It is very difficult to make the NFL playoffs 7 consecutive seasons

Favre3132

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
39
Reaction score
15
Considering the disappointing and difficult season we have all witnessed this year with our beloved Green Bay Packers, there is one positive that I take away from this season – call it a silver lining if you will.


For the past 7 years, 2009-15, only 2 teams have made the playoffs each season – the Green Bay Packers and the New England Patriots. When you consider how difficult it is to make the playoffs 7 straight years in the NFL, it is a major accomplishment. The Packers with the great Brett Favre made the playoffs for 6 consecutive seasons from 1993-1998, but could not do it for 7 straight seasons.


How would you like to be a Chicago “the Bears still suck” fan? Since 2009, they have made the postseason only once – the 2010 season when the Packers defeated the Bears in the NFC Championship on their way to Super Bowl 45. One playoff appearance in 7 years for the Bears – that would really suck! Since 2009, the Detroit Lions have made the playoffs twice and the Vikings have now made the playoffs for the fourth time.


How about those Dallas Cowboys – 2 playoff appearances, 2009 & 2014, in 7 years. Or how about the teams that have not even sniffed the playoffs – Buffalo, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Miami, Oakland, St. Louis, Tampa Bay and Tennessee. I am so thankful that I am a fan of the Green Bay Packers.


Yes, this has been a very disappointing season and a deep run by the Packers in the playoffs seems very unlikely, but it is so difficult just to make the postseason, and even more difficult to make it 7 consecutive seasons.


Here are all 32 teams and how many times they have made the playoffs the last 7 years, from 2009-2015:


7 Playoff appearances

Green Bay Packers (2009-15 – 1 Super Bowl Win)

New England Patriots (2009-15 – 1 Super Bowl Win)


6 Playoff appearances

Cincinnati Bengals (2009, 2011-15 / 0-5 record in the playoffs, not counting 2015)


5 Playoff appearances

Baltimore Ravens (2009-12, 2014 - 1 Super Bowl Win)

Denver Broncos (2011-2015)

Indianapolis Colts (2009-10, 2012-14)

Seattle Seahawks (2010, 2012-2015 - 1 Super Bowl Win)


4 Playoff Appearances

Pittsburgh Steelers (2010-11, 2014-15)

New Orleans Saints (2009-11, 2013 - 1 Super Bowl Win)


3 Playoff Appearances

San Francisco 49’ers (2011-13)

Philadelphia Eagles (2009-10, 2013)

Atlanta Falcons (2010-12)

Arizona Cardinals (2009, 2014-15)

Carolina Panthers (2013-15)

Minnesota Vikings (2009, 2012, 2015)

Houston Texans (2011-12, 2015)

Kansas City Chiefs (2010, 2013, 2015)


2 Playoff Appearances

San Diego Chargers (2009, 2013)

NY Jets (2009-10)

Dallas Cowboys (2009, 2014)

Detroit Lions (2011, 2014)

Washington Redskins (2012, 2015)


1 Playoff Appearance

NY Giants (2011 – 1 Super Bowl Win)

Chicago Bears (2010)


X Playoff Appearances

Buffalo

Cleveland

Jacksonville

Miami

Oakland

St. Louis

TampaBay

Tennessee


Be thankful we are Packers fans!
 

RRyder

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
183
Holy crap. You mean TT and MM have been as successful as any team in the league?

I call shenanigans cause if message boards have taught me anything about the Green Bay Packers is that this team settles for mediocrity
 
OP
OP
Favre3132

Favre3132

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
39
Reaction score
15
RRyder - great post and I am very impressed with your "sarcasm" and writing skills.

I know what you mean about many of the posters on this forum and other Packer forums that tell us how bad MM and TT are, that both need to be fired, and how mediocre the entire Packers organization is.

And there will be some on this forum that will try and explain that making the playoffs for 7 straight years is no big deal and is in fact, a mediocre and 2nd rate accomplishment.

Have I been frustrated over the past several years with MM, TT, AR, etc. - absolutely. And I admit that I have at times, because of my frustration and disappointment, contributed to the whole "mediocre" belief. But 7 straight playoff appearances - that is pretty impressive and is in no way, shape or form, mediocre.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,467
Reaction score
599
Expectations. 7 playoffs, 1 SB when it should have been 3, followed by this year. '70s and '80s, expectations were to upset the team they were playing that week, to beat the Bears, to knock somebody out of the playoffs, and they often succeeded.
 

