2016 National Football League (NFL) Regular Season

[arnold layne]

Two weeks ago Las Vegas had Arizona and New England in the Superbowl. Now Carolina is favored over Arizona by three.

Regardless of the NFC, I think New England has it all won easily.

[Apollo]

Arizona had been shredding GB's defense the last part of the 2nd half. If Randall doesn't pick off that shitty Palmer pass in the endzone, Rodgers hail mary wouldn't even matter. Arizona's offense had all the momentum going for them, especially after Dom switched to zone (which I believe he used on the first play in overtime as well)

On the flip side, after their first drive in the 2nd half GB's offense completely stalled out.

So what's the better odds - winning the coin toss and scoring a touchdown on your first drive (the most likely scenario needed to win) or getting two yards in one play?

I would go for 2. I would respect Mac a hell of a lot more if he would've gone for two, even if we didn't get it. We tried playing conservative on the road in the NFC Championship game last year and it came back to burn us. We were playing on borrowed time in this game anyway, why not go for it?

Agreed. Game is in YOUR hands.

Two yards and you win.

You take out the drama and coin flip options. Just like what ended up happening. GB didn't even get to touch the ball in OT.

Two yards - you win.

Or you have to rely on your defense. Then you gave to drive 50-80 yards to score.

At least the Seahawks lost.

And this is why you are not a coach in the NFL.......no coach is going to take the risk you propose in an NFL playoff game......this isn't fantasy football.........Wow

I've never said I wanted to be an NFL coach so I'm not sure why the need for the smart-ass comments.

Do you want to be the GM of an NfL team when you make comments about the decisions an organization makes?

What does fantasy football have to do with anything. That makes no sense at all.

Sometimes people have different opinions than you.

Edited January 19, 2016 by Apollo

[Apollo]

Two weeks ago Las Vegas had Arizona and New England in the Superbowl. Now Carolina is favored over Arizona by three.

Regardless of the NFC, I think New England has it all won easily.

Carolina is really tough.

Should be a great Super Bowl regardless of who makes it.

[arnold layne]

Two weeks ago Las Vegas had Arizona and New England in the Superbowl. Now Carolina is favored over Arizona by three.

Regardless of the NFC, I think New England has it all won easily.

Carolina is really tough.

Should be a great Super Bowl regardless of who makes it.

I am not sure who deserves the credit. Rivera has struggled these past few seasons, so I don't know if he is the real deal. Cam Newton, well, he may be it. I see a lot of improvement since the prior season.

Talent-wise, offensively he is the team.

It is just unreal. Panthers have been terrible. This turn around is just a fluke. Next year I imagine Atlanta and New Orleans will outplay them.

[Crazyman]

This article breaks down the reasons why the Packers should've gone for two better than I was trying to explain.

Here's an article with quotes from Mac as to why they didn't

Sparknotes:

Article 1 (They should've gone for it):

It's almost always better for the underdog to try to turn the game into a shorter contest. Taken to an extreme, if you're playing Steph Curry one-on-one and you start with the ball, it's better to play to one than 11, because you might fire off a jumper and get lucky, but you're not going to hit 11 shots over Steph without giving him the ball.

Even an aggressive estimate would suggest that the Packers had, say, a 40 percent chance of winning the game if it went into overtime. Factor in the aforementioned possibility of a missed Crosby extra point and you're down to a 39 percent shot if you kick the extra point. The chances of the Packers converting their two-pointer are almost definitely better than 39 percent. The league has converted 48.1 percent of its attempts over the past three years, with the Packers going 5-for-9. Give the Cardinals credit for a tough defense and take into consideration that the Packers don't have a great running game. You're still going to find it difficult to come up with a scenario in which the chances of winning the game heading into overtime are better than converting a two-pointer.

