Packers: Pretenders or Contenders· Page 23

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

10 years ago

We were a contender until we lost at Buffalo and ceded home field to Seattle. Our home crowd gave us the possibility of beating Seattle. Heck, Kansas City did it a few weeks ago. If KC had gone to Seattle they would've been blown out. Lambeau was our only hope vs. Seattle as we know we're about half as good on offense away from the tundra.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

You may very well be right, but I would say a defeatist attitude isn't very appealing to me personally, so I'll remain hopeful.

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

musccy
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#222

If KC had gone to Seattle they would've been blown out. Lambeau was our only hope vs. Seattle as we know we're about half as good on offense away from the tundra.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

KC would have been blown out just like Dallas and Denver were?

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#223

KC would have been blown out just like Dallas and Denver were?

Originally Posted by: musccy

Dallas and Denver were earlier in the season when they were really struggling.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#224

Dallas and Denver were earlier in the season when they were really struggling.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

This doesn't apply to when the Packers play the Seahawks?

macbob
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#225

If the 2nd seed has no shot of beating the 1 seed in their yard they aren't contenders by my definition but perhaps yours?

We need a St. Louis Rams Christmas Miracle. Go for the sweep St. Louie!

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Sorry, it's not a definition difference between contender and pretender, but it's a difference between the definition of 'no shot of beating'.

Packers and Seattle are close, with Seattle having an edge on D and Green Bay having an edge on O. By the simplest measure, points scored:

Green Bay's offense has scored 456 pts, Seattle's offense has scored 374, a difference of 82 pts.

Green Bay's D has given up 328 pts, Seattle's D 248, a difference of 80 pts.

So, the teams are close with Seattle having an edge on D.

Would we be the favorites to beat Seattle at Seattle? No. Would that mean we have 'no shot of beating' Seattle at Seattle? No.

And in any event, you'll need to get used to disappointment. The #2 seed in the playoffs would not be the indictment/firing of Ted and Mike that you're wanting.

Of course, we STILL have to get past Detroit on Sunday...

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#226

Originally Posted by: macbob

This is the typical disconnect between me and you and your ilk. You post these stats and then don't even begin to consider what has been previously discussed. You will take this IRRELEVANT data and try to force it to fit with what I've said.

Go back and post the ROAD stats for the Packers and the HOME stats for the Seahawks as this is where this game would take place. Make the stats fit with the situation. Please. I'd love for you to answer why you chose to make this post? Were you unaware of where this game would be played, or did it not come out so well when looking at the stats that you should be looking at?

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

macbob
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#227

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Any stat that does not support what uffda says = meaningless stat.

Read MY post. I explicitly said that we would not be considered the favorite at Seattle.

Does not being the favorite = no chance? NO.

OK, here's some meaningless stats comparing Seattle at home and Green Bay on the road (source = ESPN home/away splits. It's difficult finding home/away splits...sigh...):

Offense Passing:
GB Home: 295 yds/game; 23 TDs
GB Away: 245 yds/game: 13 TDs

Sea Home: 173 yds/game: 6 TDs
Sea Away: 226 yds/game; 14 TDs

So, we've thrown for 50 yds less and 10 TDs less per game on the road, but Seattle has thrown for 53 yds less and 8 TDs less per game AT HOME.

At Lambeau, we'd have had a 69 yd/game (295-226) & 9 TD (23-14) advantage; on the road we'd have a 72 yd/game (245-173) & 7 TD (13-6) advantage.

I'd say for passing home vs away was a wash.

Offense Rushing:
GB Home: 130 yds/game; 7 TDs
GB Away: 107 yds/game; 6 TDs

Sea Home: 170 yds/game; 12 TDs
Sea Away: 179 yds/game; 7 TDs

Rushing, at Lambeau Seattle would have a 40 yds/game (170-130) advantage, with a tie on rushing TDs (7-7). At Seattle, Seattle has a 63 yd/game (170-107) & 6 TD (12-6) advantage.

