3 Packer games you can change outcome of

[rmontro]

We already beat them earlier that year on Thigpen's end zone drop. Maybe they would have wanted revenge for our "cheap" victory.
Wanting and getting are two different things

 

[Half Empty]

We already beat them earlier that year on Thigpen's end zone drop. Maybe they would have wanted revenge for our "cheap" victory.



Very good point.

Really? At least two people who, if given three games, would pick one that gives an individual a better head-to-head record on a another individual?

 

[C-Lee]

I don't think the 2007 Packers would have beaten the 2007 Patriots.

 

[scotscheese]

any given sunday

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't think the 2007 Packers would have beaten the 2007 Patriots.

Oh I am quite sure that they did...in someones home, on their Madden game!

 

[rmontro]

Really? At least two people who, if given three games, would pick one that gives an individual a better head-to-head record on a another individual?

I was the first one to bring up the Brady game. All I said was I was surprised no one has mentioned it. As for a top three, I said I liked the OP's list. But if you've read the thread, you'll notice even the OP mentioned FIVE games, even though he was the one who wanted the top three. People have been talking about various important games even if they aren't in their top three.

But it seems to me some posters here seem to be more Rodgers fans than Packers fans, and I guess that's to be expected.

 

[swhitset]

Really? At least two people who, if given three games, would pick one that gives an individual a better head-to-head record on a another individual?

Thank you for pointing that out. I was just shaking my head.

 

[Mondio]

Obviously the Super Bowl against Denver, who wouldn't take another Lombardi?

I'm a toss up between Jerry Rice fumble and 2007 Giants. I'm not certain we win either game after that, but I would have liked our chances regardless

and 2014. That will always be the year they "should have" won a super bowl. They would have beaten the Pats, they were a better team and at the time, just as disciplined and focused. Well for most of the year anyway

 

[rmontro]

Thank you for pointing that out. I was just shaking my head.

You can shake you head, but that's a straw man because no one said they would pick the Brady game as one of their three games.

 

[swhitset]

You can shake you head, but that's a straw man because no one said they would pick the Brady game as one of their three games.

I’ll accept your disclaimer lol... but you definitely brought the game up suggesting that you considered it a valid response. From my perspective that game wouldn’t even make my top 10.

 

[rmontro]

I’ll accept your disclaimer lol... but you definitely brought the game up suggesting that you considered it a valid response. From my perspective that game wouldn’t even make my top 10.

I wouldn't consider it at all, it was part of a wasted season. But I remember discussion about it at the time, there were guys who really wanted Rodgers to have that 2-0 advantage. I like the Packers myself, but some people follow players more so than teams, and I'm sure Rodgers has a lot of fans who aren't die hard Packer fans.

But at this point Brady has cemented the GOAT argument so firmly, it's not really worth talking about.

 

[OldSchool101]

I don't think the 2007 Packers would have beaten the 2007 Patriots.

GB went 1-1 against the Super Bowl Champs in the regular season and playoffs. The Giants played the perfect game because NE was an absolute powerhouse that year. Even so, I think we would’ve had a very realistic chance of upsetting the Patsies.

In comparison. The 1997 Denver game we had absolutely no business winning. I remembered that distinctly and Terrell absolutely manhandled our D and it was a slow bleed. It was one of those games where the score absolutely didn’t give the feel of the actual game, we were plain outmatched and lucky not to get embarrassed worse. That’s not a game we even deserved to be in much less winning it.

While we always want to win a SB, Losing by a FG in OT in -20 windchill against the impending Champion 2 weeks before SB Sunday was nothing short of a highly esteemed finish for GB.

 

[rmontro]

While we always want to win a SB, Losing by a FG in OT in -20 windchill against the impending Champion 2 weeks before SB Sunday was nothing short of a highly esteemed finish for GB.

That was a true frozen tundra type game though. I know we weren't playing a dome team or a team from the south, but we're supposed to win those.

 

[swhitset]

GB went 1-1 against the Super Bowl Champs in the regular season and playoffs. The Giants played the perfect game because NE was an absolute powerhouse that year. Even so, I think we would’ve had a very realistic chance of upsetting the Patsies.

In comparison. The 1997 Denver game we had absolutely no business winning. I remembered that distinctly and Terrell absolutely manhandled our D and it was a slow bleed. It was one of those games where the score absolutely didn’t give the feel of the actual game, we were plain outmatched and lucky not to get embarrassed worse. That’s not a game we even deserved to be in much less winning it.

