2009 Schedule

[Kerb Hohl]

FINALIZED:

6 Division games:
@Min/Min
@Chi/Chi
@Det/Det

AFC North:
@Pit
@Cle
Bal
Cin

NFC West:
@Ari
@StL
Sea
SF

3rd place NFC teams:
Dal
@TB

[aaprigs311]

Looks pretty easy. I expect us to patch some holes and win at least 10 games.

[bigkurty]

Wow, next year should be a piece of cake (knock on wood). Ooh, and I should be living in AZ by then so I will have to go to that game. Very cool.

[El Duderino]

Wow, next year should be a piece of cake (knock on wood). Ooh, and I should be living in AZ by then so I will have to go to that game. Very cool.

The schedule sure looks to be easier and help some next year, but as i posted in another thread, don't ever go to overboard and assuming as near fact before any season starts that so and so teams will be really good and others will be an easy win. Consider prior to this season

Last year, two of the worst teams in the NFL were the Falcons and Dolphins, going 1-15 and 4-12. Fans seeing those teams on the schedule prior to this year starting had those teams penciled in as easy wins, now both could finish up at 11-5. I'm sure prior to the year very few if any had Atlanta beating us at home. Other fans had to see the Packers as a strong possibility of a loss, we'll likely finish 6-10. Even if some may have thought the Browns were a bit overhyped before the year started, who would have seen them on the schedule and thought, that's a very easy win, home or away given they went 7-1 at home last year? Thought Jacksonville would be one of their easiest opponents they'd face? Who had Seattle chalked up as a near cake walk win?

In the end, even if a softer schedule helps us get more wins, the Bears/Vikes will also play many of the same two. Besides that, to become more than a fringe playoff team at best, a legit threat in the NFC, the team simply has to get more talented and better coached in certain area. If that happens, then we won't need an easier schedule to become that legit threat, our play will show everyone that the Packers are a team to be reckoned with come playoff time. Take the Bears this year. If they somehow squeak out a playoff berth, does anyone actually think they'll do any damage?

[trwi7]

I agree with El Dude. Yeah, the schedule looks easier if you look at the records of the teams we play this year, but with the parity in the NFL you never know who's going to be good and who's going to be bad. If you would've told me right after the Super Bowl last year that the Packers would be 5-10 heading into the final week and the Dolphins would be 10-5, I would've laughed at you.

And the Bears and Vikings have pretty much the same schedule as us. Obviously there's the division games so I won't include those, but these are the schedules for each team.

Packers:

Home - San Francisco, Seattle, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Dallas/Philadelphia/Washington
Away - Arizona, St. Louis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay/Atlanta/New Orleans

Vikings:

Home - San Francisco, Seattle, Baltimore, Cincinnati, New York Giants/Dallas/Philadelphia
Away - Arizona, St. Louis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Carolina/Atlanta/Tampa Bay

Bears:

Home - Arizona, St. Louis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, New York Giants/Dallas/Philadelphia
Away - San Francisco, Seattle, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Carolina/Atlanta/Tampa Bay

Pretty much all the same opponents except for two, same home/road opponents except two with Minnesota, home and road games are different for Chicago, but the same teams. Only two opponents will be different next year and none of New York, Dallas, Philadelphia, Carolina, Atlanta and Tampa Bay are likely to be pushovers so there's really no advantage.

[Jollay]

No, no. You guys are assuming every GM is like Ted Thompson, who will stand pat in the offseason.

The Browns, Seahawks, 49ers, and Bengals all could be alot better next year. I mean jesus, the Seahawks were a playoff team a year ago and were mising their starting QB and all their receivers. Nobody denies the Browns have talent and the Bengals were without Carson Palmer and the 49ers are improving.

Maybe the Vikes get a QB, who knows?

I love how its a given how we return to 10-6 or something next year but its a given these teams will all be bad--even teams that were in the playoffs like us a year ago.

We whine about Cullen Jenkins--what would it be like without A-Rod? Thats essentially what the Hawks and Bengals went through this year.

[Kerb Hohl]

The Bengals were bad with Palmer. The Browns haven't scored an offensive touchdown in 3 games. The Browns got "aggressive" this offseason and look where that took them. The 49ers spent about 100 million 2 offseasons ago and are still one of the worst teams in the league.

On the flip side, I do see the 49ers as finally improving to a respectable team next year, however the Cards are proving to be worthless, the only reason they have 8 wins instead of 5 is because they were able to feast on 5, soon to be 6 free games this year in their division. I agree, all of those teams we play may improve, that is the nature of the NFL nowadays.

I am hoping/thinking we may catch Seattle in a transition year this year with a new coach and Hasselbeck beginning to reach the twilight of his career.

No, no. You guys are assuming every GM is like Ted Thompson, who will stand pat in the offseason.

I know you are being a bit sarcastic here and I also agree with you in some aspects that other teams are a bit more proactive in the offseason...but to directly answer this quote more than I have already in this post...what about 4-12 -> 8-8 -> 13-3?

