Mortal Lock!!

[funkytown]

I know anytime somebody uses that term, it's a sure-fire jinx. However, taking the Vikings for the season at under 7 wins looks like too much yum yum to me. Tavaris Jackson getting 8 wins this season? NFW

[New001]

Not a lock, but it does rate as the best of my season totals by a large margin at -110.

[cefis21]

TJ is a piece of crap. BUT... With Green Bay , Detroit and the sinking Bears in the division, it's possible for the Vikes to win games by not tripping over their shoelaces. Plus when TJ starts sucking, they'll replace him. It is not a lock.

[thing85]

How do you like Under 6.5 wins at +125?

[TomG]

Bodog currently has this priced at Under 7 (-115). King Yao estimates the frequency of a push on 7 at around 20%. That would make Under 6.5 (+125) the worse bet. Take Bodog's line.

[NajdorfDefense]

Like it, but Vikes had best run D in NFL last year, Jackson will be better than last year, and a great run attack in Peterson and Chester Taylor. They will pick up Kelly Holcomb [Eagles 4th stringer right now] or McCown or someone better than Jackson as well.
Bears will be worse and so will GB possibly.

[blackasthma]

Don't think run D alone will get them over...consider the Colts run D last year. Either the offensive or defensive passing game must improve, imo, or this total may as well be at 16.5 wins. Also factor in the chance occurrence of a lineman dropping dead before the season begins. I personally don't like the number their getting, but....
how 'bout them buccaneers??? NFC South is always soft, and I think Kiffin's defense will rebound from last year. Throw in Garcia at QB - I think you're looking at a bargain over 7.5u30...

[NajdorfDefense]

Your post made no sense....we like the Under. I think under 16.5 wins would be a good bet...why are you comparing the #1 run D to the #32 run D? Are you saying since a team with an awful run D did well last year that the Vikes will?

[blackasthma]

[ QUOTE ]
...or this total may as well be at 16.5 wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

ooops!!! scratch that line...
I know you like the Under. My implication is that it'll take much more than strong run D for the vikes to be successful this year. The colts disregarded their run D because they didn't need it. They rarely trailed in a game, hence, opponents needed to pass the ball, not run the ball. The vikes are different. They won't win with just a strong running game and run D. They desperately need a passing attack to score some points or a formidable pass D to prevent the opposition from scoring. Either way, I don't like betting the under here. Too many people are taking it because their weaknesses have already been exposed. It's like taking a stock tip from Jim Cramer - it's already stale by the time you get it.
I apologize for the confusion...

[funkytown]

I live in the Twin Cities and I can assure you that the Vikings, sans 1998, have ALWAYS played to the level of their competition. There is no need to analyze their schedule. This team absolutely sucks. And their coach as well.