POLL-ODDS BETTER FOR 6-10 or 10-6 ?

[Bretsky]

Many comments have been made about how legitimate of a 8-8 team they were last year. I've seen comments about us beating some pathetic competition in the last four games. But then I've seen valid comments made about games Green Bay should have won against Buffalo and St Louis.

As shown by the games against New England and the Jets, the Packers undoubtedly were not a contender. But how close were they to a playoff team in the sub par NFC ? At worst they were the second best team in a horrid division.

As we enter the 2007 season, on paper it appears the Detroit Lions have made some solid improvements on paper and the Vikings "may" have as well.

The most logical, and maybe gutless, prediction for next years season has them winning between 7 and 9 games. Honestly it seems that it is where nearly everybody, including me, is at.

With this poll I'm asking you to make a statement as to how much ground Green Bay has gained or lost on the rest of the NFL. Throw your conservative predication out the Window. Have we gained ground on more teams in the NFL over the past year ?

Have we gained ground on the Bears and increased ground on the Vikings and the Lions ? Show us your bias.

IS GREEN BAY MORE LIKELY TO FINISH THE SEASON 6-10 OR 10-6 ?

[]{ilr]3]

Tough schedule this year. I am hoping for the best, but realistic projection would be less than 8 wins.

[HarveyWallbangers]

{ilr]3]Tough schedule this year. I am hoping for the best, but realistic projection would be less than 8 wins.

Agreed. If they played the same schedule as last year, I'd say they'd win 9 or 10 games. If last year's team played this year's schedule, I'd say they would have won 6 or 7 games. I know teams go up and down each year, but I don't see this being an easy schedule any way you shake it out. For this season, I have to choose 6-10 unfortunately. If they played last year's schedule, I'd choose 10-6.

[Bretsky]

I was listening to ESPN 1070 when Heller and Murph were breaking down Peter King and his ratings.

Main points were the D should be slightly improved, ton of questions on O and a tougher schedule. While common predictions were in the 7-8 win range, hosts felt they would not be surprised if our record took a 2-3 game fall but anything with double digit wins would greatly surprise them.

So thought I'd bring the discussion to PR where the real experts reside :lol:

[Packnut]

I was listening to ESPN 1070 when Heller and Murph were breaking down Peter King and his ratings.

Main points were the D should be slightly improved, ton of questions on O and a tougher schedule. While common predictions were in the 7-8 win range, hosts felt they would not be surprised if our record took a 2-3 game fall but anything with double digit wins would greatly surprise them.

So thought I'd bring the discussion to PR where the real experts reside :lol:


Things could go either way. All I know for sure is that this season is a direct reflection upon the job our GM is doing.

[Joemailman]

I think the Packers were closer to 10-6 last year than they were to 6-10, and I don't see it being any different this year. I expect the rookies from last year's OL to be better simply because they're not rookies anymore. I also expect the communications problems in the defensive secondary to largely be a thing of the past, and in fact they largely disappeared the last month of last season.

I don't put much stock in the supposedly tougher schedule. With the exception of maybe the top 6 teams, the talent level in the NFL is very even. The most important factors in whether a team goes 6-10 or 10-6 are red zone execution and injuries. That is something you just can't predict from year to year, so some teams that look tough now will turn out not to be so (Miami last year), and some teams you expect to beat will be tough (New Orleans, New York Jets). There fore, unlike some, I think if the Packers are better, their record will reflect that. And I do think they will be better.

[the_idle_threat]

Even though I think the team has a good chance of being 9-7 or maybe even 10-6 if things go right, I had to pick 6-10.

They're only 10-6 or better if just about everything goes right, whereas, if one or more things go wrong---out of a slew of possible things---they're down to 6-10 or worse.

The odds of 10-6 or better are not in this team's favor.

Of course, the same thing can be said of just about any team in the NFL. A month or two ago, I wonder what Atlanta fans thought their team's record would be in 2007. I wonder what they think now.

[GrnBay007]

Some surprising/special things will happen this season. 10-6 or +. Gotta believe. :mrgreen:

[the_idle_threat]

OK ... can I change my vote??? :D

[retailguy]

Some surprising/special things will happen this season. 10-6 or +. Gotta believe. :mrgreen:


Can I have some of what you're drinking? Can I look at the schedule from your angle?

This reminds me of the old Packer newspaper that had a column in it by Ray Nitchke. Every year he predicted that they "could" go 10-6 this season.... AND HOW. :wink:

[Bretsky]

Some surprising/special things will happen this season. 10-6 or +. Gotta believe. :mrgreen:

I believe we'll see plenty of surprises, maybe some amazing records broken

But I'm not kool aidy enough to have the faith that Green Bay's young players will improve that much more then the rest of the leagues

Free agency, we maybe added one piece of cheap depth at one position. Did signing Frank Walker help us gain a competitive edge on the rest of the NFC ?

I'm at peace with Harrell, but overall rookies will not have huge contributions, especially if they are not inserted at a need type positioin and he enters a position of solid depth.

Hopefully Jackson comes through, but does adding Jackson and losing Green help out offense ?

Hopefully Jones or Clowny add depth.

I would not be surprised with anything between 6-8 wins
I'd be surprised with 9, and amazed with 10 at this point.

[The Leaper]

I think 6-10 or worse is more likely. A major injury at the wrong position could seriously cripple this team. They can't really make up any ground on the division...they were 5-1 in the division last year. That isn't likely to happen again, regardless of how much we've improved. Rivalries tend to be based less on who is better and more on who is more motivated and can take advantage of known mismatches in their favor.

There are far too many questions and too many young players who will still be using this season as a learning experience. The schedule is very tough on the front end...we could be out of contention by December and playing more young guys for evaluation purposes.

10 wins just seems like a lot...that would've tied them for 2nd in the NFC last year. I just don't see how we are going to make that kind of progress in one year without adding any potential impact veterans in free agency (such as Pickett or Woodson last year).

[MJZiggy]

Rivalries tend to be based less on who is better and more on who is more motivated and can take advantage of known mismatches in their favor.

I don't know, Man, I thought we kicked the snot out of the Bears all those years because we were better than they were... :P

[Freak Out]

14-2 :smk: :alc: Kickin ass and taking names.

[The Leaper]

I don't know, Man, I thought we kicked the snot out of the Bears all those years because we were better than they were... :P

Well, when you are THAT much better, as Green Bay was during most of the 1990s, it probably doesn't matter. However, I don't think anyone in the division is THAT much better right now...which is why it is less likely we are going to go 5-1 again.

[Freak Out]

14-2 :smk: :alc: Kickin ass and taking names.

Ok.....10-6. I think they are going to surprise us all and win a few where the odds are against them, although I do think it will be a rough start. The run game will get going and we'll be ok. :rock:

[BallHawk]

I think it is more likely that they will be under .500.

However, wishful thinking (with a swig of kool-aid) makes me say that they will be above .500.

[Bretsky]

I don't know, Man, I thought we kicked the snot out of the Bears all those years because we were better than they were... :P

Well, when you are THAT much better, as Green Bay was during most of the 1990s, it probably doesn't matter. However, I don't think anyone in the division is THAT much better right now...which is why it is less likely we are going to go 5-1 again.


IMO it will be very hard to go 5-1 again in the division. Minnesota, Detroit, and Green Bay all could knock each other out from the looks of it. If I had to guess I'd go 3-3. I remember when we wanted to sweep out division; I'd take 4 wins in a second going into the season.

[Bretsky]

I think it is more likely that they will be under .500.

However, wishful thinking (with a swig of kool-aid) makes me say that they will be above .500.


I hope your wishful thinking is right

I was wondering if the Snapper loyalists would all cling to 10-6, but that does not seem to be the case

[BEARMAN]

14-2 :smk: :alc: Kickin ass and taking names.

NO more kool-aid for you !

6 - 10 is being optimistic ! :shock:

[the_idle_threat]

6 - 10 is being optimistic ! :shock:

With all the turmoil on the defensive side of the ball, plus the Wrex Grossman factor, I was thinking the same thing ... about the Bears. :P :P :P

[oregonpackfan]

Even though I think the team has a good chance of being 9-7 or maybe even 10-6 if things go right, I had to pick 6-10.

They're only 10-6 or better if just about everything goes right, whereas, if one or more things go wrong---out of a slew of possible things---they're down to 6-10 or worse.

The odds of 10-6 or better are not in this team's favor.

.

I would have to agree with Idle threat on this one. For everything to go right, these have to happen:

1. O-line improves to the point where they don't need 7 to block and can consistently make holes for the RB's.

2. Morency and Jackson make a strong 1-2 running punch where you can interchange one for the other.

3. A solid #3 receiver steps up and becomes a consistent starter.

4. We have a TE who can consistently catch the ball.

5. Marquand, Collins, and Underwood become stable safeties,

6. Avoid injuries to key players, especially Favre.

[GBRulz]

I want us to start winning at home again.

I'd rather finish 6-10, having all of those wins at home vs. 10-6 and only winning 2 games at home. Lambeau is no longer feared by opposing teams. I want that mystique back !!

[HarveyWallbangers]

I want us to start winning at home again.

That's because you go to the games.
:D

[Tony Oday]

10-6. The division got worse and we are getting better. The Lions are well the lions, the Vikes, well they have TJack at QB, The Bears will have the usual NFC losers slump.

10-6 baby! :glug:

[Rastak]

10-6. The division got worse and we are getting better. The Lions are well the lions, the Vikes, well they have TJack at QB, The Bears will have the usual NFC losers slump.

10-6 baby! :glug:


How did the Vikings get worse......did you see Brad Johnson last year. It CAN'T get worse. And don't forget AD......


that having been said if I were voting this same poll for the Vikings I'd vote the same as I did for the Packers.....6-10. I don't think either team is anything to write home about.

[Bretsky]

10-6. The division got worse and we are getting better. The Lions are well the lions, the Vikes, well they have TJack at QB, The Bears will have the usual NFC losers slump.

10-6 baby! :glug:


How did the Vikings get worse......did you see Brad Johnson last year. It CAN'T get worse. And don't forget AD......


that having been said if I were voting this same poll for the Vikings I'd vote the same as I did for the Packers.....6-10. I don't think either team is anything to write home about.


Division wise I'd vote that 6-10 is more likely for the Lions, Vikings, and Packers while 10-6 is more likely for the Bears

[wist43]

Even assuming they sweep the division and go 6-0, where do the other 4 wins come from???

They'll be underdogs against Philly, NYG, SD, Den, KC, Carolina, Dall, and STL... that's 8 of the remaining 10 games. They'll probably be favored at home against Washington and Oakland.

The odds of them getting to 10 wins are very long.

[Zool]

What about wins 7-9? Or is it a boom or bust season?

[retailguy]

What about wins 7-9? Or is it a boom or bust season?

It's a boom/bust season. They either surprise or underachieve. Most likely they underachieve as too many things need to go right for them to achieve.

Odds are truly stacked against them. I just hope they improve. There were too many games last year where they did not play well as a team. Ppl point to the Pats & Jets, but there were other games as well where they really were not competitive. I will be happy if we just see competitive football even when we lose.

[Zool]

What about wins 7-9? Or is it a boom or bust season?

It's a boom/bust season. They either surprise or underachieve. Most likely they underachieve as too many things need to go right for them to achieve.

Odds are truly stacked against them. I just hope they improve. There were too many games last year where they did not play well as a team. Ppl point to the Pats & Jets, but there were other games as well where they really were not competitive. I will be happy if we just see competitive football even when we lose.I completely agree with this. Competitive football with limited mistakes is what I want to see from this team.

[woodbuck27]

I think it is more likely that they will be under .500.

However, wishful thinking (with a swig of kool-aid) makes me say that they will be above .500.

