Remember what Rodgers said after losing to Seattle? He said the Packers lost too many road games which prevented them from getting home field against Seattle. Now their 1st game is on the road. You were supposed to remind me about that.
Hey BB, good to see you here. Yes, I was supposed to remind you about that.
What do you expect from the Packers ? To go 8-0 on the road ? If they lose one game on the road next season, this could be it. Those spots are painful. Last season they went 4-4 on the road but could also have been 2-6 (close games at Miami and Minnesota). It's hard to believe their road performances will change drastically to not think about those type of spots.
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Remember what Rodgers said after losing to Seattle? He said the Packers lost too many road games which prevented them from getting home field against Seattle. Now their 1st game is on the road. You were supposed to remind me about that.
Hey BB, good to see you here. Yes, I was supposed to remind you about that.
What do you expect from the Packers ? To go 8-0 on the road ? If they lose one game on the road next season, this could be it. Those spots are painful. Last season they went 4-4 on the road but could also have been 2-6 (close games at Miami and Minnesota). It's hard to believe their road performances will change drastically to not think about those type of spots.
I like this angle and will pay slight more attention to this match-up as Week 1 nears.
I haven't recapped 2014 and/or looked into the moves the Bears have made, and we still have preseason to monitor teams.
New Coach Vs. Former Team Angle, would slightly concern me. The new OC for the Packers, Edgar Bennett played running back for the Bears in his last two years of his playing career. Bennett only played with two teams before retiring at 30 years of age, the Packers & the Bears.
I think the line opened at GB -4. I could see this getting bet up by kickoff. My lean (w/out any knowledge of the Bears' offseason moves) would be the Bears.
In Week 1, an away favorite (-7 to -3) against a division opponent is 13-7 (65%) SU, and 8-12 (40%) ATS.
I like this angle and will pay slight more attention to this match-up as Week 1 nears.
I haven't recapped 2014 and/or looked into the moves the Bears have made, and we still have preseason to monitor teams.
New Coach Vs. Former Team Angle, would slightly concern me. The new OC for the Packers, Edgar Bennett played running back for the Bears in his last two years of his playing career. Bennett only played with two teams before retiring at 30 years of age, the Packers & the Bears.
I think the line opened at GB -4. I could see this getting bet up by kickoff. My lean (w/out any knowledge of the Bears' offseason moves) would be the Bears.
In Week 1, an away favorite (-7 to -3) against a division opponent is 13-7 (65%) SU, and 8-12 (40%) ATS.
The Green Bay Packers will open their season in a Sunday 1:00 pm game at Chicago.
One week after, they will get the Seahawks at home in the Sunday Night Football game in one of the biggest revenge spots of the last few years.
Even though it's a big rivalry, the Packers won't have the biggest motivation for the Bears as the Cheeseheads absolutely smashed them last season (38-17 & 55-14). just think of seattle they can very easily lose to stl and the pack.wilson might be forced to throw 15 passes . They will have the Seahawks game in mind all summer long and probably dream about this scene very often: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mj9fGSyCFA
The Bears, under new head coach John Fox, will just have their season opener in mind, as they play Arizona at home in week two. In addition, the Packers were everything but strong on the road during the last three seasons.
With the NFL schedule announcement, the Chicago Bears became an interesting option in week one.
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
The Green Bay Packers will open their season in a Sunday 1:00 pm game at Chicago.
One week after, they will get the Seahawks at home in the Sunday Night Football game in one of the biggest revenge spots of the last few years.
Even though it's a big rivalry, the Packers won't have the biggest motivation for the Bears as the Cheeseheads absolutely smashed them last season (38-17 & 55-14). just think of seattle they can very easily lose to stl and the pack.wilson might be forced to throw 15 passes . They will have the Seahawks game in mind all summer long and probably dream about this scene very often: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mj9fGSyCFA
The Bears, under new head coach John Fox, will just have their season opener in mind, as they play Arizona at home in week two. In addition, the Packers were everything but strong on the road during the last three seasons.
With the NFL schedule announcement, the Chicago Bears became an interesting option in week one.
I like this angle and will pay slight more attention to this match-up as Week 1 nears.
I haven't recapped 2014 and/or looked into the moves the Bears have made, and we still have preseason to monitor teams.
New Coach Vs. Former Team Angle, would slightly concern me. The new OC for the Packers, Edgar Bennett played running back for the Bears in his last two years of his playing career. Bennett only played with two teams before retiring at 30 years of age, the Packers & the Bears.
I think the line opened at GB -4. I could see this getting bet up by kickoff. My lean (w/out any knowledge of the Bears' offseason moves) would be the Bears.
In Week 1, an away favorite (-7 to -3) against a division opponent is 13-7 (65%) SU, and 8-12 (40%) ATS.
Like your thoughts
I think it will be getting bet up, too.
Quote Originally Posted by Slick100:
I like this angle and will pay slight more attention to this match-up as Week 1 nears.
I haven't recapped 2014 and/or looked into the moves the Bears have made, and we still have preseason to monitor teams.
New Coach Vs. Former Team Angle, would slightly concern me. The new OC for the Packers, Edgar Bennett played running back for the Bears in his last two years of his playing career. Bennett only played with two teams before retiring at 30 years of age, the Packers & the Bears.
I think the line opened at GB -4. I could see this getting bet up by kickoff. My lean (w/out any knowledge of the Bears' offseason moves) would be the Bears.
In Week 1, an away favorite (-7 to -3) against a division opponent is 13-7 (65%) SU, and 8-12 (40%) ATS.
For now I strongly disagree with the Bears angle.First, Rogers said after the NFC championships loss that next year, they'll need to win away games to get home field advantage during the play offs.Second, the Packers will be on the mission next year to get what they missed by a finger. (Just like the Spurs was on a mission last year after Ray Allen's three)With that being said, they have to win that week 1 game at Chicago, a team they destroyed twice next year.Don't expect them to be flabby and soft and waiting for Seahawks.The Green Bay Packer will be focus every single snap until they'll reach what they feel they diserved, which is a trip to Santa Clara.I'm not saying Packers -4 is a lock, I'm saying the emotional angle or "the sandwich game" doesn't apply in that game IMO.
Thanks for your opinion. It is a good basis for a discussion and most likely worth an own thread.If I learned one thing in my lifetime watching pro sports, it's that I never listen to phrases those coaches, managers or quarterbacks tell us. They have to tell you those things. Packers were 8-0 at home and 4-4 on the road - so it's obvious they need to improve on the road. Did you ever hear from those guys that they don't want to win their next game ?As much as you keep telling the media you have to win that next game, you don't have the exact same motivation depending on the situation and opponent. Of course the Packers will say they want to win at Chicago and will focus on that game and don't think ahead to Seattle. But it just isn't the truth. If you have ever played team sports, you will know that. There are games which you can't get 100% up for.I'm not saying the Packers will be flabby and soft, but I'm saying some guys won't be 100% focused on the Bears, because they have Seattle in their minds. Maybe they are 90% - it could be enough to not get the Packers' best effort. Even if they come out strong, there will be the moment during the game in which the Seahawks come into their minds. It's human nature.Last season the Chiefs started vs. Tennessee before playing the Broncos. They knew they have to beat the SB runner-up to have a shot at winning their division. Do you really think the Chiefs had the Titans in mind during the summer ? No, it was the Broncos. The Chiefs lost 10-26 at Arrowhead, it was one of two games the Titans won last year. Furthermore it was probably the worst Chiefs game in 2014. If you had given them the Raiders in week two, they wouldn't have lost or at least wouldn't have showed such a terrible performance. They thought it's gonna be easy because the boss is waiting the next Sunday.
LOVE the Titans Chiefs angle from last year being analogous to this game. Great stuff Suuma!
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
Quote Originally Posted by powerbalance:
For now I strongly disagree with the Bears angle.First, Rogers said after the NFC championships loss that next year, they'll need to win away games to get home field advantage during the play offs.Second, the Packers will be on the mission next year to get what they missed by a finger. (Just like the Spurs was on a mission last year after Ray Allen's three)With that being said, they have to win that week 1 game at Chicago, a team they destroyed twice next year.Don't expect them to be flabby and soft and waiting for Seahawks.The Green Bay Packer will be focus every single snap until they'll reach what they feel they diserved, which is a trip to Santa Clara.I'm not saying Packers -4 is a lock, I'm saying the emotional angle or "the sandwich game" doesn't apply in that game IMO.
Thanks for your opinion. It is a good basis for a discussion and most likely worth an own thread.If I learned one thing in my lifetime watching pro sports, it's that I never listen to phrases those coaches, managers or quarterbacks tell us. They have to tell you those things. Packers were 8-0 at home and 4-4 on the road - so it's obvious they need to improve on the road. Did you ever hear from those guys that they don't want to win their next game ?As much as you keep telling the media you have to win that next game, you don't have the exact same motivation depending on the situation and opponent. Of course the Packers will say they want to win at Chicago and will focus on that game and don't think ahead to Seattle. But it just isn't the truth. If you have ever played team sports, you will know that. There are games which you can't get 100% up for.I'm not saying the Packers will be flabby and soft, but I'm saying some guys won't be 100% focused on the Bears, because they have Seattle in their minds. Maybe they are 90% - it could be enough to not get the Packers' best effort. Even if they come out strong, there will be the moment during the game in which the Seahawks come into their minds. It's human nature.Last season the Chiefs started vs. Tennessee before playing the Broncos. They knew they have to beat the SB runner-up to have a shot at winning their division. Do you really think the Chiefs had the Titans in mind during the summer ? No, it was the Broncos. The Chiefs lost 10-26 at Arrowhead, it was one of two games the Titans won last year. Furthermore it was probably the worst Chiefs game in 2014. If you had given them the Raiders in week two, they wouldn't have lost or at least wouldn't have showed such a terrible performance. They thought it's gonna be easy because the boss is waiting the next Sunday.
LOVE the Titans Chiefs angle from last year being analogous to this game. Great stuff Suuma!
The "look ahead" angle in general makes sense in the NFL and I use it in my capping. But not for week 1 games. These players will have practiced for 3 months beating each other up everyday to get ready for opening week. There's no way every player won't be pumped and ready to go 110% for week 1.
The "look ahead" angle in general makes sense in the NFL and I use it in my capping. But not for week 1 games. These players will have practiced for 3 months beating each other up everyday to get ready for opening week. There's no way every player won't be pumped and ready to go 110% for week 1.
The "look ahead" angle in general makes sense in the NFL and I use it in my capping. But not for week 1 games. These players will have practiced for 3 months beating each other up everyday to get ready for opening week. There's no way every player won't be pumped and ready to go 110% for week 1.
2014:
The Kansas City Chiefs hosted the Denver Broncos in week two, from whom they knew they would be the opponent to beat to win the division. The Chiefs lost against the Titans at home - a team that owned the second pick in the draft. The Chiefs were outgained by 160 total yards.
The Pittsburgh Steelers visited their biggest rival, the Ravens in a TNF game on a short week in week two. They barely won against the Browns at home by a last-minute FG and did not cover the -5.5 spread. The Steelers led 27-3. The look-ahead sometimes comes during the second half.
The Baltimore Ravens hosted the Steelers on a TNF game on a short week in week two. They lost 16-23 against the Bengals in week one. The Ravens came out very flat, losing 0-15 at halftime.
The San Diego Chargers hosted the then-current Super Bowl champs, the Seahawks, in week two. A game they had circled since the schedule announcement in the spring. We saw which effort they showed in that game. Before in week one, they dropped their lead at Arizona by losing the last quarter 0-12. The look-ahead sometimes comes during the second half.
2013:
The Browns visited the then-current Super Bowl champs, the Ravens, in week two, a game they really came up for. In week one, they lost 10-23 at Miami as -2.5 favorites.
The Giants hosted the media-hyped Denver Broncos in week two, a chance for Eli Manning to beat his older brother. In week one, they lost against the Cowboys.
The Jets played against the Patriots in a TNF game on a short week in week two. Even though the Jets won and covered against the Bucs, they barely won at home on a last-minute FG by Nick Folk. The Patriots themselves, barely won at Buffalo on a last-minute FG.
Quote Originally Posted by Dubfire:
The "look ahead" angle in general makes sense in the NFL and I use it in my capping. But not for week 1 games. These players will have practiced for 3 months beating each other up everyday to get ready for opening week. There's no way every player won't be pumped and ready to go 110% for week 1.
2014:
The Kansas City Chiefs hosted the Denver Broncos in week two, from whom they knew they would be the opponent to beat to win the division. The Chiefs lost against the Titans at home - a team that owned the second pick in the draft. The Chiefs were outgained by 160 total yards.
The Pittsburgh Steelers visited their biggest rival, the Ravens in a TNF game on a short week in week two. They barely won against the Browns at home by a last-minute FG and did not cover the -5.5 spread. The Steelers led 27-3. The look-ahead sometimes comes during the second half.
The Baltimore Ravens hosted the Steelers on a TNF game on a short week in week two. They lost 16-23 against the Bengals in week one. The Ravens came out very flat, losing 0-15 at halftime.
The San Diego Chargers hosted the then-current Super Bowl champs, the Seahawks, in week two. A game they had circled since the schedule announcement in the spring. We saw which effort they showed in that game. Before in week one, they dropped their lead at Arizona by losing the last quarter 0-12. The look-ahead sometimes comes during the second half.
2013:
The Browns visited the then-current Super Bowl champs, the Ravens, in week two, a game they really came up for. In week one, they lost 10-23 at Miami as -2.5 favorites.
The Giants hosted the media-hyped Denver Broncos in week two, a chance for Eli Manning to beat his older brother. In week one, they lost against the Cowboys.
The Jets played against the Patriots in a TNF game on a short week in week two. Even though the Jets won and covered against the Bucs, they barely won at home on a last-minute FG by Nick Folk. The Patriots themselves, barely won at Buffalo on a last-minute FG.
i appreciate you taking the time to type that out but your logic is flawed. Your spinning the analysis to fit the narrative you want to portray. Anyway, i hope you win your bet.
I'll be on packers huge in week 2...hope it stays under 3.
i appreciate you taking the time to type that out but your logic is flawed. Your spinning the analysis to fit the narrative you want to portray. Anyway, i hope you win your bet.
I'll be on packers huge in week 2...hope it stays under 3.
Great thread, definitely worth the discussion. As far as the comments that the Pack won't look past Chicago, blah, blah, blah. That's what they all say and I take it with a grain of salt. The fact of the matter is they were a 4-4 team on the road last year and I believe it's a negative for the Pack that they hammered the Bears both times last year, they won't take them seriously. It's a great spot for them to look ahead with Seattle up next, they want their a$$. No doubt about that and I do like this angle. It's easy to take GB -4, that's why you have to look at taking the Bears (they just don't give $ away).
Now, onto the Bears... I'm never a fan of betting a new coaching regime coming in, it always seems like it takes time for their "system" to take hold, especially when it's coming to a bad team (which most of the time is the case). The Bears are a bad team but they still have Forte and if Cutler plays decent in the preseason, I'd lean them here. It's an interesting game that all things considered I'd have to take the 4 pts and hope for a FG game or a backdoor cover.
Great thread, definitely worth the discussion. As far as the comments that the Pack won't look past Chicago, blah, blah, blah. That's what they all say and I take it with a grain of salt. The fact of the matter is they were a 4-4 team on the road last year and I believe it's a negative for the Pack that they hammered the Bears both times last year, they won't take them seriously. It's a great spot for them to look ahead with Seattle up next, they want their a$$. No doubt about that and I do like this angle. It's easy to take GB -4, that's why you have to look at taking the Bears (they just don't give $ away).
Now, onto the Bears... I'm never a fan of betting a new coaching regime coming in, it always seems like it takes time for their "system" to take hold, especially when it's coming to a bad team (which most of the time is the case). The Bears are a bad team but they still have Forte and if Cutler plays decent in the preseason, I'd lean them here. It's an interesting game that all things considered I'd have to take the 4 pts and hope for a FG game or a backdoor cover.
i appreciate you taking the time to type that out but your logic is flawed. Your spinning the analysis to fit the narrative you want to portray. Anyway, i hope you win your bet.
I'll be on packers huge in week 2...hope it stays under 3.
Thanks, Dubfire. You might think it's flawed, but I can tell you: I've seen those spots not only in the NFL, but in other sports and in real life as well. I am not spinning it. Those are real spots in which teams or parts of the team, do look-ahead.
Quote Originally Posted by Dubfire:
i appreciate you taking the time to type that out but your logic is flawed. Your spinning the analysis to fit the narrative you want to portray. Anyway, i hope you win your bet.
I'll be on packers huge in week 2...hope it stays under 3.
Thanks, Dubfire. You might think it's flawed, but I can tell you: I've seen those spots not only in the NFL, but in other sports and in real life as well. I am not spinning it. Those are real spots in which teams or parts of the team, do look-ahead.
i appreciate you taking the time to type that out but your logic is flawed. Your spinning the analysis to fit the narrative you want to portray. Anyway, i hope you win your bet.
I'll be on packers huge in week 2...hope it stays under 3.
Come on man,
The guy wrote a great OP and then defended his position against your you comment with not only one example, but several, over not one year, but the past TWO.
Ya can't retort, "Ah well, your logic is flawed", and be over and done with it.
As a debate in a public forum, the winner is Suuma.
Quote Originally Posted by Dubfire:
i appreciate you taking the time to type that out but your logic is flawed. Your spinning the analysis to fit the narrative you want to portray. Anyway, i hope you win your bet.
I'll be on packers huge in week 2...hope it stays under 3.
Come on man,
The guy wrote a great OP and then defended his position against your you comment with not only one example, but several, over not one year, but the past TWO.
Ya can't retort, "Ah well, your logic is flawed", and be over and done with it.
As a debate in a public forum, the winner is Suuma.
For me personally, I have a harder time betting NFL than NBA. I know the NBA like the back of my hand but even though i follow nfl greatly I find it harder to be fully in tune with the NFL. Less games but Vegas doesnt make mistakes with their lines usually because of that plus with NBA i can take advantage of betting daily games and betting player props where NFL is tougher due to books being more precise and less errors. For me it is so hard to keep track of all the players in the nfl and all the injuries and so on.
Basically part of my strategy is to find line discrepancies in books. simple strategy, line hunting on underdogs not getting much action. Chicago vs GB could qualify possibly. I think it is safe to say that GB should get most of the action in this game because most people(even a bit of myself lol) feels that chicago is always shitty but with all the changes they have made I feel they will be better than the overall perception of them. People see GB -4 and might think, wow GB at only -4 vs a shitty cutler lead team? Usually if that is the case then chicago +4 could be good value. Im hoping this line goes down though.Some books are very good for getting dogs at a nice price, i made decent profit last couple years betting almost strictly on underdogs.
Ill keep an eye out on this game heading into september. No point on jumping on it early, i cant see this going down to 3.5 and no way it goes to 3.
For me personally, I have a harder time betting NFL than NBA. I know the NBA like the back of my hand but even though i follow nfl greatly I find it harder to be fully in tune with the NFL. Less games but Vegas doesnt make mistakes with their lines usually because of that plus with NBA i can take advantage of betting daily games and betting player props where NFL is tougher due to books being more precise and less errors. For me it is so hard to keep track of all the players in the nfl and all the injuries and so on.
Basically part of my strategy is to find line discrepancies in books. simple strategy, line hunting on underdogs not getting much action. Chicago vs GB could qualify possibly. I think it is safe to say that GB should get most of the action in this game because most people(even a bit of myself lol) feels that chicago is always shitty but with all the changes they have made I feel they will be better than the overall perception of them. People see GB -4 and might think, wow GB at only -4 vs a shitty cutler lead team? Usually if that is the case then chicago +4 could be good value. Im hoping this line goes down though.Some books are very good for getting dogs at a nice price, i made decent profit last couple years betting almost strictly on underdogs.
Ill keep an eye out on this game heading into september. No point on jumping on it early, i cant see this going down to 3.5 and no way it goes to 3.
The more I look into this matchup, the more I like the Bears with the given spot in week one.
I really like their offense with a more conservative style. IMO it's more in Jay Cutler's favor. He's got an average offensive line and a surrounding cast of Matt Forte, Martellus Bennett, Alshon Jeffery, Kevin White & Eddie Royal. That's some nice staff to work with, especially under John Fox and Adam Gase
The Bears looked terrible on defense in 2014, but they were a broken team and they suffered heavily from injuries. Furthermore, their defense had one of the toughest schedules. With Vic Fangio being the DC and the additions of McPhee, Goldman, Allen & Rolle, I believe their defense will look much better.
The Packers defense on the other side will be a very solid one, but they will yet again improve during the season. In 2014 they haven't had a tough defensive schedule and they rarely faced an offense that is capable of doing what this Bears offense COULD do under the new coaching staff.
If the game has been played in week 6 with the Packers going into their bye-week, I probably wouldn't take the Bears, but given this look-ahead spot of the Packers and the new-look Bears, I really like the home team to cover this game.
The more I look into this matchup, the more I like the Bears with the given spot in week one.
I really like their offense with a more conservative style. IMO it's more in Jay Cutler's favor. He's got an average offensive line and a surrounding cast of Matt Forte, Martellus Bennett, Alshon Jeffery, Kevin White & Eddie Royal. That's some nice staff to work with, especially under John Fox and Adam Gase
The Bears looked terrible on defense in 2014, but they were a broken team and they suffered heavily from injuries. Furthermore, their defense had one of the toughest schedules. With Vic Fangio being the DC and the additions of McPhee, Goldman, Allen & Rolle, I believe their defense will look much better.
The Packers defense on the other side will be a very solid one, but they will yet again improve during the season. In 2014 they haven't had a tough defensive schedule and they rarely faced an offense that is capable of doing what this Bears offense COULD do under the new coaching staff.
If the game has been played in week 6 with the Packers going into their bye-week, I probably wouldn't take the Bears, but given this look-ahead spot of the Packers and the new-look Bears, I really like the home team to cover this game.
The more I look into this matchup, the more I like the Bears with the given spot in week one.
