I think it's as little more predictable than that. If it's a team the Packers really should destroy -- if it's a team most other opponents have destroyed convincingly -- the Packers will probably let them hang around most of the game. They have an odd tendency to beat their better opponents, though.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 

This team can (and does) shit itself at any time in any venue. That's the problem, imo.

The defense was what it was this year. But they were pretty consistent. The defense will get fixed, but the psychology of this team will continue to be a problem.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Well, they didn't shit themselves last year when they were in playoff mode two weeks before the playoffs, then went on a three-game road streak in the playoffs, before winning the Super Bowl.

Originally Posted by: evad04 

And before any wise ass says ......
I'm preparing for a wise ass comment in advance.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 

Do I go out of my way to piss in YOUR Cheerios? Damn bro!!!


As myself and many others have said, it matters most who's the best finishing the season, than any rankings. We've seen that the last two years now. Although, the Packers did have the 2nd ranked POINTS AGAINST ranking. That's not defensive rank because it includes ALL scoring, even if Special Teams scores or Offense gives up a fumble for TD or pick six... so really, the #2 ranking could be higher??

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

They have an odd tendency to beat their better opponents, though.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 

Maybe the Packers should only play the Seahawks at home in the playoffs??

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Before we won the SB last year, I posted every single SB winner and their D rankings. Almost every single SB winner had a top 6 ranking. The Steelers, who we went on to beat, was #1. We were #2.

The Giants, had they been healthy the entire year, would have been top 5. Easily.

Yes, I know it includes ALL scoring but ST scoring and offenses giving up fumbles for TDs or pick sixes area are a wash because with all teams, there really isn't that much of a significant difference in the numbers.

Now, your site's search mechanism sucks. If I can find the thread, I'd bump it. But I'm at work and I'm pretty busy and don't have time to look for it.

But like I said, the list showed that the vast majority of SB winners had a top 6 D. I compiled this list after losing an argument with RaiderPride about Ds winning championships. Remember all that?

Unlike a lot of people, I can admit when I'm wrong.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer