Official Packers-Vikings week round one

[Daryl Muellenberg]

That would result in a lot more cornerbacks interfering with receivers on deep balls and being rewarded for not letting them catch the ball with any means.

Seems to be working fine in college.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

Funny, considering the have had almost exactly the same schedule as the Packers so far, except for 2 games.

Key words being 'so far'. We will see at the end of the year.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Funny, considering the have had almost exactly the same schedule as the Packers so far, except for 2 games.

The Vikings have the second lowest strength of victory in the NFC and haven't beaten a team with a winning record during Zimmer's tenure.

There's no doubt the Packers have underperformed at several points during the season but yesterday's game should serve as evidence they're way more talented than an overachieving Vikings squad.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I didn't mean to open up a can of worms on the way the NFL and NCAA treat pass interference. There are pro's and con's either way. I just prefer the college penalty of 15 yards and a first down over the potential "60 yards on a sometimes questionable call as well as never knowing if the ball was sometimes catchable or would have been caught". But that is me. You will notice that many NFL receivers are getting quite savvy at drawing the penalty.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Key words being 'so far'. We will see at the end of the year.

What would prevent a cornerback just running over a receiver by whom he got beat to prevent a deep completion??? That shouldn't be rewarded by getting only 15 yards on the penalty.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What would prevent a cornerback just running over a receiver by whom he got beat to prevent a deep completion??? That shouldn't be rewarded by getting only 15 yards on the penalty.

No different then the CB who grabs a guy who is just about to break free wide open and he gets called for holding or illegal contact, because the ball isn't in the air.

Like I said, pro's and cons of both. Have seen it work in college games as you describe it Captain, guy is wide open and instead of letting him catch the ball, the CB tackles him last second. Maybe a "half the distance of the pass" would be a more equal compromise of the 2. I just prefer the college penalty, the NFL way of dealing with it assumes the catch will be made.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

Funny, considering the have had almost exactly the same schedule as the Packers so far, except for 2 games.

I don't think Green Bay is all that great either. We're kind of a crappy team this year, not just as crappy as the Vikings.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

What would prevent a cornerback just running over a receiver by whom he got beat to prevent a deep completion??? That shouldn't be rewarded by getting only 15 yards on the penalty.

How is that a reward? No other penalty on defense is more than 15 yards. 15 yards and a 1st down is a pretty good penalty.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Funny, considering the have had almost exactly the same schedule as the Packers so far, except for 2 games.

Yeah as much as I hate to say it, Minny did not lose to Detroit at home, which our doing so could be the thing that costs us a 1st round bye, barring what happens against Arizona.

There's one thing we can learn from yesterday's game, and that is that it should never be assumed that all wins come easy. While me may not completely know the full story behind our offensive struggles the last few weeks, or even know to date if they're fixed enough even, Rodgers just was not going to play in a career bad slump forever and at some point Lacy was bound to get going. I was surprised that AD couldn't get going like I was expecting him too, but like Rodgers, make no mistake that that will not be the MO for the rest of the season.

That being said, our upcoming schedule, here's how I think it's going down

I think now that the Bears got brought back down to reality and seen their dream of beating us out for that wildcard spot go up in flames, I don't see them having nearly the edge or determination as they might have had they won and we lost yesterday. And I think the bad Cutler will show up again in Lambeau on prime time, that's been one thing we can almost surely count on over the years.

Detroit, crazy thing is they might be on a win streak when we play them that Thursday night, they 've won 2 in a row now and given how bad Philly is playing right now, I think it might be 3 in a row when we play them. But I think our guys will have revenge on the mind plus if Lacy is still running with a full load of speed and if Janis can continue to be a factor with Abbrederis, our WR core may be a bit more polished this time around.

Dallas is the game that concerns me because their defense has been a strength this year and with Romo back and still a chance to win the East if they beat Carolina this Thursday, this game would concern me.

I think we do beat Oakland because even though Carr is playing good football and certainly Latavius Murray is having a good year and their offense is improving, their defense has still been bad so I'm not too worried about them.

And then Arizona is the last game before we play Minny again, and this is by far the toughest challenge we have.

For Minny:

Yes they do have to play Atlanta next week but if Devonta Freeman can't go, the Falcons lose this hands down. Matt Ryan is really starting to suck bad and if that continues which I think it will, Minny wins this.

