I understand the intent of this thread, but I disagree.

Had the Packers not received that wake up call vs. Tampa last year, would they have finished 7-1?

Had the Packers beaten Detroit they're 10-5 going into Chicago, that game is for the Division, but then might NO and Phil not pull starters since there'd be jostling for 3-6 seeds? You could extrapolate this to myriad other games throughout the season.

If you don't believe me, trust the Simpsons...skip to 7:51 Homer time travel 

"musccy" wrote:

djcubez,

I just didn't word things properly. I was refuting the argument that if one play is different we can assume that we'd be 12-4, or the #1 seed...which is a conclusion that a lot of people seemed to be drawing.

For example. You could look at the Detroit game. We lost by 4. In the first half Jennings dropped a ball that should have been a TD which would have put us up 7-0 at halftime instead of tied at 0 (I think we were tied). You can't just say, well, that would have given us 7 more points, and we lost by 4...so that means we win!!! No, with 30+minutes to play still, both teams would certainly approach the 2nd half differently than they had.

It's like the butterfly effect...only a lot of posts are assuming that one small thing working in the Packers' favor wouldn't affect anything else for the rest of the season.

"musccy" wrote: