Week 15 Packers @ Bears "I Believe That"

[Redt]

I would like us to go straight at them with Dbl TE and two back set. Low scoring smash mouth approach. Bears defense is good especially against the pass, so keep it to a minimum. Bears offense does not scare me and Trubisky is good for at least 1 int.

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, Shanedorf said:

No worries dude
Here's 8 minutes worth of Rodgers vs bears TDs, featuring his reliance on the passing game 

 

 

Gave me shivers!  Kind of like prom night.

[Dubz41]

The biggest difference I hope for is that Philbin will use the TEs and RBs to chip at Mack and Floyd.  Rodgers is going to have trouble stepping up against their middle rush with Hicks so we have to slow down their edge.  MM was never too keen on giving help, but if we don't give help in the game it could get ugly.  Also would like to see some no-huddle, it really can slow down the pass rush if we can move the chains a little.  Last time we played Roquan Smith wasn't playing much, hope he doesn't make a difference. The Bears fans can be silenced and Arodg has done it before. Here's hoping.

[Norm]

On 12/12/2018 at 10:59 PM, Outpost31 said:

I'd defended McCarthy as the best option going forward because we know he's capable with talent.  Our next head coach could fail with talent for all we know.  I have never denied McCarthy has faults.  You're just too blind to see that, so yes... You did miss something.  A lot of somethings. 

Nuanced opinions are illegal in this country dumbass

 

Lol how is that not censored

 

Double edit. I'm clutching my pearls because I can say dumbass online!

[Golfman]

4 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

No worries dude
Here's 8 minutes worth of Rodgers vs bears TDs, featuring his reliance on the passing game 

 

 

Those few throws to Finley remind me of what could have been. This offense has missed a tall, athletic TE and we haven't had one since his injury ended his career. Makes everything else a lot easier. 

[Malfatron]

4 hours ago, Norm said:

Nuanced opinions are illegal in this country dumbass

 

Lol how is that not censored

dumb****

edit: just testing

[Mr Bad Example]

22 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

The Packers haven't won a road game all year. B

See, I have this as a check in GB's favour. GB isn't THAT bad of a team so them going 0-8 or even 1-7 on the road is unlikely. They should regress to the mean and win the last couple road games, especially since the competition in the final road game is weak, and GB is due to outplay and win vs a superior opponent (not that the Bears are unbeatable, just that this season they are unarguably the better team). 

[Mr Bad Example]

18 hours ago, Dubz41 said:

The biggest difference I hope for is that Philbin will use the TEs and RBs to chip at Mack and Floyd.  Rodgers is going to have trouble stepping up against their middle rush with Hicks so we have to slow down their edge.  MM was never too keen on giving help, but if we don't give help in the game it could get ugly. 

That's a McCarthy foible that I NEVER understood. Using an outlet receiver to chip still gives you an outlet receiver available, and at worst leaving an outlet receiver in to block takes away safe, short passes....but Rodgers never throws those anyway. 

[mikebpackfan]

There is no way the Packers should win this game. Unlike others, I’m not putting an asterisk on that. 

[Mr. Fussnputz]

32 minutes ago, Mr Bad Example said:

See, I have this as a check in GB's favour. GB isn't THAT bad of a team so them going 0-8 or even 1-7 on the road is unlikely. They should regress to the mean and win the last couple road games, especially since the competition in the final road game is weak, and GB is due to outplay and win vs a superior opponent (not that the Bears are unbeatable, just that this season they are unarguably the better team). 

Yes, regression to the mean is something to consider, but doesn't that have to do more with randomness? My stats knowledge is rusty.

On the other hand, the better team is favored by longer series. The poorer team has its best opportunity of winning just one game against a better team than it does of winning 2 out of three or 3 out of 5. As the series gets longer, the better team is more favored. So one game on Sunday gives GB its best shot, but it will take some lucky breaks. Maybe that's where regression to the mean comes in. The Pack hasn't been very lucky with turnovers and penalties this year. Maybe they start getting some breaks!

