H
HardRightEdge
Guest
It's not weak enough for you?
Half Empty
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2014
- Messages
- 4,599
- Reaction score
- 694
Not sure the guys injured from week 5 on would agree with you.
C-Lee
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2015
- Messages
- 2,144
- Reaction score
- 420
The whole "easiest schedule" matter is ********, in my opinion.It's not weak enough for you?
Teams are different each and every year. You never know who will get hot, who will get injured, or if teams just don't live up to expectations.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
While there is some truth to that, if you had your pick, would you rather face both the NFC West and the AFC West this year or the NFC East and the AFC South?
OP
OP
Deleted member 6794
Guest
The Packers had a bye in week 4 of the 2013 season as well. Kind of odd they have another one that early this season.
Well, no team with a bye week that early has won the Super Bowl over the last 10 seasons.
Wynnebeck
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2015
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 14
This schedule feels like they took the easiest schedule in the league and tried to make it as hard as they possibly could.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Some talk about bye weeks as if they are the same for all teams and they don't matter. I would disagree. While the timing of injuries can't be predicted, what a team can do during the bye week in preparation for the next game can be a big advantage in that next game. If that next game is against a tough opponent, even better. 5 year Stats show that some of the more successful teams, fair pretty well in their games after byes. Up until last year, the Packers were 5-0 and then they faced Denver, also a 5-0 team, at home, coming out of their bye week. We know what happened there. I'm thinking the better teams are even better after a bye due to the physical/mental rest as well as successful coaches having even that much more time with their game plans and film.
I also would much rather have a bye in the 8th or 9th week over the 4th week. Mid season to me, is good timing for active players to get a breather. I'm guessing more players are feeling the mental drain as well as the bumps and bruises of the season at that point, more then after 3 games. Again, 5 year stats of games after a bye week, teams are 7-7 after a 4th week bye and 16-7 after a week 8 bye. An early bye to me might break up the continuity that a team finally has after only 3-4 games.
Many ways to look at the bye week for sure.
http://www.cheatsheetwarroom.com/fantasy-football/nfl/bye-weeks.aspx#.VxE6tPkrJhE
I also would much rather have a bye in the 8th or 9th week over the 4th week. Mid season to me, is good timing for active players to get a breather. I'm guessing more players are feeling the mental drain as well as the bumps and bruises of the season at that point, more then after 3 games. Again, 5 year stats of games after a bye week, teams are 7-7 after a 4th week bye and 16-7 after a week 8 bye. An early bye to me might break up the continuity that a team finally has after only 3-4 games.
Many ways to look at the bye week for sure.
http://www.cheatsheetwarroom.com/fantasy-football/nfl/bye-weeks.aspx#.VxE6tPkrJhE
Last edited:
thisisnate
Cheesehead
Half Empty
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2014
- Messages
- 4,599
- Reaction score
- 694
Looking forward to your meaningful stats.
NelsonsLongCatch
Cheesehead
The schedule is goofy. Long home stretch, long away stretch, and early bye week is tough. With that being said, Packers play a lot of teams that were bad last year. Barring injury, there is #1 seed potential here.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Some teams change in some meaningful way; most do not.
Munch
NFL Owner
I don't understand what all the fuss is about. Play the games, win enough of the games to make it to the playoffs and then beat everyone else to win the SuperBowl.It doesn't matter if you play at home or away in Timbuktu. If there are excuses already about a schedule then we should just pack it in right now.
GO PACK GO!!!!
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
It doesn't matter if you play at home or away in Timbuktu. If there are excuses already about a schedule then we should just pack it in right now.
GO PACK GO!!!!
All due respect, its called a Fan Forum....Who is making excuses, well yet anyway? We ****, we moan, we cheer, we discuss, we argue, we strategize, we second guess, heck we even talk about what jersey's the team should wear. Without all that, why even have a Packer Fan Forum?
See you at the end of the season when the Packers raise the Lombardi Trophy in Timbuktu!
Last edited:
Robert Mason
Cheesehead
Weaker teams because Packers finished number two in the division. Vikings probably play a stronger schedule.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
This is true...at least on the surface
We get the Falcons and the Seahawks. The Vikings get the Cardinals and Panthers. Otherwise, I think we play all of the same teams
Robert Mason
Cheesehead
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
thisisnate
Cheesehead
vic touches on the week 4 bye in this week's 'ask vic'
http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...is-great/788e7bde-4b21-4423-a318-04e05f89962f
http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...is-great/788e7bde-4b21-4423-a318-04e05f89962f
Rmac587
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2015
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
schedule being weak or not isn't BS.
Nope. New England has made a living in a sub-par division for years. Their schedule has tended to be easier and home field often comes with it when you play patsies (barely over .500 or worse) twice a season. Some teams are historically bad over the last decade. Yea, some improve, but often that means sneaking in to the playoffs as a wild card before whatever missing piece they lack bites them. Jets, Houston, Bears, etc. usually QB play.
Nope. New England has made a living in a sub-par division for years. Their schedule has tended to be easier and home field often comes with it when you play patsies (barely over .500 or worse) twice a season. Some teams are historically bad over the last decade. Yea, some improve, but often that means sneaking in to the playoffs as a wild card before whatever missing piece they lack bites them. Jets, Houston, Bears, etc. usually QB play.
I'm sure I'll get flamed for this. But I'm all this is a Packer forum and we all get to share our opinions. But I honestly think the Packers struggles will continue, although I really hope I am wrong. I think their struggles has been a few years coming and teams have finally exposed their weaknesses. I feel the Bears and Vikings have addressed their issues and have improved their teams. TT has allowed the Dline get weak and has not addressed the ILB position in a few years. I feel as if we have a pretty weak defense and as proven. Defenses is what will get you into the big game. Rodgers has now had 3 straight years with an injury, with the Oline he currently has he will continue to take a beating. Our receivers are too soft and cannot get any seperation with physical defenses.
Lastly, I think MM has finally ran out of ideas and we've began to see the beginning of the end of his tenure in GB. This team is missing an attitude adjustment and play with fire.
Lastly, I think MM has finally ran out of ideas and we've began to see the beginning of the end of his tenure in GB. This team is missing an attitude adjustment and play with fire.
OP
OP
Deleted member 6794
Guest
You're taking a way too negative approach evaluating the current Packers roster. I agree Thompson has to address inside linebacker and the defensive line in the upcoming draft but aside of these positions the Packers are one of the most talented teams in the league.
Just as a side note, there's enough evidence that has been posted on this forum several times that a team doesn't need to have a dominant defense to make it to the Super Bowl.
I 'm having some doubts about the bolded part after last season. For example, going into last season, the consensus here about the WR group was between are they the best in the NFL or just top 3. Turned out that lose Nelson, and suddenly no one could run routes, get open or get seperation, and the rare times they did they were just as likely to drop the ball as make a play.
Every team's fan base overestimates their team's talent.
Let's see; #1 WR lost in preaseason. #2 & #3 WRs injured early in season, may not have recovered. #4 rookie WR lost for season when rounding into form. #5, #6 and over the hill street FA WRs played as their depth chart spots expected. QB played most of season on a bum leg which, via the eye test but not admitted, affected his accuracy. #1 HB was beside himself then ate him. Missed 4 starting OL in one game. #2 TE lost for most of season. #1 TE no excuses but couldn't outrun Honey BooBoo.
I don't see injuries as such an excuse, Poppa, not like in 2013 when they destroyed the season.
We also had all of those guys you pointed out for the vast majority of the season.
Every guy on that offence under performed, both in not playing up to their ability or in proven past performance.
Fortunately- at least IMO- it's more likely we see a reversal and return to form in '16.
We also had all of those guys you pointed out for the vast majority of the season.
Every guy on that offence under performed, both in not playing up to their ability or in proven past performance.
Fortunately- at least IMO- it's more likely we see a reversal and return to form in '16.
OP
OP
Deleted member 6794
Guest
There's no doubt the receivers underperformed last season but with Nelson hopefully returning fully healthy I expect the unit to rebound in 2016. Overall I'm convinced the Packers are one of the best teams in the league and one of the front runners to win the Super Bowl.
BTW I agree that injuries shouldn't be used as an excuse for last year's performance.
MiamiBeachPacker
Cheesehead
Jags game is getting more interesting
Similar threads
