Where the Packers are in the NFC

[Poppa San]

I don't know why my replies keep ending up in other people's posts / quotes.

I looked. "it(unquote)" is not how this software ends a quote. As noted [/QUOTE] is what to use. Stop typing over it when you hit reply. All of it needs to be there.

 

[Mondio]

I don't know why my replies keep ending up in other people's posts / quotes.

You gotta be smarter than the software.

 

[OldSchool101]

It’ll be interesting to see how many snaps Gary gets if ZaDarius is held out. Not that we want to see him due to injury,?but I’m glad we’ve been scaling Gary’s snaps up each week. He should now be ready for an increased workload.

 

[PackerDNA]

You gotta be smarter than the software.

Well then, between that and fat fingers, I'm pretty much doomed.

 

[PackerDNA]

Yay, it worked.

 

[Mondio]

Well then, between that and fat fingers, I'm pretty much doomed.

welcome to my world

 

[Mondio]

Yay, it worked.

i'm taking credit for that

 

[HardRightEdge]

After Dallas, I think the Packers, Rams, Saints, and the surprising 49ers are in a conversation.

It's interesting that Garoppolo's career record is now 11-2 as starter, 9-2 with SF. He took over a 1-10 team in midseason 2017 and went 5-0. After going 1-2 to start last season, losing to MIN and KC on the road, the 49ers went 2-11 in his absence. Now, the afterthought 2019 49ers are 3-0.

Is this mere coincidence? It's hard to think so.

While his stats are good, they're not at a level one would ordinarily see as the difference between a doormat and winning: career QB rating of 97.1, 3,519 yards in those 13 starts, TD:INT of 21:12 in those 13 starts.

Is it reasonable to say that certain QBs, not many, have some intangibles that belie the stats, for good or ill? I think so. The game has evolved to the point where the QB defines the character of the team as much as anybody else, including the head coach with few exception, for good or ill. Even in Chicago, the QB defines the character of the team as win-with-defense with the prime directive of the QB and the offense being "don't screw up".

So, does Garppollo bring some secret sauce to that 49er locker room? A contagious habit of winning brought along from his tutelage under Belichick? We'll see, but his record to date with "bad" 49er teams can't be denied.

As for Rodgers, he's a winner despite all recent arguments to the contrary. He's carried teams to the playoffs with no running attack to speak and/or mediocre-to-poor defenses. He's grown cranky with age, by his own admission. Wear and tear and last season's losing seems to have made him more risk averse where limiting INTs seems to be the priority. Risk aversion (generally unappreciated for it means) and those inexplicable spells of inaccuracy on short throws has led the team to a dismal 3rd. down performance. Is that plate in his shoulder and that cracked knee a factor on certain throws, not on others? It's hard to think not.

But this offense has been smelling blood on turnovers and in the red zone, so there's reason to believe there is some fire bubbling under the surface. While those 110 passer ratings can't hurt, they are not necessary for winning.

 

[gbgary]

at the quarter pole...3 and 1 at this point is way better than i thought they'd be. 0-4 was a real possibility heading into dallas. predicted 8-8 (9-7) for the season if injuries weren't a big factor. defense has been much better than last year. the predicted weakness up the middle isn't surprising. the secondary and edge/olb are it's strengths. the O isn't what i'd hoped it would be when they hired MLF, but it's what i expect considering the personalities involved and what they're trying to accomplish. injuries are piling up with the davante adams and bulaga injuries be the most concerning, team success wise, at the moment. jamal williams is ok. i still think 8-8 (9-7) is possible.

 

[Packer Brother]

I didn't buy the hype when they were 3-0. I'm not concerned after one loss either. 3-1 after 4 games isnt bad. Still need to see more.

 

[OldSchool101]

at the quarter pole...3 and 1 at this point is way better than i thought they'd be. 0-4 was a real possibility heading into dallas. predicted 8-8 (9-7) for the season if injuries weren't a big factor.

I went 11-5 in my prediction.
I felt like if we could go 5-3 through 8 games, we’d begin to figure things out a little better, but not without growing pains. We had a fast start there but 3-1 or even 3-2 is still respectable and right where I thought we’d be.

