Lead Up Thread: Week 1 at Philly

[shaolin34]

The Patriots won back to back Super Bowls about six years ago.

Your point? Did you read what I wrote? I said barely happens anymore.

I'm not trying to convince myself that the Packers are favorites. I think they are a top 5 NFL team and top 3 NFC team. Doesn't mean I think they will win the SB. But last year is irrelevant to me when deciding who I pick. It's the NFL, the least predictable sport there is.

How can you disagree with what Shianco is saying though? He's basically saying "We'll see. They have to prove it because they never have before.".

It just doesn't matter. It didn't matter when the Packers went from 8-8 to 13-3 and the NFCC, and it didn't matter when the Packers went from 13-3 to 6-10 to 11-5. If anything, the current Packers are a prime example that last year is irrelevant.

Agreed. It just seems like things change more frequently in football over baseball/basketball. If you have a Manning or a Brady you're always going to be good, and it is possible to be a perennial contender if you've built your team correctly, but as a whole I think the previous year doesn't have as much of a bearing for the present as some people think in the NFL.

But Shianco is right, we'll just have to wait and see, and I look forward to it!

[ReasonablySober]

A lot of teams come out of no-where to win the whole thing, relatively speaking. The Giants and Saints recently, for example. Even more come out of no where to simply make the game. Cards, Seahawks, Panthers, etc.

[PackerBacker89]

Wow. Didn't think that quote would start a page and a half debate . I'm not really upset with what Shiancoe said, he does have a point, it's just funny that it's this big thing with people hyping the Packers but I hope he didn't forget they were doing the same exact thing for the Vikings before Rice went down.

[Kerb Hohl]

The Patriots won back to back Super Bowls about six years ago.

Your point? Did you read what I wrote? I said barely happens anymore.

I'm not trying to convince myself that the Packers are favorites. I think they are a top 5 NFL team and top 3 NFC team. Doesn't mean I think they will win the SB. But last year is irrelevant to me when deciding who I pick. It's the NFL, the least predictable sport there is.

How can you disagree with what Shianco is saying though? He's basically saying "We'll see. They have to prove it because they never have before.".

It just doesn't matter. It didn't matter when the Packers went from 8-8 to 13-3 and the NFCC, and it didn't matter when the Packers went from 13-3 to 6-10 to 11-5. If anything, the current Packers are a prime example that last year is irrelevant.

Agreed. It just seems like things change more frequently in football over baseball/basketball. If you have a Manning or a Brady you're always going to be good, and it is possible to be a perennial contender if you've built your team correctly, but as a whole I think the previous year doesn't have as much of a bearing for the present as some people think in the NFL.

But Shianco is right, we'll just have to wait and see, and I look forward to it!

4 things:

1. Higher parity (salary cap(until this year) with non-guaranteed contracts) than MLB or NBA. League is saturated enough with enough players where it is hard to gain that much of an advantage under the current rules.
2. Smaller playoffs to keep a dominant team that struggled from recovering in time for the playoffs and making a run.
3. More injuries.
4. Shorter season meaning higher variability. If the MLB played a 16 game season there is a chance the Yankees may not make the playoffs. Now, the winning %s are different for the MLB so that is apples and oranges, so you get what I'm saying.

These are the reasons things change so much over the years.

[turbo2k]

I don't get why there is so much hype about the Pack this year. Let's face it, in order for us to make the SB, we need unknown quantities to step up big time on the defense (and ST). Injuries are going to happen and guys like Shields and Bush are gonna see playing time. Then there is Al Harris and Woodson's health. There are a lot of questions on this team. I for one am not expecting them to make the SB (hoping tho). I do think it is possible, but they aren't my favorites to make it in the NFC.

[Kerb Hohl]

Most NFL teams that have been to or won the Super Bowl have had weaknesses in the past decade. It's hard to have an air-tight team anymore.

I honestly think Bush/Shields can play as mediocre as we would all expect and this team can do big things if the rest of the team progresses as it should.

There are holes, which makes this team not a lock by any means to go deep in the playoffs, but they EASILY have the potential to win it all.

[turbo2k]

I agree that no team is without holes, but I don't see many teams with as many holes on 1 side of the ball as we do. I just don't see this year as much different than last year (on defense). If we match up against a good/elite offense, we're gonna get torched again. I'm hopeful we will see some development in the pass rush area, and I think that Burnett is probably already an improvement over Bigby. But our backups are essentially the same, Harris and Woody are older. We will have an (undrafted) rookie nickel back until the 6th week at least. The only way we get to the SB is either numerous guys step up on D, or the O puts up record numbers.

