Brownies Lead Up - King to IR; Goodson off IR, pg 3.

[MickeyDavis]

Pack opens as 3.5 favorites. Browns could easily win this game. I have visions of Josh Gordon scoring a bunch of TD's.

[FAH1223]

With Capers, the Browns QB is going to pass for 300 yards.

Read on Twitter

Maybe we win if we follow this advice

Read on Twitter

[jakecronus8]

Stupid Philly can't do their jobs and beat Seattle. Just win and see if Rodgers' return is the catalyst for another magic carpet ride a la 2010

[FAH1223]

Stupid Philly can't do their jobs and beat Seattle. Just win and see if Rodgers' return is the catalyst for another magic carpet ride a la 2010

Our defense sucks

No 2010 comparison

[RRyder823]

Two points to make.

1: Theres been a lot of talk about how people want TT and MM gone and how they've been carried by Rodgers. Assuming we beat the Browns that'll mean the Packers have managed to go 3-4 with what can only be described as close to league worst QB. Regardless of who the wins are against 3 wins with a QB playing like Hundley in the NFL isn't anything to sneeze at and would seem to point torwards TT/MM knowing what they're doing. Not that They can't do better just pointing out that overcoming horrible QB play is no easy task. (Capers needs to go at this point though)

2: It's been pointed out how wide open the NFC looks so why are people not excited at the possibility of sneaking in? Yes we need to win out. Yes we need help. Yes the odds are against it. But if they get in with a healthy Rodgers and a running game and a defense that actually has started to force TOs they'd be pretty much everybodies dark horse pick.

I guess I'm just confused why it seems some would rather a narrative be proven versus the team winning. So assuming a win on Sunday does the narrative that this team is Rodgers and nothing else start to change at all for the team? Or is it unflinching?

(If we lose to the Browns though I'm jumping on the MM is gone bandwagon though)



Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

[HKPackFan]

If we win, I root for Ws and just try to get in, with Rodgers there is always a chance.

If we lose burn it down. Burn it all.

[Mags FTW]

Two points to make.

1: Theres been a lot of talk about how people want TT and MM gone and how they've been carried by Rodgers. Assuming we beat the Browns that'll mean the Packers have managed to go 3-4 with what can only be described as close to league worst QB. Regardless of who the wins are against 3 wins...

If they beat the Browns, the 3 teams they will have beaten would have a combined record of 7-30. I think it does matter who they play to get these wins. I mean, the Bears have won 2 games with Trubisky at QB.

[HKPackFan]

Two points to make.

1: Theres been a lot of talk about how people want TT and MM gone and how they've been carried by Rodgers. Assuming we beat the Browns that'll mean the Packers have managed to go 3-4 with what can only be described as close to league worst QB. Regardless of who the wins are against 3 wins...

If they beat the Browns, the 3 teams they will have beaten would have a combined record of 7-30. I think it does matter who they play to get these wins. I mean, the Bears have won 2 games with Trubisky at QB.

Agreed. I'm on the fire MM wagon, but if we are 7-6 we are basically kicking the can down the road 1 more week. A W against Carolina means running the table is a possibility and we could make some noise in the playoffs.

There are not a ton of opportunities at playoffs so if it's still a shot, go for it.

A Loss against Carolina, the season is probably over and plenty of time to piss on MM. I'm thinking this is the most likely scenario, but I'm ready to put on green and gold goggles and ignore the **** I see brewing.

[raysbookclub]

Two points to make.

1: Theres been a lot of talk about how people want TT and MM gone and how they've been carried by Rodgers. Assuming we beat the Browns that'll mean the Packers have managed to go 3-4 with what can only be described as close to league worst QB. Regardless of who the wins are against 3 wins...

If they beat the Browns, the 3 teams they will have beaten would have a combined record of 7-30. I think it does matter who they play to get these wins. I mean, the Bears have won 2 games with Trubisky at QB.

I agree that the Packers haven't looked great during this stretch, but you could also make the matching argument that two of their four losses have been against top teams in the league: New Orleans and Pittsburgh. Baltimore has played well over the past month, too.

[humanrefutation]

Two points to make.

1: Theres been a lot of talk about how people want TT and MM gone and how they've been carried by Rodgers. Assuming we beat the Browns that'll mean the Packers have managed to go 3-4 with what can only be described as close to league worst QB. Regardless of who the wins are against 3 wins with a QB playing like Hundley in the NFL isn't anything to sneeze at and would seem to point torwards TT/MM knowing what they're doing. Not that They can't do better just pointing out that overcoming horrible QB play is no easy task. (Capers needs to go at this point though)

2: It's been pointed out how wide open the NFC looks so why are people not excited at the possibility of sneaking in? Yes we need to win out. Yes we need help. Yes the odds are against it. But if they get in with a healthy Rodgers and a running game and a defense that actually has started to force TOs they'd be pretty much everybodies dark horse pick.

I guess I'm just confused why it seems some would rather a narrative be proven versus the team winning. So assuming a win on Sunday does the narrative that this team is Rodgers and nothing else start to change at all for the team? Or is it unflinching?

(If we lose to the Browns though I'm jumping on the MM is gone bandwagon though)



Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

I think this can go in the leadup thread. I've merged the threads. Carry on.

[RRyder823]

Two points to make.

1: Theres been a lot of talk about how people want TT and MM gone and how they've been carried by Rodgers. Assuming we beat the Browns that'll mean the Packers have managed to go 3-4 with what can only be described as close to league worst QB. Regardless of who the wins are against 3 wins...

If they beat the Browns, the 3 teams they will have beaten would have a combined record of 7-30. I think it does matter who they play to get these wins. I mean, the Bears have won 2 games with Trubisky at QB.

I mean the narrative was/is that that this is a 4-12 team without good/great QB play so how does going 3-4 with strait up bad QB play not change that regardless of the quality of the wins?

(Also if that's a factor then the fact that 2 of the losses gave been against top notch teams and a 3rd against another borderline P.O. team should be factored in also)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

[humanrefutation]

Two points to make.

1: Theres been a lot of talk about how people want TT and MM gone and how they've been carried by Rodgers. Assuming we beat the Browns that'll mean the Packers have managed to go 3-4 with what can only be described as close to league worst QB. Regardless of who the wins are against 3 wins...

If they beat the Browns, the 3 teams they will have beaten would have a combined record of 7-30. I think it does matter who they play to get these wins. I mean, the Bears have won 2 games with Trubisky at QB.

I mean the narrative was/is that that this is a 4-12 team without good/great QB play so how does going 3-4 with strait up bad QB play not change that regardless of the quality of the wins?

(Also if that's a factor then the fact that 2 of the losses gave been against top notch teams and a 3rd against another borderline P.O. team should be factored in also)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

The 4 wins in that hypothetical 4-12 team would be against 4 crappy teams. The Bears (possibly twice), the Bucs at home, and the Brownies.

Look at our schedule. Who else are we beating with Hundley? http://www.packers.com/gameday/schedule.html

We nearly beat Pittsburgh. We had a shot against the Saints. But that's pretty much it, IMO.

[RRyder823]

If they beat the Browns, the 3 teams they will have beaten would have a combined record of 7-30. I think it does matter who they play to get these wins. I mean, the Bears have won 2 games with Trubisky at QB.

I mean the narrative was/is that that this is a 4-12 team without good/great QB play so how does going 3-4 with strait up bad QB play not change that regardless of the quality of the wins?

(Also if that's a factor then the fact that 2 of the losses gave been against top notch teams and a 3rd against another borderline P.O. team should be factored in also)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

The 4 wins in that hypothetical 4-12 team would be against 4 crappy teams. The Bears (possibly twice), the Bucs at home, and the Brownies.

Look at our schedule. Who else are we beating with Hundley? http://www.packers.com/gameday/schedule.html

We nearly beat Pittsburgh. We had a shot against the Saints. But that's pretty much it, IMO.

Those 4 wins in that scenario are also with average QB play. We don't have that. That's kinda my point.

People argued that if we only had an average QB,(something we don't have), we'd only win 4 games all year. Winning 3 out of 4 with bad QB play actively works against that narrative

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

[humanrefutation]

I mean the narrative was/is that that this is a 4-12 team without good/great QB play so how does going 3-4 with strait up bad QB play not change that regardless of the quality of the wins?

(Also if that's a factor then the fact that 2 of the losses gave been against top notch teams and a 3rd against another borderline P.O. team should be factored in also)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

The 4 wins in that hypothetical 4-12 team would be against 4 crappy teams. The Bears (possibly twice), the Bucs at home, and the Brownies.

Look at our schedule. Who else are we beating with Hundley? http://www.packers.com/gameday/schedule.html

We nearly beat Pittsburgh. We had a shot against the Saints. But that's pretty much it, IMO.

Those 4 wins in that scenario are also with average QB play. We don't have that. That's kinda my point.

People argued that if we only had an average QB we'd only win 4 games all year. Winning 3 out of 4 with bad QB play actively works against that narrative

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

Not necessarily, though. You're making the flawed assumption that we would have won more than 3-4 games just because they might win 3 out of 4 during the weakest portion of their schedule with below-average QB play. Tell me what other games they would win, even with average QB play?

[RRyder823]

The 4 wins in that hypothetical 4-12 team would be against 4 crappy teams. The Bears (possibly twice), the Bucs at home, and the Brownies.

Look at our schedule. Who else are we beating with Hundley? http://www.packers.com/gameday/schedule.html

We nearly beat Pittsburgh. We had a shot against the Saints. But that's pretty much it, IMO.

Those 4 wins in that scenario are also with average QB play. We don't have that. That's kinda my point.

People argued that if we only had an average QB we'd only win 4 games all year. Winning 3 out of 4 with bad QB play actively works against that narrative

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

Not necessarily, though. You're making the flawed assumption that we would have won more than 3-4 games just because they might win 3 out of 4 during the weakest portion of their schedule with below-average QB play. Tell me what other games they would win, even with average QB play?

Id say the Saints and the Ravens (that was a one score game up until the D strait up ran out of gas due to a horrible offense) with even just average play. That would put us at 5-2 in this stretch. As for the previous part of the season the Seattle game comes to mind as Rodgers was pretty average that game and of course the Bears are in that stretch as well so there's 7 wins with simply average QB play all season.

(Was tempted to add on the Bengals game as I think Rodgers was incredibly average that game too but he went back into God mode at the end so I left it out)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

[humanrefutation]

Those 4 wins in that scenario are also with average QB play. We don't have that. That's kinda my point.

People argued that if we only had an average QB we'd only win 4 games all year. Winning 3 out of 4 with bad QB play actively works against that narrative

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

Not necessarily, though. You're making the flawed assumption that we would have won more than 3-4 games just because they might win 3 out of 4 during the weakest portion of their schedule with below-average QB play. Tell me what other games they would win, even with average QB play?

Id say the Saints and the Ravens (that was a one score game up until the D strait up ran out of gas due to a horrible offense) with even just average play. That would put us at 5-2 in this stretch. As for the previous part of the season the Seattle game comes to mind as Rodgers was pretty average that game and of course the Bears are in that stretch as well so there's 7 wins with simply average QB play all season.

(Was tempted to add on the Bengals game as I think Rodgers was incredibly average that game too but he went back into God mode at the end so I left it out)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

Eh, I think that's really optimistic, and potentially based on different definitions of "average QB." You put Tyrod Taylor in there or someone like him, we might beat the Saints (who were playing terribly in that first half).

But besides that, you're assuming an "average QB" would have an "average" game every week. That when Aaron Rodgers has an "average" performance, that your "average QB" would also have an "average" performance when faced with the same circumstances. That's just not true, though. An "average QB" does not put up the same performance against a healthy Seattle D. An "average QB" doesn't all of a sudden put up points on a staunch Ravens defense (look at the game logs for QBs against that D this season).

Essentially, upgrading from Hundley to an "average QB" maybe adds a win. But we're still looking at 4-12/5-11. That doesn't really seem to have the narrative impact you're alleging it does.

[RRyder823]

Not necessarily, though. You're making the flawed assumption that we would have won more than 3-4 games just because they might win 3 out of 4 during the weakest portion of their schedule with below-average QB play. Tell me what other games they would win, even with average QB play?

