Kyle Orton's in the same position Chad Pennington walked into coming from the Jets to the Dolphins. He's being asked to be a game manager and not a hero. I'm still not sold on the longevity of this Broncos team, but a ridiculously weak AFC West is going to give them plenty of guaranteed wins and it'll yet again just come down to themselves and the Chargers. A two game lead on San Diego doesn't hurt.

Also Tony Romo is a garbage QB. His winning percentage is a result of the talent around him.

Damn another crappy week 4 me ...titans 0-4 ?! Ravens just when i consider them SB contender they go and lose... That Pitt vs SD game was pretty good game Steelers can't seem to hold the lead for shit ...amazing how 1 player can do so much for defense. Denver is also quite a surprise guess their defense is for real. I'm the only one that picked Packers to win tonight ?!!

Minnesota beat Cleveland, Detroit, and San Francisco and proven they know how to win even if they are behind while Green Bay beat Chicago and St. Louis, but lost to Cincinnati. Overall, I think Minnesota has a slightly better team but not by much.

Also, I'm shocked by the Titans loss and they will surely go to 0-6 now which will all but destory their playoff chances.

Jared Allen was a beast tonight:

4.5 Sacks (Best for any player was 20 sacks for all 16 games last season)
1 Forced Fumble - Vikings Recovered
1 Safety

That is an immaculate performance.

Honestly I thought Rodgers looked pretty damn good but the GB offensive and defensive lines were just dominated for most of the game (one of GB's big weaknesses). If they can finish building a team around Rodgers he will have a very good career, but they need to protect him.

PS - Working on the update now. Update is done, let me know if I missed something.

edit: lmao - watching Favre's press conference and he said the same thing I did "...Jared Allen is a beast..."

Posted on ESPN's NFC North page:

MINNEAPOLIS -- Minnesota is the best team in the NFC North, and right now it’s not close.

That’s where I stand after seeing all four division teams play this week. Chicago has played decently since its opening-week loss at Green Bay. But no one has beaten anyone from a physical standpoint as much as the Vikings defeated the Packers on Monday.

Let me correct that. The Vikings didn’t just beat the Packers. They beat ‘em up.

Yes, I know quarterback Brett Favre will grab all the headlines after a sharp -- and emotionally controlled-- performance. Favre finished with a near-perfect passer rating after completing 24 of 31 passes for 271 yards and three touchdowns.

But this game was decided just as much by the way the Vikings’ defensive front just absolutely throttled the Packers. Favre protégé Aaron Rodgers finished with some good-looking final numbers, completing 26 of 37 passes for 384 yards and two touchdowns, but the Vikings sacked him eight times and had him dancing in the pocket for most of the game. Defensive end Jared Allen led the way with 4.5 sacks.

It was nothing new for the Packers, who entered Week 4 having given up an NFL-high 12 sacks. There might have only been a seven-point difference on the scoreboard, but there seemed to me to be a much bigger gap between these two teams.

After having watched the game I really have to agree with this as far as the Packers are concerned (and not just because I'm a Vikings fan).  With the exception of 3 or 4 plays (such as Clay Mathew's strip return for a TD) the packers were physically dominated the entire game. All of their 2nd half points came after Minnesota had moved into prevent defense and were essentially just running the clock out and only trying to stop the big plays (which was a terrible decision imo by MIN).

The only caveat I would add to what he said is that it really has nothing to do with Rodgers who I think did what he needed to do but was let down by his defense, his offensive line, and (given the endzone drops) his recievers.   Maybe some of that is a leadership issue (impossible to know for sure) but where it concerned doing his job on the field I think Rodgers was more than solid under the circumstances.

I love the love the Saints are receiving! Who Dat?

I think that's a bit premature considering the Vikings haven't faced the Bears yet, who are also on fire currently. The Bears had one week of jitters and have been flying since then. Favre had his own jitters week one and week two but had the benefit of a lighter opening week and a monster in Peterson.

I'm not going to take anything away from their victory against the Packers, but let's be real. No one thought the Packs were winning this game going in, so obviously this isn't the type of matchup that was supposed to test them. Yes, they dominated the GB O-line, but so did everybody else. They still allowed over 300 yards passing, and kept Green Bay in the game until the final minutes.