JBlood

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
467
Yes, it's an accomplishment to be in the playoffs year after year. But to have 2 Championships with over 20 years of HOF quarterbacking is nothing to brag about after winning 5 Championships with Starr. Maybe it was the coaching?
 

thisisnate

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,627
Reaction score
185
Location
Maine
We are so so so so spoiled and the expectations set by some of our fans and some of the forum posters here are totally out of touch with reality.

But, I must admit, 1 Superbowl out of Aaron Rodgers is going to feel like an enormous letdown if that's what it ends up being.
 

azrsx05

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
610
Reaction score
77
Yes, it's an accomplishment to be in the playoffs year after year. But to have 2 Championships with over 20 years of HOF quarterbacking is nothing to brag about after winning 5 Championships with Starr. Maybe it was the coaching?

Different era. The players union wasn't complaining about how the players practiced and how much. Free agency wasn't really a thing, competition wasn't as close. It's hard to compare those eras, because it was just a completely different game. It's all about timing, maybe if Lombardi coached in today's game he might not have been as successful?
 

red4tribe

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
1,342
Reaction score
345
Location
New York
Yes, it's an accomplishment to be in the playoffs year after year. But to have 2 Championships with over 20 years of HOF quarterbacking is nothing to brag about after winning 5 Championships with Starr. Maybe it was the coaching?

In addition to what azrsx said, you have to look at how many teams were in the league back then. When the Packers won it all in 61, 62, and 65, there were only 14 teams in the NFL. Even with winning the first two Super Bowls in 66 ad 67, there were only nine teams in the AFL, meaning only 24 teams in the league (the Falcons became an NFL team in 1966). Also, the playoffs were vastly different. There was no playoff system until 1967, so the first four championships came under the old format, which was just a playoff game between the winners of the Eastern and Western division of the NFL. Not the same kind of opportunities for upsets like there are today.
 

pacmaniac

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
2,085
Reaction score
571
Not that difficult when you play in the NFC North. During the past 7 years, the Bears, Vikings, and Lions have each had very few winning seasons.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
Not that difficult when you play in the NFC North. During the past 7 years, the Bears, Vikings, and Lions have each had very few winning seasons.
you could say that about any division. 3 -4 years ago the NFC west was weak. The Rams, Hawks, and Cards were jokes. The NFC Least comes to mind. reputations are earned. You think the Pats have had a tough division over the past decade+? the NFC south, did they even have a winning record in it last year?
 
OP
OP
Favre3132

Favre3132

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
39
Reaction score
15
And there will be some on this forum that will try and explain that making the playoffs for 7 straight years is no big deal and is in fact, a mediocre and 2nd rate accomplishment.

I knew that this would be the case with many of the posters on this forum. Even if the Packers had won 3 Super Bowls in the last 7 years, you would still hear from some on this message board the following; "Fire McCarthy", "Rogers Sucks", "Thompson is an idiot", etc., etc. Unreal.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
These arguments always baffle me. Because there are bad teams in the league the Packers should be ok with not being great all the time? Since when is "well, the Packers are better than the Browns" the measuring stick for fans' happiness? I have the same issue with people who proclaim that today's fans are spoiled because "they don't know what the 80s were like"; why should fans be content if the Packers don't just stink? Sorry, this team has a top-5 QB, the bar should not be one-and-done in the playoffs.

So, yes, let's all be happy that the Packers are better than the Bears and Browns.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
well obviously they've been a lot better than a lot of teams for a long period of time, including, but not limited to, the Bears and Browns. 1 team has equaled their sustained and continued success in a league that is built to make it harder on teams that win with salary cap and draft implications. Of course we all want this team to be better this year, but our Top 5 QB is as much to blame as anyone else. So if it isn't good enough for him, he should stop throwing INT's when there is a TD there for the taking. Nobody is without blame. But not not be able to recognize what this team has accomplished in the past decade is incredibly short sighted.
 

RRyder

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
183
These arguments always baffle me. Because there are bad teams in the league the Packers should be ok with not being great all the time? Since when is "well, the Packers are better than the Browns" the measuring stick for fans' happiness? I have the same issue with people who proclaim that today's fans are spoiled because "they don't know what the 80s were like"; why should fans be content if the Packers don't just stink? Sorry, this team has a top-5 QB, the bar should not be one-and-done in the playoffs.

So, yes, let's all be happy that the Packers are better than the Bears and Browns.

Or you could understand the Packers have been as good as anyone in the league over the course of the last 7 years. It's not just the Browns.

And yes Packers fans today are spoiled
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
These arguments always baffle me. Because there are bad teams in the league the Packers should be ok with not being great all the time? Since when is "well, the Packers are better than the Browns" the measuring stick for fans' happiness? I have the same issue with people who proclaim that today's fans are spoiled because "they don't know what the 80s were like"; why should fans be content if the Packers don't just stink? Sorry, this team has a top-5 QB, the bar should not be one-and-done in the playoffs.
What always baffles me is fans who believe the Packers should be "great all the time" but then insist they aren't spoiled. Of course I wanted more titles since Wolf arrived - remember his "fart in the wind" comment? So it's fair to say he expected at least one more under his tenure. And IMO for the all the criticisms of Thompson (some of which I agree with), he provided the talent to get to, and win the Super Bowl last season. But just having a top 5 QB isn't enough. And BTW, our top 5 QB isn't playing like one this season.
 

mongoosev

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
175
When expectations are low fans will ride the storm, just expect the worse, and can dwell on the past accomplishments. In contrast, when expectations are high and this team plays like they did after the "bye week," it doesn't matter what we accomplished in the past, most fans just want this team to go all the way.
Don't get me wrong I don't want to be a spoiled brat and whine that this team should have won every game but, when we lose consecutively to teams(bears, detroit, etc) that had the worse records, I'd say we have a problem and fans will start to express themselves in such ways that we have seen in the Shoutbox.

If we emerge victorious, all the frustrations we experienced after the bye will be worth it! Which makes this season all that more exciting.
 
Last edited:

Un4GivN

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
811
Reaction score
82
Location
Green Bay
Hmmm... Odd

But your second highest playoff team is the Bengals... One of the biggest disappointments of this decade in professional sports. Making the playoffs means NOTHING. You are just another loser.

Brady:
14 years (one year injury) - 13 playoff appearances - 6 super bowl appearances - 4 championships. All time Playoff record: 21-8 or 72% win percentage.

Rodgers:
8 years - 7 playoff appearances - 1 super bowl appearance - 1 championship. All time playoff record 6-5 or 54%... With 4 of the 6 coming in 1 year.

Look at those... Seriously, tell me who is doing more with their talent? This isn't Brady vs Rodgers.... This is what are the Patriots doing with a HoF quarterback vs what the Packers are.

Many could argue Aaron has a vastly superior arm, mobility, and intelligence and yet has very little to show for it.

I think everyones characterization of "entitled" or "spoiled" is a ****ing joke... We aren't spoiled, up to this point to have those numbers given that you have one of the all-time great quarterback is disturbing at best.

Green Bay fans are wise enough to know when they have a winning team or a losing team. They stayed with them through many hard times. And just because they get on them when they aren't living up to their potential doesn't make them spoiled. Makes them smart enough to know something is array. That talent is being wasted and soon we could be in the years of no franchise QB and stuck in years of mediocrity without anything much to show for it.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I think everyones characterization of "entitled" or "spoiled" is a ******* joke... We aren't spoiled, up to this point to have those numbers given that you have one of the all-time great quarterback is disturbing at best.
IMO you are a spoiled and entitled fan, as indicated by your ******* overreaction ;). If you don't think so, compare the Packers to a team other than the Patriots. To me it would be like a fan of a team during the 60s whining that his team isn't as good as the Packers. IMO Vince Lombardi was the greatest HC in NFL history, but Bill Belichick is not far behind. So compare the Packers organization since Bob Harlan took over to today to any of the other 30 teams in the league. And if you think just having a great QB is enough, check the history of the NFL: Great QBs like Marino can spend 17 years in the league without winning a title and crappy QBs like _______ (fill in the blank) have Super Bowl rings.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,467
Reaction score
599
We are so so so so spoiled and the expectations set by some of our fans and some of the forum posters here are totally out of touch with reality.

But, I must admit, 1 Superbowl out of Aaron Rodgers is going to feel like an enormous letdown if that's what it ends up being.

An interesting post, particularly from the standpoint of a spoiled fan. I was set to jump on the first paragraph and go through the relativity/subjectivity/expectation recital again. Then, at the end of that first paragraph, there's another item to address. If you really think that expecting a 15-1 team, or one that was five comfortable minutes from the Super Bowl to get there is totally out of touch with reality, I think we've reached the point where added discussion is fruitless.

The other point is that your second paragraph is what I normally would use to refute the first.

Ah, the joys of sports forums. :)
 

Un4GivN

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
811
Reaction score
82
Location
Green Bay
So compare the Packers organization since Bob Harlan took over to today to any of the other 30 teams in the league.