And if you really want, pretend for a moment that the percentages are tied. There's also the small matter of the M-word. If you believe that momentum is a meaningful concept in terms of how teams win and lose football games -- and I am admittedly skeptical -- why would you ever let the game slip into overtime? Having knocked the Cardinals onto the ropes with one of the more stunning sequences in playoff history and with a minute to figure out which play you wanted to run while referees reviewed the touchdown, why wouldn't McCarthy think that his chances of winning the game were better with one immediate play?

Article 2 (Mac):

“The two-point conversion was definitely an option,” McCarthy said Monday in his season wrap-up press conference. “But it wasn’t the right option.”

"I understand how analytics plays into game management,” McCarthy said. “But from my viewpoint you look at the numbers, but you also have to take in the flow of the game and things that were going on in the football game.” McCarthy said he liked how well his defense had played up to the point and said he had “great confidence in stopping Arizona’s offense.”

“Frankly where we were as far as our young guys at receiver and the two-point plays we had available, I wasn’t comfortable with those particular calls,” McCarthy said.

Also noteworthy in that article is the fact that it was ultimately Randall's fault for abandoning Fitz after he got pass Peppers. So there's your answer.

Edited January 19, 2016 by Crazyman

[Crazyman]

I trust Brett Hundley to get that 2-point conversion more than Rodgers but I see the argument.

So how we drafting this year?

My guess is ILB, TE (could swap these two), WR, DL, RB.

I would go: ILB or TE first/second round (like you), DL, OT, RB, DB, late-round QB. Of course this is TT so none of these will be accurate

Otherwise I think these are notable players who are gone: James Jones, Don Barclay, Scott Tolzien, Quarless, Mastay (after they sign someone in training camp), Mike Neal, maybe Hayward (if his price is too expensive for TT)

Players who stay: Starks, Raji, Guion (at least one of him and Raji), Peppers, Crosby, Perry and anyone else I'm forgetting.

Packers current WR's going into next season are: Nelson, Cobb, Adams, Jones (only one not under contract), Monty, Abby, Janis. Assuming they don't resign Jones that's still 6 WR's...I don't think they'll draft another this year.

Edited January 19, 2016 by Crazyman

[classicrawker]

I trust Brett Hundley to get that 2-point conversion more than Rodgers but I see the argument.

So how we drafting this year?

My guess is ILB, TE (could swap these two), WR, DL, RB.

Depends on who they resign..... Guion, Raji, Neal and Perry are UFA's so guessing they won't sign them all which means they will most likely go OLB and DLine early maybe 1st round..........

We have 6 WR's signed for next year, Nelson,Cobb, Adams, Monty, Janis, and Abby, not counting Jones who might be a goner so can't see Ted drafting a WR too early but maybe a big raw fast guy to develop.

From what I read it is not a stellar class for TE's so maybe they don't draft one until round 3-4? and same with RB so I am betting round 1 & 2 we go defense......From what I read there is some raw talent at TE but no sure 1st round talent so they may need to pick one later to develop like they did with Finley and bite the bullet on a FA......

we also should get a couple of compensation picks between 3-5th round so we have some extra picks to load up....

Edited January 19, 2016 by classicrawker

[arnold layne]

Not much use talking about ifs and buts.

McCarthy went out to the press and called Eddie Lacy fat, which is completely ironic, and fully understandable. He cannot outrun anyone anymore. Maybe GB has had enough with Lacy and thinking about other options.

Out of all the teams left, I think the Broncos have the lowest probability of winning the Superbowl.

[Apollo]

This article breaks down the reasons why the Packers should've gone for two better than I was trying to explain.

Here's an article with quotes from Mac as to why they didn't

Sparknotes:

Article 1 (They should've gone for it):

It's almost always better for the underdog to try to turn the game into a shorter contest. Taken to an extreme, if you're playing Steph Curry one-on-one and you start with the ball, it's better to play to one than 11, because you might fire off a jumper and get lucky, but you're not going to hit 11 shots over Steph without giving him the ball.

Even an aggressive estimate would suggest that the Packers had, say, a 40 percent chance of winning the game if it went into overtime. Factor in the aforementioned possibility of a missed Crosby extra point and you're down to a 39 percent shot if you kick the extra point. The chances of the Packers converting their two-pointer are almost definitely better than 39 percent. The league has converted 48.1 percent of its attempts over the past three years, with the Packers going 5-for-9. Give the Cardinals credit for a tough defense and take into consideration that the Packers don't have a great running game. You're still going to find it difficult to come up with a scenario in which the chances of winning the game heading into overtime are better than converting a two-pointer.

And if you really want, pretend for a moment that the percentages are tied. There's also the small matter of the M-word. If you believe that momentum is a meaningful concept in terms of how teams win and lose football games -- and I am admittedly skeptical -- why would you ever let the game slip into overtime? Having knocked the Cardinals onto the ropes with one of the more stunning sequences in playoff history and with a minute to figure out which play you wanted to run while referees reviewed the touchdown, why wouldn't McCarthy think that his chances of winning the game were better with one immediate play?

Article 2 (Mac):

The two-point conversion was definitely an option, McCarthy said Monday in his season wrap-up press conference. But it wasnt the right option.

"I understand how analytics plays into game management, McCarthy said. But from my viewpoint you look at the numbers, but you also have to take in the flow of the game and things that were going on in the football game. McCarthy said he liked how well his defense had played up to the point and said he had great confidence in stopping Arizonas offense.

Frankly where we were as far as our young guys at receiver and the two-point plays we had available, I wasnt comfortable with those particular calls, McCarthy said.

Also noteworthy in that article is the fact that it was ultimately Randall's fault for abandoning Fitz after he got pass Peppers. So there's your answer.

Great information. Thanks for sharing!

[JONEZY]

Prediction for this weekends games.

Boston over Denver

Carolina over Arizona

-not gonna doubt Carolina again.

[Crazyman]

I would go Panthers/Pats too, though I'm hoping it's actually Cardinals/Broncos

[AbominableHoman]

I think we may have just witnessed Marshawn Lynch's last game as a Seahawk. I think we're gonna see a very O-Line heavy draft from the Seahawks, maybe some trades.

Yep. With Rawls and a beefed up oline you guys are way better off.

[Crazyman]

Palmer looked like trash at home against the Packers defense. Carolina should eat him alive.

I bet it ends up looking closer than it is. Carolina is an awful 2nd half team.

Which, if they play the Pats in the Super Bowl, will most likely be their demise

[bran]

Palmer is too good to play like shit like that, he needs to get it together.

[bran]

im guessing panthers vs broncos superbowl. my gut tells me the patriots but i still think the nfl might screw the patriots.

[Crazyman]

Anyone read McGinn's season-ending recap?

It was cranky and critical as McGinn has become but fairly accurate I'd say.

There haven't been enough people praising Abbrederis' performance. I'm not even a fan but he played great this year.

I like McGinn but he's been a hack of a writer lately, criticizing the most blatent things.

It's easy to call Mac and Teddy out after the fact (not so much the latter), but he's been criticizing the Packers since SB 45, and hasn't really stopped since.

It's easy to be a paper GM. I try it all the time

[J Dog]

im guessing panthers vs broncos superbowl. my gut tells me the patriots but i still think the nfl might screw the patriots.

Same here, Panther/Broncos winners today. But I won't be surprised if NE beats Denver. Fuckin Brady/Belichick are just stupid good in these games.

[Georgy Zhukov]

So many people in Cardinal shirts today. I feel bad for them.

[Crazyman]

I think the Packers offense has been stagnant for years, it's just been productively stagnant, so they've been able to get away with it.

They had all the reason to expect Adams would perform better than he did and that Montgomery would come on late in the season. I also think McCarthy stuck to the tried-and-true to give the team the best chance of winning instead of experimenting.