I consider you to be a very intelligent young man.

My respect for your sense of reality is no less. :)

[woodbuck27]

Even assuming they sweep the division and go 6-0, where do the other 4 wins come from???

They'll be underdogs against Philly, NYG, SD, Den, KC, Carolina, Dall, and STL... that's 8 of the remaining 10 games. They'll probably be favored at home against Washington and Oakland.

The odds of them getting to 10 wins are very long.

If we get 9 wins. I'll certainly be overjoyed.

We have to get it on in our division. Win at least 4 of 6. All NFC games will be no nonsense - no excuse must wins.

So hypothetically, lets go for 4 wins there.

Next. .

Philly, NYG, SD, Den, KC, Carolina, Dall, and STL. . .

All very solid teams but we take 2 of 4 fr.:

the Giants (very possible),the Chiefs (on the road makes this one difficult and it's the second of two games on the road in a row), the Panthers (will step up this season, after a solid off season and have always given us fits) and the Rams (that won't be a cake walk but we can take this team).


That gives us 6 wins. . . and in the other two games.

We can defeat the Raiders but the Redskins won't be easy. This Washington team may be a huge surprise this season with alot of the pieces in place.

I'm seeing at this point, 7 or 8 wins maximum. That if all goes really well.

GOD help us. If we suffer adversity in TC and lose a valuable player for an extended period or the season.

We don't have the blessings of a lot of depth. Look at our ST's. The talk was that TT drafted for just that, They are only Rookies and unproven as players that will make any real contribution.

If we lose even one of two particular players during the season. You decide on your two.

Just how bad will that be?

[woodbuck27]

10-6. The division got worse and we are getting better. The Lions are well the lions, the Vikes, well they have TJack at QB, The Bears will have the usual NFC losers slump.

10-6 baby! :glug:

Always the optimist. :)

We could certainly take 5 of 6 in our division.

The Lions have to get there sometime though. Maybe not? :)

[Bretsky]

What about wins 7-9? Or is it a boom or bust season?


Didn't you read the first post comments ? :wink:

Everybody is predicting between 7-9 wins. That's why it's not included; it's the ez pick.

This poll demands a statement as to your confidence in how fast GB is moving past its peers as a football team.

There are of course other factors such as the schedule, but to be honest I'm pretty surprised at the results.

With all the kool aide homerism for the Snapper methodology I would have expected more to argue our strategies our working better and faster than our competitors and we're not far away from 10-6

[BEARMAN]

6 - 10 is being optimistic ! :shock:

With all the turmoil on the defensive side of the ball, plus the Wrex Grossman factor, I was thinking the same thing ... about the Bears. :P :P :P

What turmoil? Briggs will play, he will not forfit almost 1/2 million a game check ! Tank was good, but Da BEARS have already replaced him, with draft picks, free agency picks and injured players returning to full strength. Our feenon Devon Hester is playing "O" now (look out !) We got the best TE in the draft, giving Rex more targets. Rex will run the shotgun this season giving him more time to burn you deep. Our "D" is a solid as it was last year and our "O" is way better this year ! LOOK OUT cheeseheads, Da BEARS are coming, and they are Hungery ! :twisted:

[Harlan Huckleby]

The only position on the whole team that I see as hopeless is TE. The rest of the offense is wildly unpredictable. We don't know how good the offensive line might be, or the running backs, or the 2->5 wide recievers.

[Zool]

6 - 10 is being optimistic ! :shock:

With all the turmoil on the defensive side of the ball, plus the Wrex Grossman factor, I was thinking the same thing ... about the Bears. :P :P :P

What turmoil? Briggs will play, he will not forfit almost 1/2 million a game check ! Tank was good, but Da BEARS have already replaced him, with draft picks, free agency picks and injured players returning to full strength. Our feenon Devon Hester is playing "O" now (look out !) We got the best TE in the draft, giving Rex more targets. Rex will run the shotgun this season giving him more time to burn you deep. Our "D" is a solid as it was last year and our "O" is way better this year ! LOOK OUT cheeseheads, Da BEARS are coming, and they are Hungery ! :twisted:

I'm starting to think you do this on purpose, but here goes.

Funny, the Bears don't look Hungarian

[Joemailman]

6 - 10 is being optimistic ! :shock:

With all the turmoil on the defensive side of the ball, plus the Wrex Grossman factor, I was thinking the same thing ... about the Bears. :P :P :P

What turmoil? Briggs will play, he will not forfit almost 1/2 million a game check ! Tank was good, but Da BEARS have already replaced him, with draft picks, free agency picks and injured players returning to full strength. Our feenon Devon Hester is playing "O" now (look out !) We got the best TE in the draft, giving Rex more targets. Rex will run the shotgun this season giving him more time to burn you deep. Our "D" is a solid as it was last year and our "O" is way better this year ! LOOK OUT cheeseheads, Da BEARS are coming, and they are Hungery ! :twisted:

What's a feenon? :huh:

[the_idle_threat]

6 - 10 is being optimistic ! :shock:

With all the turmoil on the defensive side of the ball, plus the Wrex Grossman factor, I was thinking the same thing ... about the Bears. :P :P :P

What turmoil? Briggs will play, he will not forfit almost 1/2 million a game check ! Tank was good, but Da BEARS have already replaced him, with draft picks, free agency picks and injured players returning to full strength. Our feenon Devon Hester is playing "O" now (look out !) We got the best TE in the draft, giving Rex more targets. Rex will run the shotgun this season giving him more time to burn you deep. Our "D" is a solid as it was last year and our "O" is way better this year ! LOOK OUT cheeseheads, Da BEARS are coming, and they are Hungery ! :twisted:

What's a feenon? :huh:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Phenom?

Gotta love phonetic spelling!

[MasonCrosby]

Even assuming they sweep the division and go 6-0, where do the other 4 wins come from???

They'll be underdogs against Philly, NYG, SD, Den, KC, Carolina, Dall, and STL... that's 8 of the remaining 10 games. They'll probably be favored at home against Washington and Oakland.

The odds of them getting to 10 wins are very long.

If we get 9 wins. I'll certainly be overjoyed.

We have to get it on in our division. Win at least 4 of 6. All NFC games will be no nonsense - no excuse must wins.

So hypothetically, lets go for 4 wins there.

Next. .

Philly, NYG, SD, Den, KC, Carolina, Dall, and STL. . .

All very solid teams but we take 2 of 4 fr.:

the Giants (very possible),the Chiefs (on the road makes this one difficult and it's the second of two games on the road in a row), the Panthers (will step up this season, after a solid off season and have always given us fits) and the Rams (that won't be a cake walk but we can take this team).


That gives us 6 wins. . . and in the other two games.

We can defeat the Raiders but the Redskins won't be easy. This Washington team may be a huge surprise this season with alot of the pieces in place.

I'm seeing at this point, 7 or 8 wins maximum. That if all goes really well.

GOD help us. If we suffer adversity in TC and lose a valuable player for an extended period or the season.

We don't have the blessings of a lot of depth. Look at our ST's. The talk was that TT drafted for just that, They are only Rookies and unproven as players that will make any real contribution.

If we lose even one of two particular players during the season. You decide on your two.

Just how bad will that be?

i think in addition they could also beat the eagles, who i really don't see as that much better, after losing garcia and stallworth in free agency and having to put Mcnabb back in as QB

[Bretsky]

When healthy McNabb is still one of the top 7 QB's in the NFL; probably top 6. And Reid is pretty dang good coach; he beat Sherman teams that were far more talented IMO.

[Noodle]

With all the kool aide homerism for the Snapper methodology I would have expected more to argue our strategies our working better and faster than our competitors and we're not far away from 10-6

I find this odd as well. There is near universal acceptance of, and even some love for, the TT way. Yet here we are, almost 3 years in to his reign, and most here think we won't bust 500.

