Impact of Schedules (Packers vs Others)

[XPack]

Another interesting article worth discussion...

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2...have-it-easiest-broncos-face-a-slate-of-doom/

How big of an impact the schedule has in a season?

• Division: Bears, Lions and Vikings have an easier schedule.
• Conference: Cowboys and Falcons have tougher schedules, but Seahawks have it easy.

I think we should be able to retain the Division and Conference might come down to us vs Falcons and Seahawks.

Schedule Toughness Raking:

1. Denver Broncos: 147-107-2, .578
2. Kansas City Chiefs: 147-108-1, .576
3. Los Angeles Chargers: 145-110-1, .568
4. Oakland Raiders: 144-111-1 .564
5. Buffalo Bills: 143-112-1, .561
6. Miami Dolphins: 140-116-0, .547
7. Washington Redskins: 138-116-2, .543
T-8. New York Giants: 135-117-4, .535
T-8. New York Jets: 137-119-0, .535
T-10. Dallas Cowboys: 134-118-4, .531
T-10. Philadelphia Eagles: 134-118-4, .531
12. New England Patriots: 135-121-0, .527
13. Atlanta Falcons: 133-122-1, .521
14. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: 132-123-1, .518
15. New Orleans Saints: 130-125-1, .514
16. Carolina Panthers: 129-127, .504
17. Los Angeles Rams: 121-130-5, .482
18. Green Bay Packers: 122-132-2, .480
19. Chicago Bears: 122-133-1, .479
20. San Francisco 49ers: 119-132-5, .475
T-21. Detroit Lions: 119-135-2, .469
T-21. Cleveland Browns: 119-135-2, .469
23. Arizona Cardinals: 118-135-3, .467
24. Baltimore Ravens: 117-137-2, .461
T-25. Seattle Seahawks: 115-138-3, .455
T-25. Houston Texans: 115-138-3, .455
T-27. Minnesota Vikings: 115-139-2, .453
T-27. Pittsburgh Steelers: 115-139-2, .453
29. Cincinnati Bengals: 115-141-0, .449
T-30. Jacksonville Jaguars: 111-142-3, .439
T-30. Tennessee Titans: 111-142-3, .439
32. Indianapolis Colts: 107-146-3, .424

Other interesting points raised in the article:

In three of the past four seasons, the team with the easiest schedule has gone on to make at least the conference title game.

Of the five teams that had the five easiest schedules heading into the 2016 season, four made the playoffs -- Packers, Lions, Giants, Cowboys. The Bears were the only team that didn’t take advantage of an easy schedule.

On the other hand, of the teams playing the eight most difficult schedules heading into the 2016 season, only two made the playoffs. One was the Falcons...

 

[XPack]

I'm curious on how Falcons/Ryan will perform this season?

Stage is set for Seahawks run.

 

[Dantés]

While this is merely opinion, I think there are aspects of our schedule that make it easier than the previous season records would indicate.

We get Seattle early, and they tend to heat up as the season progresses.

Atlanta is one of our toughest opponents on paper but I see a regression coming for them, exacerbated by the loss of Shanahan.

Our TNF opponent (short rest) is the lowly Bears at home.

We get Dallas coming off that TNF game and 10 days rest.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

We get Seattle early, and they tend to heat up as the season progresses.

That has been true for the Packers for most of the past few seasons as well though.

 

[Dantés]

That has been true for the Packers for most of the past few seasons as well though.

I don't see what that changes.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't see what that changes.

Wow, it's fine if you want to act like a ********* because we don't agree with each other but you probably should think about that statement once again.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

IMO the Packers will not be able to afford to get out to a slow start this year and rely on a "run the table" finish. Which will be tough when you have to play both Atlanta and Dallas on the road in the first 5 games. When we hit November, we are going to be facing 2 teams that are going to be coming off of full bye weeks (@Bears and Ravens) and 1 team coming off of a mini bye week (@Steelers), while statistically, it only seems to be a slight advantage, it seems to be one nonetheless. Couple that with finishing the regular season with 4 out of 6 games being on the road and the last half of the season may not look all that tough opponent wise, it could be very challenging to expect the same results we saw last year.

 

[Dantés]

Wow, it's fine if you want to act like a ********* because we don't agree with each other but you probably should think about that statement once again.

I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought that post was saying that Green Bay has often played SEA early. Not that they have started slow as well. The former obviously wouldn't change anything. The latter makes more sense.

Apparently I really touched a nerve.

 

[XPack]

I'm personally not a fan of playing Seattle and Falcons early on. I'd rather have 1 or 2 games for the team to settle in before we play the big teams.

We need to come out of the gates storming this season. I'd be happy if we could hand over a defeat to falcons at their new stadium.

 

[Half Empty]

I don't see what that changes.

Looks to me as if you were saying that playing them early is an advantage because they start slow, he's saying it doesn't make any difference because the Pack does, as well.

 

[Dantés]

I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought that post was saying that Green Bay has often played SEA early. Not that they have started slow as well. The former obviously wouldn't change anything. The latter makes more sense.

Apparently I really touched a nerve.

Looks to me as if you were saying that playing them early is an advantage because they start slow, he's saying it doesn't make any difference because the Pack does, as well.

See above

 

[Half Empty]

Aha, that old reading comprehension bugaboo.