Love how Packers fans declare...

[mistaowen]

Aaron Rodgers is a generational QB and can win games on his own. Clay Matthews has nice hair. BJ Raji was having a great year before injury and ate my friends lunch at BC one time. GB deservedly should be in the NFCCG.

That said, I'll be shocked if the Packers gain over 10 total yards. Marshawn will rush for 300 yards on 5 carries before halftime. Bevell will call the same lateral bubble screen to Tarvaris Jackson 3 times who bombs it to a streaking Jon Ryan and scores on all 3 plays. Rodgers hurts himself during the opening kickoff discount double-checking too hard on the sidelines. Matt Flynn gets a standing ovation after every pass. Russell and Sherm eat huge pieces of cheese at midfield after the game like the 49ers Turkey day game.

Seahawks 76 --- Packers 1 (Seahawks let Mason Crosby kick one of our extra points)

Raji got hurt like the 3rd practice of the year-- he didn't even play in a preseason game LOL come on man

I know. I had him on my preseason fantasy team. Couldn't choose between him or Bruce gradkowski as my 3rd overall pick. That's what we get for having the draft in April.

 

[E.Lacy27]

quote="dumbrabbit"]You packers fans are wasting your time here. If you expect to win an argument against Seattle, argue on your forum, same goes for every other fan base.

I lol at Packers fans doing everything they can to try to win an argument. Unnecessary stats, optimism, etc.

Quit over-analyzing this game, both Hawks and Packers fans... Packers fans, you seriously expect to win arguments in a Seahawks forum? Good luck getting somewhere.

I enjoy talking to other team's fans. But I also enjoy sitting back and watching this argument.

Was just hoping for reasoning and rational thoughts when applying to my posts. Clearly, that was too much to expect.

The ONLY way we would seem rational to you is if we think the Packers are going to win...we don't, so there aren't ANY rational Seahawk fans here. The problem with your rationale is that you are TRYING to talk yourself into a reason that the Packers can win, when in reality, there isn't a reason and you know it. Just keep calling all of the Seahawks fans irrational because that helps you convince yourself that the Packers actually have a chance. It's a vicious circle for Packer fans right now. I ALMOST feel sorry for them.

I didn't do any of giving rationale why the Packers could win.

For like the 4th time in this thread, I just defended a statement that the said the Packers defense sucks. I rationalized that easily and go no rational reasoning behind the sucking statement.

It's like you guys have a hard time reading in this thread.[/quote]

Yeah, we know that the Packers defense doesn't suck...against the hapless teams in the league. Congrats.

You mean like the hapless offenses of the Patriots and Cowboys?

Once again something being said without any rational... Would be nice to have an actual intelligent conversation about the game from a Seahawks fan.

Actually, I was having one for a little bit on here, but it died out.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

Once again something being said without any rational... Would be nice to have an actual intelligent conversation about the game from a Seahawks fan.

Actually, I was having one for a little bit on here, but it died out.

Was it the one that died out because you cluelessly tried to argue that one of our posters didn't differentiate between FieldTurf and artificial turf? Because when the error of your ways was pointed out, you never came back. Or did you kill another thread with moronic assertions that I missed?

Maybe you were too busy sitting on your high cheese-horse, picking your nose then looking down it at us classless Seahawks fans, and wondering why on Earth you thought the NFL still used Astroturf.

As for the Packers' defense sucking, 2 months ago they were dead last against the run. Worst in the NFL. That sucks. Here's where the teams they faced in the 1st half of the season finished in rushing:

1 - SEA
3 - NYJ
28 - DET
27 - CHI
14 - MIN
12 - MIA
7 - CAR
13 - NO

3 elite, 3 above average, 2 awful

Since then, GB made massive improvements and moved WAY up to finish 23rd against the run. (Moderate sarcasm. Like mild cheddar sarcasm.) Still sucks.

Here's where GB's final 8 opponents finished in rushing:

27 - CHI
9 - PHI
14 - MIN
18 - NE
24 - ATL
25 - BUF
29 - TB
28 - DET

2 above average, 1 below average, 5 awful

AWESOME defensive turnaround from the Packers! (That's really heavy sarcasm. Triple-cream brie sarcasm.)

Total rushing yards given up
GB: 1,919 vs SEA: 1,304 (3rd best in the league) GB gave up 38.4 more ypg than the Seahawks.

How about against the pass? We all know the Legion of Boom is totally overrated, right? (More cheesy sarcasm. Like generic-brand Velveeta sarcasm.)

Passing Defense
GB finished 10th. Not bad. Not bad at all. SEA finished 1st. Better. Much better.
Total passing yards against: GB: 3,623 vs SEA: 2,970
GB gave up 40.8 more ypg through the air.

Where our respective opponents finished in passing
GB ....... SEA
27 ........ 8
32 ........ 10
12 ........ 4
15 ........ 11
28 ........ 16
17 ........ 23
19 ........ 19
3 ........ 26
15 ........ 7
6 ........ 29
28 ........ 14
9 ........ 30
5 ........ 6
18 ........ 30
25 ........ 14
12 ........ 23

3 ........ 4 elite
5 ........ 5 above average
3 ........ 3 below average
5 ........ 4 awful

Those rankings are all inclusive, meaning they include the games against both the Packers and Seahawks. Seattle faced slightly better passing teams and still blew Green Bay out of the water for pass defense.

Defensive Yards Given Up
In total, GB surrendered 79 more ypg than SEA, and ranked 15th. Average for the league, sucky compared to the Seahawks.

Scoring
GB: 348, 21.8 ppg (rank: 13)
SEA: 254, 15.9 ppg (rank: 1)

The Packers may have had a good defensive year for them. But if you pull your head out of your cheese hole, you'll realize you're talking to people who follow the team with the NFL's best defense for 3 years straight. The Seahawks are on a historically elite run. Purple People Eaters good. Steel Curtain good. 85 Bears good. 2000 Ravens good.

You seem to take umbrage with the term "sucks" in an absolute value kind of way, but then look at a 13 rank in scoring and a 15 ranking and yards and say they don't "suck" because relative to the rest of the league, those rankings are slightly above average. Fine. Well, relative to our team, which finished #1 in both categories, your team's defense SUCKS. That's as rational as you'll get from me. Our team's D is better than yours. All that's left is for them to prove it on Sunday.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

that 'they're not the same team' we beat in September.

News flash: Neither are the Seahawks. We're better than we were then.

You will be without Percy Harvin this time around and a gimpy Maxwell. Will Unger be playing? Not sure Harvin matters all that much as the Seattle offense will be as good as Lynch and Wilson. But Harvin torched us last time and he is no longer on the team.

We are going to have a QB that can't run and that could be huge. We also had a defense in week 1 that had a few issues and have (hopefully) been rectified. Namely, Guion is healthy now ( he missed the offseason and training camp with hamstring injury) and Brad Jones is no longer starting at ILB. Nor is AJ Hawk. Our OL will no longer have D. Sherrod in at RT and we have a legit 3rd WR now. We didn't have one earlier in the year when we met.

I think the real X factor will be if Green Bay can stop Wilson from racking up huge yards with his feet. Can they stop Wilson when it's 3rd and 5? Wilson is the most dangerous weapon you have. I would keep him on the roster before anyone else. Anyone, including anyone on your defense.

Great fantasy football-like analysis.

Unger has a much bigger impact than you think. With his communication and savvy, the line blocking is much better targeted and they function with much more synergy. With him in, you will see Russ staying in the pocket more, as he has been doing lately, unless the D gives him running lanes that he cant refuse. Speaking of not paying attention, Maxwell is not 'gimpy.' He was on the injury report as 'illness,' plain as day. He had the flu and is over it now.

Wilson is 'the most dangerous weapon' we have? Ok partner, whatever you say. When you blend the best attributes of each player into a close-knit entity, it becomes much greater than one man's stats. Hopefully that will be on display on both sides of the ball on Sunday. I just wish it were in prime time (when the Seahawks play best) instead of at noon...that's ridiculous for a conference championship game.

 

[niveky]

that 'they're not the same team' we beat in September.

News flash: Neither are the Seahawks. We're better than we were then.

You will be without Percy Harvin this time around and a gimpy Maxwell. Will Unger be playing? Not sure Harvin matters all that much as the Seattle offense will be as good as Lynch and Wilson. But Harvin torched us last time and he is no longer on the team.

We are going to have a QB that can't run and that could be huge. We also had a defense in week 1 that had a few issues and have (hopefully) been rectified. Namely, Guion is healthy now ( he missed the offseason and training camp with hamstring injury) and Brad Jones is no longer starting at ILB. Nor is AJ Hawk. Our OL will no longer have D. Sherrod in at RT and we have a legit 3rd WR now. We didn't have one earlier in the year when we met.

I think the real X factor will be if Green Bay can stop Wilson from racking up huge yards with his feet. Can they stop Wilson when it's 3rd and 5? Wilson is the most dangerous weapon you have. I would keep him on the roster before anyone else. Anyone, including anyone on your defense.

Great fantasy football-like analysis.

Unger has a much bigger impact than you think. With his communication and savvy, the line blocking is much better targeted and they function with much more synergy. With him in, you will see Russ staying in the pocket more, as he has been doing lately, unless the D gives him running lanes that he cant refuse. Speaking of not paying attention, Maxwell is not 'gimpy.' He was on the injury report as 'illness,' plain as day. He had the flu and is over it now.

Wilson is 'the most dangerous weapon' we have? Ok partner, whatever you say. When you blend the best attributes of each player into a close-knit entity, it becomes much greater than one man's stats. Hopefully that will be on display on both sides of the ball on Sunday. I just wish it were in prime time (when the Seahawks play best) instead of at noon...that's ridiculous for a conference championship game.

to piggy back onto what you said about unger
http://mynorthwest.com/292/2684020/Max- ... the-middle


Seahawks' net offensive averages with and without Max Unger: 2014
Stat------------------With-----------Without
• Total YDS--------392.5---------365.7
• YDS/play----------6.21-----------5.69
• Pass YD----------188.67---------211.8
• YDS/pass play---6.51------------6.58
• Sacks--------------2.17------------2.9
• Rush YDS--------203.83---------153.9
• Rush YDS/ATT--5.97-------------4.81

the only stat that went down was pass yards a game, but that was offset with a positive net gain from the amount of rushing yards a game with Unger vs without him. To break it down the pass yards per game was 23.13 less without him but the run game gained 49.93 more with him per game. Also, even though the passing yards were a bit less, they got a little bit more yardage per pass play with him in. As you can also see total yards per play is higher which obviously leads to more yardage per game which would already be apparent from the offset from increase rushing vs passing yardage, less sacks given up and you can also see the translation to the added rushing yards a game being over 1 yard rushing extra per attempt with him in there.

 

[Chawks1]

I changed my post to get at what I wanted to say.

Also, in the interest of fairness, how do you know Capers can defend the read-option?

Looking at the post again, first of all it's not a guarantee Bryant catching the ball would have sent use home. The Packers drove the ball right down the field the next drive just trying to run the clock out and scored TDs the last two drives.

Secondly, you are correct that the Packers have not yet stopped a good offense on the road. At the same time though, they have not had that opportunity in the second half of the season. We will find out if they can do it Sunday.

Finally, yes, Capers knows how to defend the read option. Stopping it though will be more about our guys executing correctly than Capers drawing up something because schematically it's simple to stop. The outside guy, usually Clay or Peppers in our case, has to either make the QB hand it off or make the tackle if the QB keeps it. Actually executing that has been a problem for us.

Your defense might actually be built to stop the read-option more so than a traditional running team as Capers relies on smaller faster players. But I think the weakness of the run defense for you guys is you don't have large bodies on the line. Capers base personnel only employs 2 linemen 300+ pounds. The 3-4 scheme he uses relies on Julius Pepers playing as an OLb use speed more than his bulk. He also requires big stops by your LBs. Playing a heavy OL with a bruising RB surely should wear you guys out. The 4th quarter is when we separate from our opponents because the D is beat up and worn out.

Also, The key to shutting down the read-option will be how disciplined your D plays in the second half. Once a D starts to key in on stopping the RB at the line of scrimmage, RW will find the guy who cheats a little and will bust one. Exploiting the lack of discipline is how Kapernick had success against you guys the last couple years. And I think that will be our game plan against you this week.

Should be a good chess match.

 

[E.Lacy27]

Once again something being said without any rational... Would be nice to have an actual intelligent conversation about the game from a Seahawks fan.

Actually, I was having one for a little bit on here, but it died out.

Was it the one that died out because you cluelessly tried to argue that one of our posters didn't differentiate between FieldTurf and artificial turf? Because when the error of your ways was pointed out, you never came back. Or did you kill another thread with moronic assertions that I missed?

Maybe you were too busy sitting on your high cheese-horse, picking your nose then looking down it at us classless Seahawks fans, and wondering why on Earth you thought the NFL still used Astroturf.

As for the Packers' defense sucking, 2 months ago they were dead last against the run. Worst in the NFL. That sucks. Here's where the teams they faced in the 1st half of the season finished in rushing:

1 - SEA
3 - NYJ
28 - DET
27 - CHI
14 - MIN
12 - MIA
7 - CAR
13 - NO

3 elite, 3 above average, 2 awful

Since then, GB made massive improvements and moved WAY up to finish 23rd against the run. (Moderate sarcasm. Like mild cheddar sarcasm.) Still sucks.

Here's where GB's final 8 opponents finished in rushing:

27 - CHI
9 - PHI
14 - MIN
18 - NE
24 - ATL
25 - BUF
29 - TB
28 - DET

2 above average, 1 below average, 5 awful

AWESOME defensive turnaround from the Packers! (That's really heavy sarcasm. Triple-cream brie sarcasm.)

Total rushing yards given up
GB: 1,919 vs SEA: 1,304 (3rd best in the league) GB gave up 38.4 more ypg than the Seahawks.

How about against the pass? We all know the Legion of Boom is totally overrated, right? (More cheesy sarcasm. Like generic-brand Velveeta sarcasm.)

Passing Defense
GB finished 10th. Not bad. Not bad at all. SEA finished 1st. Better. Much better.
Total passing yards against: GB: 3,623 vs SEA: 2,970
GB gave up 40.8 more ypg through the air.

Where our respective opponents finished in passing
GB ....... SEA
27 ........ 8
32 ........ 10
12 ........ 4
15 ........ 11
28 ........ 16
17 ........ 23
19 ........ 19
3 ........ 26
15 ........ 7
6 ........ 29
28 ........ 14
9 ........ 30
5 ........ 6
18 ........ 30
25 ........ 14
12 ........ 23

3 ........ 4 elite
5 ........ 5 above average
3 ........ 3 below average
5 ........ 4 awful

Those rankings are all inclusive, meaning they include the games against both the Packers and Seahawks. Seattle faced slightly better passing teams and still blew Green Bay out of the water for pass defense.

Defensive Yards Given Up
In total, GB surrendered 79 more ypg than SEA, and ranked 15th. Average for the league, sucky compared to the Seahawks.

Scoring
GB: 348, 21.8 ppg (rank: 13)
SEA: 254, 15.9 ppg (rank: 1)

The Packers may have had a good defensive year for them. But if you pull your head out of your cheese hole, you'll realize you're talking to people who follow the team with the NFL's best defense for 3 years straight. The Seahawks are on a historically elite run. Purple People Eaters good. Steel Curtain good. 85 Bears good. 2000 Ravens good.

You seem to take umbrage with the term "sucks" in an absolute value kind of way, but then look at a 13 rank in scoring and a 15 ranking and yards and say they don't "suck" because relative to the rest of the league, those rankings are slightly above average. Fine. Well, relative to our team, which finished #1 in both categories, your team's defense SUCKS. That's as rational as you'll get from me. Our team's D is better than yours. All that's left is for them to prove it on Sunday.

I'll admit I messed up on the turf thread. My bad.

Secondly, you sure spent a lot of time to tell me the Seahawks defense is a lot better. Any football fan with a brain knows that already.

We can disagree though in the use of the term sucking though. To me, just because they aren't close to a very good defense, doesn't mean it sucks.

 

[Uncle Si]

neither of these teams "suck" at any aspects of their game. Thats why they are 13-4 and playing in the NFC Championship game.

i do notice the hyperbole on the Pack board is about the hyperbole on this board. tail wagging dog kinda thing

 

[E.Lacy27]

I changed my post to get at what I wanted to say.

Also, in the interest of fairness, how do you know Capers can defend the read-option?

Looking at the post again, first of all it's not a guarantee Bryant catching the ball would have sent use home. The Packers drove the ball right down the field the next drive just trying to run the clock out and scored TDs the last two drives.

Secondly, you are correct that the Packers have not yet stopped a good offense on the road. At the same time though, they have not had that opportunity in the second half of the season. We will find out if they can do it Sunday.

Finally, yes, Capers knows how to defend the read option. Stopping it though will be more about our guys executing correctly than Capers drawing up something because schematically it's simple to stop. The outside guy, usually Clay or Peppers in our case, has to either make the QB hand it off or make the tackle if the QB keeps it. Actually executing that has been a problem for us.

Your defense might actually be built to stop the read-option more so than a traditional running team as Capers relies on smaller faster players. But I think the weakness of the run defense for you guys is you don't have large bodies on the line. Capers base personnel only employs 2 linemen 300+ pounds. The 3-4 scheme he uses relies on Julius Pepers playing as an OLb use speed more than his bulk. He also requires big stops by your LBs. Playing a heavy OL with a bruising RB surely should wear you guys out. The 4th quarter is when we separate from our opponents because the D is beat up and worn out.

Also, The key to shutting down the read-option will be how disciplined your D plays in the second half. Once a D starts to key in on stopping the RB at the line of scrimmage, RW will find the guy who cheats a little and will bust one. Exploiting the lack of discipline is how Kapernick had success against you guys the last couple years. And I think that will be our game plan against you this week.

Should be a good chess match.

The Packers have been building to stop to the read option in getting guys like Peppers, Perry, and D. Jones.

Agree discipline is the key to stop the read option. That's something the D, especially Clay has had trouble with. We were able to control the read option the last two matchups vs. San Fran though after he ran wild in 2012.

We are small up the middle, although Guion had put together a good season. Our 3-4 relies on the D line eating up blockers and the LB's making the tackle. In games in which the D line did not get off blocks like vs. New Orleans and Seattle, the defense struggled.

 

[vonstout]

Are you kidding? The question was obviously "what has Green Bay done on the road against winning teams?" which, yes, 0-3 is the obvious answer. My rebuttal makes a fair point in showing that Seattle has lost at home, something that Green Bay didn't do this year, and against a team that Green Bay recently defeated.

So the Cowboys with a perfect road record (including a visit to Seattle) got beat by Green Bay at home, a feat Seattle couldn't accomplish. So logically the turn around here is that Green Bay's road woes have the same relevance as Seattle's lone home loss.

How about this one? The last time Green Bay won in Seattle, Charlie Frye was throwing TD passes to Keary Colbert for the Seahawks.[/quote]

Actually Russell Wilson was throwing INT's to MD Jenning's that were getting called TD's[/quote]


No disagreement from me that Seattle didn't deserve the last TD. However, if you watched that whole game, GB's only TD in the game was a result of a PI call on third down at midfield that was just as bad a call as the "fail Mary". Both teams got a gift TD, but it got blown up since one was the last play of the game.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

I'll admit I messed up on the turf thread. My bad.

Secondly, you sure spent a lot of time to tell me the Seahawks defense is a lot better. Any football fan with a brain knows that already.

We can disagree though in the use of the term sucking though. To me, just because they aren't close to a very good defense, doesn't mean it sucks.

Too rational for ya, huh? :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'll admit, I should have just stuck with "Packers' run defense sucks." As a whole, it's more "meh."

But at this point, I'm just messin' with you and the lurkers from Cheeseland. You all are passionate, we're all passionate. Everybody knows that both of these teams are very good and capable of winning on Sunday. I'm psyched for a good game.

 

[morgulon1]

#1 in defense vs. #15

check mark

Green Bay's defense isnt terrible. its terribly average.

Its the defense that allows the least amount of scoring (Seahawks, check) that win....

(drops mic)

 

[Blitzer88]

For me, both teams are in the championship game for a reason, they deserve to be here.

Ugh.................I am getting nervous.

 

[taco40]

No you're not!

Yes I am!

No you're not!

Yes I am!

No you're not!

Yes I am!

No you're not!

Yes I am!

No you're not!

Yes I am!

No you're not!

Yes I am!

Perhaps Monty Python was a .net poster, too.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=c ... ent+clinic

 

[Sports Hernia]

For me, both teams are in the championship game for a reason, they deserve to be here.

Ugh.................I am getting nervous.

