Predict the score: Packers at Rams

[mmmdk]

Packers 27 Rams 24

We are who we thought we were - pre-preseason!

[Brando19]

Packers 35
Rams 20

[gbpackfan]

Packers 24
Rams 10

[Scott Campbell]

Packers 24
Rams 10


Looks good to me.

[Willard]

Rams:13
Your Green Bay Packers: 38

[Jerry Tagge]

Packers 34, Rams 3.

[Freak Out]

Pack - 5

Rams - 101

[Partial]

Packers 45 Rams 0. They're going to come out and just annihilate them.

[channtheman]

No drops this week and the Packers destroy the Rams 42 - 10.

[MOBB DEEP]

Im too scared

[MichiganPackerFan]

I'm thinking the pack puts up 40+ and keeps the rams sub 10. The passing game is better than it has looked and the defense should play with a chip on their shoulder. Odds increase if Raji is in.

[Chevelle2]

LOL @ anyone concerned about this game.

We are pissed + Them being the worst time in the NFL by far = We are going to straight murder them.

Packers 45
Rams 13

[SkinBasket]

The Rams are also pissed because they're not as bad as they've played. This becomes a question of which offense finds it's identity first. GB goes up early, McCarthy makes no halftime adjustments, and barely holds on for the win.

GB 21
SL 20

[Waldo]

The Rams have scored 7 points this season, and they are fielding the least effective passing offense in the league (GB is right around the middle).

The Rams have shown no signs of being capable of playing better.

The Packers are mad, the players are all pissed, the coaches are all pissed. We've seen them play way better.

The Packers are going to seriously blow them out. If it is still a game at halftime I'll be shocked.

[cheesner]

Pack 38 Rams 6 This is the team we were expecting.

[Tarlam!]

Im too scared

+1

[PackerTimer]

I think the Packers finally get some offensive production. Rodgers is going to have a huge day.

Packers - 34
Rams - 10

2-1 going into a huge matchup with the Vikings next weekend.

[Tony Oday]

Rams 24 Pack 21 Crosby misses a 34 yarder to tie it with 3 seconds left.

[wist43]

Packers 20

Rams 17

Until the Packers prove they've got their OL problems fixed, you have to figure they're going to struggle to move the ball and score pts... doesn't matter the opponent.

[AtlPackFan]

Im too scared

+1

+1 = 3...which is why I picked Baltimore in the survival game.

I think they will win but after the Bengals game, I ain't betting on anything.

Oh...what the hell. Pack 23, Rams 21

[ThunderDan]

Rams 24 Pack 21 Crosby misses a 54 yarder to tie it with 3 seconds left.

Fixed

[Fritz]

Okay if the Packers do blow out the Rams, does that mean that, suddenly, they will be Super Bowl bound again?

[SkinBasket]

Okay if the Packers do blow out the Rams, does that mean that, suddenly, they will be Super Bowl bound again?

More likely they would be emotionally spent and lose big time in Minnesota, who's already drooling watching our safeties play.

[Waldo]

Okay if the Packers do blow out the Rams, does that mean that, suddenly, they will be Super Bowl bound again?

More likely they would be emotionally spent and lose big time in Minnesota, who's already drooling watching our safeties play.

Is Favre and his 2 yard passes going to burn our safeties?

[Zool]

Okay if the Packers do blow out the Rams, does that mean that, suddenly, they will be Super Bowl bound again?

More likely they would be emotionally spent and lose big time in Minnesota, who's already drooling watching our safeties play.

Is Favre and his 2 yard passes going to burn our safeties?

No but Peterson is going to.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Packers 10
Rams 17

[Pugger]

How will the 31st ranked offense score 17 points if we bottle up their RB?

[MJZiggy]

We've held AP in check before, why do we think it's impossible?

[channtheman]

Rams 24 Pack 21 Crosby misses a 54 yarder to tie it with 3 seconds left.

Fixed

More like McCarthy tests Crosby's range attempting a 74 yard game winning kick.

[Rastak]

We've held AP in check before, why do we think it's impossible?


Not impossible, merely unlikely.

[wist43]

St Louis doesn't present much of a challenge in the passing game... mainly b/c of their patchwork OL, so Capers should be able to load up against the run.

We have our own OL problems... so you would expect a low scoring game - fantasy wise, I need Jennings to put up something other than a goose egg :D

[Tyrone Bigguns]

We've held AP in check before, why do we think it's impossible?


Not impossible, merely unlikely.

Really? Are we worse than Detroit? they held AD in check.

Ty would say it is more likely we hold him in check than not, considering we have done so 3 of 4 times (check to ty means AD will rush for 100 yards or so..or less) and have won 3 of the last 4....losing when AD went unchecked.

[Pugger]

Let's concentrate on bottling up Steven Jackson before we think about AP and MN. :no:

[denverYooper]

27-17, Good Guys.

[Rastak]

We've held AP in check before, why do we think it's impossible?


Not impossible, merely unlikely.

Really? Are we worse than Detroit? they held AD in check.

Ty would say it is more likely we hold him in check than not, considering we have done so 3 of 4 times (check to ty means AD will rush for 100 yards or so..or less) and have won 3 of the last 4....losing when AD went unchecked.


He averaged over 6 yards a carry against Det and had 4 catches and a TD.

Not exactly "holding in check"....In addition, could they hold Cedric Benson "in check"? I rest my case.



edit: In 2008 he averaged 5+ yards a carry and 100+ yards in the first meeting and went off for 192 in the second. I know in his rookie year he got hurt one game and he didn't get but 3 carries in the second half as a coaches decision (in the other game I believe). Not sure where you are coming from on this one.

[gex]

Packers 41
Rams 2
The Pack don't even need to practice for this game. They should just sit around and bulk up on carbo's and beer and whatnot and just watch film on the Queens. :D

[Rastak]

I'll say Packers 21 Rams 17.

[Tarlam!]

Ras, we're all jealous the Vikings have AP. Don't rub it in you showboat! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Rastak]

Ras, we're all jealous the Vikings have AP. Don't rub it in you showboat! :lol: :lol: :lol:


You got Ryan Grant, perhaps a top 3 back in the league per Tex.....by the way, where the hell did he go?

[Tarlam!]

Dunno where Tex is, but I miss him.

I'll trade you Ryan Grant for AP, Ras. I'm pretty certain I can get TT to pull the trigger on that trade.

[Rastak]

Dunno where Tex is, but I miss him.

I'll trade you Ryan Grant for AP, Ras. I'm pretty certain I can get TT to pull the trigger on that trade.


Jennings and Rodgers for Peterson and Berrian.



edit: Sorry about the thread jack......and....not 100% sure I'd do that deal....lol...

[Charles Woodson]

Are we that much worse than Washington and Seattle? Come on people, Saint Louis has put up one touchdown all season... If we lose, or dont blow them out then the sky really will be falling.

Packers:41
Rams:13

[RashanGary]

Packers by 10.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

We've held AP in check before, why do we think it's impossible?


Not impossible, merely unlikely.

Really? Are we worse than Detroit? they held AD in check.

Ty would say it is more likely we hold him in check than not, considering we have done so 3 of 4 times (check to ty means AD will rush for 100 yards or so..or less) and have won 3 of the last 4....losing when AD went unchecked.


He averaged over 6 yards a carry against Det and had 4 catches and a TD.

Not exactly "holding in check"....In addition, could they hold Cedric Benson "in check"? I rest my case.



edit: In 2008 he averaged 5+ yards a carry and 100+ yards in the first meeting and went off for 192 in the second. I know in his rookie year he got hurt one game and he didn't get but 3 carries in the second half as a coaches decision (in the other game I believe). Not sure where you are coming from on this one.

Average....that is less important that the total yards. He had less than 100 rushing. That is check. Especially when you consider what he did against the browns. Any team will be more than happy to see him only rush 15 times for 92...with his longest run being 15 yards. Considering that AD is going to get 80 yards is almost a foretold conclusion.

BTW, your edit just proves my point. I said 100 or so yards. Average is fine. Total rushing...is what matters and the # of rushes. The rest of your argument is an excuse...injuries, coaches...at the end of the day he was held in check. Out of check is 150 plus yards...running wild. Anytime you hold AD to 19 rushes and 103 yards and 1 td..that is in check. 12 for 100 or so...no tds...in check.

Benson: there are a ton of factors including better WRs and better QB. But, most importantly, this is a divisional rivalry game. That is a big factor. Quickly you forget that we held Forte in check.

So, disregard all the other analysis...average, #of rushes, tds, etc....2 games 1 in check, 1 out of check...that would put us at 50% check rate....far from "unlikely". I rest my case.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Dunno where Tex is, but I miss him.

I'll trade you Ryan Grant for AP, Ras. I'm pretty certain I can get TT to pull the trigger on that trade.


Jennings and Rodgers for Peterson and Berrian.



edit: Sorry about the thread jack......and....not 100% sure I'd do that deal....lol...

No worries, as only a Viking GM would make that trade. :lol:

We would never trade Arod and Jennings for Peterson and Berrian.

[The Leaper]

GB: 27
STL: 13

[Gunakor]

Dunno where Tex is, but I miss him.

I'll trade you Ryan Grant for AP, Ras. I'm pretty certain I can get TT to pull the trigger on that trade.


Jennings and Rodgers for Peterson and Berrian.



edit: Sorry about the thread jack......and....not 100% sure I'd do that deal....lol...

Oh, that's a tough one. I don't know if I'd do it either, considering the porous OL we have employed here in Green Bay. AP would not look like AP if in Green Bay. Better than Grant, to be sure, but not 2000+ yards good. And I don't know the improvement from Grant to Peterson is worth the drop off from Jennings to Berrian, considering this offense is a pass first, pass second, pass ALL SECOND HALF type offense.

Not to mention that we don't have a quarterback anymore. Do we get FAVRE too?

[Gunakor]

I can't guess the Packers score, because the Packers offense is rather inconsistent. I will predict the Rams won't score more than 10 points, and because of that the Packers will win. But whether we win 14-10 or 28-10 or 41-10, I can't be sure.

[Rastak]

Getting 100 yards doesn't mean shit if it takes you 30 carries to do it. If you allow a back to tote it for better than 5 yards a carry you did a shit job containing a guy...(assuming a decent amount of carries). Go ask Schwartz if he was held in check.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Ras, we're all jealous the Vikings have AP. Don't rub it in you showboat! :lol: :lol: :lol:


You got Ryan Grant, perhaps a top 3 back in the league per Tex.....by the way, where the hell did he go?

I think he saw I was back and said the hell with it :D I'm staying out of FYI this time around though, so I won't get heated with you Tex!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Getting 100 yards doesn't mean shit if it takes you 30 carries to do it. If you allow a back to tote it for better than 5 yards a carry you did a shit job containing a guy...(assuming a decent amount of carries). Go ask Schwartz if he was held in check.

to a degree. If you can rush 30 times and you are at 105 then you are moving the chains and the defense has to respect the run.

Schwartz: If you asked Schwartz before the game if AD got 90 yards and a td would he be ok with that...he would be, not a question (relative to perfectionist coaches..."no, we want no tds and zero yards for AD :roll: )

[pbmax]

Packers 24
Rams 13

[Scott Campbell]

I can't guess the Packers score, because the Packers offense is rather nonexisistent.


Fixed.

[Rastak]

Schwartz is still pulling that 27 yard dagger out of his arse planted by Mr Peterson.


Adam Schein is taking GB 31 to 17.

[Gunakor]

I can't guess the Packers score, because the Packers offense is rather nonexisistent.


Fixed.

Yet when the Packers aren't playing against a top 10 defense they can put up 28+ in a half.

Or they could lay an egg.

Like I said, inconsistent.

We aren't playing Lovie's Bears or Lewis' Bengals today though. And we're playing on a very fast surface. If we don't put up at least 28 today, then I'll start to worry.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Schwartz is still pulling that 27 yard dagger out of his arse planted by Mr Peterson.


Adam Schein is taking GB 31 to 17.

Doesn't change the fact that "unlikely" was a ludicrous statement considering how we stopped Forte.