Packers Periscope: Week 12 at Detriot Lions

Up Periscope looking at the Packers week 12 opponent, the Detriot Lions.  Will the Packers be able to even out the series or is this another game that pushes the Packers back in the NFC North?

The Past

The past isn’t so far in the past, in reality only 3 weeks have passed since the Lions came to Lambeau field and did the unthinkable.  As the color commentators drowned on incessantly, the Lions had won a game at Lambeau Field in 23 years, when George Bush Sr. was still in the oval office.  In a game that can largely be forgotten by both sides, numerous missed opportunities, penalties and general suckitude left fans of both sides bored and apathetic at the product on the field.  Lions fans did get a little joy as they squeaked by 18-16, where both teams only managed 659 yards total and 92 yards rushing.  Outside of the last 4 minutes of the game, both teams only managed 3 field goals and 1 TD (and a missed extra point).  Yawn. 

The Present

Overall Team Efficiency

Packers

Lions

15.7%

-5.8%

Offense

Overall

11.5%

-5.0%

Run

-1.7%

-27.6%

Pass

29.0%

11.4%

Defense

Overall

-4.1%

2.4%

Run

-12.9%

-13.3%

Pass

2.9%

-13.3%

Special Teams

0.2%

1.6%

Quarterback (DYAR)

666

424

 

(All statistics courtesy of Football Outsiders, click here for a detailed description of DVOA and DYAR.  And as always defensive DVOA is the inverse of offensive DVOA so negative numbers are better.)  

Completely destroying the Eagles by the tune of 45-14 on Thanksgiving day had lead to some early Xmas presents for the Lions stats; they managed to jump all the way up to 16th from 28th but unfortunately it’s raised their chances of winning the division from 0.0% to 0.1%. 

In other news, the Packers have finally done something of particular note, which is that the Packers defense is currently ranked #10, making this defense a top 10 unit.  While the shock slow fades from you, in reality the defense has been the only thing keeping games competitive as the conundrum of what specific injury or issue Aaron Rodgers has and what happened to every receiver’s hands continues to elude both the Packers and their fans.

That being said the biggest matchup will likely be Rodgers and the receiving core versus the Lions pass defense, who currently rank 23rd in pass defense efficiency.  In a typical year I would guess that the Packers would have no problem carving up the Lions secondary, but the Packers would likely be 9-2 in most years with a lot more dangerous squad so remaining games likely will be outliers as well. 

The Future

It’s a little hard to not rehash what was said about the Lions during week 10, after all it’s not like much has really happened in the last 3 weeks.  The Lions are still one of the worst teams in the NFL, but beating the Packers seems to have started a little streak for Detriot, who have now won 3 straight coming into their rematch with the Packers.  Unfortunately, winning 3 games only gets them to 4 wins total and at 4-7 they are still at the bottom of the NFC North with essentially a 0% chance of making the playoffs. 

The Lions have now essentially finished cleaning house, with offensive coordinator Joe Lombardi out and President Tom Lewand and general manager Martin Mayhew also released of their duties.  It has to be assumed that head coach Jim Caldwell is a dead man walking as the new GM will likely want to select his own head coach.  The mass canings have extended even past the Lions organization as the franchise has decided to switch radio broadcasters after allegedly demanding that WXYT-FM 97.1 censor some of it’s broadcasters’ less than glowing statements about the team. 

In the end, it’s likely going to be the same same, but different, but still the same.   The Ford ownership has been repeated the same mistakes of hiring friends and yes men (i.e. Matt Millen) instead of finding someone with actual football operations experience.

Case in point, new team president Rod Wood stated during his conference: “As most people have noted, I'm not a football guy, that's not in my background.  What I am pretty good at is hiring great people and letting them do their job. I would expect that we'll do that by finding a great GM to lead the football side."  How someone with no football experience is able to discern that a GM candidate has football experience is beyond me and likely beyond Wood as well. 

The NFL is nicknamed “not for long” given how quickly things change, but as a Packers fan one thing that we can always count on not changing is the Lions screwing it up in one way or another. 

 

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (55)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Hematite's picture

December 02, 2015 at 05:44 am

The Packers have lost 2 in a row at Ford Field.
It's time to end THAT streak.
But somehow I don't see that happening and things will turn more ugly in Packers Nation.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 06:57 am

The problems that bother me is your last sentence: "...we can always count on not changing is the Lions screwing it up in one way or another." We saw that tendency in the first game. They offered themselves unconditionally, but what scares me is that we did better job in screwing up. Same was with Bears game. "The Bears still suck!" is truth, but what worries me is that Packers were sucked more on that Thanksgiving day game...
I am with Mike in how to see the Packers and I claim that if 3 throws in 3 different games were caught, Packers would be 10-1, not worse than 9-2!
While others from NFC North learning from Packers how to be great, it looks like Packers are learning from others (Vikings, Bears and Lions) how to screw up.
Also, did you noticed that last game vs Bears was the first game in which Jay Cutler did not throw INT, but Aaron Rodgers did?
Not easy feeleing for the tomorrow's game in me...

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:22 am

But here's the catch:

Do you believe that the Lions will start making smart choices and become a stable franchise in the next 5 years?

Do you believe that the Packers will fix whatever it is that is screwing them up and return to being a stable franchise in the next 5 years?

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:42 pm

Thomas, I really want the best for this franchise, but I think team is down, deep down. It may be Tom Clements (see Buffalo Bills 2004/2005), it may be Aaron, it may be that team is to confident and when they bump to the wall everything fall down. I do not know.
I'm sure Packers will find way back to the highest levels, but will that be soon enough for this season? I hope so.
And I do not expect Lions to be that franchise who will profit from learning how to be good. Their moves are not high quality moves. They gain momentum, but the question is how long that momentum will carry them... Bears and Vikings are different story. And yes I may sniff some problems for the Packers in the future. First from Vikings, than from Bears... That might not be bad, because that will push Packers to be even better. But Packers needs to do some changes... To call Joe Philbin back? He would be 5th coach over offense. I my nation there is sentence: Lot of midwifes, no good kid! Packers have 4 coach directly involved in game planning - Edgar Bennett, Alex Van Pelt, Tom Clements and Mike McCarthy... Not to mention Sam Gash, Jerry Fontenot & Mike Solari who has to coach special players (RB, TE and OL) on what was planned from 4 coaches... To many lack in communication, if not for any other reason, than for getting information from to many people...

0 points
0
0
lecko's picture

December 02, 2015 at 04:24 pm

You wrote Packers ned to do some changes ...I doubt this will happen.
They want the follow the process and stay the course..and they are in a way right...following this has kept organisation with very high winning percentage in Mc carthy years. But they wont make chnages now, and probably so late in the season it doesnt make much sense. In a way they have too good of a record to cause any big changes...they will likely finish at least 8-8 and say nothing is really broken and stil draft and develop, which is good but you also need playmakers to push you over the top like TE this year.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

December 02, 2015 at 06:43 am

Can't count our chickens anymore this year.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

December 02, 2015 at 12:30 pm

Amen.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

December 02, 2015 at 06:49 am

Yeah, this Packers team is still not right. I wouldn't bet on them winning any game, anytime, anywhere right now. If you can lose to the Lions and Bears at home...

That said this team has the talent to take off at any time. They could show up this week and look like world beaters. They could ride that streak into the playoffs.

It ain't about the Lions, Bears or Vikings. It's about the Packers. Where the heck are their heads at right now. Show me a four-game win streak. Then we can talk about who the 2015 Packers are, because right now nobody knows.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

December 02, 2015 at 10:55 am

Exactly. That's my sober outlook. Can't wait until Thursday to find out.

0 points
0
0
Bryce Hansen's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:00 am

Very well said.

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

December 02, 2015 at 10:18 am

Green Bay should win this game, but it won't be easy. Hurt WRs and O-Line will keep the offense grounded for another few weeks. It wouldn't surprise me to see the Packers come out with a fullback most of the game. Can see him as being a greater receiver threat vs. beat-up WRs/TEs.

Because Janis and Abby are fairly healthy, you might see them more involved esp. endzone plays.

The biggest reason the Pack will win this game is the defense. They will make a few plays and bail out a struggling offense.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:05 pm

Every player is a perishable good in the NFL. If he's healthy and able, play him as you need him. If he ends up on a stretcher with a trainer carrying his head off the field, so be it...but you can't play as if a guy is just going to get hurt. If that's the case, then just cut him.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:27 am

To be honest I haven't seen much from either Abby or Janis to really be confident in their ability. Abby to me at least is the better of the two, but unfortunately the Packers have plenty of players who can work the middle of the field. As far as I'm concerned, Janis' only real role is as a deep threat decoy and a PI target, I have yet to see him run a good route outside the go.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:38 am

Might not be confident in their ability's but how do we know as they have barely played.

I think they need to start using the 4 WR looks more to create different matchups. The offense has gotten into a rut of running the 11 personnel way to much. They need to do more mixing and matching its personnel.