While we always want to win a SB, Losing by a FG in OT in -20 windchill against the impending Champion 2 weeks before SB Sunday was nothing short of a highly esteemed finish for GB.

I watched that Super Bowl with a bunch of friends at Top Shots pool hall In La Crosse. While I don’t dispute the fact that Davis had his way with the defense, I do not think the game was as lopsided as you portray it. Both teams were very good, but on that day, Denver was better.

 

[OldSchool101]

I watched that Super Bowl with a bunch of friends at Top Shots pool hall In La Crosse. While I don’t dispute the fact that Davis had his way with the defense, I do not think the game was as lopsided as you portray it. Both teams were very good, but on that day, Denver was better.

Cheap Beer always makes you feel like you’re winning

 

[Half Empty]

I was the first one to bring up the Brady game. All I said was I was surprised no one has mentioned it. As for a top three, I said I liked the OP's list. But if you've read the thread, you'll notice even the OP mentioned FIVE games, even though he was the one who wanted the top three. People have been talking about various important games even if they aren't in their top three.

But it seems to me some posters here seem to be more Rodgers fans than Packers fans, and I guess that's to be expected.

Without your added explanation, I definitely took

I'm also surprised no one has mentioned this past season's loss to the Patriots, because that would have put Rodgers up 2-0 over Brady.

to mean you were including it. Since you say you weren't, pretend I didn't make my comment.

Also, in the OP, only three were listed, with the other two clearly identified as missing the list.

Gonna have to really keep an eye out for "mentioned" in posts from now on.

 

[Half Empty]

You can shake you head, but that's a straw man because no one said they would pick the Brady game as one of their three games.

This

Very good point.

comes pretty close as a reply to your post about the game.

 

[pacmaniac]

I'll go on the record and take this season's GB/NE game as one of my 3 then.

I had agreed with OP's choices - SB against Denver, 2007 NFCC, and 2014 NFCC.

But do I think Brett Favre could have beaten the undefeated Patriots in 2007? Remember Favre in the last half of his career generally stunk in the postseason. Look at his stats, and you'll see he NEVER had more than 1 good game in any postseason in the last half of his career. Would MM be able to outsmart Belichick? I guess a big key would be how was the Packers pass rush that year - I don't remember.

Do I think the Packers would have beaten the Patriots in 2014? I have already said no in previous posts. Teams rarely beat Belichick twice in one season. Could MM outcoach Belichick twice? Laughable. Could Capers outsmart Belichick in the SB? Extremely laughable.

Edit: And if Rodgers won this season's game against Brady, and if he could win 1 or 2 more SBs, people would have been able to say "Yeah Brady has more rings, but he could never beat Rodgers."

Edit 2: I might as well take the 1960 title game too. Lombardi would have 6 championships and still be tied with Belichick.

 

[pacmaniac]

In comparison. The 1997 Denver game we had absolutely no business winning. I remembered that distinctly and Terrell absolutely manhandled our D and it was a slow bleed. It was one of those games where the score absolutely didn’t give the feel of the actual game, we were plain outmatched and lucky not to get embarrassed worse. That’s not a game we even deserved to be in much less winning it.

Terrell Davis exploited Gabe Wilkins' injury. If only the NFL had the concussion protocol in place back then, Davis might not have played the final 3 quarters. We had a chance to win, getting the ball at midfield in the 4th quarter with the game tied. And Holmgren goes 3 and out.

 

[pacmaniac]

That was a true frozen tundra type game though. I know we weren't playing a dome team or a team from the south, but we're supposed to win those.

Old Favre stunk in cold weather games, whereas Young Favre was something close to 40-0 in below freezing games.

 

[sschind]

You bring up a very interesting scenario, but to answer your question I feel like we would have been worse off drafting Aikman just because we ended up with Favre a few years ago. Call me biased but I think Favre is way better than Aikman.

However drafting Barry Sanders would possibly mean 3 championships in the 90s to go along with Favre. I get the feeling Deion would have left Green Bay being a guy from Florida and his interest in baseball. Derrick Thomas to tag team with Reggie White would be deadly.

Was Troy Aikman really that good? His numbers were not good at all. Seems like he just rode Emmitt Smith to 3 rings.

If you noticed at the very end of my post I did mention the whole if we get Aikman probably no Favre thing. I do think Aikman was better than a lot of you are giving him credit for. Its hard to say how things would have gone. He probably wouldn't have had as many TDs as Favre did but don't think he would have had nearly as many interceptions either.