[Slinky]

On 12/13/2018 at 9:18 AM, Outpost31 said:

There's actually an entire site with archived evidence of my stance on Mike McCarthy.  I frequently argued that I believed McCarthy was the lesser of two evils.  That the Devil we knew was better than the Devil we don't.  It was the entire basis of my argument for McCarthy.  That can be seen in literally 70% of my posts regarding Mike McCarthy.  You will find nowhere where I said that I love McCarthy, that he was above reproach, that I love everything about him...

Everything I argued was on the principle that the Devil you know is better than the Devil you don't, that 6% of NFL head coaches in the history of the league have won a Super Bowl (and we have one of them), and that we know what McCarthy is capable of when this team has talent. 

I have already acknowledged plenty of times by literally coming out and saying that it was the right move for him to have been fired after that Cardinals game debacle. 

In spite of all my arguing to keep McCarthy, I have never acted nor suggested that McCarthy was above reproach or that he did not have faults. 

You're a sad, sorry, petulant little man if you're going to keep suggesting otherwise for the hell of it. 

 

 

You said you'd keep McCarthy over Rodgers. Enough said. LMAO.

[MacReady]

Just now, Slinky said:

You said you'd keep McCarthy over Rodgers. Enough said. LMAO.

Show when I said this, where I said this, how I said it and the context of all of the above.

Otherwise, you like smearing red lipstick all over your face while wearing high heels and calling yourself pretty.

Both statements are just as true without proof. 

[Kepler]

26 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Show when I said this, where I said this, how I said it and the context of all of the above.

Otherwise, you like smearing red lipstick all over your face while wearing high heels and calling yourself pretty.

Both statements are just as true without proof. 

And beats small animals. I saw it.

[Mr Bad Example]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Yes, regression to the mean is something to consider, but doesn't that have to do more with randomness? My stats knowledge is rusty.

On the other hand, the better team is favored by longer series. The poorer team has its best opportunity of winning just one game against a better team than it does of winning 2 out of three or 3 out of 5. As the series gets longer, the better team is more favored. So one game on Sunday gives GB its best shot, but it will take some lucky breaks. Maybe that's where regression to the mean comes in. The Pack hasn't been very lucky with turnovers and penalties this year. Maybe they start getting some breaks!

I had a bad stats prof in college and I was a....casual, let's say, student, so my knowledge isn't all it should be either. 

I believe in random occurrences - fumbles, unlucky ints, close games* are all instances where a team that has been terrible in those will regress to at or near average. So GB's 2-5-1 record in close games implies they SHOULD win a close game near the end of the season to get near .500 in that category (or they continue to suck and bounce back next season). 

 

As far as each game, I think each game may be somewhere between following established trends and a random occurrence - what the numbers tell you SHOULD occur in many cases does, but there are always the "WTF was THAT?" games that happen on a weekly basis. GB is also underperforming its pythagorean wins (6.7 expected) so that goes in their favour as well, as far as being "due." 

 

Even with all this stat wonk stuff, I think Chi can be had. I'd say that the key to the game is GB's line play - if Rodgers can hit quick and in rhythm and the OL can keep his jersey more or less clean, there's a chance. If Rodgers holds the ball behind a subpar line performance, it'll get ugly quick. 


* NFL teams tend to be .500 in close games, whether it's a good team or a bad team; being far above or below means things went your way, so teams like that tend to regress over the long term

[SAM]

Win or lose, this game will be telling on where the Pack needs to go personnel wise as well as couching. This is a character telling game as well. The Charater of this team seems to be to just play up to your opponnents strangth. If the Pack can rise up and beat a good team on the road, something they have failed at all year, they can rescue there charater and put the league on notice that the Pack is back. If they are rolled by the Bears on Sunday it will be a huge confidence builder for the Bears and launch there playoff hopes for real. For the Pack it will be rebuilding time.