I really like their offense with a more conservative style. IMO it's more in Jay Cutler's favor. He's got an average offensive line and a surrounding cast of Matt Forte, Martellus Bennett, Alshon Jeffery, Kevin White & Eddie Royal. That's some nice staff to work with, especially under John Fox and Adam Gase
The Bears looked terrible on defense in 2014, but they were a broken team and they suffered heavily from injuries. Furthermore, their defense had one of the toughest schedules. With Vic Fangio being the DC and the additions of McPhee, Goldman, Allen & Rolle, I believe their defense will look much better.
The Packers defense on the other side will be a very solid one, but they will yet again improve during the season. In 2014 they haven't had a tough defensive schedule and they rarely faced an offense that is capable of doing what this Bears offense COULD do under the new coaching staff.
If the game has been played in week 6 with the Packers going into their bye-week, I probably wouldn't take the Bears, but given this look-ahead spot of the Packers and the new-look Bears, I really like the home team to cover this game.
Couldn't agree more
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
The more I look into this matchup, the more I like the Bears with the given spot in week one.
I really like their offense with a more conservative style. IMO it's more in Jay Cutler's favor. He's got an average offensive line and a surrounding cast of Matt Forte, Martellus Bennett, Alshon Jeffery, Kevin White & Eddie Royal. That's some nice staff to work with, especially under John Fox and Adam Gase
The Bears looked terrible on defense in 2014, but they were a broken team and they suffered heavily from injuries. Furthermore, their defense had one of the toughest schedules. With Vic Fangio being the DC and the additions of McPhee, Goldman, Allen & Rolle, I believe their defense will look much better.
The Packers defense on the other side will be a very solid one, but they will yet again improve during the season. In 2014 they haven't had a tough defensive schedule and they rarely faced an offense that is capable of doing what this Bears offense COULD do under the new coaching staff.
If the game has been played in week 6 with the Packers going into their bye-week, I probably wouldn't take the Bears, but given this look-ahead spot of the Packers and the new-look Bears, I really like the home team to cover this game.
I couldn't disagree more with everything about your initial post.
So, youre telling me, the first game of the season, in one of the biggest rivalries in NFL history, on the road, and GB is going to be looking ahead to week 2??
As hard as it was to get over that loss to Seattle in the playoffs, I think it is going to be a blessing in disguise...
GB needs to get home-field advantage to give them the best chance at reaching the superbowl, and that means winning every game youre suppose to win...
There is ZERO chance GB will look past opening day on the road at Chicago.....ZERO
What a better statement to make, and what a way to crush the Bears hopes in 2015 then beating them at home again to start the year??
Yes I am a homer, but I think that loss last year in the playoffs sparked a new machine you will see this year...GB is not going to take their foot off the petal anymore during a game...
If GB stays healthy, I think they will set all types of records on the offensive end, as they have so many weapons on offense now with an above average line, add a punt returner who can make plays and give them good field position....and I think GB lights up the scoreboard every week.
If the defense can be an average defense 10-14th in the league, they will be the #1 seed...
Im sorry, but GB WILL NOT look past opening week on the road at Chicago
I couldn't disagree more with everything about your initial post.
So, youre telling me, the first game of the season, in one of the biggest rivalries in NFL history, on the road, and GB is going to be looking ahead to week 2??
As hard as it was to get over that loss to Seattle in the playoffs, I think it is going to be a blessing in disguise...
GB needs to get home-field advantage to give them the best chance at reaching the superbowl, and that means winning every game youre suppose to win...
There is ZERO chance GB will look past opening day on the road at Chicago.....ZERO
What a better statement to make, and what a way to crush the Bears hopes in 2015 then beating them at home again to start the year??
Yes I am a homer, but I think that loss last year in the playoffs sparked a new machine you will see this year...GB is not going to take their foot off the petal anymore during a game...
If GB stays healthy, I think they will set all types of records on the offensive end, as they have so many weapons on offense now with an above average line, add a punt returner who can make plays and give them good field position....and I think GB lights up the scoreboard every week.
If the defense can be an average defense 10-14th in the league, they will be the #1 seed...
Im sorry, but GB WILL NOT look past opening week on the road at Chicago
I couldn't disagree more with everything about your initial post.
So, youre telling me, the first game of the season, in one of the biggest rivalries in NFL history, on the road, and GB is going to be looking ahead to week 2??
As hard as it was to get over that loss to Seattle in the playoffs, I think it is going to be a blessing in disguise...
GB needs to get home-field advantage to give them the best chance at reaching the superbowl, and that means winning every game youre suppose to win...
There is ZERO chance GB will look past opening day on the road at Chicago.....ZERO
What a better statement to make, and what a way to crush the Bears hopes in 2015 then beating them at home again to start the year??
Yes I am a homer, but I think that loss last year in the playoffs sparked a new machine you will see this year...GB is not going to take their foot off the petal anymore during a game...
If GB stays healthy, I think they will set all types of records on the offensive end, as they have so many weapons on offense now with an above average line, add a punt returner who can make plays and give them good field position....and I think GB lights up the scoreboard every week.
If the defense can be an average defense 10-14th in the league, they will be the #1 seed...
Im sorry, but GB WILL NOT look past opening week on the road at Chicago
I'm 100% agree with that statement.
Rodgers is a winner and he'll be back with a need of revenge and the team will follow him. We are talking about football at the highest level and they know at GB that every game count.
Ok Suuma you have many examples of that but all game are different and every stories too.
I think you have to worry big time of the hurted beast that is GB (remember the 2014 Spurs)
I'm not saying GB -5 is a lock but it feel suicidal to bet against them
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:
I couldn't disagree more with everything about your initial post.
So, youre telling me, the first game of the season, in one of the biggest rivalries in NFL history, on the road, and GB is going to be looking ahead to week 2??
As hard as it was to get over that loss to Seattle in the playoffs, I think it is going to be a blessing in disguise...
GB needs to get home-field advantage to give them the best chance at reaching the superbowl, and that means winning every game youre suppose to win...
There is ZERO chance GB will look past opening day on the road at Chicago.....ZERO
What a better statement to make, and what a way to crush the Bears hopes in 2015 then beating them at home again to start the year??
Yes I am a homer, but I think that loss last year in the playoffs sparked a new machine you will see this year...GB is not going to take their foot off the petal anymore during a game...
If GB stays healthy, I think they will set all types of records on the offensive end, as they have so many weapons on offense now with an above average line, add a punt returner who can make plays and give them good field position....and I think GB lights up the scoreboard every week.
If the defense can be an average defense 10-14th in the league, they will be the #1 seed...
Im sorry, but GB WILL NOT look past opening week on the road at Chicago
I'm 100% agree with that statement.
Rodgers is a winner and he'll be back with a need of revenge and the team will follow him. We are talking about football at the highest level and they know at GB that every game count.
Ok Suuma you have many examples of that but all game are different and every stories too.
I think you have to worry big time of the hurted beast that is GB (remember the 2014 Spurs)
I'm not saying GB -5 is a lock but it feel suicidal to bet against them
I couldn't disagree more with everything about your initial post.
So, youre telling me, the first game of the season, in one of the biggest rivalries in NFL history, on the road, and GB is going to be looking ahead to week 2??
As hard as it was to get over that loss to Seattle in the playoffs, I think it is going to be a blessing in disguise...
GB needs to get home-field advantage to give them the best chance at reaching the superbowl, and that means winning every game youre suppose to win...
There is ZERO chance GB will look past opening day on the road at Chicago.....ZERO
What a better statement to make, and what a way to crush the Bears hopes in 2015 then beating them at home again to start the year??
Yes I am a homer, but I think that loss last year in the playoffs sparked a new machine you will see this year...GB is not going to take their foot off the petal anymore during a game...
If GB stays healthy, I think they will set all types of records on the offensive end, as they have so many weapons on offense now with an above average line, add a punt returner who can make plays and give them good field position....and I think GB lights up the scoreboard every week.
If the defense can be an average defense 10-14th in the league, they will be the #1 seed...
Im sorry, but GB WILL NOT look past opening week on the road at Chicago
I respectfully agree to disagree regarding the Bears game. I agree on the Packers having a good shot at getting the #1 seed. But maybe it's impossible to explain a Packers-homer that players on this team are looking ahead to Seattle.
If you have one of the biggest revenge games in NFL history on deck, on national TV and in front of your home crowd, it's impossible that you don't look ahead a bit past the 5-11 Chicago Bears who you have owned in both games last season.
If a GB-player says he is 100% focused on the 5-11 Bears and doesn't think about the Seahawks, he is lying.
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:
I couldn't disagree more with everything about your initial post.
So, youre telling me, the first game of the season, in one of the biggest rivalries in NFL history, on the road, and GB is going to be looking ahead to week 2??
As hard as it was to get over that loss to Seattle in the playoffs, I think it is going to be a blessing in disguise...
GB needs to get home-field advantage to give them the best chance at reaching the superbowl, and that means winning every game youre suppose to win...
There is ZERO chance GB will look past opening day on the road at Chicago.....ZERO
What a better statement to make, and what a way to crush the Bears hopes in 2015 then beating them at home again to start the year??
Yes I am a homer, but I think that loss last year in the playoffs sparked a new machine you will see this year...GB is not going to take their foot off the petal anymore during a game...
If GB stays healthy, I think they will set all types of records on the offensive end, as they have so many weapons on offense now with an above average line, add a punt returner who can make plays and give them good field position....and I think GB lights up the scoreboard every week.
If the defense can be an average defense 10-14th in the league, they will be the #1 seed...
Im sorry, but GB WILL NOT look past opening week on the road at Chicago
I respectfully agree to disagree regarding the Bears game. I agree on the Packers having a good shot at getting the #1 seed. But maybe it's impossible to explain a Packers-homer that players on this team are looking ahead to Seattle.
If you have one of the biggest revenge games in NFL history on deck, on national TV and in front of your home crowd, it's impossible that you don't look ahead a bit past the 5-11 Chicago Bears who you have owned in both games last season.
If a GB-player says he is 100% focused on the 5-11 Bears and doesn't think about the Seahawks, he is lying.
I'm really looking forward to Titans @ Bucs in Week 1 (yes, I know it's a game between two bottom-feeders, but that is where I make my money).
I'd like your opinions on that game if any.
Right now it sits at -3 Bucs. I love the line as it presents a nice cushion for the dog.
This will almost certainly be Winston's debut game and he will be going against Mettenberger. Mariota is holding out and is a near lock to sit the first game.
I love that switch. I'll more than happily take a mildly seasoned very motivated Mettenberger looking over his shoulder over a completely green Mariota in his first start.
So at the most important position I see the Titans as having the advantage.
The problem comes with the rest of the both teams, of which, I've done no research as of yet.
Do you have any comments on this game or the Titans and Bucs upcoming season in general?
Suuma,
I'm really looking forward to Titans @ Bucs in Week 1 (yes, I know it's a game between two bottom-feeders, but that is where I make my money).
I'd like your opinions on that game if any.
Right now it sits at -3 Bucs. I love the line as it presents a nice cushion for the dog.
This will almost certainly be Winston's debut game and he will be going against Mettenberger. Mariota is holding out and is a near lock to sit the first game.
I love that switch. I'll more than happily take a mildly seasoned very motivated Mettenberger looking over his shoulder over a completely green Mariota in his first start.
So at the most important position I see the Titans as having the advantage.
The problem comes with the rest of the both teams, of which, I've done no research as of yet.