So, is that ok? Or do folks still lay this all on Sherman? Me, I think TT has brought in only 1 true impact player -- Woodson. He's brought in some solid guys, like Hawk, Pickett, and Jennings, but that's not enough. And the proof is in the large number of people here, as optomisitic a bunch as you'll find, who think we won't win more than we'll lose.

[MJZiggy]

The team seems to think they'll win more than they'll lose...

[Joemailman]

With all the kool aide homerism for the Snapper methodology I would have expected more to argue our strategies our working better and faster than our competitors and we're not far away from 10-6

I find this odd as well. There is near universal acceptance of, and even some love for, the TT way. Yet here we are, almost 3 years in to his reign, and most here think we won't bust 500.

So, is that ok? Or do folks still lay this all on Sherman? Me, I think TT has brought in only 1 true impact player -- Woodson. He's brought in some solid guys, like Hawk, Pickett, and Jennings, but that's not enough. And the proof is in the large number of people here, as optomisitic a bunch as you'll find, who think we won't win more than we'll lose.

I guess I'm considered one of the Kool-Aid Drinkers, and I too am surprised by the results of the poll. I think a lot of people have bought into the argument that "The Pack might be better, but because of a tough schedule, their record may not reflect that." I don't buy it. I think if they improve, they'll win more than they'll lose. I also think some have been swayed by the argument that the 4 wins at the end of the season were insignificant because of the level of competition. I think 4 straight wins in the NFL is always impressive, especially for a team as young as the Packers.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I find this odd as well. There is near universal acceptance of, and even some love for, the TT way. Yet here we are, almost 3 years in to his reign, and most here think we won't bust 500.

Well, this is his third year. We haven't seen his third draft play yet. I, for one, gave him a pass his first year. He had a decent team that was really getting old and no cap room. He lost Wahle, Rivera, and Sharper almost immediately after he took over. He couldn't tear it down while they were coming off 10-6, but once they had the injuries and hit rock bottom the next year, the rebuilding started. He's in year two of the rebuilding process, and that's why I expect the big-time results to happen next year. I'll be content with a team that is solid this year, but the schedule is brutal, so I'm not sure it will show up in wins and losses like some think it should.

[the_idle_threat]

And the proof is in the large number of people here, as optomisitic a bunch as you'll find, who think we won't win more than we'll lose.

I don't reach that same conclusion from this poll.

For one thing, 9-7 is not an option in this poll, and it would be a winning record. Considering that only 3 teams in the entire NFC finished better than 9-7 last season, and 10-6 was good enough for a 1st round bye, perhaps the optimists think we could have a winning team but stop short of saying the team is on par with the top 3 teams in the conference.

Also, the poll is asking whether it is more likely the team will finish at 10-6 vs. 6-10.

Especially now---when it's so early and we haven't seen how the question marks will iron themselves out in camp---it's more likely something will go wrong rather than everything will go right.

I don't think that's an indictment of the team or of TT. I think that's a reality shared by most (if not all) teams in the league at this point in the summer.

IMO, there are maybe a half-dozen teams in the entire league---if that---who are more likely to be 10-6 as opposed to 6-10. Everyone else has some big question marks, and there's always the looming presence of injury or a Vick-like implosion from a star player.

[Bretsky]

With all the kool aide homerism for the Snapper methodology I would have expected more to argue our strategies our working better and faster than our competitors and we're not far away from 10-6

I find this odd as well. There is near universal acceptance of, and even some love for, the TT way. Yet here we are, almost 3 years in to his reign, and most here think we won't bust 500.

So, is that ok? Or do folks still lay this all on Sherman? Me, I think TT has brought in only 1 true impact player -- Woodson. He's brought in some solid guys, like Hawk, Pickett, and Jennings, but that's not enough. And the proof is in the large number of people here, as optomisitic a bunch as you'll find, who think we won't win more than we'll lose.



:bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap:

[Bretsky]

And the proof is in the large number of people here, as optomisitic a bunch as you'll find, who think we won't win more than we'll lose.

