Ouch! Detroit by 6.5

[GrnBay007]

Fosco --

Sent you a PM with the link to that site. Good luck!

[HarveyWallbangers]

Packers will prolly lose

I don't get prolly as an abbreviation for probably. It sounds silly, and it only saves two characters. Is it really that tough to type the entire word.

[GrnBay007]

Packers will prolly lose

I don't get prolly as an abbreviation for probably. It sounds silly, and it only saves two characters. Is it really that tough to type the entire word.

It's the "hip" way of talking these days Harv!!

....You know.......like calling your friend a "bitch"......LOL

[mmmdk]

Re: Detroit

The Packer teams that were much better than this one struggled in Detroit so this spread is not surprising. The only thing I care about in this game is our pass D. If a terrible QB like Kitna torches us, then all this talk about how we'll improve as the season wears on is nothing but BS.

Agreed. If the Lions have a big passing game, prospects for this year will look very bad. 220 of New Orleans' yards on Sunday occurred on 7 plays. If the Packers secondary can stop the big plays, Packers have an excellent shot at a win.

220 yards through the air on 7 plays - that's ugly. Kitna ain't bad. It's not a good matchup for the Pack - the Detroit front 7 will eat our O-line and TEs alive. Gotta find a way to win anyway - look for Favre as always.

[Bretsky]

Packers will prolly lose

I don't get prolly as an abbreviation for probably. It sounds silly, and it only saves two characters. Is it really that tough to type the entire word.

Sounds like HW was prolly a bit winy be4 hitin da sak

[Scott Campbell]

The game is indoors on turf, and that's been a struggle for years regardless of who were playing.

[mmmdk]

Not trying to bring HC McCarthy down but as a SF OC, McCarthy/49ers offense had 77 three & outs last season plus the TEs had only 20 catches combined all season. Damn, that's bad. The 49er QBs were awful last year though.

[Fritz]

[quote="HarveyWallbangers"]

Packers will prolly lose

I don't get prolly as an abbreviation for probably. It sounds silly, and it only saves two characters. Is it really that tough to type the entire word.[/quote]

Prolly.

[]{ilr]3]

Not too surprising. Pack usually struggles at the Dome against the Lions. Look at recent history. Even the '03 team that should have went to the NFC Championship game got their lunch handed to them by the Lions that season. Favre has always struggled for the most part on the road against the Lions too.

I don't like this matchup for us at all. They have a stout front and held the Seahawks to nine points in the home opener. I see a low scoring snooze-fest.

I think that was one of there Turkey Day specials though. Basically there Super Bowl so they tend to actually play the game

[BallHawk]

The Pack are probably the better team, but we just can't win in Ford Field. It's like how the Brewers can't win in PNC Park, even though the Pirates are a bad team.

[Fritz]

The whole point spread thing is so misleading. Geez...6.5 points....sounds like a huge spread, ohmygod what do they think of the Pack, then?

But consider this scenario: It's a tight game, the whole way. Back and forth. Game gets down to two minutes or so, Ahman Green fumbles as Green Bay crosses the fifty. A linebacker picks it up, runs it back until he's caught at the Green Bay forty. Lions run two plays, and on third down, Ahmad Carroll gets called for a phantom hold, just because the refs know his reputation, and on second and goal from the one, Kevin Jones plunges in. Game over, Lions cover the spread.

In that scenario, or a couple dozen you could dream up, the Lions could cover the spread in a game that is intensely close. Conversely, the Pack could be down by 21 going into the fourth quarter, getting blown out, and the Lions' prevent defense gives up seventeen points. End result, Lions win by four, Pack covers the spread though they basically played like crap.

Point spreads are crazy. I don't bet them, and they don't always tell much about how good a team is. Heck, in the Packers' Super Bowl year, they only covered the spread about half the time - exactly what the oddsmakers wanted.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Not too surprising. Pack usually struggles at the Dome against the Lions. Look at recent history. Even the '03 team that should have went to the NFC Championship game got their lunch handed to them by the Lions that season. Favre has always struggled for the most part on the road against the Lions too.

I don't like this matchup for us at all. They have a stout front and held the Seahawks to nine points in the home opener. I see a low scoring snooze-fest.

I echo these thoughts fully. There are many reasons not to be surprised by the prognostication. We don't play well on turf, much less against Detriot at thome.

tyler

[wist43]

Sounds like a moneymaker to me.

Smart money goes on Detroit...

[Fosco33]

The game is indoors on turf, and that's been a struggle for years regardless of who were playing.

Except for the one game that mattered... in the Superbowl

[Astonishment]

The thing that really suprises me about this spread is how poor the Lions have been. I would have thought it would be a 3-4 point spread in the Lion's favor because of thier poor start. IMO their offense has been worse than the Packers. In the end it really shows more about the perception of the two teams than anything else.