While they may not necessarily provide a huge impact with catches and stats, they could make a bigger impact in changing the way defenses have to defend the offense. When they started using Abbrederis against the Lions, they marched right down the field. That 4th WR against the 4th CB was a favorable matchup.
Lets face it. Rodgers is not going to be a favorable matchup against anyone. Maybe a NT, but I'm sure a NT could stay stride for stride with him.

I think the key for the offense to reach its best potential is to start using more players on offense. Using more formations and personnel. Not running the same personnel and same formations down after down.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 12:10 pm

Not seeing them is a signal in it's own right. With Nelson out, Cobb injured early in the season, Adams injured early and apparently still injured, Quarless on IR-return and Jones being slow/injured you would think that if the Packers had any confidence in Abby or Janis, as you said they would likely be playing over Rodgers.

I'm not totally convinced that adding more players on offense will help either; one of the biggest issues I see is that Rodgers doesn't trust his receivers anymore, how many times after a play this year have you seen Rodgers point at his wide receiver as if they ran the wrong route? Adding more players that Rodgers doesn't trust isn't going to help the issue. Now it could be that Rodgers is seeing the defense wrong and the WRs are actually doing the right thing but either way both side have to be on the same page.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:25 pm

I get there are trust issues. But if they don't trust Janis how can he trust Adams and Rodgers right now?

When I say use more players, I am referring to using everyone available. Use their FB's, use all their TE's, use all their WR's.

Right now the coaches are not doing enough with the personnel they do have. They stay in the same formations for most of the game, and are yielding next to nothing in results.

Ripkowski 4 games ago on the opening drive has a 22 yard catch and run. When have we seen that play since? I don't know the stats, but it seems like the FB's play maybe 25% of the time if that. Lacy is a lot better in the Pistol or I formation with a FB in front of him. They finally went back to the pistol against Minnesota and look at how much better he has been since.
I think they need to start using the FB's more and the TE's less. Schematically they could get as much if not more out of the FB in the passing game then the TE. Also it improves the running game having the FB in there. If they want to spread teams out, go to the 4 WR sets.

For me their base formation on offense I think should be the 20 personnel (2 RB's, 3 WR's.) Then mix in more 4 WR sets, and use some TE sets. Honestly I would save the TE sets until the Redzone, because that seems to be the only place that Rodgers is effective.

Coaches need to do a better job of making adjustments personnel wise for this offense to succeed.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:50 pm

For all intents and purposes Green Bay treats FBs and TEs as the same position. TEs regularly line up inline or out wide and motion into the backfield to operate as a lead blocker. All the current TEs on the roster (except maybe Kennard who hasn't seen the fieldso who knows) fit the mold of an H-back more than they do of a Jimmy Graham or a Jermichael Finley. I'm guessing that Rodgers is a better reciever/safety valve than Kuhn and most certainly Ripkowski which could be a big reason why Kuhn has been getting less and less snaps. Also keep in mind Quarless, who will be back soon is a good run blocker and also can operate as a safety valve.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 02:49 pm

Correct, they use them in similar ways. This being said, I think both Kuhn and Ripkowski are better players right now then Rodgers. So why not play them more then Rodgers? That's basically what I'm saying.

It seems like when Kuhn and Ripkowski catch the ball they are getting 5+ yards.
Kuhn has 3 receptions for 28 yards. 9.3 average.
Ripkowski has 1 reception for 18 yards.
Combined they have 4 receptions for 46 yards. 11.5 average. Not bad.

Rodgers has 40 receptions for 293 yards. 7.3 average and 5 TD's. But breaking down Rodgers since the Denver game he has 19 receptions for 104 yards. for 5.4 yards average. In the Detroit game he had 5 receptions for 32 yards. He had a long reception of 21 yards. take that out and he has 4 receptions for 11 yards. Minnesota he has 3 catches for 7 yards, and Bears he has 4 receptions for 30 yards.
He has been very pedestrian, especially since the Denver game.

I think using the FB's more or as their 'base' formation will provide a better look against defenses. They went to that down the stretch last year and the offense really took off.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 03, 2015 at 01:48 pm

I think those numbers is definitely taken out of context. For one, an n=4 is simply not big enough to actually make any statistical conclusion. Second, defenses will play a fullback lining up as a lead blocker differently versus a tight end lining up inline, out wide or even lining up as the lead blocker. The vast majority of times a fullback will be defended by no one, a zone with the defender running away or at worst an inside linebacker. Tight ends are likely going to be covered by a cornerback or a safety.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

December 02, 2015 at 04:06 pm

Sounds like a good plan. One that is certainly worth trying. Still do not understand why when something works it's a one shot deal. So frustrating. If they do the same this week I think I'll throw something at the TV.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 09:50 pm

That to me is a big issue. They don't stick with what is working enough, and don't adjust when stuff isn't working.

