Vikings Week

[Fritz]

This is a classic "circle the wagons" game. Team under fire, playing like shit, an important opponent playing great football and on a roll.

I do think the Packers will play much, much better this week, and this will be close.

But if this is another ugly performance, with more confusion and more angry gesturing, then I'd say they're getting to be toast.

[Pugger]

This is a classic "circle the wagons" game. Team under fire, playing like shit, an important opponent playing great football and on a roll.

I do think the Packers will play much, much better this week, and this will be close.

But if this is another ugly performance, with more confusion and more angry gesturing, then I'd say they're getting to be toast.

That wouldn't take much...

[Fritz]

No, I mean much better. Not one drive at the end of the game. We're going to see more consistency (in a good way). It's possible that even if they lose, it will give (some) fans hope that it's almost not too late.

But, as I said, if it's another "we're barely awake" performance, then you can pretty much stick a fork in it.

Part of what's so confusing to me is the lack of energy.

[mraynrand]

No, I mean much better. Not one drive at the end of the game. We're going to see more consistency (in a good way). It's possible that even if they lose, it will give (some) fans hope that it's almost not too late.

But, as I said, if it's another "we're barely awake" performance, then you can pretty much stick a fork in it.

Part of what's so confusing to me is the lack of energy.

Guessing about the psychology: when stuff isn't working, players lose confidence, get distracted, etc.

That blow-up on the sideline at Carolina doesn't just happen overnight. Look at the players who are underperforming (for whatever reason): Peppers, Lacy, Matthews, R.Rodgers, Linsley, Sitton, Bulaga, Bacteria, Cobb, A. Rodgers,anyone on pass rush I've forgotten, the list goes on and on, but it's full of leaders both on the field and in the locker room. There has to be a frustration and when you start focusing on that, you're not focusing on what you're supposed to be doing to be effective - you are looking around and thinking about who's to blame, etc. It can get toxic and spiral down. That's where I think the Pack is now, and why they are gonna get absolutely destroyed tomorrow.

On offense, they have nothing to hang their hat on. Nothing really is working. For four games straight, they've gone stagnant and can't establish anything. Worst of all, Rodgers' play is going down the toilet. He had at least five passes that I saw that he normally completes that went high or into the dirt. And now he has to face a defense that he's never solved without a really strong running game. The run blocking sucks, and Lacy (fat) questionable probably isn't available, and even if he were he's be sluggish, slow and ineffective behind a shitty, confused, surrendering O-line. I am betting that Zimmer will pin the ears back, virtually ignore the run game and go get Rodgers from the first snap. I am betting that Bacteria and Bulaga will retreat right into his lap all day. Maybe they try a couple of screens, but the Vikes have pretty decent LBs who can get under that crap.

The defense might help keep them in this for a while, but you can't win in the NFL when your offense is in the dumper.

I just don't see how they clean up all their trash in one week.

[denverYooper]

Guessing about the psychology: when stuff isn't working, players lose confidence, get distracted, etc.

That blow-up on the sideline at Carolina doesn't just happen overnight. Look at the players who are underperforming (for whatever reason): Peppers, Lacy, Matthews, R.Rodgers, Linsley, Sitton, Bulaga, Bacteria, Cobb, A. Rodgers,anyone on pass rush I've forgotten, the list goes on and on, but it's full of leaders both on the field and in the locker room. There has to be a frustration and when you start focusing on that, you're not focusing on what you're supposed to be doing to be effective - you are looking around and thinking about who's to blame, etc. It can get toxic and spiral down. That's where I think the Pack is now, and why they are gonna get absolutely destroyed tomorrow.

On offense, they have nothing to hang their hat on. Nothing really is working. For four games straight, they've gone stagnant and can't establish anything. Worst of all, Rodgers' play is going down the toilet. He had at least five passes that I saw that he normally completes that went high or into the dirt. And now he has to face a defense that he's never solved without a really strong running game. The run blocking sucks, and Lacy (fat) questionable probably isn't available, and even if he were he's be sluggish, slow and ineffective behind a shitty, confused, surrendering O-line. I am betting that Zimmer will pin the ears back, virtually ignore the run game and go get Rodgers from the first snap. I am betting that Bacteria and Bulaga will retreat right into his lap all day. Maybe they try a couple of screens, but the Vikes have pretty decent LBs who can get under that crap.

The defense might help keep them in this for a while, but you can't win in the NFL when your offense is in the dumper.

I just don't see how they clean up all their trash in one week.

I know what you are saying and have seen similar dynamics play out on projects that are not going well. Those kinds of projects often become a slog at best and destroy the project team at worst. At root, there often seems to be a disconnect between different groups within the team and with management. Dialog becomes unhealthy and messages that aren't getting across turn into public acts of "throwing people under the bus". Sadly, the Packers seem to be headed to that place and it is a difficult hole to climb out of. A 3 game losing streak is something this team has not experienced in several years and the sustained disappointment is starting to show.