Do you have any comments on this game or the Titans and Bucs upcoming season in general?
Rodgers is a winner and he'll be back with a need of revenge and the team will follow him. We are talking about football at the highest level and they know at GB that every game count.
Ok Suuma you have many examples of that but all game are different and every stories too.
I think you have to worry big time of the hurted beast that is GB (remember the 2014 Spurs)
I'm not saying GB -5 is a lock but it feel suicidal to bet against them
I'm not saying Bears +5 is a lock either. But the Packers have their biggest revenge game in a decade in week two and it's circled since May. For the Bears it's their personal Super Bowl of the year. There is a discrepancy in focus and motivation other than it would be in week six. If you want to fade the Packers on the road, this is the spot - that's what my intention is about.
Another example: In 2011, the Bears were a pretty good team before losing Cutler due to an injury. They were 7-3 at that point. In the 2010 playoffs, the Bears lost the NFC conference championship
against the Packers. In week 3 of the 2011 season, they played the
Packers in a huge revenge game. They had this game circled. In week 2, they played the Saints on the road and showed the worst offensive efficiency of the whole season under Jay Cutler. The Saints played one heck of a season but they weren't famous for their defense that year. Their offense overshadowed everything.
Cutler's stats:
19/45 & 3.6 NYPPA as he got sacked 6 times for a loss of 58 yards.
I don't know if I would have played the Bears in this game, but the spot to take the Saints was brilliant.
Sure, the Packers are telling everybody they want to have home field advantage in the playoffs. Doesn't every playoff team want to have that? As you said, it's Football at its highest level, a pro level. Shouldn't teams be willing to win EVERY game? Those are multimillionaires of whom many are already satisfied. Maybe they want to win every game, but they simply don't get up 100% for each game. To believe that, is wishful thinking.
The Packers say they want to win more road games than in 2014, yes. But they were also nuances away from being a 2-6 road team in 2014. What do you expect from them? To go 8-0? If they go 7-1 or 6-2 on the road this year, this game against the Bears is a possible spot for a loss.
Quote Originally Posted by powerbalance:
I'm 100% agree with that statement.
Rodgers is a winner and he'll be back with a need of revenge and the team will follow him. We are talking about football at the highest level and they know at GB that every game count.
Ok Suuma you have many examples of that but all game are different and every stories too.
I think you have to worry big time of the hurted beast that is GB (remember the 2014 Spurs)
I'm not saying GB -5 is a lock but it feel suicidal to bet against them
I'm not saying Bears +5 is a lock either. But the Packers have their biggest revenge game in a decade in week two and it's circled since May. For the Bears it's their personal Super Bowl of the year. There is a discrepancy in focus and motivation other than it would be in week six. If you want to fade the Packers on the road, this is the spot - that's what my intention is about.
Another example: In 2011, the Bears were a pretty good team before losing Cutler due to an injury. They were 7-3 at that point. In the 2010 playoffs, the Bears lost the NFC conference championship
against the Packers. In week 3 of the 2011 season, they played the
Packers in a huge revenge game. They had this game circled. In week 2, they played the Saints on the road and showed the worst offensive efficiency of the whole season under Jay Cutler. The Saints played one heck of a season but they weren't famous for their defense that year. Their offense overshadowed everything.
Cutler's stats:
19/45 & 3.6 NYPPA as he got sacked 6 times for a loss of 58 yards.
I don't know if I would have played the Bears in this game, but the spot to take the Saints was brilliant.
Sure, the Packers are telling everybody they want to have home field advantage in the playoffs. Doesn't every playoff team want to have that? As you said, it's Football at its highest level, a pro level. Shouldn't teams be willing to win EVERY game? Those are multimillionaires of whom many are already satisfied. Maybe they want to win every game, but they simply don't get up 100% for each game. To believe that, is wishful thinking.
The Packers say they want to win more road games than in 2014, yes. But they were also nuances away from being a 2-6 road team in 2014. What do you expect from them? To go 8-0? If they go 7-1 or 6-2 on the road this year, this game against the Bears is a possible spot for a loss.
I'm not saying Bears +5 is a lock either. But the Packers have their biggest revenge game in a decade in week two and it's circled since May. For the Bears it's their personal Super Bowl of the year. There is a discrepancy in focus and motivation other than it would be in week six. If you want to fade the Packers on the road, this is the spot - that's what my intention is about.
Another example: In 2011, the Bears were a pretty good team before losing Cutler due to an injury. They were 7-3 at that point. In the 2010 playoffs, the Bears lost the NFC conference championship against the Packers. In week 3 of the 2011 season, they played the Packers in a huge revenge game. They had this game circled. In week 2, they played the Saints on the road and showed the worst offensive efficiency of the whole season under Jay Cutler. The Saints played one heck of a season but they weren't famous for their defense that year. Their offense overshadowed everything.
Cutler's stats:
19/45 & 3.6 NYPPA as he got sacked 6 times for a loss of 58 yards.
I don't know if I would have played the Bears in this game, but the spot to take the Saints was brilliant.
Sure, the Packers are telling everybody they want to have home field advantage in the playoffs. Doesn't every playoff team want to have that? As you said, it's Football at its highest level, a pro level. Shouldn't teams be willing to win EVERY game? Those are multimillionaires of whom many are already satisfied. Maybe they want to win every game, but they simply don't get up 100% for each game. To believe that, is wishful thinking.
The Packers say they want to win more road games than in 2014, yes. But they were also nuances away from being a 2-6 road team in 2014. What do you expect from them? To go 8-0? If they go 7-1 or 6-2 on the road this year, this game against the Bears is a possible spot for a loss.
This might be true....but you truly think its possible for any NFL player or team not to be up for a Week 1 game??
If this was maybe a week 10 game, I can see that idea...
But to honestly think GB, or any NFL team will not be up and prepared for a week 1 game is just ridiculous...
You keep bringing up the Bears last season record...that has NOTHING to do with this season. No, GB wont go 8-0 on the road, which is EXACTLY the reason they NEED to win this game
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
I'm not saying Bears +5 is a lock either. But the Packers have their biggest revenge game in a decade in week two and it's circled since May. For the Bears it's their personal Super Bowl of the year. There is a discrepancy in focus and motivation other than it would be in week six. If you want to fade the Packers on the road, this is the spot - that's what my intention is about.
Another example: In 2011, the Bears were a pretty good team before losing Cutler due to an injury. They were 7-3 at that point. In the 2010 playoffs, the Bears lost the NFC conference championship against the Packers. In week 3 of the 2011 season, they played the Packers in a huge revenge game. They had this game circled. In week 2, they played the Saints on the road and showed the worst offensive efficiency of the whole season under Jay Cutler. The Saints played one heck of a season but they weren't famous for their defense that year. Their offense overshadowed everything.
Cutler's stats:
19/45 & 3.6 NYPPA as he got sacked 6 times for a loss of 58 yards.
I don't know if I would have played the Bears in this game, but the spot to take the Saints was brilliant.
Sure, the Packers are telling everybody they want to have home field advantage in the playoffs. Doesn't every playoff team want to have that? As you said, it's Football at its highest level, a pro level. Shouldn't teams be willing to win EVERY game? Those are multimillionaires of whom many are already satisfied. Maybe they want to win every game, but they simply don't get up 100% for each game. To believe that, is wishful thinking.
The Packers say they want to win more road games than in 2014, yes. But they were also nuances away from being a 2-6 road team in 2014. What do you expect from them? To go 8-0? If they go 7-1 or 6-2 on the road this year, this game against the Bears is a possible spot for a loss.
This might be true....but you truly think its possible for any NFL player or team not to be up for a Week 1 game??
If this was maybe a week 10 game, I can see that idea...
But to honestly think GB, or any NFL team will not be up and prepared for a week 1 game is just ridiculous...
You keep bringing up the Bears last season record...that has NOTHING to do with this season. No, GB wont go 8-0 on the road, which is EXACTLY the reason they NEED to win this game
This might be true....but you truly think its possible for any NFL player or team not to be up for a Week 1 game??
If this was maybe a week 10 game, I can see that idea...
But to honestly think GB, or any NFL team will not be up and prepared for a week 1 game is just ridiculous...
You keep bringing up the Bears last season record...that has NOTHING to do with this season. No, GB wont go 8-0 on the road, which is EXACTLY the reason they NEED to win this game
I didn't say that.
I'm not saying the Packers will be flabby and soft, but I'm saying some
guys won't be 100% focused on the Bears, because they have Seattle in
their minds. Maybe they are 90% - it could be enough to not get the
Packers' best effort. Even if they come out strong, there will be the
moment during the game in which the Seahawks come into their minds. It's
human nature.
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:
This might be true....but you truly think its possible for any NFL player or team not to be up for a Week 1 game??
If this was maybe a week 10 game, I can see that idea...
But to honestly think GB, or any NFL team will not be up and prepared for a week 1 game is just ridiculous...
You keep bringing up the Bears last season record...that has NOTHING to do with this season. No, GB wont go 8-0 on the road, which is EXACTLY the reason they NEED to win this game
I didn't say that.
I'm not saying the Packers will be flabby and soft, but I'm saying some
guys won't be 100% focused on the Bears, because they have Seattle in
their minds. Maybe they are 90% - it could be enough to not get the
Packers' best effort. Even if they come out strong, there will be the
moment during the game in which the Seahawks come into their minds. It's
human nature.
I'm not saying the Packers will be flabby and soft, but I'm saying some guys won't be 100% focused on the Bears, because they have Seattle in their minds. Maybe they are 90% - it could be enough to not get the Packers' best effort. Even if they come out strong, there will be the moment during the game in which the Seahawks come into their minds. It's human nature.
Im sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong. I have family and friends who work on the staff and for the organization....and one thing I can promise you is that there is no team in the NFL who GB plays up for more than Chicago.
Living in Chicago, and being a fan of GB...people who don't live around here, or the Midwest, of follow the NFC North...just don't understand the hate these 4 teams have for each other, and especially how much teams hate GB...nor do they understand how much GB plays up for these games.
Best of luck to you, and anything can happen. They obviously can lose the game, not cover the game, but one thing I can guarantee you is they will be 110% focused on beating Chicago in Chicago to open the season. If they were playing any other team in the league, I would say you have a strong point, but not against Chicago in Chicago
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
I didn't say that.
I'm not saying the Packers will be flabby and soft, but I'm saying some guys won't be 100% focused on the Bears, because they have Seattle in their minds. Maybe they are 90% - it could be enough to not get the Packers' best effort. Even if they come out strong, there will be the moment during the game in which the Seahawks come into their minds. It's human nature.
Im sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong. I have family and friends who work on the staff and for the organization....and one thing I can promise you is that there is no team in the NFL who GB plays up for more than Chicago.
Living in Chicago, and being a fan of GB...people who don't live around here, or the Midwest, of follow the NFC North...just don't understand the hate these 4 teams have for each other, and especially how much teams hate GB...nor do they understand how much GB plays up for these games.
Best of luck to you, and anything can happen. They obviously can lose the game, not cover the game, but one thing I can guarantee you is they will be 110% focused on beating Chicago in Chicago to open the season. If they were playing any other team in the league, I would say you have a strong point, but not against Chicago in Chicago
Hot Forum Topics
