Random Packer News & Notes

[TransientTexan]

29 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

I'm extremely excited about Nijman. But hes not competing for **** this year 😂. All athlete no tech coming in, I doubt he's gotten that fair. 

It's either Billy/Elgton slide out to Tackle or Lights getting the nod.

Yea, I'm kinda curious why they're not sliding Turner out to OT, unless they've seen very bad results from that in practice. I thought that was part of the reason they gave him so much money this offseason, because of his versatility. He certainly didn't seem to merit that much just looking exclusively at guard-play. He can't be much worse than Light. Unless GB just thinks the backup guards are even worse than Light. 

 

 

[vegas492]

8 hours ago, TransientTexan said:

Yea, I'm kinda curious why they're not sliding Turner out to OT, unless they've seen very bad results from that in practice. I thought that was part of the reason they gave him so much money this offseason, because of his versatility. He certainly didn't seem to merit that much just looking exclusively at guard-play. He can't be much worse than Light. Unless GB just thinks the backup guards are even worse than Light. 

 

 

Just a thought concerning this.

If you flip Turner out to RT, you are worse at RT.  Then you put in someone like Patrick at RG and you are worse off at guard as well.

Keep Turner at RG, put in a new RT and offer some chipping and other help over there, then you should be more solid.

That could be a reason.  That wasn't how Mac rolled, though.

Honestly, I didn't think Light was too bad.  He got help and he was beaten when I saw stunts happen around him and the 49ers did a great job of holding offensive lineman on that stunt so they couldn't get back outside.  Only got called once.

I think they can win with Light at RT.  But that's just me.

[Leader]

Week 13 Update:

Niners (10+1): @BAL, @NO, ATL, LAR, @SEA

Saints (9+2):  @ATL, SF, IND, @TEN, @CAR

Packers (8+2):  @NYG, Wash, CHI, @MIN, @DET

Seahawks (9+2): MIN, @LAR, @CAR, ARZ, SF

Vikings (8+3): @SEA, DET, @LAC, GB, CHI

Playoff rankings:
San Francisco (10+1)
New Orleans (9+2)
Green Bay (8+3)
Dallas (6+5)
Seattle (9+2)
Minnesota (8+3)

[Mr Anonymous]

Really need Seattle to knock off Minnesota. Vikings could easily win their last 4 after this one including the week 16 game at home vs the Pack. If you were a person who could get your wish on one non-Packers outcome all season, this would be the one.

[gopackgo247]

1 minute ago, Mr Anonymous said:

Really need Seattle to knock off Minnesota. Vikings could easily win their last 4 after this one including the week 16 game at home vs the Pack. If you were a person who could get your wish on one non-Packers outcome all season, this would be the one.

not sure whats harder. rooting for the Seahawks or rooting for the Vikings. 

[coachbuns]

10 minutes ago, gopackgo247 said:

not sure whats harder. rooting for the Seahawks or rooting for the Vikings. 

No brainer if you're a Packer backer.  I dislike Pete as their head coach as much as any coach in the league.  That being said, I dislike the Vikings even more.  End of story for me.  

[Leader]

51 minutes ago, Mr Anonymous said:

Really need Seattle to knock off Minnesota.

Correct.

51 minutes ago, Mr Anonymous said:

Vikings could easily win their last 4 after this one including the week 16 game at home vs the Pack.

Let's not go overboard

[MacReady]

The best possible outcome is for the Seahawks to win out.  If we win our division and Seattle wins their division, there is no scenario in which we play in California in the playoffs.  Seattle sucks, but our defense has pretty easily handled Wilson ever since 2016, and that was before we added the Smiths, Amos and Savage. 

[MacReady]

This talk of us being a 6 win team is absolutely infuriating.  WE ARE AN 8 WIN TEAM BECAUSE WE HAVE 8 WINS.

What differentiates us between those teams is putting it together.  Doing what we have to do.  Those teams lose games because they cannot execute.  Those teams lose games because their coaches go for a field goal instead of a tie against the Patriots.  We are our record because we intercept Trubisky late in the end zone.  We are 8-3 because we stop McCaffrey at the goal line.  We have 8 wins because Preston Smith comes up with a huge third down sack when trailing the Lions by 6 points. 

STOP SAYING WE SHOULD BE 6 WINS OR WHATEVER.  WE SHOULD HAVE 8 WINS BECAUSE WE WON 8 GAMES.  WE HAVE HOLES.  WE HAVE SERIOUS ISSUES.  SO DOES EVERY TEAM EXCEPT THE RAVENS. 

@AlexGreen#20.  Quit it.  I am speaking directly to you.  You believe in fairy tales.  Every single team has flaws.  The Patriots have scored under 21 points 4 times this year.  Three out of their last 4.  And they've played two single teams with a winning record.  The Bills and the Ravens.  The Bills they played without Josh Allen playing.  That's three straight games under 21 points and that is WITH the number one defense in the NFL.  Are they a 6 win team?  NO BECAUSE THEY ****ING DO WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT THEY HAVE TO WIN JUST LIKE WE DO. 

We're not a great team, but we are what our record says we are. 

[Malfatron]

2 hours ago, Mr Anonymous said:

Really need Seattle to knock off Minnesota. Vikings could easily win their last 4 after this one including the week 16 game at home vs the Pack. If you were a person who could get your wish on one non-Packers outcome all season, this would be the one.

I agree and i expect them to win their last 4

 

[AlexGreen#20]

9 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

This talk of us being a 6 win team is absolutely infuriating.  WE ARE AN 8 WIN TEAM BECAUSE WE HAVE 8 WINS.

What differentiates us between those teams is putting it together.  Doing what we have to do.  Those teams lose games because they cannot execute.  Those teams lose games because their coaches go for a field goal instead of a tie against the Patriots.  We are our record because we intercept Trubisky late in the end zone.  We are 8-3 because we stop McCaffrey at the goal line.  We have 8 wins because Preston Smith comes up with a huge third down sack when trailing the Lions by 6 points. 

STOP SAYING WE SHOULD BE 6 WINS OR WHATEVER.  WE SHOULD HAVE 8 WINS BECAUSE WE WON 8 GAMES.  WE HAVE HOLES.  WE HAVE SERIOUS ISSUES.  SO DOES EVERY TEAM EXCEPT THE RAVENS. 

@AlexGreen#20.  Quit it.  I am speaking directly to you.  You believe in fairy tales.  Every single team has flaws.  The Patriots have scored under 21 points 4 times this year.  Three out of their last 4.  And they've played two single teams with a winning record.  The Bills and the Ravens.  The Bills they played without Josh Allen playing.  That's three straight games under 21 points and that is WITH the number one defense in the NFL.  Are they a 6 win team?  NO BECAUSE THEY ****ING DO WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT THEY HAVE TO WIN JUST LIKE WE DO. 

We're not a great team, but we are what our record says we are. 

It has nothing to do with believing in fairy tales.

Point differential has consistently proven to be a better predictor of future wins and losses than team record. Same with DVOA. Same with net drive average. 

[MacReady]

10 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It has nothing to do with believing in fairy tales.

Point differential has consistently proven to be a better predictor of future wins and losses than team record. Same with DVOA. Same with net drive average. 

It’s a fairy tale.  It’s Flat Earth and Lizard People.  

[AlexGreen#20]

3 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

It’s a fairy tale.  It’s Flat Earth and Lizard People.  

What do your eyes tell you? Is this an 8-3 caliber team or is it a 6-5 caliber team?

[MacReady]

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

What do your eyes tell you? Is this an 8-3 caliber team or is it a 6-5 caliber team?

MY EYES TELL ME IT'S A ****ING 8-3 TEAM BECAUSE THAT'S HOW MANY WINS WE HAVE FOR ****'S SAKE! 

It's a team that has shown glimpses of greatness on both offense and defense with the talent to dominate on either side.  Biggest issues are defensive game plans and Rodgers being Bad Rodgers. 

This team is not capable of beating three consecutive GOOD teams in the playoffs on the road.  It's no 2010 team.  It is, however, very capable of an Eagles 2017 run.  That Eagles team was a lot like ours in the regular season.  It had some truly dominant games on defense, but some real stinkers on defense, too.  Then they got a wildly favorable series of matchups in the postseason.  The Atlanta "Build the team around a WR" Falcons.  The pretender Vikings.  Then the Patriots.  They matched the Patriots with a great offensive game plan and then came up with key stops/turnovers (which our defense is very capable of). 

Once you get to the playoffs, it's more about the luck of the draw than it is how good you are.  Do you think the Rams belonged in the Super Bowl last year?  Do you think the Patriots get to the playoffs half the times they did if they didn't have that first cake walk team or their second cake walk team on the schedule?  The Patriots got the pretender Chiefs last year who decided the best way to slow them down was EDGE pressure and no tight coverage.  Lol.  Yeah, give Brady the quick passes and defend deep when he's 41 years old. 

I don't believe we will win the Super Bowl, but there are two teams in the AFC we couldn't beat in the Super Bowl.  The Patriots and the Ravens.  But then ask what happens if our special teams decides to have an average game, Rodgers plays quick and with tempo and our defense gets a big stop early. 

If those three things happen, there's not a team in this league that we couldn't beat. 

Not coincidentally, those three things are exactly what happened in the close games against good teams we've beaten this year.  To say we're not capable of doing that is just wrong. 

If the Patriots muffed a snap early in a game or Brady fumbled on the 2 yard line, how do you think they do against the Niners?  They certainly might make it more interesting, but... Now what if the Niners were playing in Green Bay in the playoffs and something like a tipped pass ended up in Alexander's hands with room to run? 

Super Bowl history is full of teams who aren't supposed to make it out of the first round who win it all and just as full as teams who are supposed to be unstoppable who miss a kick, fumble a ball, have the first play of the Super Bowl go over Peyton Manning's head ending in a safety...

Good teams overcome those fumbles and bounces and adversity and come away with 8 wins.  Bad teams lose those ones and sit at 6-5.  DVOA is a statistic that does not measure veterans named Smith coming up with timely snaps or veterans like Amos coming up with key interceptions or Tramon Williams catching a deflected pass in the end zone or Kevin King coming up with three HUGE interceptions on the year. 

We're a good team.  We're no powerhouse like we were in 2011, but in 2011 we were beat by a team very much like this 2019 team. 

[TransientTexan]

40 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It has nothing to do with believing in fairy tales.

Point differential has consistently proven to be a better predictor of future wins and losses than team record. Same with DVOA. Same with net drive average. 

Yea I think many people have trouble understanding probabilities. There is a most likely outcome that can certainly swing +/- by outside factors. Doesn’t mean what eventually happened was ‘most likely’ and that if you repeated all the decisions that you took before it that you would continually get the same outcome year after year.