My last hope, and that which the fanatic in me will hang on to until the door is closed on the 2015 season, is that they have managed to pull out of offensive slumps before. How many years have we waited 1/2 a season or more for them to "figure it out"? They saw it happen in 2010 but their defense and opponent quality were sufficient to drag them through a multi-game offensive funk. They're clearly trying different players in an effort to find a spark.

You could be very right and it would not surprise me. When all is said and done this year, even though they will win some more games, we may look back on it as a failed project. Until that time, though, I'll continue to peg every week as the one where they figure it out and turn their season around.

This week is a great time for them to show some life

[red]

i don't have much hope for a win this week

last week against the worst team in the league was that game where things should have turned around

all we've heard this week is excuses and off the field bullshit. i doubt this team has its head screwed on right

not to mention we are about to ply a team that is very hungry and looking to make a huge statement against their biggest rival

i think we get another ugly loss

[pbmax]

Since the Packers won at Chicago late in 2012, the Packers have lost seven consecutive road games against teams that finished in the top six in scoring defense with Aaron Rodgers at quarterback. With Denver at 7-2 and ranking third in scoring defense and Carolina at 9-0 and ranking sixth, that losing streak essentially stands at nine games heading into Sunday’s showdown at Minnesota, which is 7-2 and ranks second in points allowed.

GAME		OPPONENT	SCORE	OPP PPG	AR RAT/YARDS	OPP. RAT/YARDS
2012, Divisinl	San Francisco	31-45	17.1	91.5/257	81.2200.2
2013, Week 1	San Francisco	28-34	17.0	102.6/333	78.6/221.0
2013, Week 3	Cincinnati	30-34	19.1	64.5/244	75.3/209.0
2014, Week 1	Seattle		16-36	15.9	81.5/189	78.8/185.6
2014, Week 3	Detroit		7-19	17.6	88.8/162	84.6/231.6
2014, Week 15	Buffalo		13-21	18.1	34.3/185	74.5205.8
2014, NFCC	Seattle		22-28	15.9	55.8/178	78.8/185.6
2015, Week 8	Denver		10-29	18.7	69.7/77		74.6/182.8
2015, Week 9	Carolina	29-37	19.4	96.6/369	69.1/234.6
Total				20.7	17.6	76.0/220.7	77.3/206.2

http://www.scout.com/nfl/packers/story/1614393-world-s-best-preview-look-at-the-rosters

[denverYooper]

A few things about the Lions:
1.) They aren't the worst team in the league. They've gotten blown out twice but have otherwise been competitive
2.) They have frequently given M3's Packers trouble over the years. Probably more than any other NFCN team. The Packers have gone 1-1 against the Lions over the last couple of years and the largest margin of victory since 2010 was 13 points in a home game that did not seem that close. They kicked 5 FGs because the offense kept getting bogged down in that game.
3.) They are still physical on defense despite the talent drain. The way they played the Packers last Sunday is a style that the Packers often struggle to score against.

The Packers still need to figure out which way is up but the loss to the Lions is not the harbinger of disaster some are making it out to be.

[denverYooper]

Since the Packers won at Chicago late in 2012, the Packers have lost seven consecutive road games against teams that finished in the top six in scoring defense with Aaron Rodgers at quarterback. With Denver at 7-2 and ranking third in scoring defense and Carolina at 9-0 and ranking sixth, that losing streak essentially stands at nine games heading into Sunday’s showdown at Minnesota, which is 7-2 and ranks second in points allowed.

http://www.scout.com/nfl/packers/sto...at-the-rosters

For the time being, FO still has the Packers above the Vikings in DVOA and division win probability. Their explanation from the DVOA article this week is interesting:

Why does DVOA seem so wrong about the Vikings?
There are some general reasons why the Vikings rank so low in DVOA. First, they've had phenomenal luck recovering fumbles. The Vikings have recovered 7 of 10 fumbles on offense, and 4 of 5 fumbles on defense. (They've had no fumbles on special teams. They had a muff, but those are almost always recovered by the return team.) Minnesota's 73 percent fumble recovery rate is second in the league this year. Only San Francisco has had better luck, recovering 75 percent of fumbles. (That's one of the reasons the 49ers are so far behind the rest of the league in the DVOA cellar despite winning three games.)
Second, the Vikings have had a very easy schedule so far. Based on average DVOA of opponent, the Vikings' past schedule ranks 31st -- only Atlanta has had it easier -- while their upcoming schedule is the toughest in the league. Their schedule has been particularly easy when it comes to opposing offenses, which is part of why the Vikings still rank just 20th in defensive DVOA even though they are second in the league in fewer points allowed. Five of Minnesota's nine games have come against the five worst offenses by DVOA: No. 28 Detroit (twice), No. 30 San Francisco, No. 31 St. Louis, and No. 32 Denver. The best offense they've faced this year is Oakland, which again helps explain why this week they had their highest single-game DVOA of the year at 44.7%.
But it's single games that create the biggest difference between Minnesota's DVOA and conventional wisdom, as you'll see when you look at the week-to-week graph for the Vikings' season so far.

Minnesota has four games with a single-game DVOA rating below zero. One is the loss to Denver, as expected. Another is a close win over Detroit, where the negative rating is not a huge surprise given the heavy downward adjustments that come from playing Detroit this season. The other two games are the real issue here: a Week 6 victory over Kansas City and that 20-3 faceplant against San Francisco way back on the first Monday night of the season.
I wrote about the Week 6 Kansas City game back after Week 6, calling it the kookiest, craziest result in a week filled with kooky DVOA results. The Vikings won 16-10 even though Kansas City gained 5.8 yards per play with a 47 percent success rate while Minnesota gained only 4.7 yards per play with a 33 percent success rate. Those stats certainly back the idea that Kansas City was the better team that day. And while the ratings for that game are part of why we've been so wrong about Minnesota since midseason, they are also part of why we've been so right about Kansas City in the same time period. After that game, Kansas City ranked 18th in DVOA despite being 1-5. Since then, the Chiefs have won three straight and moved into the DVOA top ten. We really can't ignore what DVOA tells us about Week 6.


On the other hand, it sure does look like we can ignore what DVOA tells us about Week 1, doesn't it? Minnesota's -92.7% DVOA for that loss to San Francisco is the second-lowest game by any team this year, trailing only Tampa Bay's Week 1 loss to Tennessee which now has a horrifying single-game DVOA of -121.3%. San Francisco may have three wins, but that's the only positive DVOA game the 49ers have had all season. There's extra reason to believe it might be a fluke: not only was it the first game of the season, but Minnesota was stuck playing the special late game of opening Monday night despite being a Central Time Zone team. Not that we have much history to look at a sample of Central and Eastern teams playing at 7:00 Pacific time, but it makes logical sense that like Pacific teams playing at 1:00 Eastern, this may have been a problem.
All the research we've done on the last 25 years of football tells us that the long-term view is usually better than the short-term, and we don't throw out games just because they look fluky. That game will count in Minnesota's DVOA all year. It will gradually fade out in the weighted DVOA formula, but it won't disappear entirely until Week 15. Nonetheless, take that game out and the Vikings look a lot different. This table shows how Minnesota's rating moves closer to conventional wisdom has you forget about Week 1, strength of schedule, and then fumble recovery luck.

[pbmax]

Green Bay Packers @packers 8m8 minutes ago
Micah Hyde, T.J. Lang upgraded to PROBABLE for Sunday vs. Vikings. Injury updates: http://pckrs.com/p4t8 #GBvsMIN

Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter 5m5 minutes ago
Packers added CB Damarious Randall (hamstring) to injury report and he is questionable for Sunday's game vs. Vikings.

Michael Cohen @Michael_Cohen13 2m2 minutes ago
Micah Hyde (hip) and T.J. Lang (shoulder) have been upgraded to probable. Ty Montgomery (ankle) is doubtful.

[Fritz]

Green Bay Packers @packers 8m8 minutes ago
Micah Hyde, T.J. Lang upgraded to PROBABLE for Sunday vs. Vikings. Injury updates: http://pckrs.com/p4t8 #GBvsMIN

Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter 5m5 minutes ago
Packers added CB Damarious Randall (hamstring) to injury report and he is questionable for Sunday's game vs. Vikings.

Michael Cohen @Michael_Cohen13 2m2 minutes ago
Micah Hyde (hip) and T.J. Lang (shoulder) have been upgraded to probable. Ty Montgomery (ankle) is doubtful.

Next man up - "Fat" Rollins!😁

[pbmax]

Weston Hodkiewicz @WesHod 1h1 hour ago
The #Packers added a player to injury report (not personal/illness) midweek five times in 2014 reg. season. Already happened 14 times in '15

They do have a Saturday practice now (did last year too) so there are going to be updates compared to the theoretical Friday report. But is this just random, or more/less honesty?

[denverYooper]

Hell if I know.

I always thought it would be a fun little linguistics project to analyze communications circulating from coaches and players against things like the injury report/starting lineup/snap counts/etc to see if there are clear signals from different teams. The M3 n-gram analyzer.

Yeah. One of these years I might get around to it.

If there is one thing I know it is that "Significant" = IR.