Packers 2024 Season Thread

[CheezWizHed]

5 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

The NFL Playoff Projections at The Athletic give the Packers a 4% chance of winning the Super Bowl for whatever that is or isn't worth.

Yeah, I knew my 1 in 1000 was hyperbolic. 4 out of 100 still isn't great.

[adambr2]

4% sounds about right. Their road is probably @Philly, then @Detroit and @Minnesota in some order. If they manage to survive that gauntlet I would guess they’d be favored in SB 59 against any AFC opponent kind of like how things unfolded for SB 45. 

Pretty remote chance but hot runs like that have happened and aren’t completely outside the boundaries of any possible reality.

[adambr2]

Also, I know we are going to hear 2010-11 run comparisons next week, pretty unavoidable, but the road this year is going to be much harder. 

For a 6 seed, ‘10-‘11 was actually about as easy of a road as you could ask for. It was just a down year for the NFC. Philly was about a 50/50 game which went our way.

Atlanta was probably the toughest game on the road but they were closer to a 13-3 paper tiger than a true contender depending on who you asked. We fell just short in their place in the regular season and the rematch was a blowout.

Chicago was a typical team from that era of Bears teams. Good defense with not much offense to speak of. Weak #2 seed.

Probably 3-4 better teams in this NFC field than any of those ‘10-‘11 opponents, honestly.

 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

27 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

The NFL Playoff Projections at The Athletic give the Packers a 4% chance of winning the Super Bowl for whatever that is or isn't worth.

1 in 25 is a lot greater than 1 in 1,000. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

14 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

Also, I know we are going to hear 2010-11 run comparisons next week, pretty unavoidable, but the road this year is going to be much harder. 

For a 6 seed, ‘10-‘11 was actually about as easy of a road as you could ask for. It was just a down year for the NFC. Philly was about a 50/50 game which went our way.

Atlanta was probably the toughest game on the road but they were closer to a 13-3 paper tiger than a true contender depending on who you asked. We fell just short in their place in the regular season and the rematch was a blowout.

Chicago was a typical team from that era of Bears teams. Good defense with not much offense to speak of. Weak #2 seed.

Probably 3-4 better teams in this NFC field than any of those ‘10-‘11 opponents, honestly.

 

This field is better than that one, the Packers were better defensively, but this is classic revisionism. You're just going back with the benefit of knowing the results and making sweeping statements about it. It's always very difficult to win the Super Bowl. Point is, nobody will remember this being some juggernaut NFC if say, Philly and Minnesota lose in the 1st round.

The game with Atlanta was decided by the Tramon INT to end the half. It completely changed the trajectory of a game that should have been 21-17 at half. That Atlanta team was good, but it was a ball control offense and going down 2 touchdowns against our defense was insurmountable. The Packers barely escaped the first round. If that final ball to Cooper was thrown a couple feet higher, it's a touchdown.

That said, the Packers were probably the best team in the NFC but they evolved as the year went on, particularly on offense, had a lot of brutal losses and bad injuries. 

This team just doesn't have the impact players that team did on either side of the ball. There's no Greg Jennings, there's no Woodson, no Matthews.

[adambr2]

18 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

This field is better than that one, the Packers were better defensively, but this is classic revisionism. You're just going back with the benefit of knowing the results and making sweeping statements about it. It's always very difficult to win the Super Bowl. Point is, nobody will remember this being some juggernaut NFC if say, Philly and Minnesota lose in the 1st round.

The game with Atlanta was decided by the Tramon INT to end the half. It completely changed the trajectory of a game that should have been 21-17 at half. That Atlanta team was good, but it was a ball control offense and going down 2 touchdowns against our defense was insurmountable. The Packers barely escaped the first round. If that final ball to Cooper was thrown a couple feet higher, it's a touchdown.

That said, the Packers were probably the best team in the NFC but they evolved as the year went on, particularly on offense, had a lot of brutal losses and bad injuries. 

This team just doesn't have the impact players that team did on either side of the ball. There's no Greg Jennings, there's no Woodson, no Matthews.

I’m not taking anything away from the Packers’ trophy that year. As you say, it’s always hard to win the Super Bowl. 

I'm simply stating that this year’s NFC field and that one are apples and oranges.  This isn’t revisionist anything. The #2 seed in the NFC that year was an 11-5 Bears team who had to win one game at home against the 7-9 Seahawks to reach the NFC Championship Game. 

It’s simply a much weaker field, regardless of what might happen in this year’s field. If Philly and Minnesota lose in the first round, it could be not because the NFC isn’t really good this year but because the Packers/Bucs/Rams are also good football teams potentially capable of winning those games.

And yes I agree that they don’t have the kind of impact players that they need to take that next step. Josh Jacobs was probably the closest, and he’s not going to likely be enough. 

Gute is going to need to do more. Youth is great, but only to a point when you’re trying to win it all. They desperately need to add a #1 type receiver and impact pass rusher.

[OldHeidelberg]

50 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

The NFL Playoff Projections at The Athletic give the Packers a 4% chance of winning the Super Bowl for whatever that is or isn't worth.

If it lets you pick this week's results like the old 538 site I would be curious how much the chance changes if they are the 6 or 7 seed.

[HarryDoyle]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

I’m not taking anything away from the Packers’ trophy that year. As you say, it’s always hard to win the Super Bowl. 

I'm simply stating that this year’s NFC field and that one are apples and oranges.  This isn’t revisionist anything. The #2 seed in the NFC that year was an 11-5 Bears team who had to win one game at home against the 7-9 Seahawks to reach the NFC Championship Game. 

It’s simply a much weaker field, regardless of what might happen in this year’s field. If Philly and Minnesota lose in the first round, it could be not because the NFC isn’t really good this year but because the Packers/Bucs/Rams are also good football teams potentially capable of winning those games.

And yes I agree that they don’t have the kind of impact players that they need to take that next step. Josh Jacobs was probably the closest, and he’s not going to likely be enough. 

Gute is going to need to do more. Youth is great, but only to a point when you’re trying to win it all. They desperately need to add a #1 type receiver and impact pass rusher.

You seem to think Detroit is going to beat Minnesota on Sunday. I don't see that happening.

[CheezWizHed]

2 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

1 in 25 is a lot greater than 1 in 1,000. 

Next you'll tell me that a 1/4 lb burger is smaller than a 1/3 lb burger!

My 1 in 1000 was hyperbole. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

4 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

You seem to think Detroit is going to beat Minnesota on Sunday. I don't see that happening.

It's a toss up but I also think Minnesota is going to take it. Better defensive team. 

Detroit is much more susceptible to a one and done than people seem to think. They are banged up. Their defense is just not good. They are going to have their hands full if they're traveling to Tampa. 

[CheezWizHed]

11 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

It's a toss up but I also think Minnesota is going to take it. Better defensive team. 

Detroit is much more susceptible to a one and done than people seem to think. They are banged up. Their defense is just not good. They are going to have their hands full if they're traveling to Tampa. 

I hate to say it, but MN is healthy, well disciplined, and playing their best ball.  Detroit is still dangerous, but very thin and banged up.  

[adambr2]

Not sure how Rashan Gary made the Pro Bowl. Certainly wasn’t on the merit of his performance.

[LouisEly]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

Not sure how Rashan Gary made the Pro Bowl. Certainly wasn’t on the merit of his performance.

Based on what?

[adambr2]

11 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

Based on what?

A barely above average PFF grade? A regression to only 6.5 sacks despite being the 8th highest paid edge rusher in the NFL? Not really sure what you’re looking for here. Even Gary himself and his DC sounded surprised, and I don’t think even the staunchest Gary supporters would describe his season as something other than disappointing.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Last I checked Gary had a 3% win rate on pass rushes which was down from the teens his previous two seasons, but it was a long time ago I looked at it. I don't think PFF is the bible some people think it is but Gary should not be in the Pro Bowl. He was average this season.

Jacobs and McKinney are fine. Maybe an offensive lineman based on the season Jacobs had and the protection Love enjoyed, but OL get in on name recognition and we don't have it.

[adambr2]

Generally I don’t even care who makes the Pro Bowl, it’s popularity, it’s kind of a joke, I get it. 
 

But in the case of Gary, he and LVN are probably 2 out of my top 5 reasons why this team didn’t take the step forward in 2024 that I hoped it would, so I’m not going to pretend that he’s one of the premiere edge rushers in the league when he most certainly is not.

[SeaBass]

I did a very perfunctory scan of sack leaders and what stood out to me is that the AFC is absolutely stacked with defensive ends at the top of the sack rankings. I was only focusing on defensive ends since that's Gary's position.

When I separated out just the NFC sack leaders there were only 4 other DEs that ranked higher than Gary. One was Nick Bosa who made the Pro Bowl) and one was Aiden Hutchenson but everyone knows the story of his injury.

I think it just came down to lack of stand out players in the NFC and whatever impression coaches and players around the league who submitted votes have of Gary.

People can argue other peripheral stats and their meanings but let's be real, these guys are most likely looking at sacks and even if Gary is a couple sacks behind a couple other guys he's still close enough where that might be overlooked against whatever his reputation within the league is.

