Packers WIll Be Champions

[bronx_2003]

My SB pick (on 9th Nov) was the 49'ers

They will make a late season run and can win on the road..... they are built to win in the playoffs

I do think K Nick has to play better though..... he seems to have regressed this season

Also, I would give Hyde more carries then Gore down the stretch. He's fresh (has only had 63 carries) and looks better then Gore this season imo

[fallforward3y+]

Rodgers is very good, I wouldn't put him ahead of Brady or Manning though.

I had us taking Miller instead of Hillman and Lacy instead of Ball during the 2 drafts............ sometimes the pro's don't know best

For me, it's pretty much Brees, Rodgers, Manning and Brady as the top 4..and you could make a good argument for any of the 4 being the top..and those who try and act like one is somehow on a level above the other 3 are being homers.

[fallforward3y+]

My SB pick (on 9th Nov) was the 49'ers

They will make a late season run and can win on the road..... they are built to win in the playoffs

I do think K Nick has to play better though..... he seems to have regressed this season

Also, I would give Hyde more carries then Gore down the stretch. He's fresh (has only had 63 carries) and looks better then Gore this season imo

I would love to see that happen, and I do believe it could. The Niners do have a good shot of beating anyone they're up against, the main concern I'd have for them is having to travel to Seattle in the playoffs, but if they face Seattle I doubt it'd be on the road at this point.

I do think Kaep is regressing, and that he does need to play better. He has a pretty good skill set, his running ability and his arm but he's kind of like Cutler in that he goes for the big play when it doesn't have a good chance too much while passing on shorter, but effective gain. I think with both of them, their big arms may make them overconfident in going for the deep ball too much.

It doesn't mesh well with the Niners offense, because it's rooted largely in the run game, and shorter passes to Boldin and Davis. The thing is, with the way teams stack the box on the Niners at times, they would be able to dominate defenses with shorter passes to guys like Boldin and Davis.....but if you don't take the shorter passes that are open that won't work. I like Kaep, but I kind of wish the Niners still had Smith. I think he would mesh better with the Niners offense.

I disagree on Gore and Hyde though, I think Gore is still better. Gore's low running style helps him a lot, it makes him very hard to drive backward..he is one of the better backs at yards while being tackled..I would rather have him against defenses/defenders where yards are tough to come by. Hyde should be worked in as part of a rotation though, top running games usually involve a RB rotation. It's a shame for them that Kendall Hunter is out for the year, he's a pretty underrated back IMO.

Dropped passes though are another killer. I don't think defensive injuries have hurt SFO very much, offense has been their issue. I also wish they would give Crabtree more screens as well. They seem to make it too easy for defenses to shut them down by taking away their run game, IMO they should do more to make defense pay for stacking the box.

It's not as if you need to have an elite passing offense to gash defenses through the air when they stack the box, when they do that it makes it a lot easier.

[CanDB]

Good receivers isn't much of a knock on a QB anyway in my book, pretty much every QB who's ever had any success has had good receivers. It's either star receivers, receivers being used well in a spread offense, a system but regardless...the receivers are making for good weapons.

With Clay, as great as he is the Packers defense doesn't seem to suffer much in his absence. Whether he's healthy or not, the Packers defense seems to be about the same. The Packers defense actually performed better against the 49ers in the playoffs with Clay out. It doesn't mean they're better without him or that he isn't good, but perhaps a sign of how many injuries don't hurt teams in the way many say they do.

I'm looking forward to the game against NE, which should be a good test for GB to see if they can keep up playing well on the defensive side. They've looked good the past 2 weeks on defense, but the Bears O with Cutler has almost never(if even ever)played well against the Packers and the Eagles with Sanchez may not be very good.

If they play well against NE though, I would be convinced their defense has gotten a lot better.

Thanks for straightening me out on some things. Not even sure what you mean about the receivers. FTR....do you agree or disagree that Rodgers has good receivers now, but not top tier?

As for Clay.....I want him in the lineup, regardless of your evaluation of his worth to the team.

[fallforward3y+]

Thanks for straightening me out on some things. Not even sure what you mean about the receivers. FTR....do you agree or disagree that Rodgers has good receivers now, but not top tier?

As for Clay.....I want him in the lineup, regardless of your evaluation of his worth to the team.

GB's receiving core is one of the best IMO. None of the 'elite 4' are handicapped by their receiving core. I would say Denver's receiving core is the best in sole possession of #1, but the Pack are among the elite. I agree they only have 2 great overall receivers, but few teams have more than 2, IMO Denver is probably the only one.

Plus, at times when teams spread the ball around, receivers get used in a great way, and seemingly mediocre receivers make very effective weapons for QBs. I guess the point there is that QBs having success with mediocre receivers usually isn't as impressive as it's made to be, and at the same time, a QB having great receivers shouldn't go against them the way it often is made to.

With Clay, well...I didn't say he wasn't good and sure, you want him in the line up. But people seem to often overstate how crucial the health of certain players are to a team's performance. There are very few single players other than QBs who seem to have crucial impact on how well a team does. The Packers won the Super Bowl in 2010, one of their least healthy years in the McCarthy era. 'Next man up' seems to be better than ever nowadays.

[Brady6]

The Packers have lost only to good teams this far. They have yet to play an elite team. Next week will be the real test. NE has a great cohesive set of corners that can match GB's offense. Today Revis was all over Megatron all day 1:1, that frees up a defender or two to play zone or stop the run. Even Talib couldn't match up to the talent Revis brings to the table.

[fallforward3y+]

The Packers have lost only to good teams this far. They have yet to play an elite team. Next week will be the real test. NE has a great cohesive set of corners that can match GB's offense. Today Revis was all over Megatron all day 1:1, that frees up a defender or two to play zone or stop the run. Even Talib couldn't match up to the talent Revis brings to the table.

They will need to spread it around to move the ball well on NE IMO, but they do that pretty well. With Detroit's offense, they make it pretty easy to stop their offense if you stop CJ. GB is different though, they do a good job finding favorable match ups in a defense. IMO NE will need to get a rush to hold down GB's offense.

I think a lot of it will have to do with GB's running game. If they run it well, it could create problems for NE's defense, if NE shuts down the run game though then it will likely be tough on GB.

It is true though that this will be the best test for their passing offense they've seen so far, aside from maybe Seattle. They will also likely need to put up a lot of points to win the game, few defenses have held down NE's offense as of late.