Official Week 18 vs Bears Pregame Thread

[tynimiller]

Well here we are....above record wise where many thought we might be, others had us slightly better - either way here we are, truly playing for nothing other than rhythm, pride and possibly some bragging right against the Bears.

The interesting thing will be what approach we take with our personnel...

Rest...one approach is treat this week more or less as a preseason game since it has "no" bearing really on our playoff future directly. Don't push guys like Evan Williams, Quay and/or others to get back out there - give them rest. Jaire, if able maybe play a series but only to test his leg and get him out of there....perhaps even let Willis take the game (That would be the extreme version of resting). The benefit to this approach is you hopefully enter the playoffs the healthiest you can...

Aggressive...play for keeps and HOPE no one gets hurt. The benefit to this one is momentum is a real thing, feeling better and more confident is a real thing and this could provide it.

 

[Pugger]

I don't think we can move up to the #6 seed even if we win against Chicago this week. If our record is the same as Washington's after these games are played they have the better conference record so it would be foolish to risk banged up players now. We need them for the playoffs. Now if the Commanders lose to Atlanta...?

 

[gopkrs]

filadelphia here we come! I think it's important to play at least a half (assuming we play well). Probably 3 quarters. da bears have a good defense. They are actually a tough team to figure out. They won't affect our seeding but I sure don't want to lose to them either. I say beat em.

 

[tynimiller]

filadelphia here we come! I think it's important to play at least a half (assuming we play well). Probably 3 quarters. da bears have a good defense. They are actually a tough team to figure out. They won't affect our seeding but I sure don't want to lose to them either. I say beat em.

Would you take a Bears win but all are healthy or a Bear's loss but Love and Jacobs get hurt?

I say this partially tongue in cheek but it is a true issue before management - and one I know I won't hold against them regardless of what they decide because damn it is a tough call.

 

[gopkrs]

Would you take a Bears win but all are healthy or a Bear's loss but Love and Jacobs get hurt?

I say this partially tongue in cheek but it is a true issue before management - and one I know I won't hold against them regardless of what they decide because damn it is a tough call.

I figure da bares are going to play all out. I'd like to play full until we have the game in hand. Which may mean until the final snap. We are coming into the playoffs on kind of a low note right now. Don't really want to leave it there.

 

[tynimiller]

I figure da bares are going to play all out. I'd like to play full until we have the game in hand. Which may mean until the final snap. We are coming into the playoffs on kind of a low note right now. Don't really want to leave it there.

You didn't answer the posed question LOL

I could argue this either way without missing a beat for sure, because you're not wrong about the low note right now.

 

[gopkrs]

You didn't answer the posed question LOL

I could argue this either way without missing a beat for sure, because you're not wrong about the low note right now.

Ok. I would take the loss. Willing to take that chance.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

At this point, I would rest my starters. The Rams are a better/healthier team than when we faced them earlier in the season. Are they better than the Eagles? Probably not, but not that big of a difference as far as matchups go. Whether you face the Rams or the Eagles, its going to be a road game and a dogfight either way. Winning either game, probably puts you on board to face the Lions/Vikings the following week, unless of course, the Packers are the #6 seed and the Commanders the 7th seed and they beat the Eagles.

Bottom line, the Packers are going to need to beat good teams, on the road in the playoffs. Beating the Bears on Sunday is basically meaningless, especially if any starters get injured and can't suit up the following week.

Give them the day off MLF.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This play last night by the Lions sums up my feelings about having MLF call plays VS Detroit's OC Ben Johnson.

MLF lacks creativity. Also, the few times MLF has tried to get creative, the plays have lacked in execution.

MSN

 

[OldSchool101]

Would you take a Bears win but all are healthy or a Bear's loss but Love and Jacobs get hurt?

I say this partially tongue in cheek but it is a true issue before management - and one I know I won't hold against them regardless of what they decide because damn it is a tough call.

I’d go vanilla. Don’t pull any trick plays or anything misdirection that will be part of our future plans. In other words play our key players at like 75% area.

I think there’s an advantage to momentum. I’d also balance that with limiting my key starters reps. We’re on the road and we all saw what a 6 day week did for energy. We could be looking at another 6-day, Saturday Wildcard game so I’d be smart about monitoring the usage of Starters.e.g Jacobs plays 70% of his usual snap count

 

[pacmaniac]

filadelphia here we come! I think it's important to play at least a half (assuming we play well). Probably 3 quarters. da bears have a good defense. They are actually a tough team to figure out. They won't affect our seeding but I sure don't want to lose to them either. I say beat em.

The game will affect our seeding if we beat the Bears and Washington loses to Dallas. But Willis should be able to beat the Bears.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The game will affect our seeding if we beat the Bears and Washington loses to Dallas. But Willis should be able to beat the Bears.

I'd be worried about all 22 starters, not just Love. What if Jacobs tears up his knee? Reid dislocates his shoulder? Lose Jenkins? Etc. Besides Jaire, Williams and Walker, the Packers are pretty healthy. I wouldn't risk that on what I think will be a meaningless home game against the Bears. I also think the Commanders beat Dallas, which negates anything that the Packers do against the Bears.

Like I said in an earlier post, the Packers are going to have to beat solid teams on the road. Whether it is the Eagles or Rams that they face in Round 1, they will probably have the Lions or Vikings next if they win.

Do I think MLF will sit his starters? Nope. But I wish he would.

 

[tynimiller]

The game will affect our seeding if we beat the Bears and Washington loses to Dallas. But Willis should be able to beat the Bears.

I could care less about #6 vs #7 - all that matter now is winning three straight games after the regular season to be in the dance for the prize. Whether that starts in Philly or LA don't care one bit.

 

[Magooch]

Heading into the Minnesota game, many saw it as a chance to get a "playoff tune-up" and to get some good momentum, good rhythm, just a nice confidence boost heading into the playoffs.

Now of course a big factor in that would be that a win there would represent a win over a "top" team, for which the Bears would certainly not qualify. But I do still think that when it comes to mentality, momentum, rhythm, etc that a win over Chicago would be beneficial, even if it doesn't impact playoff seeding at this point (though depending on the Washington result it still *could*)

And yeah, it would suck to be one week away from the playoffs and suffer a serious injury. But at the same time...how do you think it would feel to limp into the playoffs after two straight division losses, esp. when one of those losses would represent the Bears breaking a 10-game losing streak (this season) and an 11-game losing streak (to GB in recent years)? I would have to think that would also be incredibly deflating...

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

And yeah, it would suck to be one week away from the playoffs and suffer a serious injury. But at the same time...how do you think it would feel to limp into the playoffs after two straight division losses, esp. when one of those losses would represent the Bears breaking a 10-game losing streak (this season) and an 11-game losing streak (to GB in recent years)? I would have to think that would also be incredibly deflating...

I guess I don't see sitting your starters and possibly losing as "deflating". Now playing your starters and losing, THAT would be deflating. Couple that with some major injuries and you might as well play the funeral march on the airplane to Philly.

I do get what you are saying, but I still think the smart approach is to give your starters an extra week of rest and not exposing them to the physical anguish of a basically meaningless game. That physical toll I think could be worse than any mental anguish that a loss by mostly backups would inflict upon them.

 

[Magooch]

If it were already all tied up and decided I'd probably be more for it, but as it stands with our seeding still somewhat up in the air I have to think they're going to approach the game as an opportunity to improve playoff seeding... I would still prefer playing the Rams over Philly - yes, they're better now than when we played them (But I think you could argue that Philly are, too) but I still think they're a considerably worse team overall than Philly is right now...and there is still the possibility that we play Tampa (WASH loss/LAR loss/TB win/GB win)

 

[PackerDNA]

Washington plays the same time as us, so I think we have to go peddle to the metal. That said, I don't see this as a gimme. If nothing else, the bears are due for a win by law of averages, and they hate us bad enough to have their best game of the year

 

[OldSchool101]

I'd be worried about all 22 starters, not just Love. What if Jacobs tears up his knee? Reid dislocates his shoulder? Lose Jenkins? Etc. Besides Jaire, Williams and Walker, the Packers are pretty healthy. I wouldn't risk that on what I think will be a meaningless home game against the Bears. I also think the Commanders beat Dallas, which negates anything that the Packers do against the Bears.

Like I said in an earlier post, the Packers are going to have to beat solid teams on the road. Whether it is the Eagles or Rams that they face in Round 1, they will probably have the Lions or Vikings next if they win.

Do I think MLF will sit his starters? Nope.

I mostly agree. I just gave a different way of achieving that. Mitigate chances of injury by keeping key players on a snap count. Meaning Jacobs should play imo, but limit him to 15 carries or so and Balance it more Wilson and Brooks on the other 20 carries. I’d balance the Runass ratio 55:45 and I’d keep a larger selection of passes inside 10 yards. Run a little more 12 Personnel and get Musgrave going. That keeps Starters fresher on a potential short week and traveling across the Globe. It also keep Love protected with additional blocking and quicker throws. I don’t want him running at all unless it’s out of bounds and I’d make that clear.

 

[OldSchool101]

I’d love to see Lloyd play in this one, If even for 5-10 carries. I’m pretty sure he’s ready now. This is his game to knock the rust off. Nothing to lose because if he doesn’t play here he may not again this season.

Also want to see Luke ramped up. Hes had snaps of 9,12 last 2 games. Get him 20 snaps in this one

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I mostly agree. I just gave a different way of achieving that. Mitigate chances of injury by keeping key players on a snap count. Meaning Jacobs should play imo, but limit him to 15 carries or so and Balance it more Wilson and Brooks on the other 20 carries. I’d balance the Runass ratio 55:45 and I’d keep a larger selection of passes inside 10 yards. That keeps Starters fresher on a potential short week and traveling across the Globe.

I guess to me you either go all in or not at all. To what end are you playing your starters for on the limited basis you suggest? To win, to give them momentum? Josh Jacobs has had less than 15 carries in 4 games, so that isn't really protecting him by pulling him after 15 carries.

For me, this is like an exhibition game, that starters are already rust free for. Starters that could get hurt 1-20 plays in. Yes, you decrease the chances by reducing their snaps, but you totally eliminate the chance of injury, if they don't play at all.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

One other "small thing" to throw into a W or L against the Bears. While all playoff teams are automatically ordered as 19-32 in the upcoming draft, regardless of their record, a final record of 10-7 could potentially give the Packers better draft position (if they get knocked out of the playoffs) over other teams that get knocked out during the same round.

So I like to look at all angles.

 

[weeds]

From today's Pro Football Talk.

Bill Belichick: I couldn’t sell resting players to the rest of the team

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

From today's Pro Football Talk.

Bill Belichick: I couldn’t sell resting players to the rest of the team

I do find it funny that some people view "resting starters" in meaningless preseason games different from resting them in the final games of the season. I actually think resting players at the end of a long season, when most of them are dealing with some sort of injury, is a smarter approach.

 

[milani]

I don't think we can move up to the #6 seed even if we win against Chicago this week. If our record is the same as Washington's after these games are played they have the better conference record so it would be foolish to risk banged up players now. We need them for the playoffs. Now if the Commanders lose to Atlanta...?

Commanders to lose to the Cowboys.

 

[Magooch]

One interesting factor is that the Rams ARE expected to rest their starters and Jimmy G will apparently be starting at QB.

Now the Rams have clinched the NFC West. But they could still be the #4 seed, which means potentially the difference between playing the 6 seed (Packers or Commanders) or the 5 seed (Loser of Vikings-Lions). So it's interesting that they are seemingly valuing player rest ahead of possibly having to play one of Detroit/Minnesota...

But, possible implications for us too... as above, if the Commanders AND Rams lose and us and the Bucs win, then we'd play the Bucs for our opener. So, a few different things to keep an eye on. In either case I'd certainly rather play Tampa or LA than Philly.