Preview: Vikings at Green Bay Packers
by Brandon on Nov 12, 2011 7:01 AM CST
in Green Bay Packers News
Email
PrintWhen I first saw that the Green Bay Packers were favored by 14 points over the Vikings, I couldn't believe it. The Vikings had an ugly road loss in Chicago a few weeks back, but otherwise they've been close in every game. With memories of Adrian Peterson slashing apart the Packer defense a couple weeks ago, and their narrow victory over the Vikings last season in Lambeau, I've been expecting this to be a tough game. On the other hand, I can see how the Packers might cruise to a 14 point victory.
While I don't think the Packers can do anything to stop Peterson except keep the ball out of his hands, Christian Ponder didn't have a great game against the Packers in their previous meeting (51.1 QBR). His rating was about the same the following week, and it could fall lower on Monday night. He may feel comfortable in the cold, but every QB isn't as accurate in it. They'll be hard pressed to surpass the 27 points they scored in their last meeting.
On the other hand, Aaron Rodgers loses some accuracy in the cold too. But he's so accurate to begin with that it shouldn't make a big difference. The Vikings are happy to get CB Antoine Winfield back, but he's not a cure-all either for a struggling secondary. According to Football Outsiders, the Vikings pass defense is ranked lower than either the Saints or Rams, and Rodgers torched both of those teams at home. RB James Starks also proved at their end of their last meeting that he and the offensive line can run against the Vikings when they need to.
Still I think this game will be closer than some expect. Packers 31, Vikings 21.
50 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm going to go out on limb here
and predict something no one else will. Vikings win 2-0.
"Winning isn't everything but losing is nothing" - Ace Bricka coach of the Galaxy Aces
You're trying too hard
"IF CARDS CAN SIGN SUPPAN THEY CAN GIVE ME A HOME"
by Buddhasillegitimatechild38 on Nov 12, 2011 10:00 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
That just what I want to happen
my actual prediction is 34-30 Packers.
"Winning isn't everything but losing is nothing" - Ace Bricka coach of the Galaxy Aces
I don't know what would be more impressive in that
Shutting out the Packers or the Packers defense absolutely taking apart another team like that.
by PackApologist on Nov 12, 2011 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
You know PA,
every time I see your miniaturized profile pic in the comments I think it’s the Rock Biter from The Neverending Story.
"If only a face could talk" -- John Madden
Thanks, I don't know exactly how to interpret that, so I'll just stick with thanks.
by PackApologist on Nov 12, 2011 12:34 PM CST up reply actions
Nothing more than an observation :)
I like that movie, for what it’s worth.
"If only a face could talk" -- John Madden
EFF YEAH NEVER ENDING STORY!
That dog just won't hunt.
by Bush League All Star on Nov 12, 2011 8:08 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I find creatures in children's stories terrifying....
it always amazes me how kids are afraid of the stupidest things…. and yet kid’s movies/shows have these horrifying creatures that appear to be on crack at all times and they love it.
In Every Climb and Place....
by PhoenicianPakFan on Nov 12, 2011 10:29 PM CST up reply actions
shame on you for using QBR in an article. SHAME!
when life gives you melons, you might be dyslexic...
by sheehan on Nov 12, 2011 12:23 PM CST reply actions 4 recs
hehe
Yeah, I thought the same thing. I don’t trust the QBR. It seems subjective to me, with the way it gives added weight to more important plays. I mean, that sounds fine, but how do you come up with a scientific definition of “important”?
by Curly Lambeau on Nov 12, 2011 12:30 PM CST up reply actions
It seems to me that,
by creating manufacturing the QBR, ESPN was trying to say that the NFL’s Passer Rating isn’t good enough.
But, the PR is good enough; it encompasses four (count ’em, 4) passing efficiency standards that make for as objective of a way of determining a passing champion as there can be.
Meanwhile, there is so much involved in QBing that is immeasurable that any QBR, including ESPN’s, is only so much
Bottom line is this:
QBR is a sensationalist, made-for-TV stat that was manufactured as much to call attention to ESPN for creating it (thereby generating more money for ESPN), as for any other reason; more that than for any legitimate, sports-reporting reason.
I cannot understand why Brandon, who I respect greatly, would continue to cite it, unless for advertisement contractual obligations that I am not aware of.
So, as long as he does cite it, I will continue to do a mental thing with it that is the equivelant of that blur that they use on nakedness on TV. :)
"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."
"It's a great day to be great, baby!"
Skol is a four-letter word.
The Munsters of the Midway still suck!
by NorthStarr on Nov 12, 2011 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Not sold on QBR yet...
But one thing I do like is that it TRIES to give more credit for plays that happen w/ the game on the line than it does just stats. For example, if a QB (say Rodgers) runs for a 1st down on 3rd and 7 w/ 2 min left in the game w/ the scored 24-21 rates higher than a passing 1st down in the passing 1st down on 2nd and 2 in the 1st qtr, w/ the score 17-0 Packers. It actually tries to weight the play in the overall importance of the game. I don’t know how much/well it does so, but it does try to acct for meaningful plays vs plays that mean nothing in the grand scheme.
Overall trying to weight plays like that is very difficult, but at least QBR tries to acct for plays other than just passing stats. PR doesn’t do anything in that regard at all!!
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
But that's the thing...
It doesn’t seem to work all that well. A few weeks ago Rodgers had one of his amazing games and Tebow entered the fourth quarter for a few series and because he brought them back and close to winning while Rodgers moved the ball at will while ahead, but they gave Tebow the higher rating. It’s garbage. There is no end all be all stat. That’s why, in my opinion, it’s better to look at PR in addition to other stats, than to use that crap.
by RaY210 on Nov 12, 2011 10:16 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
Yep, no end all be all stat. Exactly right.
Analysis and stats are always going to be necessary to compliment each other. There’s never going to be a stat where you can look at it and go “Ah, I see that this player is the best.” While it’s true that passer rating doesn’t tell the whole story, it’s also true that QBR is subject to bias depending on how the guy doing the rating feels about a particular QB or a particular game.
QBR attempts to fold analysis into the stat, by factoring in judgments that are at least partly subjective.
And, y’know, why would we want a stat that told the whole story?? Debating the merits of a players resume is half the fun. These modern stat geeks are dogs chasing cars; they wouldn’t know what to do if they caught one.
by Curly Lambeau on Nov 12, 2011 11:56 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah, in baseball there's WAR because it's much easier to break down as each AB is an individual occurance, and WAR cuts out the situational stats of baseball like RBI's to make it more objective
In football impact can be somewhat measurable especially for a QB but stats are already flawed when objective and you are always a cog in the gear so multiple statistic are necessary, the worst part about QBR is that it tries to make things better and it makes them worse. How come if you throw a touchdown when you are down 17-14 in the fourth quarter you didn’t throw the TD earlier to be up 21-17 already. Score counts the same in any quarter and no matter how well your defense play. The situational stuff is the worst part of the stat. I like how they try to add in QB rushing but they give it too much weight and everything after that is a disaster. Seriously they eliminate YAC because apparently there is no value in leading a receiver, it’s stupid
"IF CARDS CAN SIGN SUPPAN THEY CAN GIVE ME A HOME"
by Buddhasillegitimatechild38 on Nov 13, 2011 8:25 AM CST via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
Isn't that the very definition of making plays w/ the game on the line?
Tebow entered the fourth quarter for a few series and because he brought them back and close to winning while .
I don’t like Tebow a bit, but w/ the game on the line, he made the plays to win! I know that doesn’t take into acccount that Rodgers was great throughout the game, but Tebow made plays when it counted instead of getting credit for a meaningless 1st qtr 3yd pass. Like I said, I’m not sold on it being an end all be all by anymeans, but the fact it wts plays that decide the game higher makes alot of sense Don’t you think?
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
Not really. Who says it's that play in the fourth quarter that decides the game?
What if Aaron Rodgers throws 3 TDs and puts the team in position to kick 2 more FGs in the first half while. In that situation, late game heroics likely wouldn’t be needed because he put the game away early.
Go Suns, Packers, Jays, and Huskers!
Read my thoughts on Creighton University athletics at Creightonian.com
I also edit things at Ridiculous Upside. Check it out.
by Omaha Sun on Nov 13, 2011 7:40 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Like I said if you would bother to read...
I know that doesn’t take into acccount that Rodgers was great throughout the game.
But lets face facts here a little. Most games in the NFL are decided by 7 or fewer points, so that being the case, it stands to reason that the game deciding plays are being made in the 4th qtr doesn’t it?!
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
Ah, the blur. It's what my mind does when Aikman and Buck are announcing.
Due to superstition I can’t turn them off, so they’re tuned out instead.
I already told you! I deal with the god damn receivers so the linebackers don’t have to! I have coverage skills; I’m good at covering people! Can’t you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?!
Why does everyone hate Buck, he's good and most announcers suck
Not everyone is Buck’s dad or Vin Scully but Buck is pretty decent and he’s certainly better than Thomas Brennamen and most of the other guys out there, I’d say today the only better announcer for football Al Micheals, and in baseball I know he shares a booth with mcCarver who is awful upon terrible upon bad upon awful but it’s not like McCarver and Buck are the same guy, and Buck is certainly better than Uecker, McGlaughlan, Marty Brennamen, or any other local announcer for anywhere I can think of
"IF CARDS CAN SIGN SUPPAN THEY CAN GIVE ME A HOME"
by Buddhasillegitimatechild38 on Nov 13, 2011 8:30 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Uecker is average and was funny in Major League
Buck is very good, he’s not as good as his Dad, but Jack is with Vin Scully as the two best play by plays ever by a wide margin. Joe is still very good. Very good>average. And Uecker doesn’t even have the fox truck making him look bad
"IF CARDS CAN SIGN SUPPAN THEY CAN GIVE ME A HOME"
by Buddhasillegitimatechild38 on Nov 13, 2011 3:16 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
I used to love
turning off the sound on MNF, and listening to Jack Buck and Hank Stram call the games on the radio!
And, before that, I used to love listening to Dan Patrick’s dad, Van, do the radio broadcasts.
Another case of the son not being as good as the legendary dad.
Of course, there was no three-second delay on the radio in those days.
And, in the case of Van Patrick, we didn’t get the games live on TV here, yet, then. :)
"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."
"It's a great day to be great, baby!"
Skol is a four-letter word.
Oh man, Hank Stram had to be great on that!
In Every Climb and Place....
by PhoenicianPakFan on Nov 14, 2011 12:10 AM CST up reply actions
Matriculating
for three hours a week.
"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."
"It's a great day to be great, baby!"
Skol is a four-letter word.
Uecker is great
I don’t even much care for baseball, but I love listening to him on the radio. I think your bias is showing.
13.
Grossman: Sup, you insulin needing bitch! The sex cannon has arrived! Now get the hell out of my locker room, you chinless mother fucker!
I do like him as an announcer...
even though I never watch the Brewers
In Every Climb and Place....
by PhoenicianPakFan on Nov 14, 2011 3:04 AM CST up reply actions
also, since when does Rodgers lose accuracy in the cold?
remember last December against the Giants? or the year before against Pittsburgh? Or the playoffs against Philly?
when life gives you melons, you might be dyslexic...
by sheehan on Nov 12, 2011 12:25 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
thats just assuming
That Rodgers is human which we all know he is not.
by gunslinger on Nov 12, 2011 1:16 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Don't know about cold...
The Pitts game was in Dec, and so was the NYG game last year. So cold maybe not so much, the question is the wind in the Dec games more than the actual temp. Looked briefly (not able to find), but I would be far more interested in the winds during those games, than the actual temp. The temp shouldn’t bother nearly as much as the wind speeds. That has alot more to do w/ how QB’s perform than does just the temp. If they were in the 20’s or 30’s that doesn’t bother the passing game NEARLY as much as playing in 25+ mph winds!
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
by Strohman on Nov 12, 2011 6:06 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Cold weather affecting the passing game is typically BS
Completely agree with you. Every so-called NFL analyst will tell you in the next 2 months how you need to have a running game when the weather turns cold. It is one of the biggest myths that is perpetuated year after year. The last time this statement had relevance was about 15-20 years ago.Throwing the ball in cold weather has become commonplace. Just look at the world champion GB Packers last year. There was never an effort to throw the ball less no matter what the thermometer read. Cold weather does not affect QB play unless a QB somehow gets intimidated by it in his head. I have seen some warm weather QBs have difficulty throwing in the cold, but that’s not an issue for Packer QBs. In his prime, Favre was a great cold-weather passer. Unfortunately, late in career (as he got old), he looked less and less comfortable in icy games.
Rogers throws with so much velocity that neither cold or, for the most part wind, has an effect on his throws. On a rare occasion a STRONG wind may hang up a deep throw once or twice a game. The receivers are used to catching Rogers hard throws in cold weather as well. I’ll get off my soapbox.
