I have no problem with some tempering by Mcginn....it shouldn't be to a point where fans just EXPECT a SB run, not to mention there ARE definite holes/weak spots on this roster. The fact of the matter is while this team did go 15-1 a year ago, they came up completely lame when it mattered most. Add to that the fact that there is a definite blueprint making its way around the league now thanks to KC and NYG. I think there's good reason to believe this Packer team might be exposed a bit more this year. The hope, for me anyway, is that the vets learned from last year's collapse, and the young guys coming up have the ability to make plays when plays are needed.
quote:Originally posted by CitizenDan:
Nickel picked SF to win the AFC.
(my guess is she didn't really say that)
Your guess is right, my goof. Fixed.
Realistically who is better than GB in the NFC this year? New Orleans? San Francisco? Atlanta? Philly? I doubt it.
Where are the 6 losses? They get a few tough teams on the road (Houston, NYG, Seattle, Detroit) but McCarthy has always fielded good road teams. Outside of the Saints and 9ers and Bears and Detroit their home schedule is really pretty easy. They will likely be favored in 12 or 13 of their games.
I also don't get the 1998 comparisons. Why? They didn't have a 15-1 Vikings team, or any other dominant team in the division, to worry about. Detroit and Chicago should be OK, but they aren't 15 win teams. Heck, they might not be 10 win teams themselves much less McGinn's prediction of GB.
Where are the 6 losses? They get a few tough teams on the road (Houston, NYG, Seattle, Detroit) but McCarthy has always fielded good road teams. Outside of the Saints and 9ers and Bears and Detroit their home schedule is really pretty easy. They will likely be favored in 12 or 13 of their games.
I also don't get the 1998 comparisons. Why? They didn't have a 15-1 Vikings team, or any other dominant team in the division, to worry about. Detroit and Chicago should be OK, but they aren't 15 win teams. Heck, they might not be 10 win teams themselves much less McGinn's prediction of GB.
quote:Originally posted by Goalline:quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
The Packers are being regarded as a SB favorite by the majority of sportswriters and other media members, McGinn sees an opportunity to be the lone dissenting voice.
Hardly a lone dissenter. Watching the NFL Network yesterday, 2 out of 3 guys picked the Bears to win the division, as does Mike Greenberg(YES!!!).
Ya but today Mike Greenberg picked the Packers to win the Super Bowl.
DAAAAMMMN!!!! 
Bob McGinn â@BobMcGinn Asked yesterday who are #Packers' best tacklers. After a long pause and checking roster, I said 1) Matthews; 2) Bush; 3) Walden. Smith is 4. Expand Reply Retweet Favorite
quote:Originally posted by phaedrus:
With the possible inclusion of OL play, I think the Packer's success depends most on secondary play and front seven, especially defensive line, penetration (pass rush).
Since you included 16 out of 22 positions, why not include the WR,RB,QB and ST.
Sorry Anyways, I'm taking off early and started drinking already, so I'll play.
I think if you look at last season's remarkable 15-1 record you could find 6 or 7 games that came down to a couple of plays that could have meant a different result. You could even say if not for a couple of turnovers in the playoff game, the Packers might have won that game. My point is that in professional sports and especially the NFL, there is not a lot of difference between the top and the bottom. I think you can look at a ton of teams and their season comes down to a handful of plays. That is why both the Packers and Giants were able to win the SB after having pretty lousy regular season records. Add in injuries, erratic bounces and poor refereeing and the whole thing is a mess and tremendously difficult to predict with any accuracy. That is why there is so much interest. Everyone has their opinion.
I re-read McGinn's article and it is like most of his stuff IMO. He is not a homer houseball that blindly believes in the company line. His article like most of his are, is well reasoned and he explains all of his points. Yes, this article is pessimistic, but he isn't saying it will turn out that way, he just is pointing out the potential weaknesses. This is a hell of a lot better than the junk 99% of the sportswriters/broadcasters put out there.
I leave you with the thought: Would you rather be reading Skip Bayless?
A series of tweets from Bob yesterday that I thought were all good points:
One play #Packers LT Marshall Newhouse must deal with brute force of RE J. Smith, next play it'll be the length-speed of ROLB A. Smith. Wow.
