NOT one of the best of all time… get real.

And no one fears the Vikings? I agree, whisper that into AD’s ear all week this week and post that all over the locker room!

What really gets me is that Mark Chmura was reached for comment. Why on earth would you go talk to a guy who basically (allegedly) raped his way out of the NFL? No one wants to hear from that idiot…

It’s going to be tougher than it should be for the Vikings, who definitely look like a better team in nearly every aspect of the game (I’d give the nod to the GB receivers and a respectful nod towards Rodgers, who’s an excellent QB himself but in those two aspects it’s a tie at best).

I’ve seen some stats-waving about Turnover differential as of late but you really can’t put much stock in that due to the Vikings game at St. Louis where they were handed several turnovers and then the fluky turnovers in Pittsburgh that probably shouldn’t have happened (the fumble never happens if they don’t make that awful tripping call incorrectly and the INT was totally lucky, bounced right to the Pittsburgh defender). The Packers got a lot of turnovers from their first game against the (apparently) cursed Chicago Bears AND they just played two of the crappiest teams on the planet so it’s hard to take any turnovers in their favor all that seriously, either. So that’s a murky point at best.

Both teams haven’t played the toughest competition, imho…though I’d give the nod to the Vikings in that regard by a bit (49ers played a tough game in Minneapolis, the Ravens are still fairly tough and the Steelers are also very tough (though not quite as fearsome as they once were after seeing the Vikes basically outplay them most of the game and in most facets of the game) and of course we played the Packers who aren’t great but are very good. The Pack really only played Cinci and the Vikes and that’s it for tough teams – losing both games.

I’d say offensively the Vikings have a few more options and more talent overall but it’s not by a huge margin, either. The Packers defense, statistically is giving up less points but that’s probably more of a factor of their schedule (one less game and mostly easier opponents) than anything concrete.

That leaves Defense, Special teams, and the X-factors. I think that the Viking’s Defense surprised everyone, including themselves, after the Steelers game – doing a great job shutting down a top-flight passing attack even though they didn’t reall pressure Big Ben all that much. The Secondary held their own without the deadly Antoine Winfield, who very much could be playing this Sunday. The Vikes pass-rush will still be fairly effective though perhaps not quite as dangerous as it was in the dome and this will probably help the Packers a bit. I think that the Packer defense isn’t quite what it could or used to be and I’d give the nod to the Vikes Defense on this one, to some extent. I think they (Vikes) are more likely to win the Turnover battle in this one by just by a hair.

Special teams has shifted – it’s now the Vikings who hold a solid edge in this regard though I’d say both field goal kickers are great. With Harvin out there, watch out though!

X-factors include motivation (in that regard slight edge to the Packers who lost the first leg and will be eager to prove it was a fluke) and home-field advantage (something not as potent at Lambeau field as it once was).

Despite my firm allegiance to the Vikings and my hatred for anything and everything Packer-related (except ol’ Favre, I love him as a Viking), I’m not sure who will win this game.

I think that the Vikings SHOULD win and are fully capable of winning this game but whether or not they get the lucky breaks AND stay focused is hard to determine.

I’ll go with Vikings 27-Packer 17.

You can’t single out one or two people to “fear” each week, because we beat you with someone else every week. Week 1 AP goes to town on CLE. Then teams key in on him, so Favre gets it done with Shiancoe. Then Percy starts making plays in special teams and we get him the ball in the slot and some wildcat. Teams think they have to shut down percy, so here comes sidney rice with 300 yds in 2 games.

You can’t pick one weapon on offense to shut us down, that’s what this vikings team is a lot better than people think.

Personally I like being underdog and unfavored by the media. It makes it a sweeter victory when we go 13-3 and a superbowl ring.

you guys know it. I know it. The rest of the NFL fan base knows it. it the pack vs. the Vikes. ANYTHING can happen. IMHO the Packers are frankly. not that great of a team right now. They’re lucky they have Rodgers or they’d be pretty crappy. The Vikings have surprised me and truly look like contenders. That loss last week proved more to back that theory up than the six wins in previous weeks. I think on paper, the Vikes win going away..maybe blow them out, Lambeau or the Dome.

All that being said, Chester Marcol may kick a FG in OT for a 6-3 Packer win…. Or, Faud Reviez may blast an ugly 29 yarder late in the game for the 16-13 victory. Guys..its the Pack vs. the Vikes…..this game can go either way every single time. Throw the season records out the window on this one. Flip a coin, bite your nails & keep the beers flowing. Its going to be a tense game for BOTH fan bases.

btw, f’ Chmura. That guys is a proven moron.

I agree Bret Favre is not the QB he used to be, he’s flat out BETTER. His leadership qualities, building up his new team’s confidence by calling them, physically and talent-wise, the best team he’s ever been on,( he did qualify that with its all up to team chemistry now) . His play selection, his taking sacks instead of trying to do it all by himself all at once.

So far, a world class performance.

The guys is truly nutz. He told me that I was basically fabricating Favre’s late season fades even though there are clearly stats to prove that position. Can’t reason someone out of a postition they didn’t reason themselves into. Everyone, including himself, knows that Favre fades down the stretch. In fact, there hasn’t been even one season in the last six that he has played well in the last month.