Divisional Round: Packers @ 49ers - Saturday, Jan 20th 7:15pm (Fox)

[homer]

Niners open as 9.5-point favorites.

[young guns]

Here's to hoping the rest the starters in week 18 curse bites them.  Even despite last week I still can't gather much hope to win this game.

[HarveysWBs]

It can be done, people.  Winning in San Francisco in the playoffs is not like jumping to Mars.

(the above link is to highlights of the 1995 divisional round game, which is apparently blocked on third party sites—thanks, NFL)

[GAME05]

Hopefully Jaire heals up quickly. That'll sure be a big difference in the game.

[SeaBass]

SF is 0-3 vs. teams from the Midwest this season. (CIN, MIN, CLE)

[stalton]

SF is 2-5 when they give up at least 20.

GB is 5-5 if you include last week.

[Fear The Chorizo]

The Packer D line will have to play their best game of the season to at least dampen the 49ers running game enough without having to put too many LBs and safeties in the box - If the Packers have to be too focused on stopping the run from killing them the 49ers are going to gouge them off play action and quick-hitting passes to huge holes in their coverage schemes.  I'd rather they do whatever it takes to tighten up coverage across the middle of the field and force Purdy to beat them with throws to the perimeter.

Really hoping Jaire is ok to suit up and play Saturday, otherwise San Fran will likely have more than one patsy in the Packer secondary to target with their quality weapons at each position grouping with plays giving Purdy short and easy throws to guys in space.  If they make Purdy have to throw the ball downfield and to the outside, I think the defense can stay in the game well enough to give the Pack a chance to win.

Offensively, I think there will need to be some more of the jet sweep/endaround action with Reed and Watson to help the running game against the 49er front 7.  Misdirection coupled with some trap and power runs between the tackles....then you just hope the Oline can hold up well enough for Love to continue distributing the ball all over the field - Packers will need a shot play or two with Watson to win a one on one and huge games from the TE/slot receivers off play action.

If the 49ers have some rust and don't dominate from the opening snap, this will be a tight game - however if the hit the ground dominating in the trenches it's going to be tough to keep the game within 10 points even if the Packer offense plays well.

[HarryDoyle]

3 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

It can be done, people.  Winning in San Francisco in the playoffs is not like jumping to Mars.

(the above link is to highlights of the 1995 divisional round game, which is apparently blocked on third party sites—thanks, NFL)

One of my top 5 Packer games all time.

[yourout]

Going to have to win the turnover battle again.

Need to be +2.

[CheezWizHed]

9 hours ago, homer said:

Niners open as 9.5-point favorites.

We have them just where we want them.

 

[BrewerFan]

Ok...so how are we feeling about this game?

Does anyone feel like we WILL beat the 49ers?

Not can we or is it possible? All it takes is a Craig Newsome err...Carrington Valentine scoop and score off a Christian McCaffery Fumble and we KNOW we've got a chance!

 

Got me feeling a little nostalgic. Went back and watched the highlights of the '95 Divisional Rd upset. The game that would determine who went on to play the Pats in the SB(and likely both teams beat the Pats).

A couple of things stand out.

First, go to ~5:00. It's when Young gets sacked on what I thought was a QB blitz by Wayne Simmons. But the important thing is how quickly they blow it dead. It looks like the ball is coming out before he goes down. I slowed it down and it certainly looks like it's come loose(though as Packers fans who watched their playoff game two years later knows, the refs don't like calling penalties on the Niners! Cough*Rice*Cough*

• The contrast between the West Coast Offense in it's original form vs the modern West Coast offense...which I really don't think has much of a meaning. I guess now it's just built off that quick, short passing game, but the entire premise was to find a way to get the most out of your QB who lacked elite arm strength. Walsh came up with it after Bengals great Ken Anderson had elbow injuries...and he'd go on to win a SB. The thing is, these two QBs did NOT lack arm strength. You can see it in some of these absolute LAZERS over the middle.
  
  It also looked more like they went with the first read very often instead of picking out the matchup based on coverage. So I guess it was both more difficult to play QB given the rules that were not yet in place, but also simpler as you didn't have as much on your shoulders. You get the play, you go to your first read, if it's not there, you dump it off(especially with Reggie bearing down on you.
   
• But beyond that, all the snaps under center. You have a T formation in many of these with two backs with their hands on the ground, both off-set. NOW you'd have a QB surveying the defense and one of those players lined up at RB would either go in motion or would motion back into the backfield and neither would be in a 3-point stance.
   
• These were the two BEST QBs in the NFL and they were playing at a high level. Fritz Shurmur was an outstanding DC. He had limited athleticism in the LBing core and the secondary outside of Butler and for a brief moment Brian Simmons, but Reggie White on that DL gave everyone 1 on 1s and when he sent a LBer, they were getting home.

Very interesting to watch how the game has changed. I know it's almost 30 years now, but it's still kinda wild.

[MrTPlush]

Maybe we win, maybe we don't. Is this lopsided on paper? Yah...but we would be very far from the first team to win such a match-up in the playoffs. I have watched the Giants in the playoffs enough to know that. 

I think our offense is good enough and our defense performs better than people like to think sometimes. I think we are pretty underrated. Despite the disastrous start to the year our offense was ranked #12 and the defense #10 in the NFL. That was without key pieces on offense too. We are playing our best ball and playing like a Top 5 team. We don't blow the doors off offensively or defensively...but it is a legitimate Super Bowl possible team. Of course, they probably don't have a great chance if the 49ers bring their 'A' game, but that doesn't always happen.

[Outlander]

2 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Got me feeling a little nostalgic. Went back and watched the highlights of the '95 Divisional Rd upset. The game that would determine who went on to play the Pats in the SB(and likely both teams beat the Pats).

 

That was two different playoffs. The Packers lost to the Cowboys again after upsetting the 49ers in 1996. The Packers were the top team in the NFC and the favorite to win it all when they eventually won the Super Bowl in 1997, killing the 49ers at Lambeau along the way. 

[BrewerFan]

22 minutes ago, Outlander said:

That was two different playoffs. The Packers lost to the Cowboys again after upsetting the 49ers in 1996. The Packers were the top team in the NFC and the favorite to win it all when they eventually won the Super Bowl in 1997, killing the 49ers at Lambeau along the way. 

Ah...that should have been obvious being as it was in Candlestick. 

Good call. Anyway, that was still a massive game for us. Knocking off SF when it was viewed as a two-team race over those 4 years. SF's  last win with Montana, then NYG, Washington...and then I think it was Dallas for two, SF knocked them off with Deion(and their cap punishments) and then won it again...that year.

 

And it seemed like every game started the same way. GB would score. Dallas would score(or maybe we'd jump out to a two-score lead). Then at some point, usually a pivotal point, Favre would throw a pick, Dallas would score, get the ball back at half, score, they'd have the lead and then it was 5 yards before anyone could touch Emmitt! And if you DID get them in 3rd and long, Irvin or Harper was gonna get one. BUT if you just happened to double them, then Novachek would beat you down the seem!

And Jerry tries to argue this team is as talented as that one. 3-4 legit HOF caliber players on that OL(Erik Williams was as good of a RT as I've seen, Larry Allen was a top 10 all-time OL, and Newton was a freak-freak athlete). I think Barry goes for 3K a couple of years with that offense!

 

Anyway, good catch. The Catch 2, the one that should have been a Rice fumble, was in SF as well, correct? I think it was, but...don't care to go look it up right now. 

[CheezWizHed]

It is lopsided on paper, but you play the game for a reason.  Any given Sunday. 

The Packers are hot; they are underdogs and have nothing to lose.  Like the Cowboys, all the pressure is on the 49ers.  We shouldn't be here. 

The bye week gave the 49ers a chance to heal.  And Purdy is the type of QB we typically struggle against.  They have a good running game and McCaff is healthy now. But Purdy doesn't have much experience in the playoffs.. if he throws picks, we have a good chance (vs Bengals 2 INTs, Ravens 4INTs, Vikings 2INT, Browns 1 INT)

The bye week hasn't always been the Packer's friend though in the past.  And some 49ers haven't played for 2 weeks.  Maybe the 49ers come out a little cold and sluggish? Though Shanahanahan seems to always have his team ready for us.  

But time for MLF to break that hold on us. 

 

[Fear The Chorizo]

San Fran/Santa Clara forecast looks like its going to be rainy/soggy Saturday evening for the game with a decent amount of wind....that could factor into how this game is played.  A slower/soggy field may actually help neutralize the rest advantage the 49ers have going into this game - but it also will put a premium on winning in the trenches at the line of scrimmage, where the 49ers are better.

If this young team can avoid turning the ball over in wet weather conditions while forcing a turnover or two themselves and GB can still stretch the field in the passing game, they can absolutely win this game.  

[OldHeidelberg]

1 hour ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

San Fran/Santa Clara forecast looks like its going to be rainy/soggy Saturday evening for the game with a decent amount of wind....that could factor into how this game is played.  A slower/soggy field may actually help neutralize the rest advantage the 49ers have going into this game - but it also will put a premium on winning in the trenches at the line of scrimmage, where the 49ers are better.

If this young team can avoid turning the ball over in wet weather conditions while forcing a turnover or two themselves and GB can still stretch the field in the passing game, they can absolutely win this game.  

I thought it never rained in California?

 

We have been outmuscled by more physical teams in the playoffs so many times it's hard to be too optimistic. But this is the Love era now so who knows. It's a very successful season already, none of us thought we would get this far. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

2 hours ago, OldHeidelberg said:

I thought it never rained in California?

 

We have been outmuscled by more physical teams in the playoffs so many times it's hard to be too optimistic. But this is the Love era now so who knows. It's a very successful season already, none of us thought we would get this far. 

hehe....it's actually been raining a ton in California over the last year +...it's just hardly ever written/talked about, because, well, I'll just leave that alone for now.

And one thing I don't think can be said about this young Packers team is that it's not physical...the last few drafts have dramatically changed the physical makeup of the roster.  

If the Packers lose Saturday it won't be a surprise, and it won't be chiefly because they aren't physical enough....they would have just run into a better, more veteran team built to win now.  The rainy weather conditions throw a variable into the game that doesn't show up in "on-paper" matchups.

[HarveysWBs]

I’m still waiting for the 49ers to suffer the consequences of missing on Trey Lance/rolling with Purdy “Mr irrelevant” JAG at the most important position in sports and investing heavily in an oft-injured running back.  That kind of hubris ought to result in a bill about a mile long, and it might as well come due this week.

I don’t care—Packers by six.

[Fear The Chorizo]

1 hour ago, HarveysWBs said:

I’m still waiting for the 49ers to suffer the consequences of missing on Trey Lance/rolling with Purdy “Mr irrelevant” JAG at the most important position in sports and investing heavily in an oft-injured running back.  That kind of hubris ought to result in a bill about a mile long, and it might as well come due this week.

I don’t care—Packers by six.

The 49ers have benefitted immensely by getting compensatory draft picks for some players , but mostly coaches and front office people being hired away by other teams over the past few years - the volume of those extra picks has helped fill in what would be glaring holes in roster depth behind their marquee players.  Those compensatory picks have offset the draft pick losses for Lance and to acquire McCaffrey, and frankly I think the current system gives teams too much in draft compensation for losing front office personnel/coaches to other organizations.

That being said, the 49ers are currently one of the older rosters in the NFL, and they're already into having to play all sorts of restructuring/cap gymnastics to keep their core around past this season - without having to worry about paying their starting quarterback enough to afford a San Fran apartment.  

This is the year the 49ers need to win a title before some of these issues start swiss-cheesing their current roster.  Hoping the 49ers get silly and give Purdy huge money only to find out he's a 7th round talent as the weapons around him and the defense ages out or leaves for more money than what the 49ers can pay them.

[HarveysWBs]

It has also started to occur to me this week, as I wait for a Saturday that seems it will never arrive, that this is the last week I will really get the feeling of playing with house money.  I don’t know about how anyone else sees it, but the whole “they shouldn’t be here and they shouldn’t win” vibe worked last week and will again this week, but no longer.

In the hypothetical realm, an NFC championship game comes against either Tampa or Detroit, and that’s a very winnable game either way.  Then, once you’re in the Super Bowl, you can’t just be happy to be there.  There’s no “aw shucks, we’ll get them next year” for the losers.  Even if we face the defending champ Chiefs, or S-tier Ravens, or the red-hot Bills (and we’d be deserving dogs in all those matchups), you have to find a way to win.  Rodgers never got back to a second one, so you have to get it when the getting is good, no matter what.

So I’m once again trying to remind myself that this week is the postseason at its best.  I have no expectations for this game, and it can be pure fun (so long as I don’t think about previous playoff matchups too often).  Next week is going to be a different feeling either way.

[AKCheesehead]

8 hours ago, Outlander said:

That was two different playoffs. The Packers lost to the Cowboys again after upsetting the 49ers in 1996. The Packers were the top team in the NFC and the favorite to win it all when they eventually won the Super Bowl in 1997, killing the 49ers at Lambeau along the way. 

This one will always be a bit of a sore spot of regret for me.  This game happened at the same time as the Badgers hosted Indiana and beat Knight at the Fieldhouse for the first time since 1980, and the last time ever.  I could have went with Dad but I was pretty nuts about the Packers and didn't want to miss that. 

[thebruce44]

9 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

Despite the disastrous start to the year our offense was ranked #12 and the defense #10 in the NFL. That was without key pieces on offense too. We are playing our best ball and playing like a Top 5 team. We don't blow the doors off offensively or defensively...but it is a legitimate Super Bowl possible team. Of course, they probably don't have a great chance if the 49ers bring their 'A' game, but that doesn't always happen.

Wait, what are you looking at to see that our Defense was #10 in the NFL?

[sveumrules]

2 hours ago, thebruce44 said:

Wait, what are you looking at to see that our Defense was #10 in the NFL?

The Packers defense allowed 350 points to be scored against them this season, 10th fewest in the NFL.

[MrTPlush]

3 hours ago, thebruce44 said:

Wait, what are you looking at to see that our Defense was #10 in the NFL?

As sveum said, that is based on points allowed. They are a more modest 17th by yards allowed. 
 

The offense is 12th by points or 11th by yards allowed.