I think you’re underestimating the Eagles some. They have a relatively well rounded team. Their record is deceptive. I think they finish in that 10-6 or 11-5 area also which is very respectable.

I saw the Eagles were a “very slightly” better team Thursday (calling it like it was). You can feel a momentum in many games and they carried it through 3 of 4 quarters. If it was a boxing match they win 112-108 by decision, but nobody touched the mat. We played like a 9-7 team.. they played 10-6 style ball.

But IMO.. GB conceivably has more room to grow before seasons end and I’m betting GB catches or passes them a smidge. We’re starting to see the Offense open a little. That’s more promising to me than a very close non-division loss. .

Lots of promise still in this team. IMO we are 1 WR and 1 ILB that can carry their own away from the next level.
We’re a very talented, but still relatively inexperienced team (coaches included)

 

[PackerDNA]

We got exposed a bit. We're not there yet, one more offseason like the last two should do it. A wake-up call with a helping of humble pie never hurt anyone. Remember that teams always look different in week 12 than they do in week four.

 

[XPack]

Lions took the Chiefs to the limit before doing a Lions.

Vikes and Bears going dead even.

We should bounce back against Cowboys. It's a crucial game.

 

[gbgary]

I think you’re underestimating the Eagles some. They have a relatively well rounded team. Their record is deceptive. I think they finish in that 10-6 or 11-5 area also which is very respectable

i wasn't underestimating anything about the eagles last week. this is what i said...

people are forgetting this team won a super bowl 18 months ago. minus a few drops they're 4-0.

don't see how anyone, including the Packers, can see this as a trap game. phi's D may not be what it was but the Packers' O can barely put a drive together. on the opposite side phi's O IS scary. they'd have won last week had they not had 7-8 drops. you know that was a priority in their practices this week. wentz is a stud. any Packers player thinking they've got an easy one tonight needs suspended.

 

[OldSchool101]

i wasn't underestimating anything about the eagles last week. this is what i said...

Fair enough. My apologies on the “underestimating” bit.


As long as we’re revisiting this..
“phi's D may not be what it was but the Packers' O can barely put a drive together. on the opposite side phi's O ISscary. they'd have won last week had they not had 7-8 drops. you know that was a priority in their practices this week. wentz is a stud”

Ironically it was just the opposite. After reviewing it closer.. It was more leaning the Eagles opportunistic Defense who forced 3 turnovers that decided this game. The Eagles ST unit also put the Eagles in Packer territory, which that short field resulted in a score.

The GB Offense that you said could barely put a drive together? put up more than 500+ yards of Offensive production and easily won the Time of Possession. They also went near perfectly even to Philly on 3rd down production.

The O that you said was scary? Didn’t quite live up to the GB Offense. (160 yards passing is not a “STUD” QB. That’s actually awful)
Thankfully the Eagles ran the ball well but if I recall Wentz isn’t a RB
Had GB not turned the ball over 3 times in Eagles territory (17, 1, 5) this would’ve been a very different finish. Congrats to the Eagles they won, just not like you thought is all.

 

[rmontro]

It kind of irritates me that the Bears and Saints have lost their starting quarterback, but they're winning.
Meanwhile, when Rodgers goes out, the Packers become a dumpster fire.

I always like to see the Cowboys lose. But if they were going to have a lull, I would have preferred it to be next week.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I always like to see the Cowboys lose. But if they were going to have a lull, I would have preferred it to be next week.

I'm absolutely fine with the Cowboys putting together consecutive lulls

 

[PackAttack12]

The NFC is an absolute blood bath right now. So many teams above .500.

 

[Dantés]

Until they slip, I think the 49ers have to be considered the #1 team in the NFC. They are undefeated, three of their wins have been blow outs, and they are +70 in scoring differential right now. I think the next best scoring differential in the NFC is Dallas at +41. The Packers are +26.

This is not to say that I think SF is immeasurably better than Green Bay, but that they deserve the top spot right now based on how well they've performed.

After them, I think this win over Dallas sends a pretty good message that Green Bay is as deserving as anyone for the #2 spot.