I don't reach that same conclusion from this poll.

For one thing, 9-7 is not an option in this poll, and it would be a winning record. Considering that only 3 teams in the entire NFC finished better than 9-7 last season, and 10-6 was good enough for a 1st round bye, perhaps the optimists think we could have a winning team but stop short of saying the team is on par with the top 3 teams in the conference.

Also, the poll is asking whether it is more likely the team will finish at 10-6 vs. 6-10.

Especially now---when it's so early and we haven't seen how the question marks will iron themselves out in camp---it's more likely something will go wrong rather than everything will go right.

I don't think that's an indictment of the team or of TT. I think that's a reality shared by most (if not all) teams in the league at this point in the summer.

IMO, there are maybe a half-dozen teams in the entire league---if that---who are more likely to be 10-6 as opposed to 6-10. Everyone else has some big question marks, and there's always the looming presence of injury or a Vick-like implosion from a star player.


Right or wrong, my assumption was that anybody who truly believes Green Bay will go 9-7 would select 10-6.

And this topic, which was well thought out to purposely eliminate all of the easy predictions in the 7-9 win area, was intended to get the 8-8 people to commit one way.

[the_idle_threat]

Right or wrong, my assumption was that anybody who truly believes Green Bay will go 9-7 would select 10-6.


I don't think that's a fair assumption.

Given what looks like a tougher schedule this year as compared to last, I'm not willing to say that they'll win 10 even if I might think they can eke out 9. Each marginal win comes with great difficulty. This is especially the case given that a 10-6 team in the NFC is one of the top 3 teams in the conference.

On the other hand, it's very easy for something to go wrong and the team loses a few more than expected.

[retailguy]

Right or wrong, my assumption was that anybody who truly believes Green Bay will go 9-7 would select 10-6.


I don't think that's a fair assumption.

Given what looks like a tougher schedule this year as compared to last, I'm not willing to say that they'll win 10 even if I might think they can eke out 9. Each marginal win comes with great difficulty. This is especially the case given that a 10-6 team in the NFC is one of the top 3 teams in the conference.

On the other hand, it's very easy for something to go wrong and the team loses a few more than expected.

And what this all means in simple english, is, that when you look at the talent level of the Packers, you look at the schedule, you look at the holes on the team, you just don't see 10 wins.... They just aren't there. However, you see very clearly what can happen if a few critical things go wrong, as happened in 2005. Face it, we get a couple of injuries at critical positions of little depth, and/or, have a poor OL, this team's goose is COOKED.

[Bretsky]

I'm in search of a thread and thought I'd bump this one for any new voters

[swede]

I'm with Idle on this one.

The most likely choices weren't options. 6-10 is only more likely than 10-6.

Injuries or mistakes by young players are more likely at this point than the kind of blessed football luck needed for this team to finish at 10-6.

Yet I also think it is more likely that this team will go 10-6 than 5-11 but that wasn't a choice either.

I'm pleased with the progress on defense. Defense is the foundation of a champion and we will be in every game we play this year because of it.

I think my lack of confidence in this team's potential for racking up double-digit wins stems from my lack of confidence in the coaching and schemes. The linebacker coach is about the only guy on the coaching staff that has me believing. And this is really scary because if the coaching staff gets sacked it would once again take three-five years to rebuild, and next time it would be without Favre.

MM is lucky everybody bitches about TT non-stop. This seems to take the immediate pressure off of Philbin, and Sanders and MM himself.

[PackerBlues]

I think 6-10 is about right. Thompson already said that it was RB by committee, and I do not look at any single one of our RB's as being legitimate starters. Do you honestly think any other team would want one of our RB's as their starter going into the season.

At WR, we have Driver and Jennings, and after that, it may as well be WR by committee as well.

TE? Ouch!

Our Offense was pathetic last year, I dont see it being any better this year. Perhaps by about half way through the season some of the rookies may become familiar enough with the Offense to step up big time, but that may be just wishful thinking.

