Wildcard Weekend - 1/10 4:40 p.m. ET - Green Bay at Washington (FOX)

Share this page

I love it when people say "almost won" it makes me laugh.

The Pack are horrible on the road too, and the Redskins are the hotter team right now and are playing at home. GB is overrated and so is Rodgers, especially on the road. Their defense isn't really that good either, especially against the pass. If this game were in Lambeau, I'd probably pick and expect GB to win. Seeing that isn't the case, I'm going with Washington. The spread is only 1 so it should be a good game.

I just don't understand what all the fuss is about this particular GB team. They get by on their 1 SB win 5 years ago. They're much like the 2002 Anaheim Angels in that regard. If they do happen to beat Washington this week, do not expect them to win on the road, again, next week,.
 
O.Z.O. said:
The Pack is a train wreck right now. They went 4-6 over their last 10 games, that's a sub .500 record for more than half the season. Their secondary is on the same level of suck as Pittsburgh's, there's no way they can shut down the Redskins passing game. Cousins has a real hot hand right now and too many weapons.
Click to expand...

But the 2-4 the last 6 games for the Pats isn't anything to worry about? That's .333 for almost half a season. Interesting.
 
If the Pack had 20 ppl on IR and some recovering that were going to come back, not as much. Their losing record is not due to the same reasons. Their issues have been their issues all year, even when decently healthy.
 
HSanders said:
If the Pack had 20 ppl on IR and some recovering that were going to come back, not as much. Their losing record is not due to the same reasons. Their issues have been their issues all year, even when decently healthy.
Click to expand...

I can get with that.
 
There is no excuse for Green Bay to lose this game. None. If they do, heads should roll.

This is all because a 30-year old deep receiver's missing? He's already on the downside, how much difference would he have really made?

This isn't personnel, this is systemic.

Even so, they should still beat Washington, who has beaten exactly zero teams with a winning record this year.

That murderer's row they faced the last 6 weeks of the year: Giants, Cowboys (a loss), Bears, Bills, Eagles, Cowboys again - impresses me exactly zero percent, much like the Packers' 6-0 start to the season impressed me zero percent.

Washington a garbage time score to keep it within a TD. :coffee:
 
It's like the 06 Pats, their issue wasn't injuries, it was having little decent personnel skillwise. It kind of reminds me of the Packers offense this year, really. Just a hideous struggle to put together a single drive. If the Pats had had a crap defense in 06 they wouldn't have even made the playoffs.

And the Pats were very fortunate with injuries last year. That's always a big deal. Cincy's that healthy team this year out of the whole playoff field.
 
HSanders said:
It's like the 06 Pats, their issue wasn't injuries, it was having little decent personnel skillwise. It kind of reminds me of the Packers offense this year, really. Just a hideous struggle to put together a single drive. If the Pats had had a crap defense in 06 they wouldn't have even made the playoffs.

And the Pats were very fortunate with injuries last year. That's always a big deal. Cincy's that healthy team this year out of the whole playoff field.
Click to expand...

:BS:

Sorry, Randall Cobb, Eddie Lacy, John (James) Starks, Richard Rodgers, James Jones, have all been productive players in the league, and in recent seasons.

They brought back virtually the same defense they had a year ago, and it wasn't great then, but it was good enough until The Golden Boy choked it away in the NFCCG.

The Patriots ran out the corpses of Corey Dillon and Troy Brown, to supplement :reche: and Gaffney. That's really not the same thing.
 
TommyD420 said:
There is no excuse for Green Bay to lose this game. None. If they do, heads should roll.

This is all because a 30-year old deep receiver's missing? He's already on the downside, how much difference would he have really made?

This isn't personnel, this is systemic.

Even so, they should still beat Washington, who has beaten exactly zero teams with a winning record this year.

That murderer's row they faced the last 6 weeks of the year: Giants, Cowboys (a loss), Bears, Bills, Eagles, Cowboys again - impresses me exactly zero percent, much like the Packers' 6-0 start to the season impressed me zero percent.

Washington a garbage time score to keep it within a TD. :coffee:
Click to expand...

My goodness, we agree.
 
I'll be pleased if the Redskins advance. Of all the visiting fans and rivals boards I visited this year, the Skins fans were the most reasonable.
 
Kirk Cousins has been playing pretty good ball. Washington has a pretty good chance to win it although I give GB a very slight edge. A fumble here or an int there could swing the game. To me, this is a pickem game even though ARodgers and partly bc of Mike McCarthy.
 
GB really sucks on the road though. They may win this game but I think the Redskins pose all sorts of problems for them esp on the offensive side of the ball. Even if GB does find a way to win this game, they'll be a TD+ underdog next week in Car or Arizona

I just don't buy this year's version of GB.
 
O.Z.O. said:
The Pack is a train wreck right now. They went 4-6 over their last 10 games, that's a sub .500 record for more than half the season. Their secondary is on the same level of suck as Pittsburgh's, there's no way they can shut down the Redskins passing game. Cousins has a real hot hand right now and too many weapons.
Click to expand...

Cousins is looking good. Just think this might be the team to go on a Cinderella story
 
Patriots4ever said:
GB really sucks on the road though. They may win this game but I think the Redskins pose all sorts of problems for them esp on the offensive side of the ball. Even if GB does find a way to win this game, they'll be a TD+ underdog next week in Car or Arizona

I just don't buy this year's version of GB.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this whole post. I just don't think Washington's any good, and I'm not buying on Kirk Cousins like it seems the rest of the world is. And I certainly don't buy Jay Gruden.
 
TommyD420 said:
:BS:

Sorry, Randall Cobb, Eddie Lacy, John (James) Starks, Richard Rodgers, James Jones, have all been productive players in the league, and in recent seasons.

They brought back virtually the same defense they had a year ago, and it wasn't great then, but it was good enough until The Golden Boy choked it away in the NFCCG.

The Patriots ran out the corpses of Corey Dillon and Troy Brown, to supplement :reche: and Gaffney. That's really not the same thing.
Click to expand...

Their personnel is better than the 06 Pats for sure, but not up to their usual standards. I was more trying to compare the struggle to put together drives.
 
Patriots4ever said:
The refs screwed the Patriots, you said so yourself
Click to expand...

One of my favorite things is idiot fans attempting to draw relativity based on records over a stretch of games. Did some research, and discovered that 6 of the last 8 Super Bowl winners finished their seasons with stretches of play at or below .500. The 2 that jump out the most clearly are the '09 Saints, who lost their last 3...and the '12 Ratbirds, who dropped 4 out of their last 5 to blow not only their division but also a potential 1st round bye.
 
TommyD420 said:
Totally agree with this whole post. I just don't think Washington's any good, and I'm not buying on Kirk Cousins like it seems the rest of the world is. And I certainly don't buy Jay Gruden.
Click to expand...

who would have bought on Brady and Belichick in '01? Who bought on Walsh and Montana? Everybody has to start somewhere.
 
O.Z.O. said:
who would have bought on Brady and Belichick in '01? Who bought on Walsh and Montana? Everybody has to start somewhere.
Click to expand...

Cousins = Brady, Montana
Gruden = Belichick, Walsh

Filed away for future use. :coffee:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top