I've HAD it!

[GreenBlood]

I don't want us going undefeated and something catching back up with us in the playoffs. The playoffs is what matters, once you win enough games to grab the division title, it don't matter after that.

First of all, going undefeated will NOT make us any more likely to lose in the playoffs. Second, you're wrong about the division title. You keep going full speed until you lock up HFA.

 

[greenandgold]

I'm not expecting a 16-0 season. Would be great if they did and win it all on top of that. That would certainly be remarkable considering how much is given up by this defense.

I'll trade a 16-0 season for another Lombardi any day of the week.

Though 19-0 would be TOTALLY awesome.

 

[Pat4DaPack]

The defense is fine. There is a lot of talent on that side of the ball.

 

[Bogart]

First of all, going undefeated will NOT make us any more likely to lose in the playoffs. Second, you're wrong about the division title. You keep going full speed until you lock up HFA.

How will it not?

New England was BOUND to lose after going 16-0. When you're undefeated, teams are going to give you their 100% no matter what, it's going to make their day to knock out the undefeated team, even if it's a team that loses 10+ games in the regular season, if they give an undefeated team their first loss, that makes their season just for that.

 

[Jules]

How will it not?

New England was BOUND to lose after going 16-0. When you're undefeated, teams are going to give you their 100% no matter what, it's going to make their day to knock out the undefeated team, even if it's a team that loses 10+ games in the regular season, if they give an undefeated team their first loss, that makes their season just for that.

If you lose you lose. It happens. You can't plan on it though either. In 2009 the Colts made the biggest mistake I have ever seen with a team which is to pull the plug on the perfect season. The looks on the faces of the players, the boos from the crowd, the backlash from fans the following week and this team has not been the same since.

Maybe for the Pats in 2007 it was simply not meant to be. Honestly, I never thought it was for them. I didn't have them winning the big one that entire season. And if you watched them closely there were signs of cracking in the second half of the regular season.

This years Packers remains to be seen, they will tell their own story. If the perfect season is their destiny though it can happen.

I understand the law of averages with losing a game though. Sometimes I do wonder though if the third times the charm? NE and Indy both failed with it.....and this is just since 2007. So, it is possible for 19-0. It's very difficult but it's possible and we have seen two teams in recent years flirt with it. One came oh so close and one quit on the idea.

 

[Jules]

Now that I think of it.......wow it's setting up nicely.

2007-Pats tried for perfection

2009-Colts organization quit on perfection

2011- Packers? Currently 8-0.

Uh oh. GB it may be your turn to try to slay the perfection dragons!!! And you have the chance to do it in Indy too, the exact site where it was given up on......oh the irony.

Come on Pack. Keep winning. Let's see if this can happen. I do think it can actually.

 

[Bogart]

If you lose you lose. It happens. You can't plan on it though either. In 2009 the Colts made the biggest mistake I have ever seen with a team which is to pull the plug on the perfect season. The looks on the faces of the players, the boos from the crowd, the backlash from fans the following week and this team has not been the same since.

Maybe for the Pats in 2007 it was simply not meant to be. Honestly, I never thought it was for them. I didn't have them winning the big one that entire season. And if you watched them closely there were signs of cracking in the second half of the regular season.

This years Packers remains to be seen, they will tell their own story. If the perfect season is their destiny though it can happen.

I understand the law of averages with losing a game though. Sometimes I do wonder though if the third times the charm? NE and Indy both failed with it.....and this is just since 2007. So, it is possible for 19-0. It's very difficult but it's possible and we have seen two teams in recent years flirt with it. One came oh so close and one quit on the idea.

Had Indy went 16-0, I'm still pretty positive they would have lost the Super Bowl, that wouldn't have helped it at all.

I honestly believe had the 1972 Dolphins played a 16 game season, they would have at least lost one game.

 

[Croak]

Had Indy went 16-0, I'm still pretty positive they would have lost the Super Bowl, that wouldn't have helped it at all.

