Finish the sentence: Packers win the Super Bowl if...

[HarveyWallbangers]

If you listen to some MN fans they think their defense is he second coming of the '85 Bears. They think we are in decline and they are a shoe-in for the NFCN. Last year it took a poor season by Rodgers and our offense for them to win the division and they had to win the last game of the year to do so. Bridgewater is jag and you have to wonder when Father Time will finally catch up with AP.

Their defense is good now, and had the potent to be very good. However, a good run game and defense with a weak passing offense wins the Super Bowl about once every 10 years nowadays. Minnesota has about an edge in overall talent (probably not as much as wist thinks), but I think it's close enough that Rodgers will be the great equalizer.

[Joemailman]

Hayward was the nickel back, his replacement (Rollins?) is unproven. Didn't one of the advanced stats sites have Hayward among the league leaders in some metric, QB rating against, or something like that?

McGinn actually gave Rollins a higher grade.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...366332901.html

CASEY HAYWARD: Played 88.1% of the downs, providing a steadying influence for the rookies and usually being where he was supposed to be. The Packers normally would re-sign him, but with all the young prospects at cornerback they're probably not going to make a legitimate offer. After allowing eight plays of 20 yards or more from 2012-'14, he gave up too many (nine) this year. Hayward isn't physical in the bump zone and is susceptible outside on take-off routes. He tied for third in tackles with 88, but also led the team in misses with 14. He failed to intercept a pass, and with only nine passes broken up in 1,048 snaps he was last in PBUs with one every 116.4. His ability to find the ball might have waned due to numerous hamstring injuries and a stress fracture in his foot. Grade: C-minus.

QUINTEN ROLLINS: It took until mid-season before Rollins gained full health and was able to move past Hyde in the nickel defense. Later, when Sam Shields missed 4 1/2 games, he played extensively at right cornerback. In all, he played 30% and offered promise of an outstanding future. He's a hitter, a ball-hawk and a rugged, effective blitzer. Of the seven cornerbacks, his rate of passes defensed (one every 35.7 snaps) and his rate of tackles (one every 9.9 snaps) both ranked No. 1. He dropped four interceptions, too. Grade: C.

[red]

...... not a single player gets hurt

cause that seems to be the excuse used every year when we underperform

[pbmax]

I misunderstood. I thought your lists were quantitative identifications of loses and gains, not a qualitative analysis.

Following your initial comment, if Lacy is listed as "hopefully" a gain, Neal and Hayward should be identified as "hopefully" not losses. Hayward was the nickel back, his replacement (Rollins?) is unproven. Didn't one of the advanced stats sites have Hayward among the league leaders in some metric, QB rating against, or something like that? About Neal I am undecided; however, he was the starter even in Perry's healthiest year so far. I liked how Perry played in the playoffs, but I'm not sure we can assume Neal won't be missed..

I think that was PFF and it was a head scratcher. He allowed a number of completions as he chased crossing routes across the middle. Not entirely his fault as the defense is designed in such a way to make that an effective counter, but he wasn't doing much other than tackling well on those.

[Joemailman]

...... not a single player gets hurt

cause that seems to be the excuse used every year when we underperform

I guess you're one of those who think the Packers have underperformed every year they don't win the Super Bowl. At any rate, I don't know of anyone on here who thinks injuries are the only reason the Packers didn't win it all last year. People have pointed to the play of Rogers, coaching changes that didn't work, Lacy out of shape, ILB play, etc. as well as injuries particularly at the WR position.

[pbmax]

I guess you're one of those who think the Packers have underperformed every year they don't win the Super Bowl. At any rate, I don't know of anyone on here who thinks injuries are the only reason the Packers didn't win it all last year. People have pointed to the play of Rogers, coaching changes that didn't work, Lacy out of shape, ILB play, etc. as well as injuries particularly at the WR position.

Red was in favor of Ed Donatell accepting blame for the Eagles playoff loss.

[Pugger]

Their defense is good now, and had the potent to be very good. However, a good run game and defense with a weak passing offense wins the Super Bowl about once every 10 years nowadays. Minnesota has about an edge in overall talent (probably not as much as wist thinks), but I think it's close enough that Rodgers will be the great equalizer.

If you look at raw numbers from the regular season last year -stats at nfl.com - their defense was only substantially better than ours when it came to scoring D. I think our offense is better than theirs and it isn't just Rodgers.

[Cheesehead Craig]

... if Tony Horton gets Eddy Lacy into shape for him to dominate and then takes over the conditioning of the entire team. There's no stopping us then.

[pbmax]

^ Perhaps. But there will be no stopping Tony Horton from trumpeting this achievement throughout the season. I can't wait for Bob Costas to sit down with him on Sunday Night Halftime.

[Upnorth]

...the 2015 defense and special teams show up with the 2014 offense. Unless MM screws up the last 15 minutes of the NFCCG again.

[3irty1]

...we're reasonably lucky with injuries and the defense improves.

Might sound crazy to look at the defense but I'm not convinced 2015 was all that representative of their ability. The defense seemed to improve last year but I think this is obfuscated by a greater league-wide trend in 2015 where rules or coaching innovations or the football gods just seemed to give NFL defenses the upper hand in general. Kind of the opposite of 2011 where a handful of guys all put up MVP-worthy numbers on offense. The 2015 Packers offense was good for the Packers but relative to the rest of the league it was nothing special. I do think there's reason to expect improvement.

On offense the 2015 level of futility and injury seems too unlikely to warrant much concern.

[run pMc]

(Don't entirely believe it, but I'll throw this out there for kicks...)

A healthy Rodgers' QB rating leads the league, and the defense leads the league in opposing QB rating. Hey, it's a passing league.

[Fritz]

I could buy that one.

[Clayish]

This thread made me make an account after being a lurker hahahah.

Some of you are WILDLY negative, it's hysterical.

[mraynrand]

This thread made me make an account after being a lurker hahahah.

Some of you are WILDLY negative, it's hysterical.

don't add insults to (Packer) injuries on your first post! Here at Packerrats we are always waiting for the other shoe to drop. You can be a beacon of anti-Bostickler benevolence.

[Pugger]

I think this negativity comes from our 2014 meltdown in Seattle and Rodgers lousy play - for him - last year. If AR returns to his MVP caliber play in 2016 we will be pretty tough to beat.

[Smidgeon]

This thread made me make an account after being a lurker hahahah.

Some of you are WILDLY negative, it's hysterical.

I already like you. I think you're going to fit right in.

[pbmax]

I thought we agreed to not talk about Seattle anymore?

[Pugger]

I thought we agreed to not talk about Seattle anymore?

We did?

[Clayish]

I already like you. I think you're going to fit right in.

Thank you, friend. There are certainly some characters on here.