Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why the Packers should win the NFC North

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why the Packers should win the NFC North

    A simplistic analysis of why the Packers should win the NFC North:

    The Packers have scored 34 more points than the Bears, 51 more than the Vikings.
    The Packers have given up 22 fewer points than the Bears, 25 fewer than the Vikings.
    The Packers are +65 in point differential.
    The Bears are +9
    The Vikings are -11

    As the number of games played increases, if the offensive and defensive trends continue, scoring more than Bears and Vikings while at the same time being scored on less than the Bears and Vikings should result in the Packers finishing with more wins than either the Bears or Vikings over the course of a full season.

    By the way - the Lions have not yet been mathematically eliminated. Since they are 0-10, the fact they are not is an embarrassment to the NFC North.

  • #2
    So have the bears and vikes been patlerized??

    Anyway if we beat the bears again and don't die against the lions we should absolutely win the division as we will own every tie breaker by the looks of it.

    That being said if the bears punk us in soldier it gets murky. What would that put the bears record in division?? If it would make them 5-1 then they would own the first tie breaker and we would have to finish a game ahead. I know the division matchups aren't done yet, and I would just as soon win out and make it moot.
    The only time success comes before work is in the dictionary -- Vince Lombardi

    Comment


    • #3
      So, my dear Patler, you are going out a a real limb here!

      You are basically saying, by default, the 0-10 Lions cannot make it to 6-10, whilst you are hysterically predicting that one of the 3 remaining teams will most certainly win at least 2 more contests!!

      I sneeze in your general direction!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Anyone think any of the quarterbacks or wide receivers from the Bears or Vikings could break into the Packers starting line up?
        Lombardi told Starr to "Run it, and let's get the hell out of here!" - 'Ice Bowl' December 31, 1967

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sheepshead
          Anyone think any of the quarterbacks or wide receivers from the Bears or Vikings could break into the Packers starting line up?
          They would have a hard time making the practice squad
          Swede: My expertise in this area is extensive. The essential difference between a "battleship" and an "aircraft carrier" is that an aircraft carrier requires five direct hits to sink, but it takes only four direct hits to sink a battleship.

          Comment


          • #6
            agreed
            Lombardi told Starr to "Run it, and let's get the hell out of here!" - 'Ice Bowl' December 31, 1967

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Tarlam!
              So, my dear Patler, you are going out a a real limb here!

              You are basically saying, by default, the 0-10 Lions cannot make it to 6-10, whilst you are hysterically predicting that one of the 3 remaining teams will most certainly win at least 2 more contests!!
              I know, its a bold prediction, but I am sticking with it!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by sheepshead
                Anyone think any of the quarterbacks or wide receivers from the Bears or Vikings could break into the Packers starting line up?
                I don't think any of the QB's or WR's from the Bears or Vikings could even make our gameday roster.

                A few might have found a home on our PS though.
                Chuck Norris doesn't cut his grass, he just stares at it and dares it to grow

                Comment


                • #9
                  That's a mighty fine theory you have there, Patler. One might even call it Pythagorean!
                  Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by pbmax
                    That's a mighty fine theory you have there, Patler. One might even call it Pythagorean!
                    I prefer Patlagorean!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why the Packers should win the NFC North

                      Originally posted by Patler
                      A simplistic analysis of why the Packers should win the NFC North:

                      The Packers have scored 34 more points than the Bears, 51 more than the Vikings.
                      The Packers have given up 22 fewer points than the Bears, 25 fewer than the Vikings.
                      The Packers are +65 in point differential.
                      The Bears are +9
                      The Vikings are -11

                      As the number of games played increases, if the offensive and defensive trends continue, scoring more than Bears and Vikings while at the same time being scored on less than the Bears and Vikings should result in the Packers finishing with more wins than either the Bears or Vikings over the course of a full season.

                      By the way - the Lions have not yet been mathematically eliminated. Since they are 0-10, the fact they are not is an embarrassment to the NFC North.
                      Since the Bears and Packers play each other one more time, wouldn't the Lions be mathematically out of it? One of those teams will get to 6 wins minimum and both are 3-1 in the division. The Lions max win total this year is 6 and they are 0-4 in the division right now.
                      Originally posted by 3irty1
                      This is museum quality stupidity.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why the Packers should win the NFC North

                        Originally posted by Zool
                        Originally posted by Patler
                        A simplistic analysis of why the Packers should win the NFC North:

                        The Packers have scored 34 more points than the Bears, 51 more than the Vikings.
                        The Packers have given up 22 fewer points than the Bears, 25 fewer than the Vikings.
                        The Packers are +65 in point differential.
                        The Bears are +9
                        The Vikings are -11

                        As the number of games played increases, if the offensive and defensive trends continue, scoring more than Bears and Vikings while at the same time being scored on less than the Bears and Vikings should result in the Packers finishing with more wins than either the Bears or Vikings over the course of a full season.

                        By the way - the Lions have not yet been mathematically eliminated. Since they are 0-10, the fact they are not is an embarrassment to the NFC North.
                        Since the Bears and Packers play each other one more time, wouldn't the Lions be mathematically out of it? One of those teams will get to 6 wins minimum and both are 3-1 in the division. The Lions max win total this year is 6 and they are 0-4 in the division right now.
                        Ah, but you just as Donovan McNabb, have forgotten about the possibilities of ties. However, it does get confusing, because the Bears also play MN again. SO for neither the Packers or the Vikings to get to 6 wins, the Bears would have to tie both, making them 5-9-2.

                        If the Lions get to 6-10, they would beat the Packers, who could beat the Bears and none else, who could beat the Vikings and no one else, or the Vikings could beat the Bears, etc. etc. At any rate, I think it is possible for all four teams to get to 6-10. I have no idea what the tie breaker is in that situation.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Crap. I thought I had you.
                          Originally posted by 3irty1
                          This is museum quality stupidity.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Here's another good reason : Packers rank Fifth in the nation in DVOA from Football outsiders.

                            According to their metrics, we're a much better team than our record would indicate because of how closely we lost the games we lost.

                            They give us a 66% probability to get into the playoffs.


                            Also, Carolina is ranked 9th despite an 8-2 record because of the ease of their schedule thus far. So, we're well favored in every matchup that we'll face for the rest of the season.

                            This is raising my hopes for 5-1. Now if only we weren't 32nd in the league defending the run on second down

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by boiga
                              Here's another good reason : Packers rank Fifth in the nation in DVOA from Football outsiders.

                              According to their metrics, we're a much better team than our record would indicate because of how closely we lost the games we lost.

                              They give us a 66% probability to get into the playoffs.

                              Also, Carolina is ranked 9th despite an 8-2 record because of the ease of their schedule thus far. So, we're well favored in every matchup that we'll face for the rest of the season.
                              I'm telling you, it doesn't need to be that complicated!
                              All the Packer have to do is finish better than the Bears and Vikings. We score more than either of them. We get scored on less than either of them. We will win more than either of them.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X