Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

by Guest Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:57 pm

Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed, the two teams would meet again one week later in the wild-card round at Lambeau Field. But McCarthy wasn’t interested in discussing that scenario, nor did he even touch on running back Adrian Peterson’s pursuit of the single-season rushing record, which is sure to be a hot topic this week.

by Guest Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:09 pm

NJPackfan wrote:Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed, the two teams would meet again one week later in the wild-card round at Lambeau Field. But McCarthy wasn’t interested in discussing that scenario, nor did he even touch on running back Adrian Peterson’s pursuit of the single-season rushing record, which is sure to be a hot topic this week.

Hmmmm... I was planning on hitting the NFC Championship game at Lambeau...but, should that happen--that's a game I'll make the trip for...especially since with a L to the queens...it's very unlikely that an NFC Championship game would be held at Lambeau...

There isn't a team in the playoffs that is clearly dominant. This tournament will come down to good fortune and great coaching... I'm absolutely unsold on the Falcons...

by RagnarLodbrok2 Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:15 pm

There isn't a team in the playoffs that is clearly dominant.

What about Seattle ? They look red hot now.

by Guest Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:28 pm

RagnarLodbrok2 wrote:There isn't a team in the playoffs that is clearly dominant.

What about Seattle ? They look red hot now.

Nope... They're the hot-air balloon just waiting for the little prick to come along with the pellet gun... They have been riding high on that which cannot be sustained...and quite simply lack the foundation that makes what they've been living--real... It will soon all come crashing down for them. All you have to do is observe their chucklefuck clown for a coach dancing around out there to see that even he has no conception of why what is happening IS happening... Poof. Watch the coach turn back into a pumpkin... Cool

by RingoCStarrQB Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:42 pm

Wait a minute Ringo....... Packers can beat em all at Lambeau........Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

by RingoCStarrQB Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:47 pm

Hmmmm... I was planning on hitting the NFC Championship game at Lambeau...but, should that happen--that's a game I'll make the trip for...especially since with a L to the queens...it's very unlikely that an NFC Championship game would be held at Lambeau...

There isn't a team in the playoffs that is clearly dominant. This tournament will come down to good fortune and great coaching... I'm absolutely unsold on the Falcons..

Anything can happen HD. Imagine Pack losing to MN. Then beating MN the following week.......then going to SF to beat the Niners while the Seahawks to to Atlanta after wiping out the Redskins at Fed Ex. Then the Seahawks come to Lambeau to re-match the unofficial officials game. Maybe that is what will happen while in the AFC we see the Bengals in the AFC Championship Game.

by RingoCStarrQB Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:49 pm

We have one extra defensive lineman compared to the 1996 season. And we are running the 3-4. Expect Capers to confuse the Vikings and any other team that hope to upset the Packers. GO PACK GO

by JnC4GB Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:05 pm

All I know is I'll be really glad the fucking Giants are officially eliminated.

After that, I don't want to play AT Seattle. Yeah, we can win there, but that is the 2nd least thing I'd like to see.

Shit list:
1. Facing NYG anywhere
2. Playing AT Seattle

Other than that, fuck 'em all. Let's go.
Okay, okay...I wouldn't cry if we didn't have to go to ATL either.

by milani Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:03 pm

We do not want to face the Vikings in the postseason. Playing someone in your division can be even more difficult since they know you. Facing that opponent 2 weeks in a row is really a bad omen. Facing Adrian Peterson 3 times in a season is worse than radiation treatment.

1) In 1997 we had to beat Tampa 3 times to finally get to the NFC championship game. Each contest was a defensive drainer.

2) In 1993 we had to beat the Lions in back to back weeks. Miraculously, we won the final contest due to a 100 yard INT and a Sterling Sharpe TD.

3) In 2004 we had to face the Vikings in Lambeau after eking out 34-31 victories on Longwell winners during the season. It backfired and they were out for revenge.

4) In 2010 we had to face the Bears 3 weeks after the season finale. It was another knockdown defensive battle that went our way with the help of the great Caleb Haney.

If we lose to the Vikings our only chance to avoid them is if Arizona pulls the upset of the decade in SF next week. That won't happen. The best thing for us is to simply win next week and get the bye and wait for whomever.

by Guest Mon Dec 24, 2012 7:16 pm

All I know is I'll be really glad the fucking Giants are officially eliminated.

