Packers Opponents So Far [Archive]

Packgator

10-12-2015, 01:20 PM

Through the first 5 games the Packers opponents have a combined record of 8-17.

The Packers have yet to play a team with a winning record.

At no point during the season have any of the Packers first 5 opponents been above .500

If San Diego loses tonight, the same will apply to the game this week. If SD loses tonight, it will be week 8 (Denver) before the Packers play a team with a winning record. The Packers will also play a team with a winning record in week 9 (Carolina). After week 9 (depending how Minnesota and Dallas do) it's possible that the Packers won't see another team with a winning record until week 16 (Arizona).

It's weird how NFL schedules play out.

Bossman641

10-12-2015, 01:53 PM

MadScientist

10-12-2015, 01:54 PM

None of the Packers opponents a has played very well, but how many expected this before the season began. Seattle went from SB champ to SB loser to "Fart in the wind". KC offense is more Chefs than Chiefs. Nobody is surprised about the Bears, 49ers and Rams having losing records, although the Rams and shockingly the Bears have been playing the best of any Packers opponents.

mraynrand

10-12-2015, 01:57 PM

KC offense is more Chefs than Chiefs.....shockingly the Bears have been playing the best of any Packers opponents.

KC totally went in the tank after the Charles injury. It was like a collective gunshot to the head.

Harlan Huckleby

10-12-2015, 01:58 PM

Through the first 5 games the Packers opponents have a combined record of 8-17.

To be anal, 8-12 in other games is the record to look at.

Cheesehead Craig

10-12-2015, 02:43 PM

Packers opponents so far...

Have been beaten each time the Pack played them. That's all that matters.

mraynrand

10-12-2015, 03:32 PM

To be anal...

oh, behave!

hoosier

10-12-2015, 03:39 PM

Packers are 5-0 against the point spread so far this year. Passing rating differential is a league leading 54.6 (117.4 / 62.8); they are second best in both offensive and defensive QB rating.

smuggler

10-12-2015, 03:41 PM

Doesn't seem like SD will lose tonight, but the Chargers have a history of being very volatile. Could be they shit the bed. Could be they win 42-13.

ThunderDan

10-12-2015, 03:52 PM

Eh, tough for your opponents to have a strong record when you go 5-0 against them. Feels like a Skip Bayless argument to me.

For comparison, the opponents' records for the 5 other undefeated teams are 8-11 (NE), 8-16 (Cincy), 7-17 (Denver), 5-15 (Carolina, and 10-13 (Atl).

Both NE and Atl played Dallas w/o Romo and the Pats also got Pitt w/o Bell.

Yup, can't do anything about who you play. On a side note if ATL and CAR split and beat everyone else their strength of schedule will most likely be the lowest because they will each play NO and TB twice.

ThunderDan

10-12-2015, 03:54 PM

Remember at the beginning of the season everyone saying the Packers schedule was going to be devastating. We get both the NFC West and AFC West. Two stacked divisions with Oakland supposedly ready to take a jump with Carr in year 2. Minn and Det improving to challenge for the division and only Chicago to kick around on the schedule.

MadScientist

10-12-2015, 04:18 PM

With only 5 teams in the NFC with a winning record, and 6 in the AFC, most of the game will be against teams that are at or below .500 right now.

mraynrand

10-12-2015, 04:59 PM

Passing rating differential is a league leading 54.6 (117.4 / 62.8); they are second best in both offensive and defensive QB rating.

That's numero uno stat

Cheesehead Craig

10-12-2015, 05:30 PM

Yup, can't do anything about who you play. On a side note if ATL and CAR split and beat everyone else their strength of schedule will most likely be the lowest because they will each play NO and TB twice.

Well, we do have Chicago and Detroit twice. So there's that.

esoxx

10-12-2015, 06:30 PM

KC totally went in the tank after the Charles injury. It was like a collective gunshot to the head.

Wouldn't a similar description be a small nuclear device to the head?

Take it to FYI

Upnorth

10-12-2015, 07:39 PM

Is it just me or does it seem like a down season for every one but the power houses? It's like the whole parity concept was destroyed by a small nuclear device to the head

Harlan Huckleby

10-12-2015, 08:27 PM

Is it just me or does it seem like a down season for every one but the power houses?

Put another way, there is a lot of crappy football. Maybe it will get better later in season.

BTW, the Packers are not looking like a power house, although they are balanced.

Joemailman

10-12-2015, 09:14 PM

mission

10-12-2015, 09:18 PM

Only one 5-0 team has beat a team with a winning record. Kind of crazy.

Joemailman

10-12-2015, 09:41 PM

Only one 5-0 team has beat a team with a winning record. Kind of crazy.

I think it might just be a quirk in the schedule. Lots of strong teams scheduled against weak ones early in the year.

pbmax

10-12-2015, 10:44 PM

I think it might just be a quirk in the schedule. Lots of strong teams scheduled against weak ones early in the year.

Division games early then late.

Pugger

10-12-2015, 11:34 PM

Doesn't seem like SD will lose tonight, but the Chargers have a history of being very volatile. Could be they shit the bed. Could be they win 42-13.

I wonder what their collective mindset will be this Sunday after that kind of loss tonight.

Joemailman

10-12-2015, 11:51 PM

I wonder what their collective mindset will be this Sunday after that kind of loss tonight.

Tough situation for them. Short week to recover from a tough loss and they have to travel to Green Bay.

Pugger

10-13-2015, 07:10 AM

Tough situation for them. Short week to recover from a tough loss and they have to travel to Green Bay.

And face a frustrated Rodgers hell bent on atoning for his performance against the Rams.

hoosier

10-13-2015, 07:55 AM

I think injuries to elite players have impacted some teams. Jordy, Roeth, Romo, Dez, Kelvin Benjamin, Alshon Jeffery, Suggs, Lynch, Jamal Charles, Victor Cruz. Also, some teams have been hurt by free agency defections and disappointments. Just seems worse this year. I do think things will stabilize. There are currently 9 2-3 teams in the NFL. some of those will be able to right the ship. We may also be seeing a decline in QB play. Brees and Peyton Manning are in decline and are not being replaced. Rodgers, Romo, Brady and Roeth are all over 30. There are currently several future HOF QB's playing in the NFL right now. That might not be the case a few years down the road.

This, and it also seems like NFL defenses have been catching up to the offenses a little bit. A few years ago people were saying that the era of the shutdown corner was over. Now maybe there is a little more balance, and you don't see quite as many 45-35 games. But with the exception of Seattle there aren't many teams who can live on defense alone, so what you get is a bunch of inconsistent teams.

bobblehead

10-13-2015, 08:21 AM

Through the first 5 games the Packers opponents have a combined record of 8-17.

The Packers have yet to play a team with a winning record.

At no point during the season have any of the Packers first 5 opponents been above .500
.

The Rams were 1-0. They were at that point above .500 (perfect in fact). SF was also 1-0. Seattle has a losing record because we beat them. The Bears have a losing record because we beat them. The Rams have a losing record because we beat them. The Chiefs have plays 3 teams that are undefeated.

Fritz

10-13-2015, 10:31 AM

It's funny how this can all be parsed. On the one hand, it's true that the Packers have played opponents who (now) have a losing record. But for about three of the five games, McGinn's assessment of the Chiefs, Seahawks, and Rams all suggested the kinds of opponents that make fans poop their pants. KC had furious outside rushers, a solid, solid, line, and and great running back. The Rams front four was reminiscent of the old fearsome foursome, and Gurley was breaking out. Seattle had that defense, plus Lynch and Wilson.

Three of the five Packer opponents sounded like possible Super Bowl teams, yet in the end, they've got losing records.

ThunderDan

10-13-2015, 10:44 AM

The only teams I really think are for real other than the Packers are in the AFC. I worry about CIN and NE.

I have watched ATL, DEN and CAR all play games and am not impressed. In the NFC the only team I have yet to decide on is ARI.

pbmax

10-13-2015, 11:36 AM

Denver can play defense on a championship level. But they are getting hurt. Ware has a back and Miller did something this weekend.

I wouldn't mind seeing them if the Packer offense can adjust to its new personnel.

MadScientist

10-13-2015, 12:19 PM

This, and it also seems like NFL defenses have been catching up to the offenses a little bit. A few years ago people were saying that the era of the shutdown corner was over. Now maybe there is a little more balance, and you don't see quite as many 45-35 games. But with the exception of Seattle there aren't many teams who can live on defense alone, so what you get is a bunch of inconsistent teams.

Seattle is finding out it can't live on defense alone. Their offense and perhaps season have gone into the tank after trading away their center. It usually takes a season or two for defenses to really stop an offensive innovation (spread offense, running QB's, etc.). There hasn't been as many new wrinkles added to offenses lately.

It also seems like pass rushers have gained an edge over the O-Line, which makes every aspect of a defense better. Perhaps the next thing is the NE O-Line rotation:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000547575/article/patriots-break-the-mold-with-offensive-line-rotation

Cheesehead Craig

10-13-2015, 03:15 PM

The Packers usually rotate OL too, but in their own way, because of an injury like they did in the good old days.

Tony Oday

10-14-2015, 06:09 AM

Packers lived by defense the last two weeks.

Packgator

10-14-2015, 11:10 PM

None of the Packers opponents a has played very well, but how many expected this before the season began.

That's what I was getting at when I said it's weird how NFL schedules play out. Before the season started a 3-2 Packers start wasn't out of the question.

Packgator

10-14-2015, 11:28 PM

For comparison, the opponents' records for the 5 other undefeated teams are 8-11 (NE), 8-16 (Cincy), 7-17 (Denver), 5-15 (Carolina, and 10-13 (Atl).

Both NE and Atl played Dallas w/o Romo and the Pats also got Pitt w/o Bell.

Since 1990, 39 of 43 teams (91 percent) that started 5-0 reached the playoffs.

Packgator

10-14-2015, 11:34 PM

There are currently 9 2-3 teams in the NFL. some of those will be able to right the ship.

Yes, there are certainly a few 2-3 teams that will end up having very good seasons. I wouldn't mind a bit if they aren't on the Packers schedule.

Packgator

10-14-2015, 11:41 PM

Tough situation for them. Short week to recover from a tough loss and they have to travel to Green Bay.

Which makes it a good situation for the Packers. I hope these little schedule quirks fall the Packers way all season.

Packgator

10-14-2015, 11:43 PM

The Rams were 1-0. They were at that point above .500 (perfect in fact). SF was also 1-0.

Yes they were. Good catch.

Fritz

10-15-2015, 05:20 AM

That's what I was getting at when I said it's weird how NFL schedules play out. Before the season started a 3-2 Packers start wasn't out of the question.

True. We've been conditioned to 2-3 starts, I think, so a 3-2 start before the season began seemed possible and maybe even acceptable by standards of the last few seasons.

I know the Lions' fans saw a brutal first five games for their team, and many of them were saying "well, if we can just start off 2-3, the schedule will get easier and the team will be fine."

That did not work out so well for them.

mraynrand

10-15-2015, 07:22 AM

Since 1990, 39 of 43 teams (91 percent) that started 5-0 reached the playoffs.

I knew the Vikings had to be in there. For a stretch of years there, they always seemed to win the off-season, win the Superbowl on paper, start out hot, and then choke it away (but usually in the first round of the Playoffs)

2003 - remember the Cardinals game? MN started 6-0, finished 9-7; no playoffs.

Smidgeon

10-15-2015, 11:01 AM

I knew the Vikings had to be in there. For a stretch of years there, they always seemed to win the off-season, win the Superbowl on paper, start out hot, and then choke it away (but usually in the first round of the Playoffs)

2003 - remember the Cardinals game? MN started 6-0, finished 9-7; no playoffs.

I've been to one NFL game. GB vs Denver when Minnesota lost the playoffs. They didn't even show the scores at Lambeau because they didn't want to distract the players. Ahman Green with a ridiculous 98 yard run, and memories that last a pretty long time.

I will always remember Minnesota choking that year. Always.

sharpe1027

10-15-2015, 02:22 PM

I've been to one NFL game. GB vs Denver when Minnesota lost the playoffs. They didn't even show the scores at Lambeau because they didn't want to distract the players. Ahman Green with a ridiculous 98 yard run, and memories that last a pretty long time.

I will always remember Minnesota choking that year. Always.

I've only been to a handful of games, but that was one of them. They didn't show the score, but the roar of the crowd when we all realized Minnesota lost gave it away to the players. There was nothing happening on the field at the time and it was the loudest part of the game.

Smidgeon

10-15-2015, 03:18 PM

I've only been to a handful of games, but that was one of them. They didn't show the score, but the roar of the crowd when we all realized Minnesota lost gave it away to the players. There was nothing happening on the field at the time and it was the loudest part of the game.

Yep. More people were listening to radios/on their phones waiting for that score than were paying attention to the game.