steveishere
12 years ago
.
zombieslayer
12 years ago

GB has beaten two 7-1 teams decisively. I'll take that over only blowing out bottom feeders. With all the injuries to significant players right now I'll take wins. As long as you make the playoffs how you played week to week in November means absolutely nothing.

Look at all the teams that have been winning the Superbowl (which is the point). Pretty much none of them were super consistent during the year, that's the way the NFL works. I know Packer fans like to think that the players on their team are significantly better than everyone else and they should destroy every team they face but in reality there are not huge talent discrepancies from team to team. The only thing that matters about the regular season is making the playoffs.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



If we count blowouts as 20+ pt wins, let's look at the last SB winners.
'99 Rams (the greatest show on turf) - 9
'00 Ravens - 4
'01 Pats - 3
'02 Bucs - 3
'03 Pats - 2 (although the team had 3 shutouts)
'04 Pats - 3
'05 Steelers - 3
'06 Colts - 1
'07 Giants - 1
'08 Steelers - 4
'09 Saints - 4
'10 Packers - 4
'11 Giants - 0

So the only team that didn't have a blowout was the Giants. In the previous 4 years, 3 teams had 4 blowouts.

We got 0 so far. I'd love to make 2010 the blueprint to how we should go.

Now let's look at the 4 Packers SB teams.
'66 Packers - 3
'67 Packers - 3
'96 Packers - 7
'10 Packers - 4

So yeah, we should shoot for blowouts. It seems like historically, when the Packers blowout opponents, it leads to good things.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท
steveishere
12 years ago
20 seems like a pretty arbitrary number but I don't see what number of blowouts has to do with consistency. Like I said I'll take the decisive victorys over otherwise undefeated teams over a string of "blowouts" over bottom feeders. Pretty much any past Superbowl winners have had losses to bad teams or close games to bad teams.

The 2010 team struggled and were a little lucky to even make the playoffs (even with all of those "blowouts"). That doesn't look like a great blueprint to me.
zombieslayer
12 years ago

20 seems like a pretty arbitrary number but I don't see what number of blowouts has to do with consistency. Like I said I'll take the decisive victorys over otherwise undefeated teams over a string of "blowouts" over bottom feeders. Pretty much any past Superbowl winners have had losses to bad teams or close games to bad teams.

The 2010 team struggled and were a little lucky to even make the playoffs (even with all of those "blowouts"). That doesn't look like a great blueprint to me.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



I think the best stat of all is still Passer Rating Differential. I don't have the stats on that.

However, I showed that SB winners often slaughter teams and the NY Giants of '11 were the only exception in the past 12 years. I don't know how that's a stat that can be overlooked. That's 11 of 12 teams.

Let's also take the '85 Bears. Arguably the most dominant team of the SB era. 6 blowouts in regular season + 3 in the Playoffs.

I'd MUCH rather use them for a blueprint than the 2011 Giants. I think if you surveyed 100 Packers fans, at least 95 would say the same.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท
Zero2Cool
12 years ago

I think the best stat of all is still Passer Rating Differential. I don't have the stats on that.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



Check the stickied thread on this category. It has a lot of useful quick links.



And yes, I would rather the Packers have a punishing menacing defense than one that pressures its own offense to play catch up that ultimately leaves opponents within winning reach at times.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
12 years ago

Check the stickied thread on this category. It has a lot of useful quick links.



And yes, I would rather the Packers have a punishing menacing defense than one that pressures its own offense to play catch up that ultimately leaves opponents within winning reach at times.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Thanks. That's one sweet page. I could get lost on that page for days. =d>

And yes, I wish our D was more punishing. Thus, ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ needs to punch Dom in the ding ding every time he rushes 3. ๐Ÿ˜ฃ

If I'm not mistaken, ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ is very hands off when it comes to the D and just lets Dom do his thing, so Dom's the one to blame for that stupid 3 man rush.

We were starting to get pressure on Skelton today. Then Dom decided to rush 3. I wasn't too pissed because we weren't threatened today. Still, I want to see the Packers blow somebody out.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท
steveishere
12 years ago

I think the best stat of all is still Passer Rating Differential. I don't have the stats on that.

However, I showed that SB winners often slaughter teams and the NY Giants of '11 were the only exception in the past 12 years. I don't know how that's a stat that can be overlooked. That's 11 of 12 teams.

Let's also take the '85 Bears. Arguably the most dominant team of the SB era. 6 blowouts in regular season + 3 in the Playoffs.

I'd MUCH rather use them for a blueprint than the 2011 Giants. I think if you surveyed 100 Packers fans, at least 95 would say the same.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



Why is 20 points the standard for "blowouts" why is blowout more significant than just a decisive victory? If you switch your number to 10 points the 2010 team had 5 and this years team already has 4.
zombieslayer
12 years ago

Why is 20 points the standard for "blowouts" why is blowout more significant than just a decisive victory? If you switch your number to 10 points the 2010 team had 5 and this years team already has 4.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



10 points is recoverable in a matter of minutes. 20 points, it's rare that anyone will recover from that deficit. It happens, but it's rare.

I've heard people say 14 points is a blowout, but I don't even like 14 points. I've watched too much football to be comfortable with a 14 point lead.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (11h) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (15h) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (15h) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16h) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16h) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16h) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16h) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16h) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16h) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16h) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16h) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16h) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (17h) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (17h) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (17h) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaireโ€™s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (17h) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (18h) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (19h) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (19h) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately
Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.
dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb
wpr (9-Apr) : yay
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland
Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'
Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texasโ€™ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
5h / Random Babble / bboystyle

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright ยฉ 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.comโ„ข. All Rights Reserved.