How is that different than normal. Pot is legal now you know. 8)

 

[taco40]

Secondly, you are correct that the Packers have not yet stopped a good offense on the road. At the same time though, they have not had that opportunity in the second half of the season. We will find out if they can do it Sunday.
.

For the record, the Packers couldn't stop an below average offense in Buffalo (final ranking -18th) in December, when the importance of games is magnified. Yes, yes, I know they are all important. However, December games take on more of a playoff look and feel. Teams can get tight with that pressure and play so as not to lose. The #1 NFL offense, playing for home field advantage couldn't score more than one touchdown on Buffalo's fourth ranked defense. This week, vs the #1 defense they will have their chance. But they indeed have their chance in crunch time.

 

[hawk45]

You mean like the hapless offenses of the Patriots and Cowboys?

Once again something being said without any rational... Would be nice to have an actual intelligent conversation about the game from a Seahawks fan.

The Patriots do not run the ball. As for the Cowboys, they rushed for 145 yards against you on 28 attempts, a 5.2 YPC average. I don't believe that either of those examples supports an opinion that Green Bay is well-equipped to stop the Seattle rushing attack in Seattle. The challenge is heightened by virtue of the assistance Seattle's ground game gets from the R/O threat posed by Wilson.

Given the lack of quality rushing opponents faced by Green Bay during their rushing defense resurgence, there is legitimate reason to question it. If the objection is to the usage of the word "sucks" then that is a strange hill to decide to die on. The part that matters is the part where they aren't capable of stopping the Seattle rushing attack, and an average-to-below-average rush defense fits that description.

Any chance of a Green Bay victory has to rest upon Lacy being effective and Rodgers not just being effective, but able to play MVP caliber football. He is quite capable of that when healthy and at home, hell he's capable even if not healthy. But on the road without that snap count advantage vs. the LOB, and with mobility issues, that would be very surprising. We just have yet to see even a great QB (Manning, Rodgers, Brady, Brees, the list goes on) able to play MVP caliber football in Seattle.

 

[E.Lacy27]

Secondly, you are correct that the Packers have not yet stopped a good offense on the road. At the same time though, they have not had that opportunity in the second half of the season. We will find out if they can do it Sunday.
.

For the record, the Packers couldn't stop an below average offense in Buffalo (final ranking -18th) in December, when the importance of games is magnified. Yes, yes, I know they are all important. However, December games take on more of a playoff look and feel. Teams can get tight with that pressure and play so as not to lose. The #1 NFL offense, playing for home field advantage couldn't score more than one touchdown on Buffalo's fourth ranked defense. This week, vs the #1 defense they will have their chance. But they indeed have their chance in crunch time.

Buffalo scored 12 points on offense. Yes, the Packers could stop Buffalo.

You're right the offense did not perform. Rodgers though, was very off that day. He missed a lot of throws despite not being under pressure and the receivers had 7 drops. I wouldn't expect the offense to be that off again.

 

[E.Lacy27]

I'll admit I messed up on the turf thread. My bad.

Secondly, you sure spent a lot of time to tell me the Seahawks defense is a lot better. Any football fan with a brain knows that already.

We can disagree though in the use of the term sucking though. To me, just because they aren't close to a very good defense, doesn't mean it sucks.

Too rational for ya, huh? :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'll admit, I should have just stuck with "Packers' run defense sucks." As a whole, it's more "meh."

But at this point, I'm just messin' with you and the lurkers from Cheeseland. You all are passionate, we're all passionate. Everybody knows that both of these teams are very good and capable of winning on Sunday. I'm psyched for a good game.

Haha. It was impressed with all the info you put together.

Good luck to you guys and enjoy the game.

 

[loafoftatupu]

Buffalo scored 12 points on offense. Yes, the Packers could stop Buffalo.

You're right the offense did not perform. Rodgers though, was very off that day. He missed a lot of throws despite not being under pressure and the receivers had 7 drops. I wouldn't expect the offense to be that off again.

The Packers allowed Buffalo to score 12 points? That means the Packer defense sucks.

You wouldn't expect the offense to be off again? Of course not, you have no reason to even consider the possibility. Especially with GB playing on the road against the best defense in the NFL with an injured QB that relies on mobility to enhance his passing game.

What could possibly go wrong there?