I honestly believe had the 1972 Dolphins played a 16 game season, they would have at least lost one game.

You may well be right. The 72 Redskins were actually the more dominant team.

 

[Jules]

Had Indy went 16-0, I'm still pretty positive they would have lost the Super Bowl, that wouldn't have helped it at all.

I honestly believe had the 1972 Dolphins played a 16 game season, they would have at least lost one game.

Tough to say and I do think they could have at least gone 16-0 with the Jets at home and then the Bills. I think the team's spirit was broken after tanking the season to rest, you have to let healthy players try for greatness at least IMO. Don't get me wrong, they still could have lost to the Saints regardless or heck even to SD if they had met up with them in the playoffs. Still we have no real proof of this and the Saints at least tried and lost fairly. The Colts team was never the same, they found ways to win every single game for 14 straight no matter how dire things looked then it stopped. In the playoffs the Jets/Ravens were good matchups; young QBs and one dimensional offenses. It is possible the Saints were more well prepared with a tougher road to the postseason IMO with better Cardinals and Vikings teams. I believe the NFC is probably stronger this year right now so the Pack would get a good test just to get to the SB. I found it interesting that last years Steelers had the same road as the 09 Colts to get to the SB; the Ravens/Jets. The Pack had more challenges I felt.

I just don't believe a loss is good to "get out of the way". If it happens it happens naturally. Based on quotes from your head coach he also does not sound like he believes a loss is a good thing. It's one thing to rest banged up guys but healthy starters? Naw.

It's still too soon yet, you only have played 8 games. If they get to 13-0/14-0 then it's a different story.......

Of course the perfect season does not have to happen for this years Packers. But, if they keep winning then roll with it.

 

[Bogart]

Tough to say and I do think they could have at least gone 16-0 with the Jets at home and then the Bills. I think the team's spirit was broken after tanking the season to rest, you have to let healthy players try for greatness at least IMO. Don't get me wrong, they still could have lost to the Saints regardless or heck even to SD if they had met up with them in the playoffs. Still we have no real proof of this and the Saints at least tried and lost fairly. The Colts team was never the same, they found ways to win every single game for 14 straight no matter how dire things looked then it stopped. In the playoffs the Jets/Ravens were good matchups; young QBs and one dimensional offenses. It is possible the Saints were more well prepared with a tougher road to the postseason IMO with better Cardinals and Vikings teams. I believe the NFC is probably stronger this year right now so the Pack would get a good test just to get to the SB. I found it interesting that last years Steelers had the same road as the 09 Colts to get to the SB; the Ravens/Jets. The Pack had more challenges I felt.

I just don't believe a loss is good to "get out of the way". If it happens it happens naturally. Based on quotes from your head coach he also does not sound like he believes a loss is a good thing. It's one thing to rest banged up guys but healthy starters? Naw.

It's still too soon yet, you only have played 8 games. If they get to 13-0/14-0 then it's a different story.......

Of course the perfect season does not have to happen for this years Packers. But, if they keep winning then roll with it.

From another stand point I think losing a game can help you, cause it gives you something to work on and show what you need fixing. The Patriots never lost a game, and went to the Super Bowl in 2007, thinking they were perfect when in all evidence they weren't.

Yes the Saints did try, but they were bound to lose a game. Everyday in the paper, they were losing a starter, and I think had they beat Dallas, Payton would have benched his full starters for the last two games, and he did going into Carolina. They caught flac for letting the Panthers win that, but he was more worried about going into the playoffs healthy. While Dallas fans bragged how they "blew them out" they only beat them by 7, (in all fairness, Saints would have beat their ***** had they been with the starters they were missing.)

That's what scares me.
If the Packers go 13-0 or 14-0 and wrap up home field advantage, and the division, are they going to rest the starters or risk them getting hurt to go undefeated?
New England does this quite often, they'll go into the last game, play their starters, and even when it came back to haunt them by losing Welker in 2009, on a game that didn't matter. What if the Bears lost a key starter when they just had to play their starters against us last year after wining the division? It comes and goes. Everyone wants to go undefeated, that's cool. But I'd rather lose the last 2 games, and not lose a starter or go to the Super Bowl undefeated and lose it like New England did.

Even if we have it wrapped up by the last game, i think McCarthy will play his starters vs Detriot, for a fair chance to not let them make the playoffs, and that is cool with me, but I don't want to lose a key starter in a game that don't matter after we've got everything under our thumbs.

 

[Jules]

From another stand point I think losing a game can help you, cause it gives you something to work on and show what you need fixing. The Patriots never lost a game, and went to the Super Bowl in 2007, thinking they were perfect when in all evidence they weren't.

Yes the Saints did try, but they were bound to lose a game. Everyday in the paper, they were losing a starter, and I think had they beat Dallas, Payton would have benched his full starters for the last two games, and he did going into Carolina. They caught flac for letting the Panthers win that, but he was more worried about going into the playoffs healthy.

That's what scares me.
If the Packers go 13-0 or 14-0 and wrap up home field advantage, and the division, are they going to rest the starters or risk them getting hurt to go undefeated?
New England does this quite often, they'll go into the last game, play their starters, and even when it came back to haunt them by losing Welker in 2009, on a game that didn't matter. What if the Bears lost a key starter when they just had to play their starters against us last year after wining the division? It comes and goes. Everyone wants to go undefeated, that's cool. But I'd rather lose the last 2 games, and not lose a starter or go to the Super Bowl undefeated and lose it like New England did.

Even if we have it wrapped up by the last game, i think McCarthy will play his starters vs Detriot, for a fair chance to not let them make the playoffs, and that is cool with me, but I don't want to lose a key starter in a game that don't matter after we've got everything under our thumbs.

Losing a game can help, but not if you intentially lose. Like I said, you can't plan on a loss, it happens. And you can still improve while winning; I firmly believe this.

Don't be afraid to repeat what happened with NE. Being afraid of greatness can keep you from it!!! If you get to 14-0 you have back to back home games. The crowd won't be too thrilled if you pull Rodgers and key starters at some time and blow the game.

Injuries can happen at anytime. Sometimes I think you get hurt more when you play to avoid them. In 2009 the Colts ironically rested to avoid injuries. They lost their #2 CB in the divisional round and their best defensive player in Freeney at the end of the AFCCG when the game was out of reach for the Jets. Talk about karma. Resting guys and then losing two key parts of the D.

I am telling you Bogart. It's just simply bad karma to tank anything when history is on the line. It just is. I can't stomach it. Let the plays go for it. Now of course if you lose a game before then and lock up homefield with a loss already then maybe things will be different.

Bill Polian has always had a stick up his a@@ with injuries and resting. No wonder his team has one SB win in Indy (in a year they could not rest) with all the talent here/none in Buffalo. You get plenty of rest with a bye week!!

BTW this is what your HC said after beating the Colts in preseason this year:

"I understand the mind-set of kicking the extra point and going home a little healthier, but that's a terrible message to send to your team," coach Mike McCarthy said. "I think just the way our team reacted on the sideline tells you about what we came here to do -- we came here to win games."

 

[Wood Chipper]

I caught the sarcasm when you said we may lose one or two games

 

[GreenBlood]

To say we need a loss to improve was just proven wrong tonight. Our defense showed real improvement against the Vikings and we didn't have to lose a game to do it. Winning doesn't mean you become "due" for a loss. The so-called "law of averages" is also known as the "Gambler's Fallacy". Winning 72 games didn't stop the Bulls from winning the 1996 Finals, did it?

 

[Croak]

You see, tonights game against the Vikings proved the whole point of this thread. What is wrong with the Packers? They should have had 60 points tonight.

 

[Wood Chipper]

Ugh they frustrate me!!! When our backup qb scores a td the only drive he plays it gets me all up in arms!!!