[Kerb Hohl]

I'm going to go ahead and say our secondary is better than the 2007 Super Bowl champ Giants by a wide margin. Now, they had an unbelievable pass rush to cover that up while we only have a decent one, but we also have an unbelievable offense.

Here's my thing, we easily could have beaten Pittsburgh, Arizona, or Minnesota in the games we got torched.

Let's look at the Arizona one, we win that, who knows, we COULD have gone all the way. I'm not saying it was probable but it isn't like we were miles away from the Super Bowl.

It's one thing to call a Super Bowl after getting torched in 4 games and going 7-9. We went 11-5 and were inches from the 2nd round of the playoffs IN SPITE of those horrible performances.

As we argued on the page before things in the NFL are so up and down. I think we saw the worst we could possibly do against those teams and I don't think it is a stretch to say with some tweaks to the scheme and a big play or two, we hold those teams to just a little less. It's not a guarantee we're going to get torched for 40 or 50 against a HOF QB every time we face one.

[turbo2k]

I get what you are saying (although like you said the Giants at least had a pass rush, we on the other hand will likely not), plus we had padded our D stats against bad teams it seemed last year. I do think the Pack has a definate shot at it, but I don't get why EVERYONE these days are picking them. They are have no better shot IMO than DAL, NO, and possibly MIN.

[Ill-yasova]

(although like you said the Giants at least had a pass rush, we on the other hand will likely not), .

Last year Matthews started the year as a backup and still finished with 10 sacks. I would expect him to improve in his second year in the NFL. Jones is the real wildcard coming into this season. If he can step it up and get 8-10 sacks and Matthews continues to develop this defense will be fine up front.

[turbo2k]

(although like you said the Giants at least had a pass rush, we on the other hand will likely not), .

Last year Matthews started the year as a backup and still finished with 10 sacks. I would expect him to improve in his second year in the NFL. Jones is the real wildcard coming into this season. If he can step it up and get 8-10 sacks and Matthews continues to develop this defense will be fine up front.

Thats why I said 'unless guys step up on D'. I understand he could contribute, and if he does, then the pass rush helps aleviate some of the possible coverage issues. But he didn't do much last year. Obviously I expect Matthews to be good (esp. if someone on the other side can contribute). My whole point is the D has a bunch of 'wildcards'.... Jones, Neal, Raji, Shields, Burnett, Harris (health). I'm just not sold on this D unless unproven guys really step up more than expected. I expect the numbers as a whole to be slightly worse than last year. But if Jones provides some rushing, Woodson stays healthy and plays at a high level again, Shields is solid in Nickel, and Burnett shines, then we are looking at a special year. My point is that is a lot of ifs.

[PackerBacker89]

Is it really that hard to see why there would be hype? If Rodgers isn't a top 5 QB, he's on the verge and by the end of the year should most definitely be considered a top 5 QB. We have possibly the scariest offense in at least the NFC, outside of the Saints (who didn't look all that dynamic last night) and a defense that should be as good as last years, so probably top 10 or maybe top 5. It's hard to see all of that as anything but contenders? Alright then.

[ReasonablySober]

One thing to consider is the NFC is down one, possibly two, contenders.

Yes, the Packers were torched by MVP caliber QBs last season and one of those performances occured in the playoffs.

But Warner is retired. No way in hell do the Cards contend this season without him.

Another contender, Minnesota, might be out of it by November. They're missing key players and their first half schedule is brutal.

You remove two top flight offenses, maybe two of four in thw entire league that could hang with GB in a shootout, and the path to the SB gets markedly easier.

It's conceivable that the NFC playoff picture looks somethinf like

GB
NO
Dal
SF
NY
Car

That's a different story than last season when every team on the NFC side could light the scoreboard up.

My point ia this: our defense won't need to be great. I think the offense should be good enough to win shootouts. Not only that, but the chances of a shootout once they're in the playoffs may not be as high.

[turbo2k]

True, but don't count out MIN yet. If they can survive the first half, it looks pretty easy. But I think people are misreading my point. I don't think it's wrong to have some people especially Pack fans to have them as the favs out of the NFC, I just don't get why for example, all 7 panelists on NFL.com all have the Pack in it. I don't see them as clear cut favorites is all I am saying. I am on board that they are ONE of the favorites. Personally I have NO. I just get nervous when hype like this builds up, it almost never actually happens. They are just a trendy pick right now.

[jakecronus8]

The closer we get to Kickoff the more I'm getting the feeling this is gonna be a let down game. I just see celek and McCoy killing us with underneath routes and screens.