NFL/Superbowl/Playoffs - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/10/2008 01:22:29 PM · #201

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I just love it. The peanut gallery seems to want it both ways. What do you guys make of this?

Total rushing yards:
Seattle: 1619
Green Bay: 1597

So, which is it? Does Seattle have no running game (and by extension neither does Green Bay)? Or does Green Bay have a running game (and by extension so does Seattle)? Or do Green Bay's yards somehow magically count for more?

I don't think that's the point. I think people are saying Seattle's air game can't beat Green Bay, so they are gonna have to have their best running game to have a chance. Are they right? I don't know... But the argument is that if the two teams have more or less equal running attacks (and your stats suggest they will) then Green bay has the edge.

R.

Actually I was responding to Bugzeye's "The Packers do have a running game" and LoudDog's "No Running game?". I think they were saying exactly what I thought they were saying, to which I responded...yo mamma!

EDIT: The truth is the two teams are statistical twins (more or less). They both run the West Coast Offense, they both have good defense. Whatever you say about the Packers is generally true about the Seahawks. Whatever you say about the Seahawks is generally true about the Packers. It should be a good game.

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 13:27:30.

Dr.Confuser

Nikon D800

01/10/2008 01:26:28 PM · #202

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I just love it. The peanut gallery seems to want it both ways. What do you guys make of this?

Total rushing yards:
Seattle: 1619
Green Bay: 1597

So, which is it? Does Seattle have no running game (and by extension neither does Green Bay)? Or does Green Bay have a running game (and by extension so does Seattle)? Or do Green Bay's yards somehow magically count for more?

I think what's confusing folks here is that:
Seattle uses a passing offense to set up the run. This was especially visible against the Redskins.
Green Bay uses a run offense to set up the pass.

To football historians, the first sounds contra-intuitive, and the second sounds tried and true.

We'll see on Saturday!

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

01/10/2008 01:28:47 PM · #203

Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

I disagree. Green Bay, last I checked, used the West Coast Offense which uses the pass to set up the run. Now I'll admit I haven't seen many GB games, but this is my understanding.

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

01/10/2008 01:29:55 PM · #204

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I just love it. The peanut gallery seems to want it both ways. What do you guys make of this?

Total rushing yards:
Seattle: 1619
Green Bay: 1597

So, which is it? Does Seattle have no running game (and by extension neither does Green Bay)? Or does Green Bay have a running game (and by extension so does Seattle)? Or do Green Bay's yards somehow magically count for more?

I don't think that's the point. I think people are saying Seattle's air game can't beat Green Bay, so they are gonna have to have their best running game to have a chance. Are they right? I don't know... But the argument is that if the two teams have more or less equal running attacks (and your stats suggest they will) then Green bay has the edge.

R.

Actually I was responding to Bugzeye's "The Packers do have a running game" and LoudDog's "No Running game?". I think they were saying exactly what I thought they were saying, to which I responded...yo mamma!

EDIT: The truth is the two teams are statistical twins (more or less). They both run the West Coast Offense, they both have good defense. Whatever you say about the Packers is generally true about the Seahawks. Whatever you say about the Seahawks is generally true about the Packers. It should be a good game.

Indeed, it will be a good game. The only difference between the two is that the Packers will win and the Sea~~gulls~~Hawks will lose. :)

01/10/2008 01:31:45 PM · #205

There is no way to gauge how the packers are going to come out and play because this year they have done both. It depends on who they are playing and what their defense is good at. If they are run stuffers, they will pass 75% of the first 15 plays If the team is no good against the run. They will try to run the ball down your throat.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/10/2008 01:32:37 PM · #206

Originally posted by karmat:

Indeed, it will be a good game. The only difference between the two is that the Packers will win and the Sea~~gulls~~Hawks will lose. :)

A point I have not been aggressively disagreeing with. :)

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

01/10/2008 01:36:22 PM · #207

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/10/2008 01:45:55 PM · #208

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
I think what's confusing folks here is that:
Seattle uses a passing offense to set up the run. This was especially visible against the Redskins.
Green Bay uses a run offense to set up the pass.

I disagree. Green Bay, last I checked, used the West Coast Offense which uses the pass to set up the run. Now I'll admit I haven't seen many GB games, but this is my understanding.

It's a modified west coast. I think both run and pass compliment each other, not really one setting up the other. They have been successful at both lately. I think they mostly run on first down. Look out for their 5 WR sets though!

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

01/10/2008 02:17:13 PM · #209

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Only because the first 7 games of the season the packers absolutely sucked in the running game. The last 9 games, since Grant emerged, they have been great. Stats don't tell much of anything.

Let's see, would that be the 9 games in which Grant went over 100 yards 3 times (with Jackson doing it once in a garbage game)? Or would that be the 9 games in which they faced one team with a winning record? Or would that be the 9 games where 6 of their opponents ranked 20th or worse in rushing defense?

I'm shaking with fear... :)

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 14:17:51.

sacredspirit

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

01/10/2008 02:52:12 PM · #210

Statistically yes, both teams have the same rushing game. Only because the first 7 games of the season the packers absolutely sucked in the running game. The last 9 games, since Grant emerged, they have been great. Stats don't tell much of anything

Couldn't that also be said for Alexander, (a proven back) who was hurt half the season.

Posting those Running stats was awesome though, I had no idea it was that close, it just adds to the Mystique of the game.

I love both teams, its going to hurt to see one go home, but its gonna be great to see one beat up Dallas.