So, there's a definite difference in Seattle rushing at home vs away.

Both Defenses are playing about equally at home vs away. They don't break down the yardage, but GB has 20 sacks home/19 sacks on the road; 9 INTs at home/9 INTs on the road. Seattle has 17 sacks home/16 sacks on the road; 6 INTs at home/5 INTs on the road.

So, based on GB's away stats and Seattle's home stats, I still can't see a 'no shot of beating' Seattle at home.

This is the typical disconnect between me and you and your ilk.

uffda wrote:

Frankly, as far as being a Packers fan, I'd much rather be 'me and my ilk' vs you, uffda. I've enjoyed the season believing we have a good team, rather than believing...

The Packers are not very good.

uffda wrote:

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#228

I hate stats.

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#229

First, Merry Christmas, Buck. Wouldn't be Christmas without your laughing emoticons.

No....not what I'm saying at all. There is one contender. I think people who know football would tell you there's Seattle...and then there's everybody else.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

So why play the rest of the season?

You and all of the."knowledgeable" people who really know football have already crowned Seattle champions.

Hell there is really NO reason for your to continue to discuss this subject.

😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

macbob
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#230

NFC North Division Champs
12-4 Record
#2 Seed in the playoffs
Bye week during Wildcard Weekend
Home game during Division Championship weekend

C-O-N-T-E-N-D-E-R-S

And the much praised (by some 'Packers fans') Seattle Seahawks? With the #1 seed and home field through the playoffs on the line Seattle struggled with the 6-10 Rams at home, in Seattle.

The Seahawks are beatable, even at home.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (8m) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (1h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (1h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (2h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (11h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (11h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (11h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (15h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other

beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)

Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.

beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs

packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.

beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating

Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!

wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.

beast (20-Dec) : As of tonight, 3 way tie for 2nd in Pick'em, that battle is interesting!

beast (20-Dec) : Lions vs Vikings could be the main last game as it could determine division winners or #1 vs #2 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Or if KC needs to win for the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Right now it looks like the only prime worthy games are Det-Minny and KC-Denver (if Denver can clinch a wild card spot)

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : The entirety of week 18 being listed as flex is weird

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Matt LaFleur today says unequivocally "Ted Thompson had nothing to do with the drafting of Jordan Love."

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Apparently, the editing is what pieces comments together. That Ted thing ... fake news.

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : LaFleur "opportunity that Ted Thompson thought was too good to pass up"

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Jordan Love pick was Ted Thompson's idea.

Mucky Tundra (19-Dec) : Kyle Shanahan on signing De'Vondre Campbell as a FA last offseason: “We obviously made a mistake.”

packerfanoutwest (19-Dec) : Alexander’s last season with GB

Martha Careful (18-Dec) : if I were a professional athlete, I would probably look to see who the agent is for Kirk Cousins and then use him

beast (18-Dec) : $100 million fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins gets benched for rookie

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : a lower case b

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : The real lie is how beast capitalized his name in his message while it's normally spelled with

packerfanoutwest (18-Dec) : haha that's a lie

beast (17-Dec) : Despite what lies other might tell, Beast didn't hate the Winter Warnings, it felt refreshing to Beast for some reason.

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : whiteout uniforms in general are pretty lame and weak. NFL greed at it's worst

Martha Careful (17-Dec) : The Viking uniforms, the whiteout uniforms specifically absolutely suck

beast (17-Dec) : Thanks Zero2Cool, looks a lot better now

beast (17-Dec) : Seems like someone has a crush on me, can't stop talking about me

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : Should be gooder now. The forum default theme went to goofy land.

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : What the hell

packerfanoutwest (17-Dec) : yeah beast hates the Winter Warning Unies

Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Okay I'm glad to know it's not just something happening to me lol

Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Zero, did you copy the Packers uniforms from last night and white out the board?

beast (16-Dec) : Oh crap, is the board going to the Winter Warning Uniforms too?!? It's all white on white right now!

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS