DarkaneRules
9 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
9 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
9 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
9 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
9 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...
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
9 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
9 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:


UserPostedImage
DarkaneRules
9 years ago
I hate stats.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
buckeyepackfan
9 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
9 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.
UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (9h) : Chase Young to sign $13M contract with Saints
    Zero2Cool (9h) : Yosh to Panthers what noooo. Wait he didn't do crap
    wpr (18-Mar) : I say that he is technically HER BIL as he married her sister. I checked it out, he's considered my BIL as well. Sad.
    Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : wpr, I assume its your BIL via marriage to your wife? If so, I can figure out where the smarts in the family went ;)
    wpr (18-Mar) : Mucky my B-I-L is Bare Stupid. I could write a book.
    Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : As a teenager in Rockford IL I would get heckled by adults in public for wearing GB gear
    Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : if you think the online ones are bad, try *living amongst* them
    Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : Never doubt wprs loyalty. Poor guy is surrounded by Bears fans in Northern IL
    wpr (17-Mar) : pass Martha. Thanks for the invite though.
    Martha Careful (17-Mar) : blog * as the same ugly Illinois colors were adopted by the Baer
    Martha Careful (17-Mar) : WPR, perhaps you should be joining the Bears fans blog has the same ugly Illinois colors were adopted by the Bears
    Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : Ah a fellow U of Illinois hater. I can respect that though I imagine it's for different reasons
    Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : BTW. I didn't catch the game. I just hate Illinois.
    Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : They're your Big Ten Chumps and you will like it!
    Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : No, not for the record. Referee's handled that BS. Orange team was trash ass
    Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : *Your* Big Ten Chumps for the record
    Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : No, not Big Ten Champs. IL is big ten CHUMPS
    wpr (17-Mar) : Big Ten Champs
    wpr (17-Mar) : !!!
    wpr (17-Mar) : INI
    wpr (17-Mar) : ILL
    Martha Careful (17-Mar) : Wisconsin with an outstanding on in the men’s Big Ten basketball tournament. Let’s hope it continues in the NCAAs
    Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : Almost like taking QB in 2020 even if you don't need one is good move.
    Mucky Tundra (16-Mar) : 2021 QB Draft class looking like a real clunker
    Mucky Tundra (16-Mar) : A conditional 6th rounder? I remember Bears fans arguing they'd get a day 2 pick at worst lol
    dfosterf (16-Mar) : So I got the no extension part right and the have to wait on the CW physical wrong
    Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Bears are trading Justin Fields for a 2025 6th-round pick that goes to a 4th-round pick based on playtime, per sources.
    Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Former Packer Jarrett Bush opens Wisconsin’s first blow dry bar in Green Bay
    dfosterf (16-Mar) : If the Bears are not doing a deal with Washington, they also cannot trade Fields until Williams physical with them. All hail Caleb Williams!
    dfosterf (16-Mar) : The talent is undeniable, but the (advertised) haul is obscene.
    dfosterf (16-Mar) : If the Bears are cutting a deal with the Commanders, in either scenario, cannot happen until williams passes a Commanders physical
    dfosterf (16-Mar) : My guess is no to the Fields extension, but yes to the trade back with the Commanders.
    dhazer (15-Mar) : I think the Bears do a Love extension and they will trade out of the 1st pick and take the haul
    Martha Careful (15-Mar) : that might make sense
    Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Justin Fields to Steelers?
    Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Kenny Pickett. Eagles. Done.
    Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : They can claim best two WR tandem.
    Mucky Tundra (15-Mar) : Aaron Donald retiring
    dhazer (15-Mar) : Campbell signing with 49ers
    dhazer (15-Mar) : I love how the Bear Fans are now claiming they have the best skill players in the NFC North lol
    Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Vikings made a move to get a 2nd first round pick
    Mucky Tundra (15-Mar) : That's a not a bad deal for the Bears
    Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Bears have traded for WR Keenan Allen sending Chargers a fourth rounder.
    Martha Careful (15-Mar) : *signs
    Martha Careful (14-Mar) : MLB Devon White science with the Eagles
    Mucky Tundra (14-Mar) : But that was before FA started
    Mucky Tundra (14-Mar) : Dhaze, I thought Kurls would be their #1 target when I read that he was an Amos comp (jack of all trades guy)
    dhazer (14-Mar) : I would like to see the Packers target 2 more FA still available Kamren Curl Safety and Chase Young edge
    Martha Careful (14-Mar) : wow...didn't see that coming
    Zero2Cool (14-Mar) : AJ Dillon re-signing with Packers.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    18-Mar / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

    16-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    16-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

    15-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

    15-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    14-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    14-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    14-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    13-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.