Many coaches refer to football as playing chess. Just like playing chess if people try to do the same thing over and over again the other person will figure it out and make adjustments. The key is to try and stay a step ahead of your opponent.
I believe that is where the offense is failing and that is where the root of the problems are. Teams figured out how to defend the Packers offense and they have not made the right adjustments. They're playing a step behind. When your opponent knows what your doing it makes it easier to defend.

0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

December 03, 2015 at 12:16 am

Exactly RCpackerFan. I agree, failed strategic leadership.
Some still think its only about the fundamentals....., not even to mention that if there is not execution of fundamentals on the field, then there is ineffective work during practice.
So either way, coaches have failed if we apply principles of results-based-management.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 03, 2015 at 07:03 am

The offense right now reminds me of a few years ago. When they essentially built the offense around Finley. It took them several weeks to figure out how to get the offense on track after Finley was injured.

It feels very much the same this year. The offense last year worked so well because they had one of the best WR's in the league. He makes all the other WR's better. Hell he makes the whole offense better as we have seen this year.
The coaches really haven't made any adjustments despite losing that huge part of the offense. They basically tried doing the plug and play thing with James Jones. And early in the season it worked for the most part because teams still feared their passing game. And because Rodgers took advantage of a lot of free plays. The problem is as the season has wore on defenses figured them out. That if they play bump and run man coverage these WR's are not able to get open themselves. They are doubling Cobb nearly every play, and the offense hasn't adjusted to what defenses are doing to them. Defenses right now do not fear the Packers offense and they won't until they start showing stuff they haven't seen them do.
The most concerning part to me is Nelson was lost before the season started. This is week 13. The offense has basically struggled the most since Week 4 against the 49ers. That is 8 weeks in a row that they have struggled, yet we haven't seen adjustments made. They have lost 4 of their last 5 games, and they nearly lost the San Diego game.

If the coaches haven't made any adjustments by now, I really don't see them making any the rest of the year. After they lost Nelson they said that not 1 person is going to be able to replace him. That it will be a group effort. Problem with that is the coaches are basically still trying to replace him with 1 person (James Jones). They are not the same type of player. They are lacking a deep threat, and the 1 guy who could be their deep threat they don't trust to play.

Coaches are right that there have been fundamental problems. But they fail to see that their scheme isn't working with the players it has. The offense has to start attacking teams more schematically with the players they have, and they have to sooner then later.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 03, 2015 at 01:50 pm

I think trying to fix things only works when you have the players to execute it and at this point the Packers are just too banged up on offense to make a whole hearted change. At the end of the day it doesn't matter if they go run and gun or wildcat if Rodgers can't connect with his receivers, no game planning will solve what is the biggest issue with the offense.

0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:01 am

I chuckle every time I read here about the "great talent" and "great depth" that this team processes. --- This is exactly what this team doesn't have.

One would think that the fans of this team would understand that the fate of this team is completely tied to its QB. ------- The rest of the roster is full of JAGs. -- That's what happens when your GM avoids free agency and fails with too many draft choices. ----- A new regime may be the answer.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:26 am

"A new regime may be the answer."

This kind of response frustrates me, as well. It may very well be the answer, but we all need to remember that when you're living in the top 10-25% of the NFL year after year there's a helluva lot more room to move down than there is to move up. A change in management/coaching is never a guarantee of improvement...but neither is standing pat.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:31 am

You are aware that new regimes almost always mean a drop in winning right? At best most franchise sit in the tank for a year or two while rebuilding and then if they are lucky they start fielding a good team.

I will agree with you that any team's fate is completely tied to it's QB, and a team can win with a roster full of JAGs if it has a QB. The Saints, Colts and Packers have all won games despite poor teams because of spectacular QB play.

0 points
0
0
Chris Pattee's picture

December 02, 2015 at 12:40 pm

You must be smoking lots of crack, either that, you're a Vikings fan.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:00 pm

They can fill out the roster quota and that is all.Talent and depth talent has been missing for a few seasons.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:28 am

To be honest, any team has the talent to take off if the QB is good enough and at this point Rodgers isn't very good. Nelson going down and Matthews playing ILB are all secondary to Rodgers being hurt/unsure/unconfident or whatever it is that's ailing him.

