2010 Schedule

[HarveyWallbangers]

Packers home games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Dallas Cowboys
New York Giants
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
San Francisco 49ers*

Could still be Seattle

Packers road games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Redskins
New England Patriots
New York Jets
Atlanta Falcons*

*Could still be Carolina

I see 12-4
:D

[Smidgeon]

Eager to get the first 2010 record prediction, aren't you? :mrgreen:

[Freak Out]

No west coast games. :cry:

[mmmdk]

Homefield games look great; killer road games. Packers gotta go 5-1 vs NFC North to secure double digit win season.

[DannoMac21]

Packers home games

Chicago Bears - W
Minnesota Vikings - W
Detroit Lions - W
Dallas Cowboys - W
New York Giants - W
Buffalo Bills - W
Miami Dolphins - W
San Francisco 49ers* - W

Could still be Seattle

Packers road games

Chicago Bears - W
Minnesota Vikings - W
Detroit Lions - W
Philadelphia Eagles - W
Washington Redskins - W
New England Patriots - W
New York Jets - W
Atlanta Falcons* - W

*Could still be Carolina


I see 16-0

[Smidgeon]

Never too early for the kool-aid...

[Brando19]

Oh man...I hope Carolina takes the spot of Atlanta on the road games. What has to happen for Carolina to be on the schedule? I'd definitely be at that game. DC's not that far from here either...I may go to that game if Carolina doesn't happen.

[pbmax]

12-3-1. One of these years, I'll be right. :lol:

[steve823]

Is this official ? If so yess.. I can go to the Packer Jet game.

[MJZiggy]

YES! Redskins! Any DC Rats wanna go?

[Brando19]

YES! Redskins! Any DC Rats wanna go?

If they don't come to Carolina....I may be there. DC is only 5 hours away!

[GBRulz]

I thought they were already coming to Carolina next year? At least that is what I've been told.

Doesn't really matter to me if they come to Atlanta or Carolina, as I'm in the middle of both!

[Brando19]

I thought they were already coming to Carolina next year? At least that is what I've been told.

Doesn't really matter to me if they come to Atlanta or Carolina, as I'm in the middle of both!

They are coming to Carolina in 2011 for sure. It depends on Carolina's record in their division as to whether they come in 2010.

[MichiganPackerFan]

YES! Redskins! Any DC Rats wanna go?

Just saw that. I am totally in!!!!

[GBRulz]

I thought they were already coming to Carolina next year? At least that is what I've been told.

Doesn't really matter to me if they come to Atlanta or Carolina, as I'm in the middle of both!

They are coming to Carolina in 2011 for sure. It depends on Carolina's record in their division as to whether they come in 2010.

So, would it be possible that the Packers play at Carolina two years in a row? Or, if they play here in 2010, they won't in 2011?

Regardless, I'm in for sure if they come to Atlanta or Carolina. DC is a bit of a stretch as it's 7-8 hours from me.

[Brando19]

I thought they were already coming to Carolina next year? At least that is what I've been told.

Doesn't really matter to me if they come to Atlanta or Carolina, as I'm in the middle of both!

They are coming to Carolina in 2011 for sure. It depends on Carolina's record in their division as to whether they come in 2010.

So, would it be possible that the Packers play at Carolina two years in a row? Or, if they play here in 2010, they won't in 2011?

Regardless, I'm in for sure if they come to Atlanta or Carolina. DC is a bit of a stretch as it's 7-8 hours from me.

Absolutely they could. They're playing Dallas 3 years in a row at home.

[Freak Out]

YES! Redskins! Any DC Rats wanna go?

If they don't come to Carolina....I may be there. DC is only 5 hours away!

I come over for the game in DC.

[Brando19]

YES! Redskins! Any DC Rats wanna go?

If they don't come to Carolina....I may be there. DC is only 5 hours away!

I come over for the game in DC.

If we're able to go....we'll have to meet up.

[MJZiggy]

Dude! That's why I asked! Mini-posters game in DC.

[gbgary]

Homefield games look great; killer road games.

i was thinking just the opposite.

my Packer buddy and i are coming up next season. would like to meet some of you knuckleheads.

[gbgary]

...

[pack4to84]

Packers home games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Dallas Cowboys
New York Giants
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
San Francisco 49ers*

Could still be Seattle

Packers road games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Redskins
New England Patriots
New York Jets
Atlanta Falcons*

*Could still be Carolina

I see 12-4
:DYou can cross off Seattle now

[mission]

I really, really hope they end up coming to Atlanta!

[TennesseePackerBacker]

I really, really hope they end up coming to Atlanta!

Agreed. I'm less than 3 hours from Atlanta. I'd love to see them come play in the Georgia dome.

[mmmdk]

Homefield games look great; killer road games.

i was thinking just the opposite.

my Packer buddy and i are coming up next season. would like to meet some of you knuckleheads.

Well, I have a crystal ball and I don't base the strength of a team on this season...that's where the crystal ball comes in :P

[BallHawk]

I really, really hope they end up coming to Atlanta!

Agreed. I'm less than 3 hours from Atlanta. I'd love to see them come play in the Georgia dome.

All that's gotta happen is for the Falcons to beat the Bucs on Sunday. Then the Packers going to ATL is a go.

[pack4to84]

Its official now

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Dallas Cowboys
New York Giants
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
San Francisco 49ers



Packers road games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Redskins
New England Patriots
New York Jets
Atlanta Falcons

[GBRulz]

Well, it looks like I'm going to see them play in Atlanta now ! 2-1/2 hours from me, not bad at all.

[MJZiggy]

I get to find out why everyone here says Fedex Field is such a pain...

[pack4to84]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

[Fritz]

That's good seasoning for the playoffs, I think, playing all those playoff teams.

[pack4to84]

Next year we would face 6 playoff teams from this season.

[Guiness]

Dallas can't be too happy about coming back up here. Seemed like for a while we were always going there.

How did that manage to happen 3 years in a row?

[retailguy]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Well, a few ways to look at this. We won 3 and lost 3. But the 3 wins came later in the season, tho' it's also clear that win 3 (yesterday) was a gimme.

We lost to Minny twice, on a neutral field, I like those odds, in the dome, well, not as much.

So, we lost to Cincy & then Minny twice, while we beat the Ravens, the Cowboys and the Cards. The real question is, would we beat Cincy today? Seems to be the best test. If the team that played yesterday showed up, yes, but again, another "gimme".

Incidentally, the Ravens lost 6 of the 7 games. They lost to the Colts, the Patriots, The Bengals (twice), the Vikings & us, and beat the Chargers (week 2). It could be a lot worse.

I didn't look at the other teams.

[ThunderDan]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Well, a few ways to look at this. We won 3 and lost 3. But the 3 wins came later in the season, tho' it's also clear that win 3 (yesterday) was a gimme.

We lost to Minny twice, on a neutral field, I like those odds, in the dome, well, not as much.

So, we lost to Cincy & then Minny twice, while we beat the Ravens, the Cowboys and the Cards. The real question is, would we beat Cincy today? Seems to be the best test. If the team that played yesterday showed up, yes, but again, another "gimme".

Incidentally, the Ravens lost 6 of the 7 games. They lost to the Colts, the Patriots, The Bengals (twice), the Vikings & us, and beat the Chargers (week 2). It could be a lot worse.

I didn't look at the other teams.

What are you trying to say? The Arizona win doesn't count. This weeks Arizona game counts? We are playing the Bungals in the SB?

Look, other than TB we only lost to teams with winning records! 3 of the 5 losses came against teams in the playoffs.

[Joemailman]

The Packers would beat the Bengals now. The Bengals ran all over the Packers that game. No one can run the ball on the Packers right now. Plus, I think it's fair to say that that Odom guy wouldn't get 5 sacks again. Vikings are the only team to beat the Packers that could possibly do it again.

[retailguy]

Not sure at all what you're trying to say, but this comment:


Look, other than TB we only lost to teams with winning records! 3 of the 5 losses came against teams in the playoffs.

is kind of where I was going. Considering that all the teams we'll now face have winning records, I wanted to know how we stacked up against those teams.

Not great, but better than Baltimore. And, no, the AZ win doesn't count. We didn't prove anything, except we can spank AZ's scrubs hard. And yes, I know we put up 14 on the 1st team, who had nothing to play for, and were using a scaled back game plan per Whisenhunt's own comments. He had two game plans ready to go, one if Minny won, and one if Minny lost.

[retailguy]

The Packers would beat the Bengals now. The Bengals ran all over the Packers that game. No one can run the ball on the Packers right now. Plus, I think it's fair to say that that Odom guy wouldn't get 5 sacks again. Vikings are the only team to beat the Packers that could possibly do it again.

Hope you're right Joe. I agree that Benson would have a more difficult time, but not sure that the line is that much improved. 5 sacks probably wouldn't happen again, but if those 5 sacks turned into knockdowns, I'm not sure that would change much.

Clearly, today, we beat them on a neutral field and at home. In Cincy? tougher, but good prospects. I actually like the matchup with Minny better. Too much for the Packers to play for. I like the intangibles in that game.

I still think the OL is the weak link on this team, but we'll see. Right now, they have played better in recent weeks.

If I were Whiz, that's what I'd attack. The OL first, and then the secondary. Hopefully we can burn that focus with a good dose of Finley. I don't see how AZ accounts for him. I think they can take Jennings out of the game, and maybe Driver, but Jennings, Finley & Driver? I don't see it.

Relying on McCarthy for a good gameplan makes me nervous. I just don't like this game.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Packers would beat the Bengals now. The Bengals ran all over the Packers that game. No one can run the ball on the Packers right now. Plus, I think it's fair to say that that Odom guy wouldn't get 5 sacks again. Vikings are the only team to beat the Packers that could possibly do it again.

Totally agree. Plus, I think the Bengals caught us off-guard. If you said before the year that the Bengals would be a running team behind Cedric Benson but would have problems throwing the ball with Carson Palmer, Chad Ochocinco, Lav Coles, etc., I think most people would have said you were crazy. I'm guessing we had a game plan that looked to stop the pass--and they gashed us with the run.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Hope you're right Joe. I agree that Benson would have a more difficult time, but not sure that the line is that much improved. 5 sacks probably wouldn't happen again, but if those 5 sacks turned into knockdowns, I'm not sure that would change much.

You don't think the OL is much improved? What? 41 sacks in the first 9 games. 10 sacks in the last 7 games.

[retailguy]

Hope you're right Joe. I agree that Benson would have a more difficult time, but not sure that the line is that much improved. 5 sacks probably wouldn't happen again, but if those 5 sacks turned into knockdowns, I'm not sure that would change much.

You don't think the OL is much improved? What? 41 sacks in the first 9 games. 10 sacks in the last 7 games.

This happens every year Harv. I want to see things change PERMANENTLY.

Nothing indicates that this won't happen again and again. Next season, game 1, I bet we're talking about OL issues, yet again....

I think if Whiz gameplans correctly, he can get to Rodgers. Whether Rodgers can take advantage of that (ie - finley and others), is still to be answered. I see hope that can happen, in spite of the OL.

[HarveyWallbangers]

This happens every year Harv. I want to see things change PERMANENTLY.

Nothing indicates that this won't happen again and again. Next season, game 1, I bet we're talking about OL issues, yet again....

What does that have to do with the point in question--which is whether we'd beat Cincinnati now and whether the OL is improved since we played them?

[Joemailman]

Obviously the OL is much better with Tauscher in there. Rodgers is now able to escape to the right when he needs to. He is absolutely deadly when throwing while rolling to the right. I really believe the Packers would be 13-3 or 14-2 if the OL had played all year the way they are playing now. They are a better team than they were 2 years ago heading into the playoffs. Still, the road ahead this year is very tough. I think this Packers team is very comparable to the 1995 team. Really good but maybe a year away.

[retailguy]

This happens every year Harv. I want to see things change PERMANENTLY.

Nothing indicates that this won't happen again and again. Next season, game 1, I bet we're talking about OL issues, yet again....

What does that have to do with the point in question--which is whether we'd beat Cincinnati now and whether the OL is improved since we played them?

Simple, I was responding to Joe's points about the OL and rushing defense as the reason we'd beat Cincy. I agreed with the rushing defense aspect, but not the OL.

I think the improvement we see in the OL is a mirage. It's going to disappear again soon. I concede that Tauscher is better than Barbre, but he's not what he used to be either.

My point is that Whisenhunt can exploit this, and I'm not sure if he won't or he will, but I still do not like this OL and don't agree that Odom and the Bengals wouldn't have the same defensive gameplan with continued success. I doubt they'd get 5 sacks, but as I said before, I'm not sure there is that much difference if those sacks became knockdowns.

You can throw out stats, but that ignores some things. Pressures and knockdowns can be just as disruptive to the gameplan as sacks. Timing is crucial in the Packers offense. Anything that messes that up successfully has an impact. This OL still allows way too much pressure.

[ThunderDan]

And, no, the AZ win doesn't count. We didn't prove anything, except we can spank AZ's scrubs hard. And yes, I know we put up 14 on the 1st team, who had nothing to play for, and were using a scaled back game plan per Whisenhunt's own comments. He had two game plans ready to go, one if Minny won, and one if Minny lost.

And what did we have to play for? Nothing! It's just an excuse. I agree they pulled their starters early but we played with fire and executed well. To me that is worth every penny even if it was against their "scrubs".

Really, how many "scrubs" can an NFL team carry on a 53 man roster?

For the Packers you have guys like Quinn Johnson (3rd fullback inactive at start of season), Brad Jones, Bush(vomit), TJ Lang, et al.

Due to injuries it is extremely hard to justify below average players on the bottom of your roster. This is also why I like having young guys with potential to chase in case of injury instead of 9 year vet who is a stop-gap at best.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think the improvement we see in the OL is a mirage.

Well, it isn't a mirage. Seven games is a trend not a mirage. Now, we could have a bad game in the playoffs--but one bad game doesn't mean it's a mirage. Just like having one bad game at Pittsburgh doesn't mean we have a bad pass defense. We don't. We had 16 games to hold opposing QBs to a 68.8 passer rating, 6.8 yards/attempt, 54 completion % with 30 interceptions.