Me too. Even though the Giants are a zombie team the Packers seem to bring out the best in them. Also because I'm here in Giants land.

by duck Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:25 pm

_HD_ wrote:
RagnarLodbrok2 wrote:There isn't a team in the playoffs that is clearly dominant.

What about Seattle ? They look red hot now.

Nope... They're the hot-air balloon just waiting for the little prick to come along with the pellet gun... They have been riding high on that which cannot be sustained...and quite simply lack the foundation that makes what they've been living--real... It will soon all come crashing down for them. All you have to do is observe their chucklefuck clown for a coach dancing around out there to see that even he has no conception of why what is happening IS happening... Poof. Watch the coach turn back into a pumpkin...

I don't like Carroll either, HD, but damn, I don't see how you can dismiss the Seahawks like that. They've outscored their opposition 150-30 in their last three games, most recently completely dismantling the vaunted 49er defense. I don't know what's not to like. Their defense is stingy, Lynch is a beast and Wilson has been playing lights out.

Believe me, I would like to see their "hot air balloon" pop... but I would have to say objectively that they are indeed the *hot* team going into the playoffs.

The Packers are also legitimate contenders for that role too, especially after the 55-7 blowout of the Titans. I don't think too many teams would be eager to play the Pack right now, especially with all the injured players coming back. One huge advantage the Packers have over most teams is depth. And not only do we have depth, but most of the back up players have gotten significant game experience due to all the injuries.

by throttleplate Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:27 pm

ah you guys got your g-strings too tight up your bung holes.the seachickens aint gonna sack rodgers 7 times in the first half again.Mcdonuts was stubborn that game and kept goin for the home run,our offense basically only played 1/2 a game and we got jobbed in the end.

The run pass option that they run will be trickey,the defense will have to be coached on how to stay patient and probably spy the qb,this is where woodsons experience on the line will help.

by duck Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:12 pm

throttleplate wrote:ah you guys got your g-strings too tight up your bung holes.the seachickens aint gonna sack rodgers 7 times in the first half again.Mcdonuts was stubborn that game and kept goin for the home run,our offense basically only played 1/2 a game and we got jobbed in the end.

The run pass option that they run will be trickey,the defense will have to be coached on how to stay patient and probably spy the qb,this is where woodsons experience on the line will help.

You make good points, Throttle. Much of that first half disaster was on MM. With better play calling, as we saw in the second half, the Pack fared better (By the same token, I think the Packers would do better against the Niners with a better game plan.) Nevertheless, Seattle is considerably improved since that initial contest.

I agree, Capers will have to designate a spy to control Wilson's mobility. In this situation, I can't think of a better candidate than Woodson.

by throttleplate Tue Dec 25, 2012 12:54 am

ok,lets compare,Wilson or kempenick,gore or lynch.The niners may have lost manningham at reciever and davis is concussed and their d lineman smith may be lost with a bad elbow.So niners now beat up with rookie qb.

Seahawks are from what i know full strength,this is tough to call,i need more injury reports from all teams invloved before i can predict whom would be best matchup.

Now back to the present,still got to play the queens,maybe we will be chasing RGIII,Forte,AP or Bryant,lots to figure out yet but its enjoyable to pretend i know what i am talking about as some sports writers do.

by RingoCStarrQB Tue Dec 25, 2012 8:11 am

Watched the ICE BOWL rerun on NFL Network last night. Always a classic.........always. One thing I noticed is all of the Packers tackles were crisp, hard........and totally legal. Wood, Adderley, Robinson, Nitschke, Caffey.......they all tackled like you are supposed to tackle.

by milani Tue Dec 25, 2012 4:06 pm

nor did he even touch on running back Adrian Peterson’s pursuit of the single-season rushing record

The thought of having to face this guy 2 weeks in a row is as horrifying as it gets.

We actually did have to face Barry Sanders 2 weeks in a row in a similar scenario in 1993. We prevailed in the second one that counted the most.

by RingoCStarrQB Tue Dec 25, 2012 9:18 pm

Blocking.....Tackling........Possessing the Ball..........Winning the Turnover Battle And making those 2 or 3 plays when it matters most. GO PACKERs

by Sponsored content

Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?

Re: Should the Vikings win and the Packers remain the No. 3 seed ?