Bottom line, when they meet the Bears, we'll see who's the best. Until then, they can share the spotlight. What they should be talking about is those G-Men and how they're standing alone in their division right now. Funny that the team that was supposed to have one of the most problematic passing games coming into this season has produced the single most productive receiver of the year in Steve Smith and another top 5 talent in Mario Manningham. The only team with a comparable tandem is the other Manning boy and his Wayne/Clark combo.

On the Packers, there is a difference between the 12 sacks in their first 3 games total and the 8 put on them by MIN in a single game, and 6 of those 8 came when the Vikings rushed only 4 with no blitz. So while a qualatative analysis might appear equal, the numbers say we went far beyond what others had done by doubling their previous sacks per game average (which was an already a very high 4 per).  Thats not "just as good" thats phenomenal, I really think you underestimate how sick those numbers are...

But as for letting them stay in the game until the final minutes...I do not agree at all.  For starters they were "in the game" at the end because MIN went into prevent defense with the intent to grind the clock down with their 2 TD lead.  The entire idea being that you have the game in hand so do not open yourself to mistakes that can cost you the game and just grind towards the finish. So yes you will get some padded stats and scores with soft coverage as a result....but you will win more games if you dont mind that your opponent closes the gap a bit.  They were "in it" because the Vikings chose not to take the risks of going tit-for-tat when it was not needed.....not because they couldnt, but because they didnt feel they even needed to. That is pretty standard fare as far as coaching strategies go...and in general when it comes to analyzing how a team played the final score really could not mean less.  Plenty of teams lose when they deserve to win and win when they deserve to lose....the score is important, but its honestly not what is being discussed here so much as how each team played throughout the game.

Just look at how GB did score...all 3 of its touchdowns came on huge plays from 30+ yards out of the end zone.  One was Rodgers beating the blitz, one was the AP strip (which I specifically mentioned as one of the plays they were more physical), and the other came against the prevent (and was accompanied by a failed 2-pt conversion).  For comparison the Vikings drove down the field into the red zone for all of their scores accept the Berrian TD and pounded the ball into the end zone moving it down field pretty much at will for most of the game.  Those are the kinds of things Im looking at when I say the Vikings were more physical.

But as for GB passing yardage.....its pretty obvious for anyone who watched the game that the passing was pretty much all Rodgers making plays in spite of his O-line. And as I said he had a fantastic game all things considered.  But the point being made wasnt about passing yards (which mean nothing by themselves, its all in how you get them), it is about the trench warfare level of the game where the linemen battle it out from down to down.  GB was physically dominated all over the field throughout the game and it is why holding AP to 55 yards, returning a fumble for a TD, and stellar play from Rodgers was not enough for GB to win.

I am not saying this just to be mean to the Packers...its there for anyone to see and honestly a lot of the analysis of the game I have read seems to agree with it...and as I showed above some of it goes even further than I would.

As for the Bears, you should note I agreed with him "as far as the Packers are concerned".....In all honesty I think you are far too gracious to the Bears, but I also think the author was far to tough on them. 

There's actually not a difference, since 6 of those 12 other sacks came from Week 2 against Cincinnati. The bears racked up another 4 even after suffering the loss of Urlacher in that game. Even the Rams had 2 against GB. Face it, the Vikes are good, but that GB O-line is also that bad. So yeah, they scored 8 sacks against GB, but they have only another 8 against their first three matchups, and that includes games against the Lions and Browns. That to me sounds more like a good D taking advantage of the worst O-line in the NFL, nothing more. I'm sure this won't be the end of teams taking advantage of that GB O-line.

Secondly, I'm not sure why you're defending the Vikes so much against GB. My original point is that GB isn't that good of a team, so a victory against them is not very telling to the strength of your own team. When they face the Bears and beat them, then we can talk about them dominating the NFC North. Not a moment sooner.

Even if they are or become the best in the NFC North, that's only going to be their own divison. When they had to face SF, they won by the skin of their teeth on a hail mary pass...with Frank Gore out. What it comes down to is that the Vikes are a good team in the NFL right now, but they're among many more in an NFC that is absolutely dominant with great teams, and they're the only supposed divisional leader that doesn't have a true handle on their division like the Giants, Saints and 49ers do.