Official Packers-Seahawks Thread

[Brohm]

There has been talk over the past few years about making adjustments to avoid the throw away games at the end of the year (teams resting starters etc because it's wrapped up) and making overall record matter more.

[gbgary]

tampa won

[imscott72]

Down go the Saints..Wow..

[The Leaper]

Dallas sucks, and when we needed the pass rush most against the Steelers it wasn't there.

Really? It was there on the second to last play...Jenkins should have ended it but couldn't get Ben on the ground.

Our pass rush is fine...it isn't elite, but they get to the QB enough to force turnovers.

[denverYooper]

Against great teams the pass rush hasn't been there.

They got pressure against both Dallas and Pittsburgh.

I think we also would do better against the VIkings now...our front seven has reached more of a comfort zone in the 4-3, which wasn't as true in the first half of the season.

Dallas sucks, and when we needed the pass rush most against the Steelers it wasn't there. I'd love to be wrong, I just think with dangerous pass heavy teams we're in trouble..

If against any other QB than Roethlisburger, Cullen gets the 6th sack to end the game.

[pbmax]

No, this D lacks conventional pass rushers. When a team is in throw only mode and the Packers are dropping seven or eight, their pass rush suffers. If Capers can blitz, then it works better.

What teams get great pass rush with a 3 man rush? If you are dropping 8, you aren't likely to get a pass rush...no matter if your OL has both Reggie White and Deacon Jones.

3 man lines, just like 4 man lines can get a rush, but the rate of success is lower for the 3 man and it takes longer. And that is fine as you don't even need the sack, you need to force the throw to come out. The Packers too often were doing neither.

[red]

is there any chance we can have a home playoff game? or do the wildcard teams automatically have to travel to a division winner, even if we have a better record?

Wildcards always are on the road.

Only chance we could have at a home game in NFCC game...against the #6 seed (if we remain the #5 seed).

thats crap, you're rewarding a team for being the best in a horrible division

it should all be based on record

if a team has the 3rd or 4th best record in their conference, they should host a first round game, even if they are a wildcard

I don't agree--then it would be like the NBA where divisions don't mean anything.

they still matter, you still get into the playoffs when you win a division. and that should be good enough

a team that goes 6-10 in a horrible division and wins the division is already getting a gift by being in the playoffs without being one of the 6 best teams

why reward them further by giving them a home game?

[denverYooper]

Playoffs.

Looks like numb needs to fix his sig.

[The Leaper]

There has been talk over the past few years about making adjustments to avoid the throw away games at the end of the year (teams resting starters etc because it's wrapped up) and making overall record matter more.

There will always be throw away games...impossible to eliminate them. But I do like the idea of eliminating the automatic home field for the division winners. Give division winners an automatic playoff berth...but seed everyone according to overall record.

[ICU81MI]

Packers, Philly and Minne look like the teams to beat in the NFC. Philly looks to be the best team.

[BallHawk]

a team that goes 6-10 in a horrible division and wins the division is already getting a gift by being in the playoffs without being one of the 6 best teams

But that's never happened before and likely will never happen. The worst record a division winner has ever had was 8-8 (1985 Browns). I see no problem with divisions.

[The Leaper]

But that's never happened before and likely will never happen. The worst record a division winner has ever had was 8-8 (1985 Browns). I see no problem with divisions.

I don't think anyone is arguing that division winners shouldn't make the playoffs...just that they shouldn't host playoff games against teams with better records.

[Packman_26]

a team that goes 6-10 in a horrible division and wins the division is already getting a gift by being in the playoffs without being one of the 6 best teams

But that's never happened before and likely will never happen. The worst record a division winner has ever had was 8-8 (1985 Browns). I see no problem with divisions.

Do you think that people are arguing to remove divisions? Thats not the case. They are simply saying that the seeds in the playoffs should be entirely based on overall record.
I find it hard to believe that you don't see anything wrong if an 11-5 wildcard team having to go play on the road in the playoffs against an 8-8 division winner.

[MJZiggy]

I'm not liking having to play the Cardinals in the playoffs though...I don't think we match up well with them.

I don't care if we play Jesus and the Angels in the playoffs, we made it in...

[Packman_26]

I will take this playoff argument one further and say that first round byes should also be based on overall record. Lets say the Packers and the Vikings have the same record at 13-3 but the Vikings beat the Packers twice. Under the current system even if the Packers had the second best record int he conference, they would have to play a road game in the first round of the playoffs. I would think that they should get a first round bye over an 11-5 division winner.