NFL Game of the Week: Packers-Vikings Rematch

At 1:15pm PST (that's right—daylight savings is over, and it's time to change your clocks back to real time!), the second-place Green Bay Packers host the division-leading Minnesota Vikings.

It is a rematch of the Week Four matchup won by the Vikings, 30-23. And I think I have heard something about a future Hall of Fame traitor's return...

(Incidentally, for all of you still holding the ridiculous notion that The Traitor did not go to the Vikings to stick it to the Packers—catching us fans who love(d) him in the crossfire—read the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel piece from Oct. 31. In it, they examine his changing of a late third-down play from a clock-managing run to a deep pass to rub it in.)

But then, you have already ignored previous evidence of the team's efforts to talk him out of retirement, his declaration to Peter King that he was not forced out when he announced his retirement, reports that he fed an opponent inside information to help them still lose to the Packers—and his claim that even if he did, it's not against the rules, all but an admission he did do it—and how about his own admission that he did want to go to Minnesota last season out of revenge! So what's one more piece of evidence to refute your irrational position?

For me, this is about two rivals that hate each other and are the top contenders for the division title. I could care less about the quarterback matchup (And no, I am not one of those who says "could care less" when he means "couldn't care less"...I am acknowledging that it does matter to me, since denial of that would be as irrational in light of the above rant as the position that rant was directed toward).

So how do the teams match up? Let's first examine the injuries: CB Antoine Winfield will miss the game for the Vikings, while FB Korey Hall and WR Jordy Nelson will for the Packers.

TE JerMichael Finley is listed as doubtful for Green Bay, but I expect everyone else to play—several players have missed practice time for both teams and are listed as questionable or better, but they are not going to miss this key matchup.

Given the personnel losses, here is how the units compare:

Packers passing attack vs. Vikings pass defense: advantage, Green Bay

The loss of the Vikings best corner means more than the loss of the fourth wide receiver and platooning tight end combined, and the Packers had this matchup won with both teams healthy.

The Packers have the 10th-best passing attack in the league in yards per game (258.3) while the Vikings have the 20th-ranked pass defense (ironically, giving up less than the Packers attain, at 234.6).

Green Bay's offensive line—clearly its Achilles heel—is bolstered by the return of the tackles who have been their bookends over the past eight seasons, and the young players are improving.

And while the Vikings have played with a lead, leading to them facing more passes, the Packers have been in the lead almost as much, leading to running out the clock late.

Packers rushing attack vs. Vikings rush defense: advantage, Minnesota

On paper, these two teams seem close—Green Bay is ranked 13th (118/game) and the Vikings 10th (95.4), with both teams numbers being artificially high because of playing with leads. However, anyone who has been following the teams knows better.

In recent years, the Packers ground game has been inconsistent and the Vikings have been dominant. While it is fair to think this deep into the season that paradigm is shifting, it is foolish to think it has shifted as much as the stats indicate.

Vikings passing attack vs. Packers pass defense: advantage, Green Bay

Minnesota has the league's 13th-ranked passing attack (233.7) while Green Bay has the fourth-best pass defense (174). Both are equally affected by their scores coming in, but Green Bay is also among the league leaders in interceptions and takeaways, while Minnesota is only above average in preventing them.

The only shortcoming the Packers have here is the pass rush (supposedly improved in a 3-4), but it has not stopped them from attaining elite status.

Vikings rushing attack vs. Packers rush defense: advantage, Minnesota

Here again reason must win over statistics. Both teams rank 12th in their respective categories (97.5 yielded by Green Bay and 119.9 gained by Minnesota), and both teams are helped by the scores their opponents have faced.

But come on, the Vikings have Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor. I know the Packers held Peterson to 55 yards on 25 carries in the first contest, but that will not happen again.

Special Teams: even

Minnesota has a slightly more reliable kicker and punter, but horrible coverage units. They may have better return units, but not enough to offset the coverage, or Mason Crosby's substantial superiority on kickoffs.

Intangibles: huge advantage, Green Bay

Almost every one of these lines up in the Packers favour outside of penalties—the Packers are second worst in the league with 429 yards and the Vikings (despite one more game) are sixth-best with 280.

Minnesota has a slight edge in time of possession and third-down conversion comparison (offense vs. defense), but not enough to tip the scales.

There is the idea that the Packers are under more pressure—if Green Bay loses, they fall 2.5 games back and the Vikings have the tie-breaker. But that also gives them more urgency, so that is one of those half-full/half-empty things.

Moreover, the Traitor will counter any perceived advantage by putting pressure on himself to win this one, especially when he resents the plethora of boos he will receive.

He has a long history of trying to win the big games on each play, actually losing them in the process.

He will scrap the gameplan and throw deep on a regular basis, not a good idea with the matchup of his receivers against the best secondary in the world.

Here are the other intangibles in Green Bay's favour (most admittedly minor):

1. A homefield advantage not just generated by the most fervent fans in the league, but a surface that will slow down the Vikings attack.
2. The Packers have a turnover ratio of +10—nearly +2 per game—while the Vikings have just a +7—exactly +1 per game.
3. Mike McCarthy is 5-2 against Brad Childress, with the two losses being by seven and one point.
4. The only time since 1998 in which the Vikings have swept the season series was 2005.
5. The two teams have played almost identical schedules (both weak, with opponents who have lost at least twice as many as they have won), but the Packers have fared better vs. two of the three opponents.
6. Green Bay's scoring margin overall is 161-96 (+10.8/game), while Minnesota's is 205-148 (+8.1/game).
7. Momentum: Green Bay has won two games handily in the last two weeks, while Minnesota has narrowly won one thanks to a missed field goal and lost another. While there is no doubt the Vikings played better competition, the two games have allowed the Packers to work on their flaws and see first-hand ways to exploit Minnesota's shortcomings.

When you factor in that the Vikings have no virtually no statistical edge in the two categories in which they were given their advantages in the above assessment, while the Packers' edges are concrete, and this one is clearly in Green Bay's favour. That is why every analyst on NHL.com picked Green Bay, and it is why I am, too...

Prediction: Packers 31, Vikings 27