That said, they missed so many opportunities to be successful, before and during the season, and I think that McGinn's closing is the most accurate thing.

Here's three simple things that would've made big results:

(1) Keep Neal as 3rd RB and use him in short pass game

(2) Use Janis on slants and jet sweeps

(3) Call digs and curls instead of deep posts and verts

I put it more on Mac than I do TT. Ted really needs to go for need this year (ILB, athletic TE, pass-catching RB and o-line depth) on offense, either through the draft or free agency (lol).

Mac is too damn stubborn though. Agreed that the offense is stagnant - Mac always expects the receivers to win their matchups while running some pretty bland routes. There were times during the games last year that the opposing players were running their routes

Hopefully he'll use the offseason to tinker with the playbook a bit. We're gonna be loaded at WR next year no matter what, assuming we don't get as many injuries as this year.

[classicrawker]

I think the Packers offense has been stagnant for years, it's just been productively stagnant, so they've been able to get away with it.

They had all the reason to expect Adams would perform better than he did and that Montgomery would come on late in the season. I also think McCarthy stuck to the tried-and-true to give the team the best chance of winning instead of experimenting.

That said, they missed so many opportunities to be successful, before and during the season, and I think that McGinn's closing is the most accurate thing.

Here's three simple things that would've made big results:

(1) Keep Neal as 3rd RB and use him in short pass game

(2) Use Janis on slants and jet sweeps

(3) Call digs and curls instead of deep posts and verts

I put it more on Mac than I do TT. Ted really needs to go for need this year (ILB, athletic TE, pass-catching RB and o-line depth) on offense, either through the draft or free agency (lol).

Mac is too damn stubborn though. Agreed that the offense is stagnant - Mac always expects the receivers to win their matchups while running some pretty bland routes. There were times during the games last year that the opposing players were running their routes

Hopefully he'll use the offseason to tinker with the playbook a bit. We're gonna be loaded at WR next year no matter what, assuming we don't get as many injuries as this year.

I would love those position in the draft as well but unless we resign Raji, Guion, Neal and Perry, not to mention Peppers will be a year older and on the last year of his contract, they desperately need studs at OLB and DL IMHO.

they have 18 UFA's this offseason so will not be able to sign them all but should get a couple 3-5 round compensation picks so will have some opportunities to reload. might be the year Ted dips into the FA pool.

Edited January 25, 2016 by classicrawker

[Crazyman]

I put it more on Mac than I do TT.

Agreed.

As far as drafts go, it's possible that last years class goes down as Ted's best.

I think Randall is a #1 CB and Rollins is a strong #2. That's a scary good secondary. Now just get some power up front.

Also while he was limited this year due to the injury, I think Montgomery is going to be a stud with that size and speed.

I think Rollins is actually gonna be better than Randall, though Randall will probably play the other team's #1 receiver.

Monty makes me happy because the versatility that we could have with him and Cobb in the backfield is great. Might not even need a pass-catching RB if Monty stays healthy.

I think the Packers offense has been stagnant for years, it's just been productively stagnant, so they've been able to get away with it.

They had all the reason to expect Adams would perform better than he did and that Montgomery would come on late in the season. I also think McCarthy stuck to the tried-and-true to give the team the best chance of winning instead of experimenting.

That said, they missed so many opportunities to be successful, before and during the season, and I think that McGinn's closing is the most accurate thing.

Here's three simple things that would've made big results:

(1) Keep Neal as 3rd RB and use him in short pass game

(2) Use Janis on slants and jet sweeps

(3) Call digs and curls instead of deep posts and verts

I put it more on Mac than I do TT. Ted really needs to go for need this year (ILB, athletic TE, pass-catching RB and o-line depth) on offense, either through the draft or free agency (lol).

Mac is too damn stubborn though. Agreed that the offense is stagnant - Mac always expects the receivers to win their matchups while running some pretty bland routes. There were times during the games last year that the opposing players were running their routes

Hopefully he'll use the offseason to tinker with the playbook a bit. We're gonna be loaded at WR next year no matter what, assuming we don't get as many injuries as this year.

I would love those position in the draft as well but unless we resign Raji, Guion, Neal and Perry, not to mention Peppers will be a year older and on the last year of his contract, they desperately need studs at OLB and DL IMHO.

they have 18 UFA's this offseason so will not be able to sign them all but should get a couple 3-5 round compensation picks so will have some opportunities to reload. might be the year Ted dips into the FA pool.

True, but with Clay kicking back outside (and assuming Pep stays another year/we possibly resign Perry), I think our outside depth will be decently fine.

Gotta assume we keep one of Raji/Guion too. Wouldn't be surprised to see them get some depth there in the draft, just hopefully some day 2 picks or later.

[classicrawker]

great Broncos/Pats game........actually was rooting for Manning as it would be nice to see him win one last SB and ride into the sunset after a tough season......Gronkowski blaming the missed extra point for the loss but it never should have come down to that.......

Panthers with nother dominating first half......let's see if they can keep it going or do their typical second half fade....

I put it more on Mac than I do TT.

Agreed.

As far as drafts go, it's possible that last years class goes down as Ted's best.

I think Randall is a #1 CB and Rollins is a strong #2. That's a scary good secondary. Now just get some power up front.

Also while he was limited this year due to the injury, I think Montgomery is going to be a stud with that size and speed.

I think Rollins is actually gonna be better than Randall, though Randall will probably play the other team's #1 receiver.

Monty makes me happy because the versatility that we could have with him and Cobb in the backfield is great. Might not even need a pass-catching RB if Monty stays healthy.

I think the Packers offense has been stagnant for years, it's just been productively stagnant, so they've been able to get away with it.

They had all the reason to expect Adams would perform better than he did and that Montgomery would come on late in the season. I also think McCarthy stuck to the tried-and-true to give the team the best chance of winning instead of experimenting.

That said, they missed so many opportunities to be successful, before and during the season, and I think that McGinn's closing is the most accurate thing.

Here's three simple things that would've made big results:

(1) Keep Neal as 3rd RB and use him in short pass game

(2) Use Janis on slants and jet sweeps

(3) Call digs and curls instead of deep posts and verts

I put it more on Mac than I do TT. Ted really needs to go for need this year (ILB, athletic TE, pass-catching RB and o-line depth) on offense, either through the draft or free agency (lol).

Mac is too damn stubborn though. Agreed that the offense is stagnant - Mac always expects the receivers to win their matchups while running some pretty bland routes. There were times during the games last year that the opposing players were running their routes

Hopefully he'll use the offseason to tinker with the playbook a bit. We're gonna be loaded at WR next year no matter what, assuming we don't get as many injuries as this year.

I would love those position in the draft as well but unless we resign Raji, Guion, Neal and Perry, not to mention Peppers will be a year older and on the last year of his contract, they desperately need studs at OLB and DL IMHO.

they have 18 UFA's this offseason so will not be able to sign them all but should get a couple 3-5 round compensation picks so will have some opportunities to reload. might be the year Ted dips into the FA pool.

True, but with Clay kicking back outside (and assuming Pep stays another year/we possibly resign Perry), I think our outside depth will be decently fine.

Gotta assume we keep one of Raji/Guion too. Wouldn't be surprised to see them get some depth there in the draft, just hopefully some day 2 picks or later.

From what I read there is no first round talent at TE and don't see Ted drafting an ILB #1.........would not surprise me to see him draft an OLB or DT #1. Peppers is 36 and not sure he brings back both Raji and Guion.

Hard draft to handicap for the Pack......

[bran]

my picks looking good...

[bran]

just seeing the patriots lose made my offseason.

[AxlisOld]

Brady bled. I liked it. Does that make me a bad person?