Who did we face in those 7 games? Two very good pass rushing teams: #2 (Pittsburgh) and #4 (San Francisco). Two middle of the road pass rushing teams: #13 (Chicago) and #19 (Baltimore). Two bad pass rushing teams: Seattle and Detroit. I'll throw out the game against #6 Arizona. It's not like we've faced 6 teams who couldn't rush the passer.

[HarveyWallbangers]

You can throw out stats, but that ignores some things. Pressures and knockdowns can be just as disruptive to the gameplan as sacks. Timing is crucial in the Packers offense. Anything that messes that up successfully has an impact. This OL still allows way too much pressure.

I don't think the pressure has been that bad. The QB still tends to hold the ball too long at times--which I guess is a catch-22 since holding onto the ball allows big plays down the field to develop.

[Bossman641]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Wait, but I thought the Packers only played easy teams and therefore none of their wins should count??

[mission]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Wait, but I thought the Packers only played easy teams and therefore none of their wins should count??

Yeah and we beat Baltimore... sooooo, what does that say?

[packerbacker1234]

I see a lot, and I do mean a lot, of tough games.

4 playoff teams on the schedule, and a good team in the niners... etc.

thats a rough schedule IMO. 10 - 6 early prediction until things are finalized.

[packerbacker1234]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Wait, but I thought the Packers only played easy teams and therefore none of their wins should count??

Yeah and we beat Baltimore... sooooo, what does that say?

3 wins against teams with winning records. What does that say?

[woodbuck27]

Packers home games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Dallas Cowboys
New York Giants
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
San Francisco 49ers*

Could still be Seattle

Packers road games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Redskins
New England Patriots
New York Jets
Atlanta Falcons*

*Could still be Carolina

I see 12-4
:D

I see two tough home and five tough road games. 2010 will be interesting.

GO PACKERS!

[Bossman641]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Wait, but I thought the Packers only played easy teams and therefore none of their wins should count??

Yeah and we beat Baltimore... sooooo, what does that say?

3 wins against teams with winning records. What does that say?

Who cares? The Vikings beat 4 teams with winning records. You play who is scheduled.

Some of you act like other other playoff teams were off playing the Colts and Saints every week while we were beating up on the Rams and Lions.

[mission]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Wait, but I thought the Packers only played easy teams and therefore none of their wins should count??

Yeah and we beat Baltimore... sooooo, what does that say?

3 wins against teams with winning records. What does that say?

Lost to two teams seeded higher than us in the playoffs to account for 3 games.

Hmm, aside from TB and one MN game, we pretty much did what was (highly) expected of us.

It is what it is.

A strong win next week and I think you can say this team is legit from a playoff perspective. There's still that chance we come out, and stay out, flat. We don't really have a precedent in the playoffs with this team (AR).

[ThunderDan]

Heard on the radio last night after the game the Packers had played more teams that made the Playoffs then any other team in the Playoffs. So I looked it up. Raven had played one more playoff team then the Packers.

Playoff teams faced
Arz 2
Ind 2
NO 4
SD 4
Phi 4
Min 4
Dal 5
NYJ 5
NE 5
Cin 6
GB 6
Balt 7

Wait, but I thought the Packers only played easy teams and therefore none of their wins should count??

Yeah and we beat Baltimore... sooooo, what does that say?

3 wins against teams with winning records. What does that say?

That we took care of business with the teams on our schedule!!! Fuck, the schedule is set years in advance. It's not like the Packers petitioned the league to have Detroit in their division.

The Vikings only beat the Packers, Ravens and Bengals as teams with winning records. Their 12-4 must be a scham also.

[MJZiggy]

The team made the playoffs. That makes them a playoff-caliber team. If we win the SuperBowl I don't want to hear that the opponent shouldn't have been there because they weren't good enough...

[MichiganPackerFan]

I get to find out why everyone here says Fedex Field is such a pain...

I went to see the Chiefs/Redskins game this season. 50 yard line suite, free food & drinks and premium free parking. It was great, except for the noticeable lack of professional football, and even that started to fade away in the second quarter as a direct result of the aforementioned free drinks.

However, when I go next year, I anticipate the typical standstill DC traffic to be a huge factor. Apparently, they also herd the tailgaters to a designated tailgating area as well. The inside of the stadium seemed decent enought for a new stadium and I can't wait for next years game!!!

[Joemailman]

Packers home games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Dallas Cowboys
New York Giants
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
San Francisco 49ers*

Could still be Seattle

Packers road games

Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Redskins
New England Patriots
New York Jets
Atlanta Falcons*

*Could still be Carolina

I see 12-4
:D

I see two tough home and five tough road games. 2010 will be interesting.

GO PACKERS!

Road schedule does look tough. Packers will have to do better than 6-2 at home if they want to win the NFCN.