Why since Harlan, why does that matter? Compare with any good team in the last 30 years. The Packers should be that good if not better considering they have one of the most prolific passer of his generation. At that point it is up to the coaches and front office to put the tools in to help. And the coaches to make sure they win.

How about the 2000's Giants, 90s Cowboys, 90s 49ers, 2000's Patriots... That's just the beginning of the list. Lets be real. the 2010's Seahawks have a better track history than the Packers. They have accomplished more in the past 3 years than the Packers have in 8 with Rodgers. There is probably more. Just off the top of my head.

And if you think just having a great QB is enough, check the history of the NFL: Great QBs like Marino can spend 17 years in the league without winning a title and crappy QBs like _______ (fill in the blank) have Super Bowl rings.

You are right... Marino got shafted, I don't think anyone would disagree with that. It's one the biggest disappointments or feel bad moment in NFL history that he didn't get a title. He was let down by his organization and it is a shame. I feel bad for the Dolphin fans.
 

thisisnate

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,627
Reaction score
185
Location
Maine
An interesting post, particularly from the standpoint of a spoiled fan. I was set to jump on the first paragraph and go through the relativity/subjectivity/expectation recital again. Then, at the end of that first paragraph, there's another item to address. If you really think that expecting a 15-1 team, or one that was five comfortable minutes from the Super Bowl to get there is totally out of touch with reality, I think we've reached the point where added discussion is fruitless.

The other point is that your second paragraph is what I normally would use to refute the first.

Ah, the joys of sports forums. :)

I'm just saying I think 1 title over the career of a great quarterback is pretty decent, and I'd be happy if we won 2 or 3 more titles over my lifetime. That's like 1 every 15-20 years. I think that's realistic.

But I don't think we can apply normal expectations to Aaron Rodgers. He's got a skillset at a level I don't think we've seen before. He should be able to do more with it than meet standard expectations.

So yeah, I think expecting greatness and a title shot every year is out of touch with reality as a general rule. I don't think that general rule holds when your quarterback is Aaron Rodgers.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Why since Harlan, why does that matter? Compare with any good team in the last 30 years. The Packers should be that good if not better considering they have one of the most prolific passer of his generation. At that point it is up to the coaches and front office to put the tools in to help. And the coaches to make sure they win.
I used Harlan as the benchmark because that marked a significant change in the organization. Any starting date for comparison purposes is arbitrary so if you prefer acquisition of "the most prolific passer of his generation" as a starting date, use 1992. Or don't. But again, you are putting way too much emphasis on the position of QB as I wrote in the last sentence of that post. In sum, crappy QBs win titles too.
 

Un4GivN

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
811
Reaction score
82
Location
Green Bay
I used Harlan as the benchmark because that marked a significant change in the organization. Any starting date for comparison purposes is arbitrary so if you prefer acquisition of "the most prolific passer of his generation" as a starting date, use 1992. Or don't. But again, you are putting way too much emphasis on the position of QB as I wrote in the last sentence of that post. In sum, crappy QBs win titles too.

I put more emphasis on it because I believe a prolific passer significantly increases your chances at a title. I am just wondering, as other have, if management is correctly making use of this advantage. It's a short window in the NFL, and nothing is guaranteed. We don't even know with certainty that Aaron will be able to play next year. Year/career ending injuries happen all the time.

I guess my main point is... Do we really believe that this team is doing all it can, at a high level to win championships? Is MM the best coach for that? Is TT getting the best talent, and filling the gaps to win right now. Or are we being just competitive enough to make you believe we are on the right track?

New England signed Revis/Browner last year knowing it was likely only for one year. To fill a gap that was needed to contend for a championship that year. With no regard to them being staples of the defense for long term. And it paid off big time.

I can't say that I have enough experience in personnel choices to make an educated opinion on the subject. But looking at the result of this have been lackluster... I stand firm in my belief that playoffs mean nothing. Just another loser.
 

XPack

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,640
Reaction score
527
Location
Garden State
The only way to survive in this league is by constantly and continuously improving. After every goal we reach and target we achieve we need to keep raising the bar higher.

Vince Lombardi said:
“Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence.”

I certainly don't get this 'entitled' and 'spoilt' tags. Don't really get why we should be happy we made previous 7 play off's when we currently lost the division title. No athlete worth his salt would be happy after losing irrespective of previous records.

It is quite true that we can't always be on top, but I certainly do not see the need to 'rationalize' a loss with an historical excuse. And I don't get the "we made the playoff's" stats at all. If you consider the post-Lombardi era Super Bowl stats, I'd doubt we'd rank within the Top 5 in NFL (appearances/wins)
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top