Should be a terrific matchup Sunday when #Packers ROLB Clay Matthews faces #49ers LT Joe Staley. Great technicians, top athletes, fine pros.
Remains to be seen if #49ers play any base vs. GB. That would reduce role of NT Isaac Sopoaga, the type of load that could trouble Saturday.
Never forgot that #49ers drafted P Andy Lee D6 in '04, three rds. after Mike Sherman traded up for P BJ Sander. Lee rivals Lechler as best.
RT Anthony Davis can be a fine player. Too often, he engages in shoving/pushing that can detract from his performance. Pickett is foe.
I do think he takes the pessemistic side of things. Fans don't like reading about a teams potential liabilities. But the guy understands the game and matchup issues and isn't afraid to call them out.
One play #Packers LT Marshall Newhouse must deal with brute force of RE J. Smith, next play it'll be the length-speed of ROLB A. Smith. Wow.
Should be a terrific matchup Sunday when #Packers ROLB Clay Matthews faces #49ers LT Joe Staley. Great technicians, top athletes, fine pros.
Remains to be seen if #49ers play any base vs. GB. That would reduce role of NT Isaac Sopoaga, the type of load that could trouble Saturday.
Never forgot that #49ers drafted P Andy Lee D6 in '04, three rds. after Mike Sherman traded up for P BJ Sander. Lee rivals Lechler as best.
RT Anthony Davis can be a fine player. Too often, he engages in shoving/pushing that can detract from his performance. Pickett is foe.
I do think he takes the pessemistic side of things. Fans don't like reading about a teams potential liabilities. But the guy understands the game and matchup issues and isn't afraid to call them out.
Good stuff Chilli
Bob McGinn has developed many solid contacts in the personnel/scout world and they feed him these comments and insight from their POV
we'd be fools to ignore or discount them completely
Go Packers
Bob McGinn has developed many solid contacts in the personnel/scout world and they feed him these comments and insight from their POV
we'd be fools to ignore or discount them completely
Go Packers
Pretty much, everything he mentioned in this column, came to fruition yesterday. 
They haven't replaced Collins, Jenkins and now with Bishop gone for the year, the defense is far from its 2010 form.
Jarrett Bush as the #2 CB is also pretty scary.
But the 'Niners are probably the best team in the NFC, and the Packers were in the game until the end. A couple mistakes and a bad penalty erased, they might have won it.
Jarrett Bush as the #2 CB is also pretty scary.
But the 'Niners are probably the best team in the NFC, and the Packers were in the game until the end. A couple mistakes and a bad penalty erased, they might have won it.
Looking at the niners, they have really stacked up very high draft picks due to their many awful years.
Which begs the question: does the pack need 1 awful year (like mm's first season) to finally get better draft picks in the defense (particularly given wood's decline and the disarray in the LB/DL) and then make a strong 2-3 push at the top, or can they get by with what they have and continue to retool while remaining in contention?
One observation is obvious - this team appears to be an Arod injury away from a 4-12 to 6-10 record.
BTW - I see the same in the Saints - they are really paying for giving away a first rounder for Ingram IMHO.
Thoughts?
Which begs the question: does the pack need 1 awful year (like mm's first season) to finally get better draft picks in the defense (particularly given wood's decline and the disarray in the LB/DL) and then make a strong 2-3 push at the top, or can they get by with what they have and continue to retool while remaining in contention?
One observation is obvious - this team appears to be an Arod injury away from a 4-12 to 6-10 record.
BTW - I see the same in the Saints - they are really paying for giving away a first rounder for Ingram IMHO.
Thoughts?
First off....49ers have won one game. Lets see how the season turns out. "Best Team" I don't think so. They have a very nice (intimidating D) that is full strength right now. QB had his best game ever. Lets see how he does when the weather is bad. I'm guessing they are 12-4 # 2 seed. Coming back to GB and will get an Ass kicking.
Lets not forget their kicker and the 63 yd kick. Not happening in playoffs at Lambeau.
Why are you assuming, if the Packers make the playoffs, that they would even host SF? Because thanks to the game Sunday SF already is a game up in the home field advantage race.
packers play better on the road anyway