Abbreviated Rooting Guide + Playoff Picture: 11/29

by rhys on Nov 29, 2009 11:23 AM CST Comment 18 comments

I'm going to make this brief, because dishingoutdimes' " The Playoff Hunt - Where We Stand After Turkey Day" kind of usurped me.

It was obviously a good thing that the Packers won, and also a good thing that the NY Giants lost.

Here are the NFC Wild Card standings as of now:

1. Green Bay Packers (7-4), (6-3 in conference)

2. Philadelphia Eagles (6-4), (5-2 in conference)

3. NY Giants (6-5), (4-3 in conference)

4. Atlanta Falcons (5-5), (4-4 in conference)

It'd be nice to see the Falcons and Eagles both lose this Sunday, creating a solid one-game cushion for the Packers to sit on. Think of it as Ravens/Steelers insurance.

I'm assuming the 8-3 Cowboys will run away with the NFC East title.

With that in mind...

1. The Falcons are at home against the Buccaneers @ 12 pm. central. Root for the Bucs. We can hope that the Falcons get the Packers treatment in this game, minus the 3-game surge directly following the dispiriting loss.

2. The Eagles are at home against the Redskins @ 12 pm central. Root for the Redskins. It's looking like the Eagles are going to be the Packers likely Wild Card companion, but, even so, a Eagles loss can only be good for the Packers playoff aspirations.

The Packers close the season with a big home game against the Ravens, a road game against the Bears, another road game against the Steelers, home for a spat against the Seahawks, and close out the season in Glendale against the Cardinals (who will hopefully be resting their starters).

Overall, I think 10-6 will probably clinch a wild card spot for the Packers (3-2 in final 5 games) and certainly 11-5 (4-1 in final 5) will do it.

Go Pack Go!

1 recs | Comment 18 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

We should root for the Jaguars

against the Niners. I’m not so much concerned that the Niner’s will catch us in the Wild Card race, as much as I want to make sure the Cards clinch the NFC west before they face us week 17.

Plus, I kinda like the Jaguars.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Nov 29, 2009 3:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Close, but no cigar for all 3 games (+ the one Jobe suggested). Oh well. None of them are fatal blows, and the Falcons could be without Michael Turner AND Matt Ryan for a significant amount of time.

Hope you’re all scouting the Ravens tonight.

88-74 - Giants Series Record: 28-18-5, 19-7 at home.

Adopted Giant: Daryl "Dealio" Maday - Not reassigned after all. Still a mediocre AA pitcher.

by rhys on Nov 29, 2009 9:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Bummer

Philly and Atlanta pulled out wins, though the Falcons took a literal beating (losing both Ryan and Turner during the game). Packers just have to keep winning.

by Brandon on Nov 29, 2009 10:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Cowboys are a long way from clinching NFC East

The Eagles are only a game behind, and the Cowboys Incredible Disappearing Offense means none of their final 5 are a gimmie. The division could come down to Week 17 Eagles @ Cowboys.

For the NFC West, Cards have the Vikings next week (likely loss), and the 49ers have the Seahawks (likely win). If so, circle Cards @ 49ers in two weeks. If the Cards win, it will give them some breathing room and a chance at the tie-breaker. If the 49ers win, they will be tied, and own the head-to-head tie breaker, which would likely mean the NFC West going down to the wire as well.

[Interestingly, if the Cardinals do win the NFC West, and the Packers clinch a wildcard spot, the Packers could very well be playing in Glendale two weeks in a row…]

I don’t think the Falcons (can’t win on the road) or Giants (cant win at all) are going to be a problem.

by DaveInTucson on Nov 30, 2009 1:21 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Good Points

“Incredible Disappearing Offense” LOL

I had been thinking the Cards had completely run away with that division, but they really haven’t. We can all hope they beat the Vikings and 49’ers to lock up that division title.

I’m pretty sure it’ll be Green Bay and Philly for the two wild card spots, unless either team has a monumental collapse.

88-74 - Giants Series Record: 28-18-5, 19-7 at home.

Adopted Giant: Daryl "Dealio" Maday - Not reassigned after all. Still a mediocre AA pitcher.

by rhys on Nov 30, 2009 8:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I kind of hope they don't, actually.

It’d be nice for the Cards to fail at season’s end and give the division to the Niners, making them a wildcard. ’Cisco only has Philly the week after they play for what will likely be the division as their only tough games. They have games @Seattle, against Detroit, and finish the year @St. Louis. Arizona has games left against against Minnesota, @SF, and against Green Bay also in addition to beating up the Lions and Rams.

I’m really not all that scared about the Cardinals, especially if Leinart is playing in place of Warner. We’ve already proved we can beat second-tier NFL squads at full strength like the Cowboys and Niners, and our offense can get going against Zona’s 24th ranked defense (29th against the pass, 14th against the run). I don’t fancy the idea of playing there two weeks in a row.

by vitaminx on Nov 30, 2009 3:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

About those Cards...

We can all hope they beat the Vikings and 49’ers to lock up that division title.

If they do that, then they could be playing for a first-round bye in Week 17.

Methinks that the Packers will just need to show up, ready to play.

The glass is more than half-full.

by NorthStarr on Dec 1, 2009 4:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I would love to see Philly smash Dallas at the end of the season again to knock them out of the playoffs.

by Charlie Kelly on Nov 30, 2009 11:50 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

Well that didn’t work out very well for us, now did it?!!

I can’t see the Falcons being too dangerous now that they were IDIOTS and played Turner in that game. What a ridiculously stupid move by their coaches. Good for the Packers I guess though, the Falcons minus Ryan and Turner is bad bad bad for them. The Giants…I can’t figure them out but they are NOT playing good football right now. They can’t run the ball and Manning is doing his usual end of season slide.

by TrevorR on Nov 30, 2009 10:03 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

End of season slide?

You mean like the one he had in 2007?

by vitaminx on Nov 30, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually yes…at the end of the season, even in 2007, they had a slide. Remember that Giants team BARELY made the playoffs. The finished the second half of the season 4-4 with wins over the Lions, Bears, Eagles, and Bills. So yes, to reaffirm, first half 6-2, second half 4-4. I know you were being sarcastic, but it failed.

They came in and managed to win 4 straight in the playoffs which was pretty amazing, but in the regular season which is what I was referring to, they tail off every year.

In 2008 they lost 3 of their last 4 after starting 11-1.
In 2006, they went 2-6 in their last 8 games after starting 6-2.

by TrevorR on Nov 30, 2009 3:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, you're still kind of wrong.

We’re talking about Eli Manning here, not the Giants (although I credit their turnaround in 2007 to the defense and how exceptional they played the rest of the way). The 6-2 record was very misleading as the six wins came against a cupcake schedule- the 9-7 Redskins, 8-8 Eagles, the 4-12 Jets, 4-12 Falcons, 5-11 Niners, 1-15 Dolphins before the bye, all of whom didn’t make the playoffs. At that point, Manning had 13 touchdowns and 9 interceptions. Afterwards, he had 10 touchdowns and 11 interceptions which would seem to help your argument except that 4 of those picks came in that debacle against Minnesota and the last game was against what we all thought was an unstoppable Patriots squad. His QB rating despite the worse TD-INT rating was at its best in December and peaked out in January. The defense for them played horrible after the bye, giving up 30+ to the Cowboys (the #1 seed in the NFC), the Vikings(8-8, narrowly missed the playoffs) and the Patriots (16-0, you know the story). It was hardly a “slide” for him that year, especially when you take into account what he did in the playoffs which clearly is the most important part when we’re talking about “end of the season.”

I suppose the difference here is that I’m defining season as “the whole NFL season” instead of just the regular season, i.e. no postseason. He had a 95.7 rating in the playoffs, with 6 TDs and 1 pick, and 854 yards in those 4 games, when it mattered the most. That counts for a lot.

by vitaminx on Nov 30, 2009 6:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That is the entire point.

My entire post referred to the season…not the POST season, but the season. I called it an end of season slide. The post season is a totally different animal. So I am still right on that one. Sure they made a great run in the post season that year, but NO one saw it coming. They played a great game to finish the season against NE but no one even saw THAT coming.

Regardless you are still referencing ONE season and trying to argue against his career. If anything 2007 proves to be a fluke season but I don’t even feel that way.

Lets look at his end of the SEASON…again the POST season is not the SEASON. Its after the season…its the playoffs:

Here is how he looked in December:
960 yards passing in 5 games (192 per game)
7 TD / 5 INTs (1.4/1 per game)

Compare that to the start of the season:
1076 yards (215 per game)
9 TDs/6 INTs (1.8/1.2 per game)

I don’t know how to compare QB Rating but if you look at his rating in the first 5 vs the last 5, its VERY different. If you take out the Patriots game you start seeing an even clearer picture of how poorly he was playing as he got 250, 4 TDs and 1 INT in that game which clearly tainted his numbers.

His numbers slide dramatically as the year goes on…in fact, he’s a very average QB most of the year. That 2007 playoff run made him a LOT of money that honestly he really hasn’t earned.

by TrevorR on Dec 1, 2009 10:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

His passer rating (not QB rating!) for the first five games (92 of 157 for 1076 yards, 9 TDs and 6 int) was 82.7;
for the last five (80 of 157 for 960 yds, 7 td and 5 int) was 71.6.

The glass is more than half-full.

by NorthStarr on Dec 5, 2009 7:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Regardless of what any other team does

I think the key games for the Packers are the next two weeks. If they can hold serve against the Ravens at home and beat the Bears in Chicago like they should, they then just need to beat Seattle at Lambeau which shouldn’t be a problem.

They just have to go 3-2 from here on out. The Steelers and Cardinals (depending on their predicament, if they need to win or not) will be the two toughest games IMO. If they beat the Ravens on Monday night, I will be back out of the pessimistic stage. With their opponents remaining schedules, if the Packers don’t make the playoffs then they flopped down the stretch big time and the MM & TT dislikers should get their wish.

by GGGamer on Nov 30, 2009 6:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

What is their wish?

Management change?

That is ridiculous; this is the youngest team in the NFL. We also happen to be the best defense in the NFL. We have the best young quarterback in the NFL. We have the best cornerback in the NFL. Many of these points are arguable, but this isn’t: the Packers are good team that will only get better next season.

What reasons can you have to call for a change in management?

Injuries on the O-line and in the secondary early on are the primary reasons we’ve had problems this season.

by StephanL on Dec 1, 2009 3:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

[clapping]
Exactly…there IS no argument. I am still not a huge McCarthy fan but the team is playing well right now. I’d like to see them bring in someone to call plays for him though…I think that would help the team a lot!

by TrevorR on Dec 1, 2009 10:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Why is it ridiculous?

If you know my thought process and everything I’ve posted on here to this point you should know that I am in no way a McCarthy hater, and I am critical of Thompson in some areas but I think he has done a lot of good things as well. I’m not the guy who comes on here and says Fire TT! Fire MM!

With that said, the reason they are the youngest team in the NFL again is because of Thompson. That isn’t an excuse. They will be around the youngest team in the NFL every single season Thompson is the GM because he fills out the back end of his roster with all draft picks, undrafted rookies, and other teams discarded younger players (Bush, Bell). He always takes youth over experience. The other reason youth isn’t an excuse is because the Packers starters are actually top half in the league in age. The Packers have a ton of vets on this club, the backups just bring the age way down (I think 22 years old is the avg. backup) like I mentioned will always be the case with Thompson.

The reason the Packers have the best defense in the NFL is because of a guy named Dom Capers, not McCarthy. Capers runs the defense and McCarthy runs the offense. The reason Capers has been given head coaching opportunities is because he runs his defenses so impressively. Thompson gets credit for giving Capers the players to be successful but McCarthy really has nothing to do with the #1 rated defense. Hence I said MM & TT dislikers, not Capers.

Rodgers is the best young QB in the NFL and I think playing behind Favre for a few seasons and McCarthy’s QB school have helped him tremendously. I think that is what McCarthy does best — develop young QB’s. I also think McCarthy is a great offensive mind based on the Packers offensive production every season but he has yet to show us if he’s a great head coach. How many big games have the Packers won in the past two seasons? They just beat their first team that was over .500 in forever, two weeks ago.

Woodson is great and that is credit to Thompson and Capers.

I just disagree with your assertion that the Packers will be better next season and it isn’t arguable. How do you know that? I really hope you’re right and I would love to see that, but playing the devil’s advocate; how do you know that? There are big problems on the offensive line (like two tackles who probably won’t be effective next season), an average running back where half the teams in the league have two good ones, and they need a CB unless Harris at the age of 35 makes a remarkably fast recovery.

I love what the Packers have done the last few weeks and I hope it continues, but if they don’t go at least 3-2 and get into the playoffs, there needs to be some change somewhere. I think they will go 4-1 or 3-2 and make the playoffs but if they fail that will just go to show that the Packers never win any big games under McCarthy. This next month will show a lot in regards to how far McCarthy has grown as a HC and if they play great down the stretch then there is no reason he should be let go.

In regards to Thompson, he needs to realize that the Packers are an impact player on both sides of the ball away from being a perennial contender for the Super Bowl. In Seattle, he and Bob Whitsitt built them up but it took the two of them leaving and Tim Ruskell coming in to put them over the top. Ruskell signed a bunch of free agents and he traded up to get Lofa Tatupa. Those moves took them to the Super Bowl. I have yet to hear one person say that Thompson doesn’t need to dabble more in free agency. Every analyst and former Packer players on the radio and so on say that he needs to take some chances. Everyone knows that you have to get players from more than one avenue to be successful. Has he figured that out yet?

So all I’m saying is wait until they make a run before you get so confident. The last two seasons the Packers lose to good teams and beat bad teams. This season they beat a good Cowboys team, but lost to a terrible Bucs team so they need to put together a string of games where they actually beat opponents with winning records.

by GGGamer on Dec 1, 2009 11:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs