NFC Playoff Picture (1 Viewer)

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

NFC East:

Eagles 7-3: @ Chicago, vs Houston, @ Dallas, @ NYG, vs Minny, vs Dallas

Giants 6-4: vs Jags, vs Wash, @ Minny, vs Eagles, @ GB, @ Wash

Washington 5-5: vs Minny, @ NYG, vs TB, @ Dallas, @ Jags, vs NYG

NFC North:

Chicago 7-3: vs Eagles, @ Detroit, vs NE, @ Minny, vs NYJ, @ GB

Packers 7-3: @ Atlanta, vs 49ers, @ Detroit, @ NE, vs NYG, vs Chicago

NFC South:

Atlanta 8-2: vs Packers, @ TB, @ Carolina, @ Seattle, vs Saints, vs Carolina

Saints 7-3: @ Dallas, @ Cinci, vs Rams, @ Ravens, @ Atlanta, vs TB

TB 7-3: @ Ravens, vs Atlanta, @ Wash, vs Detroit, vs Seattle, @ Saints

NFC West:

Seattle 5-5: vs KC, vs Carolina, @ 49ers, vs Atlanta, @ TB, vs Rams

Rams 4-6: @ Denver, @ Arizona, @ Saints, vs KC, vs 49ers, @ Seattle

Division Winners: Eagles, Chicago, Atlanta, Seattle

Wild Cards: Saints, Packers

 

[bryhamm]

Division Winners: NYG, GB, ATL, STL

Wild Cards: PHI, NO

 

[ttea]

DIV: PHI, GB, ATL, STL

WILDCARD: NY, NO

 

[Doug B]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Saints, Rams

Wild Cards: Giants, Falcons

 

[gorf]

Packers, Falcons, Eagles, Seahawks

Saints, Giants

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

1. AF 2. PE 3. GB 4. SS

5. NO 6. NYG

 

[Go Blue]

Division winners: Philly, Green Bay, Atlanta, Seattle

Wildcard: New Orleans, N.Y. Giants

 

[HMKRich]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Saints, RamsWild Cards: Giants, Falcons

LOL. I can't wait for week 16. We're gonna show y'all a mighty fine time. Div champs: Eagles, Packers, Falcons, SeahawksWC: Bucs and Bears.

 

[Go Blue]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Saints, RamsWild Cards: Giants, Falcons

LOL. I can't wait for week 16. We're gonna show y'all a mighty fine time. Div champs: Eagles, Packers, Falcons, SeahawksWC: Bucs and Bears.

I'd be shocked if New Orleans does not make the playoffs. They have a pretty easy schedule from here on out. Except for Baltimore and Atlanta. I see 11 wins this year. The Bucs are a good team, but not a playoff team just yet. I wouldn't bet against them because they find a way to win, but I'm thinking 2011 and beyond. I think the Bears are going to come back down to earth and show their true colors these last 6 weeks. Chicago has won a few games they should not have this year. I don't think they'll get that lucky the rest of this year. I think they'll end the year 9-7 and miss the playoffs.

 

[Eric Stratton]

No love for the Bears!

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Saints, RamsWild Cards: Giants, Falcons

LOL. I can't wait for week 16. We're gonna show y'all a mighty fine time. Div champs: Eagles, Packers, Falcons, SeahawksWC: Bucs and Bears.

I'd be shocked if New Orleans does not make the playoffs. They have a pretty easy schedule from here on out. Except for Baltimore and Atlanta. I see 11 wins this year. The Bucs are a good team, but not a playoff team just yet. I wouldn't bet against them because they find a way to win, but I'm thinking 2011 and beyond. I think the Bears are going to come back down to earth and show their true colors these last 6 weeks. Chicago has won a few games they should not have this year. I don't think they'll get that lucky the rest of this year. I think they'll end the year 9-7 and miss the playoffs.

The one worry I have with the Saints is 4 road games and they haven't been playing like the same team from last season.Chicago has also lost 2 games they should've won...it goes both ways. I think with that offense still figuring itself out and a top defense ans special teams...they will be tough to beat in cold weather. Plus 3 of their 4 tough games are at home(Philly, NE, NYJ) road games (@Det, @ Minny, @ GB).

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I find it odd that the respect goes to the AFC...yet the NFC seems to have less parity(8-2, 7-3, 7-3, 7-3, 7-3, 7-3, 7-3, 6-4) vs AFC (8-2, 8-2, 7-3, 7-3, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4).

 

[Insein]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Falcons, Rams

Wild Card: Saints, Bucs

Someone is getting screwed between the Bears, Giants, Saints and Bucs. Two of those teams won't make it in. This is actually a wide open NFC but a pretty good NFC suprisingly.

 

[Pipes]

No love for the Bears!

They have a brutal schedule the rest of the way...though I do think 10-6 is possible for them.

 

[Premier]

It sucks that the disgusting NFC West is going to take a spot from a good team. There might not be an 8-8 team in that bunch.

 

[Insein]

No love for the Bears!

They have a brutal schedule the rest of the way...though I do think 10-6 is possible for them.

I think the Bears go 10-6 and finish 8th in the conference. The NFC West is going to have an 8-8 or 7-9 team make the playoffs this year.

 

[Ghost Rider]

No love for the Bears!

Their schedule down the stretch is brutal. That great defense of theirs could conceivably steal a couple of wins in there, getting them to maybe 10-6, but that is it. How they fare in those three division road games will obviously be key. They can't lose at Detroit, and God only knows what condition the Vikings will be in by the time the Bears go there. I think they will barely miss the playoffs.

 

[ScottyFargo]

No love for the Bears!

Their schedule down the stretch is brutal. That great defense of theirs could conceivably steal a couple of wins in there, getting them to maybe 10-6, but that is it. How they fare in those three division road games will obviously be key. They can't lose at Detroit, and God only knows what condition the Vikings will be in by the time the Bears go there. I think they will barely miss the playoffs.

Green Bays is just as bad, and they are starting a half game behind Chicago already. GB's only got 3 wins against teams over 500, and they have 4 remaining on the schedule. Detroit already gave them fits this year, so I find it a hard sell that everyone is on GB's bandwagon with so many games left to play.

 

[RudeDog]

Whatever happens its good news for fantasy. They'll be no sitting of starters this year as it looks to go down to the wire in all divisions. That includes AFC also

 

[sho nuff]

No love for the Bears!

Their schedule down the stretch is brutal. That great defense of theirs could conceivably steal a couple of wins in there, getting them to maybe 10-6, but that is it. How they fare in those three division road games will obviously be key. They can't lose at Detroit, and God only knows what condition the Vikings will be in by the time the Bears go there. I think they will barely miss the playoffs.

Green Bays is just as bad, and they are starting a half game behind Chicago already. GB's only got 3 wins against teams over 500, and they have 4 remaining on the schedule. Detroit already gave them fits this year, so I find it a hard sell that everyone is on GB's bandwagon with so many games left to play.

They're not a half game behind...keep thinking tiebreakers before the teams play their second game is you want. You are just mad your "lucky to win 3 games" crap is going out the window

 

[ThePittbully]

Eagles Packers Saints Rams

Falcons Giants

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Eagles Packers Falcons Hawks

Bucs Saints

 

[Shawnky]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Saints, RamsWild Cards: Giants, Falcons

LOL. I can't wait for week 16. We're gonna show y'all a mighty fine time. Div champs: Eagles, Packers, Falcons, SeahawksWC: Bucs and Bears.

I'd be shocked if New Orleans does not make the playoffs. They have a pretty easy schedule from here on out. Except for Baltimore and Atlanta. I see 11 wins this year. The Bucs are a good team, but not a playoff team just yet. I wouldn't bet against them because they find a way to win, but I'm thinking 2011 and beyond. I think the Bears are going to come back down to earth and show their true colors these last 6 weeks. Chicago has won a few games they should not have this year. I don't think they'll get that lucky the rest of this year. I think they'll end the year 9-7 and miss the playoffs.

Nothing unusual. Falcons fans are really full of themselves this year. They're just mad because of the Saints Superbowl win. The ONLY reason they beat the Saints this year is because of Garrett Hartley. It's something they're dealing with.

