Why the Packers should win the NFC North

[Patler]

A simplistic analysis of why the Packers should win the NFC North:

The Packers have scored 34 more points than the Bears, 51 more than the Vikings.
The Packers have given up 22 fewer points than the Bears, 25 fewer than the Vikings.
The Packers are +65 in point differential.
The Bears are +9
The Vikings are -11

As the number of games played increases, if the offensive and defensive trends continue, scoring more than Bears and Vikings while at the same time being scored on less than the Bears and Vikings should result in the Packers finishing with more wins than either the Bears or Vikings over the course of a full season.

By the way - the Lions have not yet been mathematically eliminated. Since they are 0-10, the fact they are not is an embarrassment to the NFC North.

[bobblehead]

So have the bears and vikes been patlerized??

Anyway if we beat the bears again and don't die against the lions we should absolutely win the division as we will own every tie breaker by the looks of it.

That being said if the bears punk us in soldier it gets murky. What would that put the bears record in division?? If it would make them 5-1 then they would own the first tie breaker and we would have to finish a game ahead. I know the division matchups aren't done yet, and I would just as soon win out and make it moot.

[Tarlam!]

So, my dear Patler, you are going out a a real limb here!

You are basically saying, by default, the 0-10 Lions cannot make it to 6-10, whilst you are hysterically predicting that one of the 3 remaining teams will most certainly win at least 2 more contests!!

I sneeze in your general direction!!

:D

[sheepshead]

Anyone think any of the quarterbacks or wide receivers from the Bears or Vikings could break into the Packers starting line up?

[Tony Oday]

Anyone think any of the quarterbacks or wide receivers from the Bears or Vikings could break into the Packers starting line up?

They would have a hard time making the practice squad

[sheepshead]

agreed

[Patler]

So, my dear Patler, you are going out a a real limb here!

You are basically saying, by default, the 0-10 Lions cannot make it to 6-10, whilst you are hysterically predicting that one of the 3 remaining teams will most certainly win at least 2 more contests!!

I know, its a bold prediction, but I am sticking with it! :lol:

[Gunakor]

Anyone think any of the quarterbacks or wide receivers from the Bears or Vikings could break into the Packers starting line up?

I don't think any of the QB's or WR's from the Bears or Vikings could even make our gameday roster.

A few might have found a home on our PS though.

[pbmax]

That's a mighty fine theory you have there, Patler. One might even call it Pythagorean! :lol:

[Patler]

That's a mighty fine theory you have there, Patler. One might even call it Pythagorean! :lol:

I prefer Patlagorean! :lol:

[Zool]

A simplistic analysis of why the Packers should win the NFC North:

The Packers have scored 34 more points than the Bears, 51 more than the Vikings.
The Packers have given up 22 fewer points than the Bears, 25 fewer than the Vikings.
The Packers are +65 in point differential.
The Bears are +9
The Vikings are -11

As the number of games played increases, if the offensive and defensive trends continue, scoring more than Bears and Vikings while at the same time being scored on less than the Bears and Vikings should result in the Packers finishing with more wins than either the Bears or Vikings over the course of a full season.

By the way - the Lions have not yet been mathematically eliminated. Since they are 0-10, the fact they are not is an embarrassment to the NFC North.

Since the Bears and Packers play each other one more time, wouldn't the Lions be mathematically out of it? One of those teams will get to 6 wins minimum and both are 3-1 in the division. The Lions max win total this year is 6 and they are 0-4 in the division right now.

[Patler]

A simplistic analysis of why the Packers should win the NFC North:

The Packers have scored 34 more points than the Bears, 51 more than the Vikings.
The Packers have given up 22 fewer points than the Bears, 25 fewer than the Vikings.
The Packers are +65 in point differential.
The Bears are +9
The Vikings are -11

As the number of games played increases, if the offensive and defensive trends continue, scoring more than Bears and Vikings while at the same time being scored on less than the Bears and Vikings should result in the Packers finishing with more wins than either the Bears or Vikings over the course of a full season.

By the way - the Lions have not yet been mathematically eliminated. Since they are 0-10, the fact they are not is an embarrassment to the NFC North.

Since the Bears and Packers play each other one more time, wouldn't the Lions be mathematically out of it? One of those teams will get to 6 wins minimum and both are 3-1 in the division. The Lions max win total this year is 6 and they are 0-4 in the division right now.

Ah, but you just as Donovan McNabb, have forgotten about the possibilities of ties. However, it does get confusing, because the Bears also play MN again. SO for neither the Packers or the Vikings to get to 6 wins, the Bears would have to tie both, making them 5-9-2.

If the Lions get to 6-10, they would beat the Packers, who could beat the Bears and none else, who could beat the Vikings and no one else, or the Vikings could beat the Bears, etc. etc. At any rate, I think it is possible for all four teams to get to 6-10. I have no idea what the tie breaker is in that situation.

[Zool]

Crap. I thought I had you.

[boiga]

Here's another good reason : Packers rank Fifth in the nation in DVOA from Football outsiders.

According to their metrics, we're a much better team than our record would indicate because of how closely we lost the games we lost.

They give us a 66% probability to get into the playoffs.


Also, Carolina is ranked 9th despite an 8-2 record because of the ease of their schedule thus far. So, we're well favored in every matchup that we'll face for the rest of the season.

This is raising my hopes for 5-1. Now if only we weren't 32nd in the league defending the run on second down :roll:

[Patler]

Here's another good reason : Packers rank Fifth in the nation in DVOA from Football outsiders.

According to their metrics, we're a much better team than our record would indicate because of how closely we lost the games we lost.

They give us a 66% probability to get into the playoffs.

Also, Carolina is ranked 9th despite an 8-2 record because of the ease of their schedule thus far. So, we're well favored in every matchup that we'll face for the rest of the season.

I'm telling you, it doesn't need to be that complicated! :lol:
All the Packer have to do is finish better than the Bears and Vikings. We score more than either of them. We get scored on less than either of them. We will win more than either of them.

[boiga]

I'm telling you, it doesn't need to be that complicated! :lol:
All the Packer have to do is finish better than the Bears and Vikings. We score more than either of them. We get scored on less than either of them. We will win more than either of them.

I know, I know. But greater confidence can be ascribed when separate models reach similar conclusions. I don't care if we win simply or complicatedly, as long as we're still playing in January.

Oh, and here's the link for this weeks DVOA : http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/week-11-dvoa-ratings-3

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Here's another good reason : Packers rank Fifth in the nation in DVOA from Football outsiders.

According to their metrics, we're a much better team than our record would indicate because of how closely we lost the games we lost.

They give us a 66% probability to get into the playoffs.


Also, Carolina is ranked 9th despite an 8-2 record because of the ease of their schedule thus far. So, we're well favored in every matchup that we'll face for the rest of the season.

This is raising my hopes for 5-1. Now if only we weren't 32nd in the league defending the run on second down :roll:

Carolina is vastly overrated IMO. Don't forget one of their losses was to the Queens, and the other was a blowout @ the hands of the Bucs.

I'm more worried about going in to New Orleans and winning then getting the 8-3 or 9-2 Panthers at our house.

[denverYooper]

Here's another good reason : Packers rank Fifth in the nation in DVOA from Football outsiders.

According to their metrics, we're a much better team than our record would indicate because of how closely we lost the games we lost.

They give us a 66% probability to get into the playoffs.

Also, Carolina is ranked 9th despite an 8-2 record because of the ease of their schedule thus far. So, we're well favored in every matchup that we'll face for the rest of the season.

I'm telling you, it doesn't need to be that complicated! :lol:
All the Packer have to do is finish better than the Bears and Vikings. We score more than either of them. We get scored on less than either of them. We will win more than either of them.

Saragin's analysis (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl08.htm) shows us 9th overall, but third in "pure points" based on score margins. Supposedly it's a better predictor than W/L.

[RashanGary]

Good point. It was getting a tad frustrating to hear the drama about how this team was sinking into obscurity for the next 20 years because we lost two tough road games against one great team and one that is great at home. It's nice to have reality brought back into the conversation.

The Packers are a good young team IMO, but I think they're going to have to solidify the DL and offensive LT if they want to take that next step.

[run pMc]

At this point in the season, I think it's fair to factor strength of remaining schedule in as well as PF & PA. Bedard posted some number on the JSO packers blog that showed MIN had the toughest schedule. Factor in Childress is the coach, the Williamses might be suspended, and you have to think they're least likely.

CHI has a gimpy Orton and surprisingly inconsistent D and ST...which used to be strengths. McCarthy had Crosby kick to Hester last week -- I wonder if he's turning into Dante Hall? CHI has a similar schedule to GB (having STL helps them out big time) so I think it will come down to Week 17.

GB has to win and not look over their shoulder. If they win 4 out of the next 6, they will be 9-7 and that will probably be enough for the NFCN title.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I figured the Pack would win the division as they are the bearers of light and truth while the rest of the division full of evil and bumbling.

[MadtownPacker]

I thought the Packers would win the division just based off the fact the other 3 team's jerseys/helmets look like shit.

[HarveyWallbangers]

GB has to win and not look over their shoulder. If they win 4 out of the next 6, they will be 9-7 and that will probably be enough for the NFCN title.

I think 9-7 (with victories over Chicago and Detroit to clinch the tiebreakers) wins the division. I think Green Bay wins 3 of their last 4 games. Thus, I think they must win 1 of their next 2 games to win the division, but they probably don't have to win both. You never know though. It would be nice to win this one. It will be tough. They probably won't be the favorite in either game.

[Fritz]

Here's another good reason : Packers rank Fifth in the nation in DVOA from Football outsiders.

According to their metrics, we're a much better team than our record would indicate because of how closely we lost the games we lost.

They give us a 66% probability to get into the playoffs.

Also, Carolina is ranked 9th despite an 8-2 record because of the ease of their schedule thus far. So, we're well favored in every matchup that we'll face for the rest of the season.

I'm telling you, it doesn't need to be that complicated! :lol:
All the Packer have to do is finish better than the Bears and Vikings. We score more than either of them. We get scored on less than either of them. We will win more than either of them.

Except, my dear Patler, the Packers have done this so far...and have the same record as those teams.

[Patler]

Except, my dear Patler, the Packers have done this so far...and have the same record as those teams.

I explained that in my original post starting this thread, in which I stated:


As the number of games played increases, if the offensive and defensive trends continue, scoring more than Bears and Vikings while at the same time being scored on less than the Bears and Vikings should result in the Packers finishing with more wins than either the Bears or Vikings over the course of a full season.

[Fritz]

Ah, but in your first post you used the word "should" while in the latter post you used the word "will."

Did I Patlerize Patler?

[Patler]

Ah, but in your first post you used the word "should" while in the latter post you used the word "will."

Did I Patlerize Patler?

No, "should" became "will" because I convinced myself with the strength of my argument! :lol:

[Fritz]

Patler, I'm thinking you ought to come up with some way to patent what you do. I "Patlerized" someone on another thread (who claims Jared Allen was "essentially a free agent") and I think this board - in fact, the world - could use a tool that might be called "The Patlerizer."

You could sell them on QVC!

[Patler]

Patler, I'm thinking you ought to come up with some way to patent what you do. I "Patlerized" someone on another thread (who claims Jared Allen was "essentially a free agent") and I think this board - in fact, the world - could use a tool that might be called "The Patlerizer."

You could sell them on QVC!

Maybe it will pay for my retirement? Sure doesn't look like my 401k and IRA accounts will do it! :lol:

[Rastak]

Patler, I'm thinking you ought to come up with some way to patent what you do. I "Patlerized" someone on another thread (who claims Jared Allen was "essentially a free agent") and I think this board - in fact, the world - could use a tool that might be called "The Patlerizer."

You could sell them on QVC!

Maybe it will pay for my retirement? Sure doesn't look like my 401k and IRA accounts will do it! :lol:


Patler, you sure as hell ain't kidding there. Ain't fun when you see 6 figure losses and the damn thing cut in half.

[Patler]

Patler, I'm thinking you ought to come up with some way to patent what you do. I "Patlerized" someone on another thread (who claims Jared Allen was "essentially a free agent") and I think this board - in fact, the world - could use a tool that might be called "The Patlerizer."

You could sell them on QVC!

Maybe it will pay for my retirement? Sure doesn't look like my 401k and IRA accounts will do it! :lol:


Patler, you sure as hell ain't kidding there. Ain't fun when you see 6 figure losses and the damn thing cut in half.

Couldn't have come at a worse time for me, personally. Sure, it will recover, but how quickly? I don't have that much time left!! :lol: