Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

I'd rather play Green Bay. Here's why:


hepcat

Recommended Posts

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d82609ff6/GameDay-Giants-vs-Packers-highlights

 

I'm sure Gettleman remembers this game.  The Giants had a similar team to Carolina back in 2011.  If we erase the game the Packers beat the Joe Webb lead Vikings at home in the 2012 playoffs (seriously that doesn't count - almost as bad as playing Ryan Lindley and the Cardinals), they haven't won a home playoff game since 2007 against Seattle.  Lambeau used to be a place where you knew you were going to lose if you played there in the playoffs.  Now?  Not so bad.  Green Bay has shown to be very beatable there, losing home playoff games in 2013, 2011, and 2007.  Seattle?  Not so much.  

 

Despite matching up better on paper against Seattle, I think the Panthers chances are better against Green Bay.  The cold weather means those timed passing routes are harder to execute, and the Panthers physical defense will make those Packers receivers feel every catch.  I think this could be a huge upset in waiting.  Seattle is the harder opponent IMO.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually i think there's a good chance the panthers beat either of those teams. we've played both and both have beat us. it's very hard to beat any team twice in the same season. usually the losing team learns enough to get the next game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d82609ff6/GameDay-Giants-vs-Packers-highlights

I'm sure Gettleman remembers this game. The Giants had a similar team to Carolina back in 2011. If we erase the game the Packers beat the Joe Webb lead Vikings at home in the 2012 playoffs (seriously that doesn't count - almost as bad as playing Ryan Lindley and the Cardinals), they haven't won a home playoff game since 2007 against Seattle. Lambeau used to be a place where you knew you were going to lose if you played there in the playoffs. Now? Not so bad. Green Bay has shown to be very beatable there, losing home playoff games in 2013, 2011, and 2007. Seattle? Not so much.

Despite matching up better on paper against Seattle, I think the Panthers chances are better against Green Bay. The cold weather means those timed passing routes are harder to execute, and the Panthers physical defense will make those Packers receivers feel every catch. I think this could be a huge upset in waiting. Seattle is the harder opponent IMO.

The cold weather works to GBs advantage....you are claiming that will hurt them? They are conditioned to it.

Rodgers at home has been the most dominant play by a QB this season at any stadium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cold weather works to GBs advantage....you are claiming that will hurt them? They are conditioned to it.

Rodgers at home has been the most dominant play by a QB this season at any stadium

 

 

Still who has the better playoff record? GB at home or SEA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last year Rodgers had just come back from injury and they were playing a clearly better team, were only at home because of winning the North. There team this year is no comparison.

2007 is so long ago, it does not matter here at all.

Rodgers and Co. at home this year is a much better measure of what to expect, and they are scary as hell up there.

Seattle is much more beatable for our current personnel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, I don't buy into these trends spanning back multiple seasons.  Each season is unique.  All that matters is how they've been playing this year, and this year GB seems like a tougher team to beat.  Against Seattle our strengths match up well and it'll be a close game that comes down to the fewest mistakes.  GB's strengths exploit our weaknesses and vice versa.  A game that is more difficult to plan for and more prone to slipping out of control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah and I am doubtful he can offer that consistently. I don’t have many years left at my age and in my view we have wasted two and this whole exercise with him was always a three year minimum.  I am out on that with a guy I don’t believe in, and never believed in, it has sucked. To me it is a costly detour off the right track. Years.    But I am not so rigid that I can’t see excellence. He needs to display it though, consistently before I change my outlook.  
    • No, when I said rage, I meant rage, which only applies to certain fans on this board. Your timeline of trying to assess whether he is the future or not is really tied to the discussions surrounding his second contract. If this team is going to commit to some monster contract while he has shown nothing but glimpses of brilliance would be deservedly worrisome, so the clock is genuinely ticking for him to settle into something resembling his final form. Perhaps a best case scenario is that he plays well, the team succeeds, but he does so with a more limited role that makes the rest of the league view him as a game manager, and his second contract value reflects that. Then he continues to improve and becomes a bargain comparatively while not handicapping the team around him, and we enter an era of consistent championship competitiveness that the fanbase has craved for decades and has never really experienced before. But that requires many, many things to go right and for Bryce himself to facilitate that if he ends up being the quarterback of the future.
    • Exactly. And the flame throwers as well, get location benefits from not going all out. But they have it in reserve.  Not sure how much Greg had but he was an artist.  There was a YouTube I came across last year or maybe even 2023 and I don’t how to even find now but it had two NFL QBs I want say one was Carr from the Raiders but I don’t really remember  The point of it is they stood side by side throwing identical distances to identical targets. Radar gun was used.  They threw the normal effort (not all out) and it was measured etc. Then they were asked to throw their ‘fastball’. They were missing and most often they were missing high. It demonstrated the same principle.    edit: and applying that to arm strength, give me the guy that doesn’t need max effort to have good velocity. The margins are so narrow with less velocity in tne NFL the defenders can Close on it and this is a league where they value down to the 100th of a second level. It is that tight 
×
×
  • Create New...