01/10/2008 02:55:04 PM · #211

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by LoudDog:
Only because the first 7 games of the season the packers absolutely sucked in the running game. The last 9 games, since Grant emerged, they have been great. Stats don't tell much of anything.

Let's see, would that be the 9 games in which Grant went over 100 yards 3 times (with Jackson doing it once in a garbage game)? Or would that be the 9 games in which they faced one team with a winning record? Or would that be the 9 games where 6 of their opponents ranked 20th or worse in rushing defense?

I'm shaking with fear... :)

LOL. You make it sound like Seattle had a difficult schedule in comparison.

01/10/2008 02:56:06 PM · #212

Originally posted by yanko:

LOL. You make it sound like Seattle had a difficult schedule in comparison.

I wasn't the one claiming my team had a running game...

01/10/2008 02:58:30 PM · #213

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:
LOL. You make it sound like Seattle had a difficult schedule in comparison.

I wasn't the one claiming my team had a running game...

Well the stats show Green Bay at least had one for the second half after they benched Brandon Jackson. You dispute this?

ETA: But I bet you claim Seattle has a passing game? How difficult was their schedule this year against the pass? Did they actually do anything against teams that could actually defend the pass? I seem to remember Seattle getting shutout by Pittsburgh this year.

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 15:00:13.

01/10/2008 03:02:45 PM · #214

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:
LOL. You make it sound like Seattle had a difficult schedule in comparison.

I wasn't the one claiming my team had a running game...

Well the stats show Green Bay at least had one for the second half after they benched Brandon Jackson. You dispute this?

Ya, I dispute it because Grant ran over 100 only 3 times out of 8 games (the last being played by the bench) and 6 of those teams had a rush defense of 20 or worse. Seattle's rush defense is not 20th.

All I am really calling out is the idea that Green Bay is different from Seattle.

01/10/2008 03:07:00 PM · #215

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

All I am really calling out is the idea that Green Bay is different from Seattle.

Well they are. One is going to win big this weekend and the other will go back to Seattle. :P

01/10/2008 03:11:40 PM · #216

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
All I am really calling out is the idea that Green Bay is different from Seattle.

Well they are. One is going to win big this weekend and the other will go back to Seattle. :P

Man Richard, you ought to take your act on the road...

01/10/2008 03:15:56 PM · #217

Tell you what, I'll go on record so I can look like the genius or fool. Grant will finish with between 60 and 80 yards mainly gained on draw plays.

01/10/2008 03:18:19 PM · #218

No matter what the numbers say, Ryan Grant is going into the playoffs with a boat load of confidence and plenty of talant to go with it.

However I am not too sure the Packers will need much of a running game in this match up. The Packers defense will dominate this game. Expect to see Favre spend alot of time throwing the quick release short ball and moving the chains. On the other side of the ball watch for Kampman and Kabeer to be mopping the sod with a #8 jersey.

Another fun thing to do during this game is to count the number of shades of purple holmgrens face changes as he pisses himself with anger. I used to love it when Favre would make him mad, Watching him troll the sidelines with boogers frozen in his stash and spit on his chin. Throwing his head set on the ground then yelling at his assistants because his radio stopped working. I think he hated Favre for the first 2 seasons they were together.

01/10/2008 03:24:17 PM · #219

I'll join you on record but I am going to say 90-110 yards. He will break one for 40 or more. So now I will offically eat some crow if I am wrong. However I will be serving it up in hungry man portions if I stand correct.

Go Pack Go!!!!

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Tell you what, I'll go on record so I can look like the genius or fool. Grant will finish with between 60 and 80 yards mainly gained on draw plays.

01/10/2008 03:33:21 PM · #220

Originally posted by Bugzeye:

On the other side of the ball watch for Kampman and Kabeer to be mopping the sod with a #8 jersey.

Green Bay's pass rush is pedestrian at best tied for 13th in sacks. Seattle's O-line is also pedestrian (with the exception of W. Jones). Seattle's pash rush is most excellent while GB's O-line is also most excellent.

The chess game continues...

01/10/2008 03:43:15 PM · #221

I would buy stock into that but I cant. because you really do not need to get sacks to be an effective pass rushing unit. You need to rush the quarterback. Force him to move out of the pocket or make bad throws or both. That is how the packers D has been sucessful all year. They hurry the QB they get in his face while he is releasing the ball they still knock him on his ass afterwards too. So unless the ball is caught for a gain. It is as effective as it needs to be, sack or no sack.

that stat is not important.

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Bugzeye:
On the other side of the ball watch for Kampman and Kabeer to be mopping the sod with a #8 jersey.

Green Bay's pass rush is pedestrian at best tied for 13th in sacks. Seattle's O-line is also pedestrian (with the exception of W. Jones). Seattle's pash rush is most excellent while GB's O-line is also most excellent.

The chess game continues...

smardaz

01/10/2008 03:46:57 PM · #222

what it all really comes down to is we can just wait and watch, we can throw all kinds of stats around, in fact on espn.com they had a stat that GB has a losing record in playoff games where the temperature is below 40! All these things may mean nothing. I am not doubting that the scales prob tip in the favor of GB but i will be rooting for my team.

01/10/2008 03:47:44 PM · #223

Originally posted by Bugzeye:

that stat is not important.

Well, feel free to show me the number of knockdowns and hurries. The sack stat is important because the other two are strongly correlated. The more sacks, the more knockdowns and hurries. Unless you can show me wrong.