Id say the Saints and the Ravens (that was a one score game up until the D strait up ran out of gas due to a horrible offense) with even just average play. That would put us at 5-2 in this stretch. As for the previous part of the season the Seattle game comes to mind as Rodgers was pretty average that game and of course the Bears are in that stretch as well so there's 7 wins with simply average QB play all season.

(Was tempted to add on the Bengals game as I think Rodgers was incredibly average that game too but he went back into God mode at the end so I left it out)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

Eh, I think that's really optimistic, and potentially based on different definitions of "average QB." You put Tyrod Taylor in there or someone like him, we might beat the Saints (who were playing terribly in that first half).

But besides that, you're assuming an "average QB" would have an "average" game every week. That when Aaron Rodgers has an "average" performance, that your "average QB" would also have an "average" performance when faced with the same circumstances. That's just not true, though. An "average QB" does not put up the same performance against a healthy Seattle D. An "average QB" doesn't all of a sudden put up points on a staunch Ravens defense (look at the game logs for QBs against that D this season).

Essentially, upgrading from Hundley to an "average QB" maybe adds a win. But we're still looking at 4-12/5-11. That doesn't really seem to have the narrative impact you're alleging it does.

Well id argue that even with the greatness of Rodgers he does in fact have average weeks and not just average for him.

I'd also argue the the difference from Hundley to an average QB is much greater then anyone is admitting too. Some outcomes will stay the same but the entire complection of others changes drastically.

Point being if your winning 4-5 games with one of the worst starting QBs in the league it tends to work against the narrative that they'd be a 4-5 win team with an average one due to just how important the position is

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

[humanrefutation]

Id say the Saints and the Ravens (that was a one score game up until the D strait up ran out of gas due to a horrible offense) with even just average play. That would put us at 5-2 in this stretch. As for the previous part of the season the Seattle game comes to mind as Rodgers was pretty average that game and of course the Bears are in that stretch as well so there's 7 wins with simply average QB play all season.

(Was tempted to add on the Bengals game as I think Rodgers was incredibly average that game too but he went back into God mode at the end so I left it out)

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

Eh, I think that's really optimistic, and potentially based on different definitions of "average QB." You put Tyrod Taylor in there or someone like him, we might beat the Saints (who were playing terribly in that first half).

But besides that, you're assuming an "average QB" would have an "average" game every week. That when Aaron Rodgers has an "average" performance, that your "average QB" would also have an "average" performance when faced with the same circumstances. That's just not true, though. An "average QB" does not put up the same performance against a healthy Seattle D. An "average QB" doesn't all of a sudden put up points on a staunch Ravens defense (look at the game logs for QBs against that D this season).

Essentially, upgrading from Hundley to an "average QB" maybe adds a win. But we're still looking at 4-12/5-11. That doesn't really seem to have the narrative impact you're alleging it does.

Well id argue that even with the greatness of Rodgers he does in fact have average weeks and not just average for him.

I'd also argue the the difference from Hundley to an average QB is much greater then anyone is admitting too. Some outcomes will stay the same but the entire complection of others changes drastically.

Point being if your winning 4-5 games with one of the worst starting QBs in the league it tends to work against the narrative that they'd be a 4-5 win team with an average one due to just how important the position is

Sent from my SM-G892A using RealGM mobile app

Eh, the evidence does not make your point especially persuasive, IMO, but whatevs.

I guess I'm wondering what the broader point is? That McCarthy and Thompson shouldn't be fired if they beat the Browns because Hundley went 3-4 with wins over the Browns, Bears, and Bucs?

[WeekapaugGroove]

With TT I think john dorsey being available could spur his retirement early. They have been rumored to love dorsey and if they want him this offseason is their chance to land him. I could see them hiring dorsey and TT sliding into a consulting type role for a year or two and work with his former pupil.


If they prefer wolf then I expect TT around 1 more year.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

[Ron Swanson]

The only thing that going 3-4 without Rodgers dispels is this hyperbolic notion that we'd be the Cleveland Browns, or some bottom-3 team if not for HoF QB play. Or that McCarthy is a bottom-tier coach. Which is something that any reasonable fan would have always laughed at. That doesn't mean that a staff change still wouldn't benefit this team in the long-run though...