People predicting GB to win 10+ games are going to be wrong, IMO. Winning 10-12 games after winning 6 the previous season is going to be extremely tough, especially since the whole defensive scheme is different. I understand Raji is a stud, but going from a 4-3 to a 3-4 and getting an immediate upgrade isn't going to happen. Next year? That isn't even certain, either.

NIUSox,

 

Is Jay hitting that girl up from behind in your sig?

 

Edited September 8, 200916 yr by NIUSox

Green Bay winning 10-12 games after winning 6 the previous season is going to be extremely tough

 

Not extremely tough, by any means. First 11 games:

 

Chicago

Cincinnati

At St. Louis

At Minnesota

Detroit

At Cleveland

Minnesota

At Tampa Bay

Dallas

San Francisco

At Detroit

 

If 8-3 is worst-case, then they have to win two of their last five to finish with a 10-6 record:

 

Baltimore

At Chicago

At Pittsburgh

Seattle

At Arizona

 

Tough stretch, but I can't see the Packers losing four of their last five.

 

There's no question that the Bears, Vikings, and Packers have lucked out this year with 8 games against the NFC West, Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Detroit. I see the big three winning 10 or 11 games a piece, with one of 'em getting the shaft in the tiebreaker department.

People predicting GB to win 10+ games are going to be wrong, IMO. Winning 10-12 games after winning 6 the previous season is going to be extremely tough,

See 2008 Miami Dolphins

People predicting GB to win 10+ games are going to be wrong, IMO. Winning 10-12 games after winning 6 the previous season is going to be extremely tough, especially since the whole defensive scheme is different. I understand Raji is a stud, but going from a 4-3 to a 3-4 and getting an immediate upgrade isn't going to happen. Next year? That isn't even certain, either.

Why is it going to be hard for them to convert to a 3-4? They have a solid DT in Raji as you stated, Capers has a history of 1 year conversions from 4-3 to 3-4 and they have a number of very solid LB's.

 

If that is your line of thought then I suppose the same could be said for the Bears' O. They just upgraded QB with Cutler. That means they probably won't be good on O this year or next year.

See 2008 Miami Dolphins

Yeah, and WR's in their first year are awesome because Marques Colston was awesome in his first year.

 

No.

 

Why is it going to be hard for them to convert to a 3-4? They have a solid DT in Raji as you stated, Capers has a history of 1 year conversions from 4-3 to 3-4 and they have a number of very solid LB's.

 

If that is your line of thought then I suppose the same could be said for the Bears' O. They just upgraded QB with Cutler. That means they probably won't be good on O this year or next year.

First off, I love BJ Raji. But he's only good at the initial point of attack. He does his job as a run stopping DT but he isn't very mobile at all. You do have a point on Capers, but maybe the other teams had the personel to make that switch easily. Now, Aaron Kampman isn't going to be able to stick his hand in the ground anymore as a DE, and he's going to have to drop in coverage.

 

And no, that can't be said for the Bears. They didn't change schemes. This is Matt Forte's team still.

Edited September 10, 200916 yr by whitesoxbrian

People predicting GB to win 10+ games are going to be wrong, IMO. Winning 10-12 games after winning 6 the previous season is going to be extremely tough, especially since the whole defensive scheme is different. I understand Raji is a stud, but going from a 4-3 to a 3-4 and getting an immediate upgrade isn't going to happen. Next year? That isn't even certain, either.

 

they lost something like 7 games by a touchdown or less. They were extremely unlucky to get the record they did, but they perhaps lucked out simply because they landed Raji.

they lost something like 7 games by a touchdown or less. They were extremely unlucky to get the record they did, but they perhaps lucked out simply because they landed Raji.

And the main reason was the almighty Aaron Rodgers. His QB rating was 13 points less in the 2nd half then in the 1st half. Also, his QB rating was below 70 in the last 2 minutes of halves. That isn't unlucky; it's just not being good in crunch time (in the clutch, if you will).

And the main reason was the almighty Aaron Rodgers. His QB rating was 13 points less in the 2nd half then in the 1st half. Also, his QB rating was below 70 in the last 2 minutes of halves. That isn't unlucky; it's just not being good in crunch time (in the clutch, if you will).

 

It was also his first full year of starting. He deserves a little bit of slack.

It was also his first full year of starting. He deserves a little bit of slack.

I could argue that the pressure will be even higher this year. I just don't get how people think a 4 win turn-around is going to happen.

I just don't get how people think a 4 win turn-around is going to happen.

 

Wow, you're about as thick-headed as they come if this thread is any indication.

Borderline...keep it civil please.

I could argue that the pressure will be even higher this year. I just don't get how people think a 4 win turn-around is going to happen.

They won 4 games in 2005, 8 in 2006. That's a 4 game turn around. They won 8 games in 2006 and 13 games in 2007. That's a 5 game turnaround.

 

Both examples within the last 4 years just using the Packers. It isn't unprecedented. Actually, parity is pretty damn common in the NFL recently. What is so hard to "get"?

Borderline...keep it civil please.

 

I might suggest that those Green Bay Packers fans here might go join a Packers forum and feel giddy about your chances this upcoming season.

 

Most people here are from the Chicagoland area and thus Bears fans o_O

I might suggest that those Green Bay Packers fans here might go join a Packers forum and feel giddy about your chances this upcoming season.

 

Most people here are from the Chicagoland area and thus Bears fans o_O

 

I'm a Bears fan. Thank god I'm not a complete and utter meathead, though.

And the main reason was the almighty Aaron Rodgers. His QB rating was 13 points less in the 2nd half then in the 1st half. Also, his QB rating was below 70 in the last 2 minutes of halves. That isn't unlucky; it's just not being good in crunch time (in the clutch, if you will).

Now I'm not looking to argue and yes, Rodgers was horrific in the final minutes of games last year. Here's an interesting take on Cutler this year, and no I'm not saying he will bust.

 

http://www.docsports.com/2009/jay-cutler-bust-065.html

Rodgers was horrific in the final minutes of games last year.

 

Who cares? Aaron Rodgers was essentially a rookie last year.

 

Who looks at close-and-late splits for a first-year QB and then starts making definitive assessments based on such crap?

 

I'm gonna print out the stat-sheet and wipe my ass with it.

Who cares? Aaron Rodgers was essentially a rookie last year.

 

Who looks at close-and-late splits for a first-year QB and then starts making definitive assessments based on such crap?

 

I'm gonna print out the stat-sheet and wipe my ass with it.

I'm a Packers fan, I know Rodgers had a great year and is essentially rookie. Just agreeing with whitesoxbrian that Rodgers poor fourth quarter play was the reason for the seven something games lost by 7 points or less. Important player injuries on the defense side of the ball hurt as well.

 

2009 is another year and I'm stoked because the schedule looks pretty favorable and the 3-4 scheme certainly didn't look all that bad in preseason games.

Edited September 10, 200916 yr by ChWRoCk2

Just agreeing with whitesoxbrian that Rodgers poor fourth quarter play was the reason for the seven something games lost by 7 poitns or less.

 

It's a team game, though. You can't put that entire load on Rodgers.

 

Okay, saw your edit. Their defense and and rushing attack left something to be desired in '08.

 

Rodgers was brilliant, though. You couldn't have expected more from a first-year QB.

It was also his first full year of starting. He deserves a little bit of slack.

 

I could argue that the pressure will be even higher this year.

 

Here's another thing that I meant to respond to, but I think that my head was getting ready to explode at the time, so I didn't address it.

 

The pressure is gonna be even higher this year, huh? Higher than when he had to replace one of the greatest QBs in NFL history?

 

All I ask is that you think these things through, chief.

I might suggest that those Green Bay Packers fans here might go join a Packers forum and feel giddy about your chances this upcoming season.

 

Most people here are from the Chicagoland area and thus Bears fans o_O

 

what's your point?

 

I'm a Bills fan anyway. I just like to be objective in any analysis I make. Just because the Packers are a rival doesn't mean that someone can't say that they think they could be a pretty damn good team this year. The Vikings could too, old man river at QB or not. The Bears could be pretty damn good too, even on offense, the mediocre WR corps be damned too.

 

The Lions are going to be awful though.

what's your point?

 

He doesn't really seem to have one.

 

Just massive fail all around.

Whatever,f*** the Packers.

 

Do you think you'll get brownie points for talking up the Packers as a supposed Bears fan?

 

You do realize the Bears have beaten them 7 of the last 10 times,right?

 

I ain't buying that they are a really good team,my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

 

Massive fail if your Packers lose this Sunday:D