What I'd like to see from the Packers now is the ability to win a game in which they don't win the turnover margin. They were +1 against Chicago, +2 against Minnesota, +3 against Denver, -2 against Philly, and +3 against Dallas.

It's not a coincidence that Philly is the only loss on the schedule. But can they go even or -1 in the TO margin and still win? That's what I would like to see.

 

[XPack]

Until they slip, I think the 49ers have to be considered the #1 team in the NFC. They are undefeated, three of their wins have been blow outs, and they are +70 in scoring differential right now. I think the next best scoring differential in the NFC is Dallas at +41. The Packers are +26.

Their only material win was vs Bucs who themselves are on a bit of roller coaster season (lost to Giants and beat Rams next). Rest of wins are against Browns, Steelers and Bengals are combined 3-12 which says for quality of opposition. They are what Cowboys were 2 weeks before.

Let's wait and see how they do vs Rams next.

 

[Dantés]

Their only material win was vs Bucs who themselves are on a bit of roller coaster season (lost to Giants and beat Rams next). Rest of wins are against Browns, Steelers and Bengals are combined 3-12 which says for quality of opposition. They are what Cowboys were 2 weeks before.

Let's wait and see how they do vs Rams next.

I agree, but we can only assess teams against their schedule. And while they are playing a poor schedule, the Niners are blowing out their opponents with the exception of a good Pittsburgh defense. If a team has an easy schedule, you can't really ask for more than +17.5 points per game.

Now that said, you're right that the sample size isn't reliable. Which is why power rankings this early aren't worth much.

 

[greengold]

Much like DAL power rankings prior to Sunday, where I sensed it was all smoke and mirrors based upon the chumps they played. Same with NE. Those ****ers. Cake walk division and schedule. It won't help them come playoff time, except for the fact they can rest starters endlessly with the weak sisters they play.

I do firmly consider GB the front runner, hands down in the NFC. Figure, we have yet to put a complete game together... our Offense is still not even close to a fixed gel... there is so much more that we have yet to see on O. The D is coming around nicely. When this whole thing comes together, look out.

 

[XPack]

I agree, but we can only assess teams against their schedule. And while they are playing a poor schedule, the Niners are blowing out their opponents with the exception of a good Pittsburgh defense. If a team has an easy schedule, you can't really ask for more than +17.5 points per game.

Now that said, you're right that the sample size isn't reliable. Which is why power rankings this early aren't worth much.

Yeah, agreed.

For me the Saints are still the #1 team of NFC. Their only loss was when Brees got injured and Teddy took over mid game vs Rams. They have beaten Seahawks and Bucs with good offence and Cowboys with a good defence. A very balanced team and Teddy will only get more comfortable going forward. When eventually Brees returns it will only strengthen them more.

My current tiering would be:

T1: Saints
T2: Packers, Seahawks
.....and the rest follows after.

 

[Dantés]

Much like DAL power rankings prior to Sunday, where I sensed it was all smoke and mirrors based upon the chumps they played. Same with NE. Those ****ers. Cake walk division and schedule. It won't help them come playoff time, except for the fact they can rest starters endlessly with the weak sisters they play.

I do firmly consider GB the front runner, hands down in the NFC. Figure, we have yet to put a complete game together... our Offense is still not even close to a fixed gel... there is so much more that we have yet to see on O. The D is coming around nicely. When this whole thing comes together, look out.

I think it's a stretch to say that it was *all* smoke and mirrors for Dallas just because we beat them. The Packers are pretty good.

Also, the Patriots have played in an easy division for years and it doesn't tend to hurt them come play off time. They actually might have a tough opponent this year in Buffalo.

 

[Dantés]

Yeah, agreed.

For me the Saints are still the #1 team of NFC. Their only loss was when Brees got injured and Teddy took over mid game vs Rams. They have beaten Seahawks and Bucs with good offence and Cowboys with a good defence. A very balanced team and Teddy will only get more comfortable going forward. When eventually Brees returns it will only strengthen them more.

My current tiering would be:

T1: Saints
T2: Packers, Seahawks
.....and the rest follows after.

Yeah, that's a good point about the Saints. I kind of forgot about them.