[superfan]

The most likely choices weren't options. 6-10 is only more likely than 10-6.

Injuries or mistakes by young players are more likely at this point than the kind of blessed football luck needed for this team to finish at 10-6...

Agree completely with swede.

Almost everything would need to go right for 10-6. Only a few things need to go wrong to slip to 6-10. I also agree that this statement holds true (to me) for all but maybe the top half dozen or so teams in the league.

I think GB has about an equal chance of going 7-9 as 9-7. 11-5 or better is almost unfathomable, as is 5-11 or worse.

I don't think it is fair to use this poll as an indicator of Thompson's performance to date. Anything can happen in one season. If the Bears regress badly this year, as has been the case recently with Super Bowl losers, is that the fault of Lovie Smith or the GM? Maybe, but not necessarily. Players can have down years, injuries happen, fluke plays and bad calls can cost teams games.

It is the job of the GM to put the pieces in place to help mitigate risks, but he can't control all of the variables.

[Bretsky]

GM's plan for injuries; the WILL happen and that is why a GM considers using all resources to have a team with depth. When they are outrageous, like our 4-12 season, they can have a greater effect. But every GM has to plan for injuries, which will occur.

Nearly everybody in the world is picking between 7-9 wins for Green Bay. I made this poll and thread to force people to think a bit outside the box and make a decision with stones.


Cheers,
B

[The Leaper]

When healthy McNabb is still one of the top 7 QB's in the NFL; probably top 6. And Reid is pretty dang good coach; he beat Sherman teams that were far more talented IMO.

Huh? The Eagles went to 4 straight NFC title games in Sherman's tenure. I think Reid's teams in the Sherman era were pretty damn talented...certainly not far less talented than Green Bay.

[The Leaper]

I'm thinking 7-8 wins is the most likely scenario at this point. Our defense should win a couple games on their own...and Favre is good for a couple games as well.

After the pathetic offensive showing the other night, thinking we can reach 10 wins would be a real stretch.

[Tony Oday]

I love living in the past :)

[oregonpackfan]

Thanks for bringing up this past post. Man, were most of us every wrong in our predictions, including me!

Yep, I admit it. I was wrong and am damn happy about it! :)

[Joemailman]

I was listening to ESPN 1070 when Heller and Murph were breaking down Peter King and his ratings.

Main points were the D should be slightly improved, ton of questions on O and a tougher schedule. While common predictions were in the 7-8 win range, hosts felt they would not be surprised if our record took a 2-3 game fall but anything with double digit wins would greatly surprise them.

So thought I'd bring the discussion to PR where the real experts reside :lol:


Things could go either way. All I know for sure is that this season is a direct reflection upon the job our GM is doing.

Will someone please tell this to Merlin?



14-2 :smk: :alc: Kickin ass and taking names.

NO more kool-aid for you !

6 - 10 is being optimistic ! :shock:

Bearman, we meant the Packers, not the Bears!

[Tony Oday]

Thanks for bringing up this past post. Man, were most of us every wrong in our predictions, including me!

Yep, I admit it. I was wrong and am damn happy about it! :)


lol I was wrong, barring a HUGE colapse, and I was saying 10-6! People thought I was drinking crack, yup drinking, when I said the PAck would win the division and the Bears would be better than 500. :)

[cpk1994]

I was listening to ESPN 1070 when Heller and Murph were breaking down Peter King and his ratings.

Main points were the D should be slightly improved, ton of questions on O and a tougher schedule. While common predictions were in the 7-8 win range, hosts felt they would not be surprised if our record took a 2-3 game fall but anything with double digit wins would greatly surprise them.

So thought I'd bring the discussion to PR where the real experts reside :lol:


Things could go either way. All I know for sure is that this season is a direct reflection upon the job our GM is doing.

Will someone please tell this to Merlin?



It doesn't matter if you tell Merlin. He will continue to claim that TT is satan and is flushing this team down the toilet, Rodgers is a bust, and Mason Crosby should not have been kept. Still entertaining to read his idiocy though. :)