There is a good chance that getting anyone other Mandarich that year may have changes our fortunes enough to have changed our future so I'll say that as disappointing as he was he may have been instrumental in ringing in the whole Favre/Rodgers era so he should probably be in the Packer HOF.

 

[LambeauLombardi]

I don't think the 2007 Packers would have beaten the 2007 Patriots.

The Giants pass rush with their front 4 without blitzing was the biggest reason for their success that postseason. We had a decent pass rush that year but not on their level. I think I agree with you, but the 07 Patriots weren't as good in the 1st half of the year as the 2nd half as they weren't consistently running up the score on teams.

I wouldn't consider it at all, it was part of a wasted season. But I remember discussion about it at the time, there were guys who really wanted Rodgers to have that 2-0 advantage. I like the Packers myself, but some people follow players more so than teams, and I'm sure Rodgers has a lot of fans who aren't die hard Packer fans.

But at this point Brady has cemented the GOAT argument so firmly, it's not really worth talking about.

Bingo! The Rodgers Brady comparison is media driven. The Patriots game this past season didn't even cross my mind. I was twice as upset with the Vikings tie in week 2 considering we could have went 2-0 to start the year with wins over both of the biggest threats in the division. 1-0-1 after the game due to a ******** call left a sour taste in everyone's mouth.

In comparison. The 1997 Denver game we had absolutely no business winning. I remembered that distinctly and Terrell absolutely manhandled our D and it was a slow bleed. It was one of those games where the score absolutely didn’t give the feel of the actual game, we were plain outmatched and lucky not to get embarrassed worse. That’s not a game we even deserved to be in much less winning it.

Very true. The TD to Chmura at the end of the half kept that from being a blowout IMO. I could say the same thing about the 07 game vs the Giants. Besides the Driver 90 yd td, the offense was crap and we didn't stop Plaxico all day. Still 2 games I would have liked to have stole, a lot like how Seattle stole one from us.

Could MM outcoach Belichick twice? Laughable. Could Capers outsmart Belichick in the SB? Extremely laughable.

Edit 2: I might as well take the 1960 title game too. Lombardi would have 6 championships and still be tied with Belichick.

MM wasn't as crappy of a coach in 2014 as he was in 2018. I believe self doubt started to creep in his head after the Seattle game as he removed himself from play calling the next year. If he gets past Seattle, people still look at MM as not quite an all time great coach but at least a good one.

Good point on 1960, but also remember it has taken BB 19 years to win 6, took Vince about half the time to win 5 (6 if you include the one with the Giants in 1956). D-bags will act like pre-Super Bowl area means nothing so I don't waste any time on them.

If you noticed at the very end of my post I did mention the whole if we get Aikman probably no Favre thing. I do think Aikman was better than a lot of you are giving him credit for. Its hard to say how things would have gone. He probably wouldn't have had as many TDs as Favre did but don't think he would have had nearly as many interceptions either.

Top 20 qb of all time without question. Not in my top 10. Once they lost guys to free agency after 95 he wasn't able to carry the load. I'd probably put him top 15.

 

[GreenReign]

The Failmerry game. We win that we have home field in the playoffs instead of having to play the NFCCG in Seattle, which is obviously another game we'd all like to change the outcome of.

 

[rmontro]

=I might as well take the 1960 title game too. Lombardi would have 6 championships and still be tied with Belichick.

That game looms large in Lombardi's legend though, as he vowed they would never lose another championship. If this was science fiction, I might be afraid to change the timeline here, because who knows how it would affect the years to come. If it were science fiction.

That game provided the kind of motivation I had hoped the 2014 NFCCG loss against Seattle might have provided, but it never transpired.

I do think Aikman was better than a lot of you are giving him credit for. Its hard to say how things would have gone. He probably wouldn't have had as many TDs as Favre did but don't think he would have had nearly as many interceptions either.

Probably wouldn't have had as many rings either. Those Cowboys teams were loaded.
It would be nice to erase Mandarich though.

 

[LambeauLombardi]

The Failmerry game. We win that we have home field in the playoffs instead of having to play the NFCCG in Seattle, which is obviously another game we'd all like to change the outcome of.

As far as playoff seeding goes and not getting a first round bye, some regular season one's that come to mind is Week 17 @ Jets 2002 and Week 17 @ Vikings that same year as the Fail Mary in 2012. 2002 we lost the first ever home playoff game in Lambeau the week after. And I doubt Kaepernick goes bananas in Lambeau like he did @ San Fran. We beat Atlanta in Georgia dome that year imo.