Packers 34 Vikings 20
by Icebowler on Nov 12, 2011 8:41 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Really?
Although that I agree that cold weather doesnt deter teams from passing anymore but to say that “cold weather does not affect QB play” is a lie. Cold weather affects everybody, no human is immune to its effects. Have you ever played quarterback in frigid temperatures? At least thrown a football in sub 30? It’s not as easy as it looks. For one, the ball is heavier when it’s colder not to mention the air is actually thicker AND colder weather causes the extremities to become numb which in turn causes less feeling. Add up all that together and trust me you have a HUGE affect on a quarterback. ( As well as the receiver) Nowadays quarterbacks are better prepared for cold weather (practicing with frozen footballs) but to say that cold weather doesn’t have any effect has no merit. Next time it snows, go outback and throw the ball around for an hour and let me know how easy it is.
"Football isn't a contact sport, it's a collision sport. Dancing is a contact sport."
Really cold definitely does have an affect.
Like you mentioned the wt of the ball and the feelings in your hands suffer, especially when you get down to single digits or below. Games in the 20’s aren’t too difficult, but single digits w/ winds or sub-zero temps have a definite affect on throwing the ball. Even w/ hand warmers the ball just doesn’t fly very well, almost like trying to throw a rock.
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
well, Ponder makes me a little nervous.
If he plays really well, they might start to believe and then make a game of it. Otherwise… They play us tough at the Metrodome, but they’ll fold like a tent at Lambeau.
It’d be nice to see some honest-to-goodness garbage time. With our defense playing so crappy, we’ve never really put any games out of reach so far. I’d be very happy to see it get to where we’ve got Flynn in there with the JVs.
Didn't we put the Broncos game out of reach?
"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."
"It's a great day to be great, baby!"
Skol is a four-letter word.
The Munsters of the Midway still suck!
Question
He grew up in Texas and played at Florida St.
My question, has he ever played in a game with temps below 40?
It won’t be freezing, but may be pretty different for him.
probably not
The only game that could possibly have temps like that was 20Nov10 @ Maryland.
13.
Grossman: Sup, you insulin needing bitch! The sex cannon has arrived! Now get the hell out of my locker room, you chinless mother fucker!
40 degrees
Should NOT be much of a hinderance to QB play. Now if accompanied by 20mph wind, then absolutely, but just temp by itself doesn’t mean that much. IMO anything in the teens or above shouldn’t be a big deal, unless its accompanied by high wind speeds.
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
by Strohman on Nov 12, 2011 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Most of Ponder's success
came thanks to a blown coverage and converting third downs at an unsustainable rate. I don’t think that will happen again, but I do expect the Packers to pick him off a couple of times.
I'll be slightly surprised if the Packers defense only gives up 21 points
I am too drunk to taste this chicken.
by ThroughBeingCool on Nov 12, 2011 4:31 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I'll be slightly surprised if the Packers D gives up MORE than 21 pts...
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
by Strohman on Nov 12, 2011 6:10 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
AAAAHHHHHHHH
you guys HAVE been watching our D, ryt?
God Bless Our Troops............Especially Our Snipers!
by bigbill992001 on Nov 12, 2011 10:15 PM CST up reply actions
Just wondering...........
I’m in California so I don’t catch all the Packer news, I see Mike Neal may be back on Thanksgiving but has anyone heard when Morgan Burnett is expected to get the club off his hand??
I don’t think there’s been a time table set for it yet. I read something today that had McCarthy saying that it’ll continue to get smaller and smaller.
Fire Slocum
by packallday555 on Nov 12, 2011 9:16 PM CST up reply actions
Originally
The cast was only suppose to be on for 5 weeks but that was 7 weeks ago….
"Football isn't a contact sport, it's a collision sport. Dancing is a contact sport."
Huh?
Hasn’t it only been a month?
He broke it on October 13 from what I can tell, and it’s now November 13.
Go Suns, Packers, Jays, and Huskers!
Read my thoughts on Creighton University athletics at Creightonian.com
I also edit things at Ridiculous Upside. Check it out.
Sorry I forgot
I was living in the future…
"Football isn't a contact sport, it's a collision sport. Dancing is a contact sport."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
- Having finally landed, Kellen Winslow looks for a fresh start in Seattle
- Tim Tebow teased with chants of ‘Lolo!’ in Jets locker room