0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

December 02, 2015 at 03:03 pm

The talent level isn't attrocious. Cow, you definitely know how to tilt the field so that all the positive people have a contrast. The truth is, the talent level is somewhere in between.

We field good enough teams to win division titles and be in the playoffs and if things click and we stay healthy maybe muster up a Superbowl. You couldn't do that with just a good QB.

We also don't have high tiered talent like teams that build because they suck for so long. There are three modes to be in....and they're all tricky to navigate.

1) Lose every year for awhile, nab some high rounders, get a good coach, patch with FA, go on a run, die down again because everyone has to get paid: 49ers. Seattle. Panthers. Denver.

2) Be 8-8 every year. Revolving door at qb (because one day they'll get the "man"), same coach or not, draft middle tier talent. Stay 8-8: Philly, vikes, redskins, kc, buffalo, jets, Tennessee.

3) Winning team every year. Playoff chance. Stable coach, stable QB, restock talent with drafting or FA. Develope talent. Draft low every year. Make a run: Pack, Patriots, Steelers, Giants. Colts (with manning, but maybe with luck)

So....in order to restock to get high grade talent, you have to be 1). And that means tanking and starting over. And that means you may or may not get out of the cycle of perverbial shit. And even if you do, you'll be a flash in the pan and then lose everyone to FA. All for a ring? Hmmm. I enjoy your contrast cow, but no thanks to that kind of GMing. I'll take my chances with option 3) and have success every year even if not a championship.

0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

December 03, 2015 at 12:20 am

Perfectly said.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

December 02, 2015 at 04:11 pm

Talent was good enough last year. Even with Hawk and Jones. Granted no Jordy but there is still talent here.

0 points
0
0
Bryce Hansen's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:09 am

If they lose to the Lions and are swept for the season, which I'm legitimately worried about, then I don't even know. They should beat the Cowboys and will get crushed by the Cardinals. Oakland is no gimmie on the road vs. a potential playoff team and the Vikings have me worried now too. We could be staring down the barrel of 10-6 or 9-7 if we can't pull this off. I hope they've got their crap sorted out or I'm just gonna hafta start watching replays of '10 on Sunday afternoons.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:19 am

The more we look at this game tomorrow night, the more of a 'must win' the game becomes.

At the way they have been playing that is very possible. As sad as it is, it could be true.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:22 am

As soon as they dropped that game to the Bears last Thursday, they all became must-wins...

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:33 am

While their chances of getting into the playoffs dropped after losing to the Vikings, I wouldn't say that every game is a must win, unless you think the VIkings are going to win out the remainder of the season. I personally don't think any team is going to win out the remainder of the season, let alone the Vikings.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:04 pm

On paper, you're right: they aren't all must-wins, but the only "quality" game we've seen out of this team recently was in the Twin Cities when they were playing a game they absolutely needed to win to maintain control of their own playoff destiny. The effort was there. There was enough offense. The defense was on point.

They need to find that "back against the wall" mentality every week, it seems. If it means labeling all the games from here out as "must-wins" then I'm all for it.j

...after who lost to the Vikings?

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:52 pm

The Falcons?

0 points
0
0
Bryce Hansen's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:07 pm

Uhhh they beat the Vikings bro.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:02 pm

Every game should be a must win with a small expectation of a loss happening.
The Packers are playing like no game is a must until week 17.

0 points
0
0
Bryce Hansen's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:06 pm

Ugh, you're right. It is both sad and true. I don't even wanna know what'll happen if they drop that game.

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:54 pm

If the Packers lose tomorrow you have to start cheering for the Bears, Cardinals and Seahawks to beat the Vikings as they are two teams that actually would effect the Packers playoff odds.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

December 02, 2015 at 06:41 pm

I don't believe in the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' theory.

0 points
0
0
carl's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:16 am

I will keep the faith, till the end. GO PACK GO!!!!

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 02, 2015 at 11:20 am

I like it.

Go Pack Go!!!

0 points
0
0
Gianich's picture

December 02, 2015 at 12:01 pm

It took a few weeks but it sure is nice going into tomorrow with lower expectations than usual. It will potentially make a win feel better and a loss feel like "meh." I have little confidence in this offence right now. If they just played like a middle of the road unit rather than a bottom 5 unit the defense could have carried this team to 2 wins out of the last 4 losses. Mashed Potato Mike Scheming again!

0 points
0
0
Bryce Hansen's picture

December 02, 2015 at 01:15 pm

I'm right there with you. A month ago I thought that this was a Super Bowl team. Now I'm like you said, expectations low, will be pleased if they make the playoffs.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

December 02, 2015 at 04:03 pm

The Packers are doing this on purpose. It's the only way to explain losing to lolions and barelies at home. Goodell called Murphy and said, " the league is tired of you running away with the div, lose a few, make some shitty teams happy, then turn it back on".

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 03, 2015 at 02:01 pm

The league wants the Packers to win because the fan base for the Packers is bigger than the Bears or the Lions and happy fans are fans who watch the games (and more importantly the commercials) and buy merchandise. My guess is that in a perfect world the Pats, Packers, Steelers and Cowboys would all go 16-0 at the expense of the Jags, Browns and Titans.

0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

December 02, 2015 at 04:18 pm

Best case scenario is a number two seed. It is possible if the vikings and the Pack beat the cards. We would have to win out (insert demonic cackle by cow here) or.....Arizona could drop a game and we could drop a game. AZ still has to play Seahawks too. Either way, we need the head to head on cards and vikes and we already have it on the hawks.

Seed 3 probable scenario. We win our division.

Seed 5 scenario. We lose the division by a game. And have to be road warriors.

Seed 6 scenario. We lose too many games and get in by the skin of our teeth because the rest of the NFC is worse.

Worst case scenario. We don't get in at all and Packer nation goes crazy. Nagler posts get 230 comments. Cow becomes the mayor and gets GM offers from Mark Murphy. They erect a cow statue in Title town, but only chtv gets the reference.

I think we win our division and get the three seed and host one playoff game. I just don't see us staying in such a funk. A few caught balls changes Packer nation's attitude towards this team minus like five people.

0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

December 03, 2015 at 12:35 am

Bohj. You are bold to keep on with future projections with a team defying all rational predictions all year.

My pre-season prediction was bordering on 9-7 and getting a wildcard as Vikes take the division...but now I see I may have casted a spell, so I decided to stop predicting for good of packers.

I appreciate your artistry in the worst-case scenario, though. humor is always good during the toughest of times.
Maybe Cow will have something tomorrow for us that will cheer us up.

0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

December 03, 2015 at 09:56 am

It seems like it is stated as a prediction. It's really a personal hope. Everyone has personal doubts about the season, myself included. But hope and optimism keep the game fun for me. Just to know there is a chance. Otherwise why watch?

If I psychologically mail it in, then the season is already over. I like to believe that anyone can overcome adversity in any situation. That's why all the good stories are about underdogs.

Maybe that's what we are this year......underdogs. So be it. Makes the story that much better. Just like 2010.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 03, 2015 at 01:29 am

"Not seeing them is a signal in it's own right. ...[Y]ou would think that if the Packers had any confidence in Abby or Janis, as you said they would likely be playing over Rodgers."

It is a signal, but imo not of what you suggest, Thomas. Every year for the last 5 years I've felt that the coaches were very slow to play more talented guys that instead sat on the bench for far too long. Palmer played 55 snaps; Ryan played 0. Datone played 27 while Guion did nothing for 19 snaps. Elliott got only 7 snaps. Kuhn and Rip played 10 and 0 snaps. Also, I think Abby will (or for God's sake ought to) play a lot of snaps against Detroit. Many see Abby as a slot guy, but I think he can play outside as well. I would say that in general in years past that GB could afford to be conservative in replacing guys, but the coaches also seem to have their favorites who play and play even in the face of failure.

"You are aware that new regimes almost always mean a drop in winning right?"

Yes, but it is a correlation and not necessarily causative. Generally, teams do not change their regimes unless the W-L record is bad, and there is generally a problem with the talent level and/or cap. We have an example where changing regimes does not result if a worse record: Denver, whose current record under Kubiak is 9-2 (.818%) after posting a 12-4 (.750%) record last year. [For the record, I do not support firing MM, but I am looking at some of his assistants. I also feel that GB has good talent, and pretty good depth. I suspect the OL has been more banged up than we know for most of the season.]

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

December 03, 2015 at 01:58 pm

For your first point, yes the Packers are slow when it comes to "changing the guard" but the difference this year isn't just about talent, its about health. Every Packers receiver has gone through a major injury and yet Janis and Abby have not seen the field significantly. It's one thing to wonder if Janis is better than James Jones. It's another to wonder if Janis is better than Davante Adams, who has been wrecked by the ankle injury.

0 points
0
0