A little early but...

[Upnorth]

Footballoutsiders is a stats site that pulls data and uses it as a way of ranking teams players etc.
Currently Packers have a 12.4% chance at the superbowl,

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

[Joemailman]

Interesting they list 49ers chances at only 1.1%. They give them the 2nd best odds of being a wildcard in the NFC. I guess they probably factor in that they would probably have to win at Seattle in the playoffs at some point to make it to the Super Bowl.

[hoosier]

Interesting they list 49ers chances at only 1.1%. They give them the 2nd best odds of being a wildcard in the NFC. I guess they probably factor in that they would probably have to win at Seattle in the playoffs at some point to make it to the Super Bowl.

Well this is clearly wrong. San Fran probably goes undefeated at home as well, and are likely to do better than Sea on the road. Apparently their formula is unable to balance a small sample size early in the season with some other metric, like one that accounts for team's performance over a longer span. San Fran played a crappy game at Seattle. Big deal. Give me those odds (90% chance of Seattle winning the West vs. 7% of SF winning division) and I could pay my three kids way through college in one bet.

[mraynrand]

Footballoutsiders is a stats site that pulls data and uses it as a way of ranking teams players etc.
Currently Packers have a 12.4% chance at the superbowl,

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

I had them at 12.647%, with five significant figures.

[Joemailman]

They listed the Super Bowl chances of 31 teams. Jacksonville now knows how Rodney Dangerfield felt.

By the way, the Vikings are listed as the 2nd most Likely team to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft. Behind Jacksonville, of course.

[MadScientist]

They listed the Super Bowl chances of 31 teams. Jacksonville now knows how Rodney Dangerfield felt.

By the way, the Vikings are listed as the 2nd most Likely team to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft. Behind Jacksonville, of course.
Lets hop not. I have no desire to see Clowney go to the Vikings. Besides I can't see them finishing below Washington the way they are playing.

[3irty1]

Clowney should just sign with Jacksonville now.

[MadScientist]

There were some reports of Jacksonville taking a QB instead. Don't really want the Vikings getting a good one of those either.

[denverYooper]

Looks a little different today. They still have the Pack at 68% but I'm betting it will look a little different after this week's in the books. The Packers will be on the outside looking in pretty quickly if they don't handle the Lions next weekend. They're going to have some stiff competition for a playoff spot.

If they can't overtake the Bears for the NFC North lead, I'm not even sure they make it in. The NFC West will probably put out a WC team and the NFC South is looking tough this year, with NO, Atlanta, and Carolina probably in the mix.

Funny thing is, I think the team is better than last year's. More well-rounded, with a better defense and an actual running game. But that doesn't guarantee anything.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I thought I heard last night on the game broadcast that no team that has started the season 1-3 has made the playoffs. Can that be right?

[denverYooper]

I thought I heard last night on the game broadcast that no team that has started the season 1-3 has made the playoffs. Can that be right?

1992 Chargers started 0-4 and made the playoffs.

[Maxie the Taxi]

1992 Chargers started 0-4 and made the playoffs.

I guess you could safely say then that if we lose to the Lions we definitely have an uphill struggle. :mad:

[red]

so you're telling me there's a chance? YEAAAAHHHHH

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcStxVuAclnaowcJZk4XNIhfFDBhjqkKE pbnxRY1ZiWhmh8g_g_ASQ

[denverYooper]

I also feel the Lions are better than the Bears, even though the records don't reflect it yet. They might be the ones to contend with for the division if they don't self destruct. Their defense is better than Chicago's or Minnesota's and they have talent on offense.

The Bears O is probably better than late, but their D is very suspect. Lots of "experience" and they've faded late the last couple of years. Now Melton is done and Peanut is banged up.

Next Sunday is a huge game for the Pack - Lions @ Lambeau. I suspect that's why they backed Clay off last weekend -- they'll need all hands on deck.

[HarveyWallbangers]

1992 Chargers started 0-4 and made the playoffs.

It's happened plenty of times (1-3 making the playoffs). The Packers alone have done it twice in the last 10 years (in 2003 and 2004). In 2004 they started 1-4 and still made the playoffs.

[Maxie the Taxi]

+1

The tendency is for Packer fans to take beating the Lions, Minnesota and da Bears twice a year for granted. Lions have better personnel this year. Bears have a better coach and Minnesota might have an at least respectable QB now, plus they always have AP who can be a game changer.

I was discussing the Cincy loss with my brother and he tended to discount it based on his faith that the Pack would clean up in the Central Division. I sure hope they do.

[Maxie the Taxi]

It's happened plenty of times (1-3 making the playoffs). The Packers alone have done it twice in the last 10 years (in 2003 and 2004). In 2004 they started 1-4 and still made the playoffs.

My hearing must be getting as bad as my eyesight! Or maybe the announcer was just blowing smoke.

[mraynrand]

My hearing must be getting as bad as my eyesight! Or maybe the announcer was just blowing smoke.

I'd go with blaming the announcer if I were you.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I'd go with blaming the announcer if I were you.

Thanks for the sage advice. That announcer...I think his name is Mike Mayock...is a little overbearing anyway. I guess he knows his stuff cause he overanalyzes every sticking play in super deep depth. His player insights are good though, if you can listen to him talk about this "kid" and that "kid" and nice "kid" and tough "kid." He could be easier to listen to, no kidding.

[mraynrand]

Thanks for the sage advice. That announcer...I think his name is Mike Mayock...is a little overbearing anyway. I guess he knows his stuff cause he overanalyzes every sticking play in super deep depth. His player insights are good though, if you can listen to him talk about this "kid" and that "kid" and nice "kid" and tough "kid." He could be easier to listen to, no kidding.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-1b4fwKhigAs/T6RwQP1nUYI/AAAAAAAs-EM/ArHIgLX_7ww/s250-c-k-no/Almasoomtrade%2528branch%2529

[Maxie the Taxi]

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-1b4fwKhigAs/T6RwQP1nUYI/AAAAAAAs-EM/ArHIgLX_7ww/s250-c-k-no/Almasoomtrade%2528branch%2529

That kid could play in this league if he could find a helmet with huge ear holes.

[mraynrand]

I was talking with a friend of mine who had dinner with Campen. Campen says that Sherrod is a "Great Kid, Nice Kid" I kid you not.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I was talking with a friend of mine who had dinner with Campen. Campen says that Sherrod is a "Great Kid, Nice Kid" I kid you not.

I don't know if I can believe that story about Campen because you tend to be quite a kidder.

[Maxie the Taxi]

By the way, a friend of mine told me that Stubby is handling Arod with kid gloves this week.

[mraynrand]

I don't know if I can believe that story about Campen because you tend to be quite a kidder.

It's a true story - I'm not trying to get your goat.

[swede]

Sez ewe.

[Maxie the Taxi]

It's a true story - I'm not trying to get your goat.

I'll bet you it's not true. Double or mutton.

[denverYooper]

+1

The tendency is for Packer fans to take beating the Lions, Minnesota and da Bears twice a year for granted. Lions have better personnel this year. Bears have a better coach and Minnesota might have an at least respectable QB now, plus they always have AP who can be a game changer.

I was discussing the Cincy loss with my brother and he tended to discount it based on his faith that the Pack would clean up in the Central Division. I sure hope they do.

+1 for referencing the NFC Central.

[Maxie the Taxi]

+1 for referencing the NFC Central.

It will always be the NFC Central to me. :-D

[mraynrand]

I'll bet you it's not true. Double or mutton.

shear nonsense

[Guiness]

It's a true story - I'm not trying to get your goat.

You'd have to be a sheep at the wheel to believe that!

[Upnorth]

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

Interestingly enough they have us as the favorite to win the 'Central' (head nod to Maxie) even though the bears have a two game lead on us.
As an aside for those of us who think they have played a hard schedual, FO has us with the 26th easiest schedual so far, with the 25th easiest going forward.

[pbmax]

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

Interestingly enough they have us as the favorite to win the 'Central' (head nod to Maxie) even though the bears have a two game lead on us.
As an aside for those of us who think they have played a hard schedual, FO has us with the 26th easiest schedual so far, with the 25th easiest going forward.

That will change as the 49ers will get back to being good. The Redskins might help later and the Bengals crashed their current rating by losing to the Browns.

[Upnorth]

So quick confession, I am a stats head and like numbers even though my posts don't really include many,

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/10/team-efficiency-rankings-week-4.html
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2013/week-4-dvoa-ratings

The reason why I post these links are not good. Advanced NFL stats break downs games on a play by play basis by both players and teams and gives each play a number as to how much it adds to a game in terms of wins or expected points. (there is much more to it but if you really want to find out more read teh site). Any way our D is rank 32nd on there site.
FO breaks down on a play per play basis and then compares the result to what the expected result for the average team or player is in that same situation (once again for more detail please see the site). They have us as 31st on D.
Both sites have our run d as average to a bit above average, but look out when it comes to pass d.
The last time we had numbers like this was 2011, but after 3 games our O was covering up for the horrible d.
Do I have my panties in a bunch or do we expect Wist to start saying 'I told you so"?

[pbmax]

So quick confession, I am a stats head and like numbers even though my posts don't really include many,

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/10/team-efficiency-rankings-week-4.html
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2013/week-4-dvoa-ratings

The reason why I post these links are not good. Advanced NFL stats break downs games on a play by play basis by both players and teams and gives each play a number as to how much it adds to a game in terms of wins or expected points. (there is much more to it but if you really want to find out more read teh site). Any way our D is rank 32nd on there site.
FO breaks down on a play per play basis and then compares the result to what the expected result for the average team or player is in that same situation (once again for more detail please see the site). They have us as 31st on D.
Both sites have our run d as average to a bit above average, but look out when it comes to pass d.
The last time we had numbers like this was 2011, but after 3 games our O was covering up for the horrible d.
Do I have my panties in a bunch or do we expect Wist to start saying 'I told you so"?

No, I don't think they are the 30th worst defense in the League. But they have not been better than average for more than a couple of drives per game. Maybe a quarter and a half.

Like San Fran (run) or Cincy (TEs), if they concentrate on one factor of an opponent, they can shut it down. So they are not ineffective. But the are then vulnerable to the rest of the playbook. Not having Hayward and Burnett made this worse versus the 49ers; not having Matthews made it worse against the Bengals.

The turnovers and 3 and outs on offense aren't helping the D either.

[Upnorth]

IN the second and third quarters of the Cincy game we had a complete (and unbelievable) defense. Out side of that 30 minutes of brilliance, we can only shut down any one factor of the opponents game plan, but at the cost of giving up big plays in other areas. I don't think our D is as bad as the numbers show, however I do not think we are much better, and with our olines pass blocking struggles that is not good enough. Having a better run game should help sustain drives taking some pressure away from the d, but that did not show up in the last quarter of any games (including to washington)

[mraynrand]

That will change as the 49ers will get back to being good. The Redskins might help later and the Bengals crashed their current rating by losing to the Browns.

Well, the Browns are 2-2, same as Cincy. When the Packers play the Browns, they might be a formidable team!

[denverYooper]

SInce this has turned out to be the unofficial stats thread, I"ll stick this here:

Pro Football Focus ‏@PFF 39s

From Sig Stats: top MLB/ILB Run Stop Pct.
20.9% J.Brinkley,ARZ
19.6% B.Cushing,HOU
18.2% B.Spikes,NE
17.4% L.Kuechly,CAR
14.9% B.Jones,GB

[Pugger]

I guess you could safely say then that if we lose to the Lions we definitely have an uphill struggle.
:mad:

This Sunday is a MUST WIN. IMO if we lose to Detroit we won't be in the playoffs this season. You don't want to be 3 games back in addition to losing to your division's leader at home. :-(

[denverYooper]

Some things make me think the Packers offense might be better than we think. Small sample disclaimers apply.

Packers are 2nd in the league in PPG, with 32, 12.8 behind Denver. In 2011, they scored 35 ppg. They're 3rd in yards per play. After playing 2 of the better defenses on the road, those numbers are pretty good.

They are 2nd in rushing ypc, 9th in ypg.

They have fumbled 4 times and lost all 4, with the most freaky being the Franklin fumble returned for the game winning TD in the Bengals game. They are tied for 8th when it comes to number of fumbles. They are tied for 8th worst when it comes to fumbles lost. And they've got to be dead last in the location and result of the lost fumbles -- those have resulted in 2 short TDs for the opposition's offense and a return TD. So they're not fumbling a lot but their fumbles have cost them dearly Fumble luck has been a real bitch.

It's early yet, but this offense could very well be better than their 2011 offense by the end of the year if they can stay healthy.

[Pugger]

I'll bet you it's not true. Double or mutton.

Baaa!

[Pugger]

Some things make me think the Packers offense might be better than we think. Small sample disclaimers apply.

Packers are 2nd in the league in PPG, with 32, 12.8 behind Denver. In 2011, they scored 35 ppg. They're 3rd in yards per play. After playing 2 of the better defenses on the road, those numbers are pretty good.

They are 2nd in rushing ypc, 9th in ypg.

They have fumbled 4 times and lost all 4, with the most freaky being the Franklin fumble returned for the game winning TD in the Bengals game. They are tied for 8th when it comes to number of fumbles. They are tied for 8th worst when it comes to fumbles lost. And they've got to be dead last in the location and result of the lost fumbles -- those have resulted in 2 short TDs for the opposition's offense and a return TD. So they're not fumbling a lot but their fumbles have cost them dearly Fumble luck has been a real bitch.

It's early yet, but this offense could very well be better than their 2011 offense by the end of the year if they can stay healthy.

And not turn the ball over. TOs have literally killed us in our 2 loses this season.

[denverYooper]

And not turn the ball over. TOs have literally killed us in our 2 loses this season.

Yeah Pug.Every fumble has resulted in points for the opposition or lost points for GB.

Lacy fumbled at the GB 10 in the 1st game, setting SF up for an easy score.
Jones fumbled out of the endzone for a touchback in the WAS game, costing the Packers 7 points.
Ross muffed at the GB 2 in the Cincy game. Easy TD for Cincy.
Franklin fumbled in Cincy territory, Nelson got tackled and fumbled to his own teammate who returned it for a TD.

[denverYooper]

Ints have been a slightly different story...

On Finley's int vs 49ers, the defense held and Dawson missed a 49 yard FG
On Jones's int vs the Bengals, the defense held and Nugent missed a 52 yarder
On Rodgers 2nd int at the Cincy 9, the Bengals rode down the field for a TD. At least a 10 point swing, because the Packers were in FG range.

[sharpe1027]

It will always be the NFC Central to me. :-D

A division name that made perfect sense given Tampa bay's location near the center of something to other.