[aaprigs311]

Yeah, you could say the nfc west might improve. They probably will. It's hard to play any worse collectively. We're still superior to each of those teams. If you had a choice as to which division you'd like to play 9 outta 10 of you would probably choose the nfl west wouldn't you?

[El Duderino]

The Bengals were bad with Palmer. The Browns haven't scored an offensive touchdown in 3 games. The Browns got "aggressive" this offseason and look where that took them. The 49ers spent about 100 million 2 offseasons ago and are still one of the worst teams in the league.

On the flip side, I do see the 49ers as finally improving to a respectable team next year, however the Cards are proving to be worthless, the only reason they have 8 wins instead of 5 is because they were able to feast on 5, soon to be 6 free games this year in their division. I agree, all of those teams we play may improve, that is the nature of the NFL nowadays.

I am hoping/thinking we may catch Seattle in a transition year this year with a new coach and Hasselbeck beginning to reach the twilight of his career.

The thing is though, the Bears/Vikings play those same NFC West teams that we do so even if they don't improve much and still suck, we really gain no advantage beyond it possibly helping us if we are in a wild card race with a non-NFC North team.

[Jollay]

The Bengals were bad with Palmer. The Browns haven't scored an offensive touchdown in 3 games. The Browns got "aggressive" this offseason and look where that took them. The 49ers spent about 100 million 2 offseasons ago and are still one of the worst teams in the league.

On the flip side, I do see the 49ers as finally improving to a respectable team next year, however the Cards are proving to be worthless, the only reason they have 8 wins instead of 5 is because they were able to feast on 5, soon to be 6 free games this year in their division. I agree, all of those teams we play may improve, that is the nature of the NFL nowadays.

I am hoping/thinking we may catch Seattle in a transition year this year with a new coach and Hasselbeck beginning to reach the twilight of his career.

No, no. You guys are assuming every GM is like Ted Thompson, who will stand pat in the offseason.

I know you are being a bit sarcastic here and I also agree with you in some aspects that other teams are a bit more proactive in the offseason...but to directly answer this quote more than I have already in this post...what about 4-12 -> 8-8 -> 13-3?

Well you could be right. I think the Browns still easily could rebound hard, though, especially if they get Cowher. They still have a very young talented nucleus through the draft (how much would you kill to have Joe Thomas on our roster right now), not just their FA guys (and S.Rogers made the probowl, incidentally, still).

But we just don't know. I think you might be right about the Seahawks taking a deep breath and stepping back for a year.

Certainly we have reason for hope--if TT plugs a hole or two in the offseason. Personally I believe if he doesn't bring in at least 2 fairly significant vets we're destined for mediocrity again.

Or worse.

[magicfan4life05]

Just curious, but how do you guys know the schedule for next year...dont those come out in the offseason?

[Kerb Hohl]

Just curious, but how do you guys know the schedule for next year...dont those come out in the offseason?

Here is the formula:

NFC North(6 games): Always, 1 home, 1 away vs. every team.

NFC Division(4 games): Rotate through divisions and play all of them. Home/away decided by last time you played the team in the division rotation.
2009-NFC West
2010-NFC East
2011-NFC South
etc. etc.

AFC Division(4 games): Rotate through the AFC divisions yearly and play all of the teams in the division. Home/away rotates every time you see a certain team.
2009-AFC North
2010-AFC East
2011-AFC West
2012-AFC South

NFC Places(2 games): The last 2 games are from the other 2 NFC divisions you didn't have in your rotation this year. You play the team in those divisions that placed the same as you. Therefore, if we play the NFC West in 2009, we play the 3rd place team (we are taking 3rd this year in the North) in the NFC South and NFC East. Home/away rotates every year you see the division in this category.

[Kerb Hohl]

Edited.

We now officially play Tampa at home. The only thing up in the air is the game at Dallas/Philly/or Washington whigh will be decided in a few hours.

[MickeyDavis]

Next year is the last year of this scheduling formula. They could keep it the same but it has to be decided. Goodell may want some changes although with 32 teams it works pretty well, why screw with it. Of course I say the same thing when it comes to playing regular season games in Europe but they do that anyway.

[Kerb Hohl]

Looks like if we can assume a Dallas loss then it is down to Dallas/Washington. If the 'skins win, they take 3rd and we play them @FedEx Field.

[Kerb Hohl]

Now final. We get the Cowgirls again @Dallas.

[trwi7]

Are you sure? I think we get Dallas at home and go to Tampa again.

[Kerb Hohl]

Are you sure? I think we get Dallas at home and go to Tampa again.

I could be wrong...why do you think that?

I figured we'd be @ Dallas because our NFC East Place opponent was a home game this year so we rotate to away next year.

Now that I think of it...we had Carolina at home last time we played a place game vs. the NFC South so I guess that could rotate it to away also?

[Captain Erv]

vs Dallas, at Tampa

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/36810619.html

[trwi7]

Boom! I was right.