DarkaneRules
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
10 years 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 



KC would have been blown out just like Dallas and Denver were?
uffda udfa
10 years ago

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.



UserPostedImage
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
10 years ago

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?
UserPostedImage
macbob
10 years ago

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
10 years ago

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...

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?


UserPostedImage
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
10 years ago

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?

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
10 years ago
I hate stats.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
buckeyepackfan
10 years ago

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
10 years ago
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.
Fan Shout
dfosterf (14-Jul) : *analysis* gettin' old
dfosterf (14-Jul) : One of the best analyisis I"ve ever watched at this time of an offseason
dfosterf (14-Jul) : Andy Herman interviewed Warren Sharp on his Pack a day podcast
packerfanoutwest (10-Jul) : Us Padres fans love it....But it'll be a Dodgers/Yankees World Series
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Brewers sweep Dodgers. Awesome
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : And James Flanigan is the grandson of Packers Super Bowl winner Jim Flanigan Sr.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : Jerome Bettis and Jim Flanigans sons as well!
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Thomas Davis Jr is OLB, not WR. Oops.
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Larry Fitzgeral and Thomas Davis sons too. WR's as well.
Mucky Tundra (5-Jul) : Kaydon Finley, son of Jermichael Finley, commits to Notre Dame
dfosterf (3-Jul) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp
dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night
dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60
dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

15-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

14-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

14-Jul / Community Welcome! / lijog

10-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

10-Jul / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

6-Jul / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Jun / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.