[adambr2]

I find it really interesting how the Rams are approaching this weekend. They are basically approaching it like a preseason game and resting all main starters, which makes it highly likely (given that the Bucs have something to play for and are playing the Saints) that the Rams are essentially conceding the #3 seed to the Bucs, and at the #4, he’s certain to draw Minnesota or Detroit in the first round.

So at least as far as Sean McVay is concerned, he doesn’t see much difference between playing Minnesota, Detroit, Washington or Green Bay and would rather just focus on getting there healthy.

[yourout]

13 minutes ago, SeaBass said:

I did a very perfunctory scan of sack leaders and what stood out to me is that the AFC is absolutely stacked with defensive ends at the top of the sack rankings. I was only focusing on defensive ends since that's Gary's position.

When I separated out just the NFC sack leaders there were only 4 other DEs that ranked higher than Gary. One was Nick Bosa who made the Pro Bowl) and one was Aiden Hutchenson but everyone knows the story of his injury.

I think it just came down to lack of stand out players in the NFC and whatever impression coaches and players around the league who submitted votes have of Gary.

People can argue other peripheral stats and their meanings but let's be real, these guys are most likely looking at sacks and even if Gary is a couple sacks behind a couple other guys he's still close enough where that might be overlooked against whatever his reputation within the league is.

Would be interesting to see the draft positions of the top sack guys. 

I've always thought elite pass rushers were the hardest to project from college.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

11 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I find it really interesting how the Rams are approaching this weekend. They are basically approaching it like a preseason game and resting all main starters, which makes it highly likely (given that the Bucs have something to play for and are playing the Saints) that the Rams are essentially conceding the #3 seed to the Bucs, and at the #4, he’s certain to draw Minnesota or Detroit in the first round.

So at least as far as Sean McVay is concerned, he doesn’t see much difference between playing Minnesota, Detroit, Washington or Green Bay and would rather just focus on getting there healthy.

To me, makes GB slipping to 7 even less important because I would have liked going to LA but not really going to Tampa. I don't think that offense is a good matchup for GB and I just don't like the Packers playing in Florida.

I also think McVay wants to play indoors as often as possible. They are well documented hating the cold/elements. If they drop to 4 and win, they stay indoors with Minn/Det in the 2nd round - assuming 6 and 7 also lose which is fairly safe.

[yourout]

4 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

To me, makes GB slipping to 7 even less important because I would have liked going to LA but not really going to Tampa. I don't think that offense is a good matchup for GB and I just don't like the Packers playing in Florida.

I also think McVay wants to play indoors as often as possible. They are well documented hating the cold/elements. If they drop to 4 and win, they stay indoors with Minn/Det in the 2nd round - assuming 6 and 7 also lose which is fairly safe.

I think most teams with older QBs are better indoors. 

At the end Farve and Rogers both were better indoor than it in the cold.

[adambr2]

I have no idea what to think of Tampa. Some weeks I think they could win the Super Bowl, other weeks I think they’ll be the weakest team in the playoffs. Baker would be an MVP contender if Allen and Lamar weren’t having otherworldly seasons.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

29 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I have no idea what to think of Tampa. Some weeks I think they could win the Super Bowl, other weeks I think they’ll be the weakest team in the playoffs. Baker would be an MVP contender if Allen and Lamar weren’t having otherworldly seasons.

That is about what they are. The offense is really good. That's another 12ish win team without some of the injuries they've had this year. Plus Baker is that prototype kind of journeyman almost great not never quite great QB that throws for 500 yards on the Packers.

[LouisEly]

2 hours ago, SeaBass said:

When I separated out just the NFC sack leaders there were only 4 other DEs that ranked higher than Gary. One was Nick Bosa who made the Pro Bowl) and one was Aiden Hutchenson but everyone knows the story of his injury.

In addition, Gary is one of the league leaders in % of times being chipped.  At one point earlier in the season he was 3rd in the NFL.  That's going to affect sacks, pressures, pass block win rate, etc.   If you're 3rd in the NFL in % chipped, the league knows you are pretty darned good.  Gary is also excellent in run defense and does a great job of setting the edge. 

Yes, the Pro Bowl is based a lot on reputation, but usually it's earned.  2/3rds of the vote comes from players and coaches, and they know who is good.

[sveumrules]

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

But in the case of Gary, he and LVN are probably 2 out of my top 5 reasons why this team didn’t take the step forward in 2024 that I hoped it would

Last year they were 9 W - 8 L while scoring the 12th most points per game (22.5) and allowing the 10th fewest points per game (20.6).

They should finish this year 12 W - 5 L and are currently scoring the 8th most points per game (27.4) and allowing the 6th fewest points per game (19.6).

They are currently 5th in point differential after finishing 10th last year.

Sounds like you were hoping for them to take a couple two tree steps forward, not just one.