Then I know they do have Seattle which I'm not sure what to call, but I think because it's in Minny and because Seattle has been in regression all year and lacks a passing threat on the road late in season, I think Minny wins this one too.

Minny will lose to Arizona on the road, I wouldn't doubt that one bit

They should beat Chicago at home

The New York Giants I don't know. Jason Pierre Paul is back now and this team might be one to look out for, but the question always is which Eli shows up to play. 50/50 on this one.


And then us. I got a feeling we could both be coming into this game with tie records just like we had against Detroit in the final game last year. Given how unpredictable the league is I would certainly not assume that last game is an auto W for us. But I got a feeling it will be a winner take all game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

How is that a reward? No other penalty on defense is more than 15 yards. 15 yards and a 1st down is a pretty good penalty.

Well, preventing a 50 yard completion by interfering with the receiver resulting in a 15 yard penalty is a reward of 35 yards.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Well, preventing a 50 yard completion by interfering with the receiver resulting in a 15 yard penalty is a reward of 35 yards.

key word "preventing". That assumes the ball is caught 100% of the time and we all know it isn't.

Preventing a 10 yard completion and potentially an 80 yard run after the catch by holding a receiver at the line of scrimmage isn't treated as to what could have happened, really no penalty is (except pass interference). If a defensive lineman jumps offsides and blocks a field goal, they don't assume the field goal would have been good.

Final thought. If the defensive player has a clear interception and the wide receiver tackles him before he can catch the ball, is the defense given the ball?

 

[Curly Calhoun]

How is that a reward? No other penalty on defense is more than 15 yards. 15 yards and a 1st down is a pretty good penalty.

I see both sides of the argument. However, if a P.I. happens in the endzone, a touchdown is not awarded. If a DB is beaten there , he is "rewarded" if he reaches out and tackles the receiver while the ball is in the air.

Maybe 15 yards and a first down is not so unreasonable after all.

 

[TJV]

I too see both sides but I agree with captainWIMM, look what actually happened: The Packers had the ball at their 15 yard line, 3rd and 15. Instead of 1st and ten at the Packers 30, they had first and 10 at the Vikings 35 (already in FG range). With 1:53 left in the half and one timeout, the chances of the Packers scoring a TD from their 30 yard line are greatly reduced IMO. Under NCAA rules, that would have been a “reward” for the Vikings IMO. The other thing worth mentioning is everyone knew what the rule was. All the DB had to do was read Janis’ eyes or jump and turn toward the ball as it arrived. Instead (if I remember correctly) he wrapped his arm around Janis’ waist.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

I too see both sides but I agree with captainWIMM, look what actually happened: The Packers had the ball at their 15 yard line, 3rd and 15. Instead of 1st and ten at the Packers 30, they had first and 10 at the Vikings 35 (already in FG range). With 1:53 left in the half and one timeout, the chances of the Packers scoring a TD from their 30 yard line are greatly reduced IMO. Under NCAA rules, that would have been a “reward” for the Vikings IMO. The other thing worth mentioning is everyone knew what the rule was. All the DB had to do was read Janis’ eyes or jump and turn toward the ball as it arrived. Instead (if I remember correctly) he wrapped his arm around Janis’ waist.

Yes, under the current rules the Vikings would have benefited if it was only a 15 yard penalty, but I still would not call it a reward, they still would have been penalized. It just seems like such a huge penalty, especially on deep balls like that (I don't know for sure but I would bet the completion percentage on balls thrown over 40 yards is below 50%). If a defender pulls down a receiver before the ball is thrown, then it is only 5 yards. If a defender interferes when it is in the air, why should that be a potential 50 yard or more penalty just because the ball is in the air? Also, if it's offensive pass interference, it is only a 10 yard penalty. It should be the same penalty regardless of whether it is offensive or defensive pass interference.

 

[TJV]

Yes, under the current rules the Vikings would have benefited if it was only a 15 yard penalty, but I still would not call it a reward, they still would have been penalized. It just seems like such a huge penalty, especially on deep balls like that (I don't know for sure but I would bet the completion percentage on balls thrown over 40 yards is below 50%). If a defender pulls down a receiver before the ball is thrown, then it is only 5 yards. If a defender interferes when it is in the air, why should that be a potential 50 yard or more penalty just because the ball is in the air? Also, if it's offensive pass interference, it is only a 10 yard penalty. It should be the same penalty regardless of whether it is offensive or defensive pass interference.

Since “benefit” is a synonym for “reward” I wouldn’t quibble with that difference. I don’t think the completion percentage on long throws by itself is relevant. How about combining it with the impact of those long passes that are caught? I don’t think the difference between defensive holding and pass interference is relevant either. They are two different penalties for a reason, for example before the ball is thrown the intended receiver is unknown. As for offensive pass interference, I’d be fine with the change to 15 yards.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

So are we all ok with Offensive Pass Interference resulting in the ball going to the Defense at the spot of the foul?? Since like Defensive Pass Interference, that assumes the ball was going to be caught by the defender. Oh He** I said I wasn't going to debate this one.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

Since “benefit” is a synonym for “reward” I wouldn’t quibble with that difference. I don’t think the completion percentage on long throws by itself is relevant. How about combining it with the impact of those long passes that are caught? I don’t think the difference between defensive holding and pass interference is relevant either. They are two different penalties for a reason, for example before the ball is thrown the intended receiver is unknown. As for offensive pass interference, I’d be fine with the change to 15 yards.

How can the completion percentage not be relevant? If there is a penalty, it is assuming that the pass would be caught 100% of the time, which obviously doesn't happen. So you are fine with the offense getting a 15 yard penalty but not the defense? Why shouldn't they be the same, considering it is for the same infraction? And before you bring up defensive holding versus offensive holding, I think they should also be the same. I also don't understand why it's an automatic 1st down if it's on the defense - just give the down over, like other penalties. Doesn't seem right if it's 3rd and 25 and the defense holds then the offense gets an automatic 1st down out of it.

 

[TJV]

How can the completion percentage not be relevant? If there is a penalty, it is assuming that the pass would be caught 100% of the time, which obviously doesn't happen. So you are fine with the offense getting a 15 yard penalty but not the defense? Why shouldn't they be the same, considering it is for the same infraction? And before you bring up defensive holding versus offensive holding, I think they should also be the same. I also don't understand why it's an automatic 1st down if it's on the defense - just give the down over, like other penalties. Doesn't seem right if it's 3rd and 25 and the defense holds then the offense gets an automatic 1st down out of it.

I disagree with your premise. Every OL holding penalty on a passing play doesn't assume the DL being held was going to sack the QB. Penalties are imposed to deter the "illegal" conduct. There is no comparative penalty on the offense regarding how pass interference penalizes the defense so yes, I'm fine with defensive PI as it is and offensive PI to be 10 or 15 yards. As I said I see advantages and drawbacks to how both the NCAA and the NFL impose PI, but I'm fine with the way the NFL does it. As to holding on defense, if it's 3rd and 25, it would encourage defensive holding if it wasn't also an automatic first down. Again, penalties are imposed to deter conduct.

BTW, the offensive side of the ball has benefited more by rule changes than the defensive side of the ball for some time now. Unfortunately offense "sells" and great defense doesn't (perhaps because it requires a more informed fan base). I don't view that as ideal but I still love NFL football and fanatically follow the Packers. Frankly if it ever goes to pay per view, I would pay a lot of my entertainment dollars budget to continue to do so. Needless to say, even with those changes, they haven't ruined the game for me.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

I disagree with your premise. Every OL holding penalty on a passing play doesn't assume the DL being held was going to sack the QB. Penalties are imposed to deter the "illegal" conduct. There is no comparative penalty on the offense regarding how pass interference penalizes the defense so yes, I'm fine with defensive PI as it is and offensive PI to be 10 or 15 yards. As I said I see advantages and drawbacks to how both the NCAA and the NFL impose PI, but I'm fine with the way the NFL does it. As to holding on defense, if it's 3rd and 25, it would encourage defensive holding if it wasn't also an automatic first down. Again, penalties are imposed to deter conduct.

BTW, the offensive side of the ball has benefited more by rule changes than the defensive side of the ball for some time now. Unfortunately offense "sells" and great defense doesn't (perhaps because it requires a more informed fan base). I don't view that as ideal but I still love NFL football and fanatically follow the Packers. Frankly if it ever goes to pay per view, I would pay a lot of my entertainment dollars budget to continue to do so. Needless to say, even with those changes, they haven't ruined the game for me.

Yes, penalties are there to deter conduct. But there should be limits. So how is holding (a 5 yard penalty) so much different that being offsides (a 5 yard penalty). To deter being offsides, why don't they give an automatic 1st down for that penalty? Your argument that a lesser penalty wouldn't deter any infractions doesn't hold water IMO. If the defense continues to commit the penalty, then they just keep on tacking on penalty yards and getting the down over. That should be enough of a deterrent.

 

[Poppa San]

GENTLEMEN: how 'bout we take the penalty discussion to its own thread.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

The Vikings have the second lowest strength of victory in the NFC and haven't beaten a team with a winning record during Zimmer's tenure.

There's no doubt the Packers have underperformed at several points during the season but yesterday's game should serve as evidence they're way more talented than an overachieving Vikings squad.

Don't forget that until yesterday, the Packers hadn't beaten a team with a winning record either. Bears, Seahawks 49ers, Rams, Chargers, and Chiefs are all .500 or worse.

 

[Raptorman]

The Vikings have the second lowest strength of victory in the NFC and haven't beaten a team with a winning record during Zimmer's tenure.

There's no doubt the Packers have underperformed at several points during the season but yesterday's game should serve as evidence they're way more talented than an overachieving Vikings squad.

In the last 32 games, the Packer have beaten 3 teams with winning records. 0 in 2013, 3 in 2014, and 0 in 2015. Zimmer's in his second year as head coach. McCarthy's in year what? 10? With what many consider one of the best QB's to ever play? If the Vikings are over achieving, the Packer have been under achieving for the last few years.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

In the last 32 games, the Packer have beaten 3 teams with winning records. 0 in 2013, 3 in 2014, and 0 in 2015. Zimmer's in his second year as head coach. McCarthy's in year what? 10? With what many consider one of the best QB's to ever play? If the Vikings are over achieving, the Packer have been under achieving for the last few years.

Ummm, you do realize the Vikings have a winning record and the Pack beat them Sunday - so how is that 0 wins for 2015???

Rodgers missed half the year in 2013, so you really can't count that year. In 2014 the Pack beat 4 teams with winning records (counting the victory over the Cowboys in the playoffs) and 3 other games where the opponent was at 500 when they played them (4 if you included the first game of the year). They came within 1 play of going to the Super Bowl that year, so I don't think you can really call that underachieving. They shouldn't have lost to Detroit this year, but losing to Denver and Carolina wasn't all that unexpected. And as you know, even if you have the greatest qb ever it is still a team sport, he can't play defense or catch his own passes. But I suppose some fans will agree that if they don't win the Super Bowl then they are underachieving.

I wouldn't call the Vikings over achievers (which means they are playing above their talent). The Vikings have beaten teams with worse records, which is what a team is supposed to do. Because of their record they may be over rated (considering they haven't beaten a team with a winning record), but I wouldn't call them over achievers.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Don't forget that until yesterday, the Packers hadn't beaten a team with a winning record either. Bears, Seahawks 49ers, Rams, Chargers, and Chiefs are all .500 or worse.

I'm well aware of that but the Packers have proven in the past that they're capable of beating good teams, something the Vikings haven't done at all in Zimmer's tenure.

 

[Raptorman]

Ummm, you do realize the Vikings have a winning record and the Pack beat them Sunday - so how is that 0 wins for 2015???

Rodgers missed half the year in 2013, so you really can't count that year. In 2014 the Pack beat 4 teams with winning records (counting the victory over the Cowboys in the playoffs) and 3 other games where the opponent was at 500 when they played them (4 if you included the first game of the year). They came within 1 play of going to the Super Bowl that year, so I don't think you can really call that underachieving. They shouldn't have lost to Detroit this year, but losing to Denver and Carolina wasn't all that unexpected. And as you know, even if you have the greatest qb ever it is still a team sport, he can't play defense or catch his own passes. But I suppose some fans will agree that if they don't win the Super Bowl then they are underachieving.

Apparently you haven't been paying attention. According to some, the Vikings are overachieving and haven't played anyone this year. Even though 7 of their games were against the same teams the Packer played this year.