How good are the Green Bay Packers?

[Aso]

Please.
You and Houstonboi can go on having virtual sex with one another. I have no issue with that. But, please, get over the piling on me. At least I have my OWN opinion and don't just follow you fruits.

Are you kidding me? You think I'm a person to follow popular opinion? I was one of the only people who said Randy Moss was done last year and that Vincent Jackson was better. That discussion never ended and I took a lot of heat.

The only difference is what you're saying does have a shred of common sense in it.

[dave]

Are you kidding me? You think I'm a person to follow popular opinion? I was one of the only people who said Randy Moss was done last year and that Vincent Jackson was better. That discussion never ended and I took a lot of heat.

The only difference is what you're saying does have a shred of common sense in it.

That potential 16-0 Colts team showed its true colours ... proving my point.

[ZoneBlitz]

IMO, if the Colts had entered that game as unbeaten, it could have changed the dynamics of that game.

Possibly one of the stupidest things ive ever heard, rivaled by the theory of the Broncos sabotaging Tim Tebow (which was also said by you).

[dave]

Possibly one of the stupidest things ive ever heard, rivaled by the theory of the Broncos sabotaging Tim Tebow (which was also said by you).

And you're wrong too. But I give you some credit for not groaning me.
I disagree with you, but that's it.

BTW, I stand by my Tebow theory. The Broncos never truly wanted him to succeed. He did despite their wishes.

[MrBill]

I'd say the Packers are still pretty damn good. They haven't lost a game since last December and along the way picked up another Super Bowl championship. They have the best record in the league and can clinch HFA next week with a win over the woeful Bears. The Chiefs caught the Packers looking forward to their next two games over division rivals at home and they won't come out flat for those games.

Today was a trap game plain and simple. No need for panic in Green Bay.

[dave]

I'd say the Packers are still pretty damn good. They haven't lost a game since last December and along the way picked up another Super Bowl championship. They have the best record in the league and can clinch HFA next week with a win over the woeful Bears. The Chiefs caught the Packers looking forward to their next two games over division rivals at home and they won't come out flat for those games.

Today was a trap game plain and simple. No need for panic in Green Bay.

Agreed. It was just a game. Shit happens.

Your Packers better hope Philly doesn't sneak into the playoffs. They reek of last year's Packers or Seahawks ... just getting in and blowing up.

[Colonel Angus]

I'd say the Packers are still pretty damn good. They haven't lost a game since last December and along the way picked up another Super Bowl championship. They have the best record in the league and can clinch HFA next week with a win over the woeful Bears. The Chiefs caught the Packers looking forward to their next two games over division rivals at home and they won't come out flat for those games.

Today was a trap game plain and simple. No need for panic in Green Bay.

I'm glad that there are still some level headed fans after this game. They still have 4 weeks to heal up before playing games that matter again.

[Primetime]

I'm glad that there are still some level headed fans after this game. They still have 4 weeks to heal up before playing games that matter again.

Haven't seen any Packers fans on the site blowing up. Most people know this game didn't mean shit to anyone.

[Cornelius]

Haven't seen any Packers fans on the site blowing up. Most people know this game didn't mean shit to anyone.

It probably just earned Romeo a head coaching spot.

[Bear Pand]

Indy pulling their starters did show weakness and did have some impact on the team. This can't be denied, the team visibly reacted to it. But it's pretty much impossible to measure that impact and it's not likely it was a large enough to make them lose the Superbowl.

And no this loss isn't a good thing for the Packers. That's just shit people say to make themselves feel better about it.

[Fappin Raptor]

Maybe the Saints were just a better team that year? Just a guess.

[MrBill]

And no this loss isn't a good thing for the Packers. That's just shit people say to make themselves feel better about it.

It's not that hard to feel better about it when you are 13-1 and can clinch HFA next week.

[Senser81]

Yeah and focusing solely on results when we're talking about one-shot games, or a string of a few one-shot playoff games is retarded.

You saying this years Packers are better than the 07 Pats just because they managed to win the SB (assuming it even happens of course) has as much validity as me saying this years Chiefs are > than this years Packers because they beat them today.




I'd rather have the better team since it increases my likelihood of winning the SB.

Kind of an interesting thought. Last year the Packers won the Super Bowl despite a ton of injuries. They were probably better than their 10-6 record indicated. If the Packers go like 15-1 this year and win the Super Bowl, then they will have had a season of 18-1 with a Super Bowl win, preceded by another Super Bowl win. The Patriots will have an 18-1 season without a Super Bowl win, followed up by missing the postseason.

[DSpydr84]

I seem to remember a Saints team a few years back that was undefeated up until around this time, then slid for a few weeks, and nobody knew what was happening, then eventually they went on to win the Superbowl.

Although, for the record, the Packers are 0-1 without Greg Jennings. Just sayin.

[Tengo Juego]

I'm still not sure why the phrase "trap game" is being thrown around. Isn't there a game of more importance to follow, in that scenario? When you're trying to remain undefeated, every game is important. Not to mention, home field advantage was a pretty big incentive.