Packers Huddle

go pak go wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2023 13:01

It is very hard to have a winning record in the playoffs. Two wins either forces you to make the conference title game every year or the SB if you have a bye.

Actually, 48 out of 103 before this year had a winning record in the Playoffs.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2023 20:09

go pak go wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2023 13:01

It is very hard to have a winning record in the playoffs. Two wins either forces you to make the conference title game every year or the SB if you have a bye.

Actually, 48 out of 103 before this year had a winning record in the Playoffs.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Are you saying there have been 103 head coaches to coach a playoff game?

Both would probably be our #1 heading into the season.

An interesting look at Super Bowl teams as far as O and D rank in points and yards. Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants. Since and including 2016 every SB participant has had a top 8 O in points. The chart is the last 20 years of O and D points from the SB teams.

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2023 07:33

Both would probably be our #1 heading into the season.

I think Everett and LaFleur overlapped in LA in 2017.

Thomas Edward Patrick Brady Jr. (born August 3, 1977) is a former American football quarterback who played in the National Football League (NFL) for 23 seasons. He spent his first 20 seasons with the New England Patriots, where he was a central contributor to the franchise's dynasty from 2001 to 2019. In his final three seasons, he was a member of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Brady is widely regarded as the greatest quarterback of all time.

Mmmkay.

Thanks for that, I guess...?

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2023 09:01

image.png

An interesting look at Super Bowl teams as far as O and D rank in points and yards. Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants. Since and including 2016 every SB participant has had a top 8 O in points. The chart is the last 20 years of O and D points from the SB teams.

Absolutely not true. The one underlying thing in the Super Bowl over the years has been that the SB winners have a good defense as well as a good offense. From the beginning through 2005, the SB winner's average rank on defense in points was 4.3 ppg. The average ppg on Defense during that time was 15.3 ppg. From 2006 to 2016 is where things started to get funky. That is where the Giants won a couple without a top defense during the year. But their defense stepped up in the playoffs. Even with that, the average ppg on defense for the SB winner is still below 20 ppg at 19.2 since 2006. The Super Bowl losers are pretty much in the same boat but the averages are just a bit higher.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 08:08

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2023 09:01

image.png

An interesting look at Super Bowl teams as far as O and D rank in points and yards. Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants. Since and including 2016 every SB participant has had a top 8 O in points. The chart is the last 20 years of O and D points from the SB teams.

Absolutely not true. The one underlying thing in the Super Bowl over the years has been that the SB winners have a good defense as well as a good offense. From the beginning through 2005, the SB winner's average rank on defense in points was 4.3 ppg. The average ppg on Defense during that time was 15.3 ppg. From 2006 to 2016 is where things started to get funky. That is where the Giants won a couple without a top defense during the year. But their defense stepped up in the playoffs. Even with that, the average ppg on defense for the SB winner is still below 20 ppg at 19.2 since 2006. The Super Bowl losers are pretty much in the same boat but the averages are just a bit higher.

Raptor... Nothing I said was untrue. You missed the scope of what I was looking at.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 08:19

Raptorman wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 08:08

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2023 09:01

image.png

An interesting look at Super Bowl teams as far as O and D rank in points and yards. Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants. Since and including 2016 every SB participant has had a top 8 O in points. The chart is the last 20 years of O and D points from the SB teams.

Absolutely not true. The one underlying thing in the Super Bowl over the years has been that the SB winners have a good defense as well as a good offense. From the beginning through 2005, the SB winner's average rank on defense in points was 4.3 ppg. The average ppg on Defense during that time was 15.3 ppg. From 2006 to 2016 is where things started to get funky. That is where the Giants won a couple without a top defense during the year. But their defense stepped up in the playoffs. Even with that, the average ppg on defense for the SB winner is still below 20 ppg at 19.2 since 2006. The Super Bowl losers are pretty much in the same boat but the averages are just a bit higher.

Raptor... Nothing I said was untrue. You missed the scope of what I was looking at.

Ah, no I didn't. This line is just wrong. There is a rhyme and reason before 2015.

Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants.

There have been 112 teams in the Super bowl. 92 have had a top-10 offense. 86 have had a top-10 defense. The 5 teams that scored the most points on offense in NFL history have all lost the Super Bowl. Up until and including the year 2000, only 9 teams that didn't have a top-10 offense made it to the Super Bowl. It's been very standard throughout the years. A top-10 offense and top-10 defense are your best bet to make it to the big game.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 15:25

There have been 112 teams in the Super bowl. 92 have had a top-10 offense. 86 have had a top-10 defense. The 5 teams that scored the most points on offense in NFL history have all lost the Super Bowl. Up until and including the year 2000, only 9 teams that didn't have a top-10 offense made it to the Super Bowl. It's been very standard throughout the years. A top-10 offense and top-10 defense are your best bet to make it to the big game.

I might be high, but this feels like a strongly-reasoned (and passionately-delivered) case for a balanced approach, probabilistically

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 15:41

Raptorman wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 15:25

There have been 112 teams in the Super bowl. 92 have had a top-10 offense. 86 have had a top-10 defense. The 5 teams that scored the most points on offense in NFL history have all lost the Super Bowl. Up until and including the year 2000, only 9 teams that didn't have a top-10 offense made it to the Super Bowl. It's been very standard throughout the years. A top-10 offense and top-10 defense are your best bet to make it to the big game.

I might be high, but this feels like a strongly-reasoned (and passionately-delivered) case for a balanced approach, probabilistically

Correct. The only real correlation in SB winners is SB winners tend to have both the offense and defense as top 10 units. Usually one side is top 5, but the other side is not lower than 10th.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 15:25

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 08:19

Raptorman wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 08:08

Absolutely not true. The one underlying thing in the Super Bowl over the years has been that the SB winners have a good defense as well as a good offense. From the beginning through 2005, the SB winner's average rank on defense in points was 4.3 ppg. The average ppg on Defense during that time was 15.3 ppg. From 2006 to 2016 is where things started to get funky. That is where the Giants won a couple without a top defense during the year. But their defense stepped up in the playoffs. Even with that, the average ppg on defense for the SB winner is still below 20 ppg at 19.2 since 2006. The Super Bowl losers are pretty much in the same boat but the averages are just a bit higher.

Raptor... Nothing I said was untrue. You missed the scope of what I was looking at.

Ah, no I didn't. This line is just wrong. There is a rhyme and reason before 2015.

Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants.

There have been 112 teams in the Super bowl. 92 have had a top-10 offense. 86 have had a top-10 defense. The 5 teams that scored the most points on offense in NFL history have all lost the Super Bowl. Up until and including the year 2000, only 9 teams that didn't have a top-10 offense made it to the Super Bowl. It's been very standard throughout the years. A top-10 offense and top-10 defense are your best bet to make it to the big game.

You absolutely missed the scope of what I was looking at... I was only looking at the last 20 years, so your 112 teams and not true statement is nonsense to my original post. So what you say may be true and what I said is also...

https://www.outkick.com/greg-olsen-stan ... ting-team/

Been seeing this sentiment shared all over the place the last couple weeks and I want to register my opinion that it's dumb. Greg Olsen ain't that good, sorry. Made me scratch my head several times in the past couple years and laugh at him. And also Tony Romo did get a bit worse but he's still the best commentator.

This is all just some more groupthink by sportswriters.

Olsen will go to another network if his position and oay are cut that much. I am sure there is a no compete clause, but it is probably void if a promotion (which going from #2 on fix to, say, ESPN, would be a promotion). Romo was great his first season, still very good.

Romo annoys me. Way over the top. Drawing on the screen as the play is about to start. Total clown.

The think I like about Olson is he’s not over the top. He doesn’t have that big game feel, but he doesn’t take over the game or distract from the game.

I like Greg

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 22:04

Romo annoys me. Way over the top. Drawing on the screen as the play is about to start. Total clown.

The think I like about Olson is he’s not over the top. He doesn’t have that big game feel, but he doesn’t take over the game or distract from the game.

I like Greg

I agree! Romo says stupid stuff like,"it was a perfect throw if it had been accurate." He yells and is too often nonsensical. He no longer makes many interesting comments about the situation as he used to do. Olson makes these types of good, informative situational comments. He also doesn't yell.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 16:09

Raptorman wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 15:25

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2023 08:19

Raptor... Nothing I said was untrue. You missed the scope of what I was looking at.

Ah, no I didn't. This line is just wrong. There is a rhyme and reason before 2015.

Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants.

There have been 112 teams in the Super bowl. 92 have had a top-10 offense. 86 have had a top-10 defense. The 5 teams that scored the most points on offense in NFL history have all lost the Super Bowl. Up until and including the year 2000, only 9 teams that didn't have a top-10 offense made it to the Super Bowl. It's been very standard throughout the years. A top-10 offense and top-10 defense are your best bet to make it to the big game.

You absolutely missed the scope of what I was looking at... I was only looking at the last 20 years, so your 112 teams and not true statement is nonsense to my original post. So what you say may be true and what I said is also...

ya know why people have trouble following? heres a clue, the stats never give a complete picture of the reality, there simply a reference, the Giants where a good example, using a full season of defensive stats doesn't come close to explaining how dominate there defenses where in the PO games, and you use these tactics to win every argument, it's why it is so frustrating to have a conversation with you.

and these graphs with dots for teams, are more confusing then explanative.

the idea that defense wins Championships is complete bunk and anyone with a lic of football sense knows that without scoring ability a team doesn't stand a chance, this isn't the 60's where low scoring games depended so much more on great defense to keep it that way, this is the era of quick scoring offenses and defense can barely keep up.

Balance has been the order of the day for most teams, a potent scoring attack coupled with a better then average defense is a winning formula.

your attempt to defend the BS thats went on here concerning team building is a joke, we have spent almost all of our picks on defense, and let the offense continually decline and you and others here support this crap, and that approach has led to one and done in the PO's, and who do you blame, one of the best QB's the league has ever seen, now do you realize why we disagree?