 

[Stewy]

NFC East:

Eagles 7-3: @ Chicago, vs Houston, @ Dallas, @ NYG, vs Minny, vs Dallas

Giants 6-4: vs Jags, vs Wash, @ Minny, vs Eagles, @ GB, @ Wash

Washington 5-5: vs Minny, @ NYG, vs TB, @ Dallas, @ Jags, vs NYG

NFC North:

Chicago 7-3: vs Eagles, @ Detroit, vs NE, @ Minny, vs NYJ, @ GB

Packers 7-3: @ Atlanta, vs 49ers, @ Detroit, @ NE, vs NYG, vs Chicago

NFC South:

Atlanta 8-2: vs Packers, @ TB, @ Carolina, @ Seattle, vs Saints, vs Carolina

Saints 7-3: @ Dallas, @ Cinci, vs Rams, @ Ravens, @ Atlanta, vs TB

TB 7-3: @ Ravens, vs Atlanta, @ Wash, vs Detroit, vs Seattle, @ Saints

NFC West:

Seattle 5-5: vs KC, vs Carolina, @ 49ers, vs Atlanta, @ TB, vs Rams

Rams 4-6: @ Denver, @ Arizona, @ Saints, vs KC, vs 49ers, @ Seattle

Division Winners: Eagles, Chicago, Atlanta, Seattle

Wild Cards: Saints, Packers

Division: Eagles (12-4), Packers (10-6), Falcons (14-2), Rams (7-9)WC: Giants (11-5), Saints (11-5)

 

[Flash]

No love for the Bears!

Their schedule down the stretch is brutal. That great defense of theirs could conceivably steal a couple of wins in there, getting them to maybe 10-6, but that is it. How they fare in those three division road games will obviously be key. They can't lose at Detroit, and God only knows what condition the Vikings will be in by the time the Bears go there. I think they will barely miss the playoffs.

Green Bays is just as bad, and they are starting a half game behind Chicago already. GB's only got 3 wins against teams over 500, and they have 4 remaining on the schedule. Detroit already gave them fits this year, so I find it a hard sell that everyone is on GB's bandwagon with so many games left to play.

 

[DoubleG]

It sucks that the disgusting NFC West is going to take a spot from a good team. There might not be an 8-8 team in that bunch.

This I agree with 100%. You could have a 10-6 team stay home, while a 7-9 team goes into the playoffs. That's just wrong.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Green Bays is just as bad, and they are starting a half game behind Chicago already. GB's only got 3 wins against teams over 500, and they have 4 remaining on the schedule. Detroit already gave them fits this year, so I find it a hard sell that everyone is on GB's bandwagon with so many games left to play.

They're not a half game behind...keep thinking tiebreakers before the teams play their second game is you want. You are just mad your "lucky to win 3 games" crap is going out the window

What's the difference between Chi: Phi, @Det, NEP, @MIN, NYJ, @GBPand GB: @ATL, SFO, @DET, @NEP, NYG, Chi?Chicago goes on the road to their easy games, gets the tougher matchups at home. Green Bay has to go on the road AND prove to be successful against winning teams? I don't see that Green Bay is that much better than the Bears right now that they are the overwhelming choice. How can Chicago's be brutal but Green Bays be any easier at this point, especially when Green Bay plays the tougher opponents on the road?

 

[sho nuff]

Green Bays is just as bad, and they are starting a half game behind Chicago already. GB's only got 3 wins against teams over 500, and they have 4 remaining on the schedule. Detroit already gave them fits this year, so I find it a hard sell that everyone is on GB's bandwagon with so many games left to play.

They're not a half game behind...keep thinking tiebreakers before the teams play their second game is you want. You are just mad your "lucky to win 3 games" crap is going out the window

What's the difference between Chi: Phi, @Det, NEP, @MIN, NYJ, @GBPand GB: @ATL, SFO, @DET, @NEP, NYG, Chi?Chicago goes on the road to their easy games, gets the tougher matchups at home. Green Bay has to go on the road AND prove to be successful against winning teams? I don't see that Green Bay is that much better than the Bears right now that they are the overwhelming choice. How can Chicago's be brutal but Green Bays be any easier at this point, especially when Green Bay plays the tougher opponents on the road?

I don't think I denied anything about the schedules being tough down the road.Might want to read what I actually wrote.And above you mentioned that Detroit gave GB fits...might want to check what fits they also gave the Bears.But you are clearly one of the more biased against GB posters there are on this board...so its not unexpected.

 

[thadonkey]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Saints, RamsWild Cards: Giants, Falcons

LOL. I can't wait for week 16. We're gonna show y'all a mighty fine time. Div champs: Eagles, Packers, Falcons, SeahawksWC: Bucs and Bears.

Superbowl Champs. What can you say to that, HMKRich? You really think Matt Ryan can do anything in the playoffs besides win maybe 1 game? You're kidding yourself. And by the way, home field advantage means absolutely nothing when the Saints and Falcons play, so you better pray we don't come up there in the playoffs. Admit it, it's your worst fear.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Green Bays is just as bad, and they are starting a half game behind Chicago already. GB's only got 3 wins against teams over 500, and they have 4 remaining on the schedule. Detroit already gave them fits this year, so I find it a hard sell that everyone is on GB's bandwagon with so many games left to play.

They're not a half game behind...keep thinking tiebreakers before the teams play their second game is you want. You are just mad your "lucky to win 3 games" crap is going out the window

What's the difference between Chi: Phi, @Det, NEP, @MIN, NYJ, @GBP

and

GB: @ATL, SFO, @DET, @NEP, NYG, Chi

?

Chicago goes on the road to their easy games, gets the tougher matchups at home. Green Bay has to go on the road AND prove to be successful against winning teams? I don't see that Green Bay is that much better than the Bears right now that they are the overwhelming choice. How can Chicago's be brutal but Green Bays be any easier at this point, especially when Green Bay plays the tougher opponents on the road?

I don't think I denied anything about the schedules being tough down the road.Might want to read what I actually wrote.

And above you mentioned that Detroit gave GB fits...might want to check what fits they also gave the Bears.

But you are clearly one of the more biased against GB posters there are on this board...so its not unexpected.

Do you not want to debate the schedule? Calling me biased and mad does not address my questions here or add to the discussion. I didn't address your post because it didn't address my post that questioned calling Chicago's schedule "tough" but ignoring the fact that Green Bays is just as hard, (if not tougher because they have to play tough teams on the road). If you don't have anything to say I don't know why you're bothering to reply.

 

[sho nuff]

Do you not want to debate the schedule? Calling me biased and mad does not address my questions here or add to the discussion. I didn't address your post because it didn't address my post that questioned calling Chicago's schedule "tough" but ignoring the fact that Green Bays is just as hard, (if not tougher because they have to play tough teams on the road).

If you don't have anything to say I don't know why you're bothering to reply.

I think I replied to your post about them being tied...and you again posted the schedule.Want to talk the schedule...ok.

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

I replied to other things in your post...you said more than just that about the schedule.

Its pretty simple.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

1 - GBP

2 - Philly

3 - Atlanta

4 - Seattle

5 - Saints

6 - Chicago

AFC just for giggles:

1 - NYJ

2 - Balt

3 - Indy

4 - SD

5 - Nepats

6 - Pitt

 

[ScottyFargo]

Do you not want to debate the schedule? Calling me biased and mad does not address my questions here or add to the discussion. I didn't address your post because it didn't address my post that questioned calling Chicago's schedule "tough" but ignoring the fact that Green Bays is just as hard, (if not tougher because they have to play tough teams on the road).

If you don't have anything to say I don't know why you're bothering to reply.

I think I replied to your post about them being tied...and you again posted the schedule.Want to talk the schedule...ok.

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

I replied to other things in your post...you said more than just that about the schedule.

Its pretty simple.

Thank you for your in depth and nuanced analysis of why this = everyone picking GB instead of Chicago the rest of the way.

 

[sho nuff]

Do you not want to debate the schedule? Calling me biased and mad does not address my questions here or add to the discussion. I didn't address your post because it didn't address my post that questioned calling Chicago's schedule "tough" but ignoring the fact that Green Bays is just as hard, (if not tougher because they have to play tough teams on the road).

If you don't have anything to say I don't know why you're bothering to reply.

I think I replied to your post about them being tied...and you again posted the schedule.Want to talk the schedule...ok.

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

I replied to other things in your post...you said more than just that about the schedule.

Its pretty simple.

Thank you for your in depth and nuanced analysis of why this = everyone picking GB instead of Chicago the rest of the way.

I don't think the schedule is the only reason people are.I think there are plenty of people who think GB is simply the better team.

And I agree with that.

They are better offensively and seemingly just as good defensively.

and a big part of it is Rodgers > Cutler

 

[Eric Stratton]

Do you not want to debate the schedule? Calling me biased and mad does not address my questions here or add to the discussion. I didn't address your post because it didn't address my post that questioned calling Chicago's schedule "tough" but ignoring the fact that Green Bays is just as hard, (if not tougher because they have to play tough teams on the road).

If you don't have anything to say I don't know why you're bothering to reply.

I think I replied to your post about them being tied...and you again posted the schedule.Want to talk the schedule...ok.

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

I replied to other things in your post...you said more than just that about the schedule.

Its pretty simple.

Thank you for your in depth and nuanced analysis of why this = everyone picking GB instead of Chicago the rest of the way.

 

[sho nuff]

 

[Doug B]

The one worry I have with the Saints is 4 road games and they haven't been playing like the same team from last season.

Check 'em since Halloween -- they're turning the corner. The Saints are gradually getting healthy, too.

 

[reprisal]

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

It looks to me like it is more or less that simple. I project both teams to enter Lambeau 10-5, one team leaves with the division crown, one team leaves in a log jam for the final WC spot with the Bucs and Giants. Its still a very open race but it doesnt surprise me in the least that most people dont trust the Bears.

 

[sho nuff]

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

It looks to me like it is more or less that simple. I project both teams to enter Lambeau 10-5, one team leaves with the division crown, one team leaves in a log jam for the final WC spot with the Bucs and Giants. Its still a very open race but it doesnt surprise me in the least that most people dont trust the Bears.

Which is why talking the tiebreaker now is foolish IMO.If they both enter that game at 10-5, it won't matter that it was the Bears who won that first game. its one of GB's losses, no more important than the other 4 in that scenario.

The only way the tiebreaker matters is if GB is 10-5 coming in and Chicago is 9-6 and wins that game.

I think people don't trust the offense, that Oline, or Cutler just yet.

Should be a great weekend with GB in ATL and Chi vs. Philly.

 

[dhockster]

Do you not want to debate the schedule? Calling me biased and mad does not address my questions here or add to the discussion. I didn't address your post because it didn't address my post that questioned calling Chicago's schedule "tough" but ignoring the fact that Green Bays is just as hard, (if not tougher because they have to play tough teams on the road).

If you don't have anything to say I don't know why you're bothering to reply.

I think I replied to your post about them being tied...and you again posted the schedule.Want to talk the schedule...ok.

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

I replied to other things in your post...you said more than just that about the schedule.

Its pretty simple.

Thank you for your in depth and nuanced analysis of why this = everyone picking GB instead of Chicago the rest of the way.

How about the bears have Cutler and Lovie Smith. That might make people pick GB instead of Chicago.

 

[DoubleG]

Do you not want to debate the schedule? Calling me biased and mad does not address my questions here or add to the discussion. I didn't address your post because it didn't address my post that questioned calling Chicago's schedule "tough" but ignoring the fact that Green Bays is just as hard, (if not tougher because they have to play tough teams on the road).

If you don't have anything to say I don't know why you're bothering to reply.

I think I replied to your post about them being tied...and you again posted the schedule.Want to talk the schedule...ok.

They both have some tough games coming up and a big one on Jan 2nd.

I replied to other things in your post...you said more than just that about the schedule.

Its pretty simple.

Thank you for your in depth and nuanced analysis of why this = everyone picking GB instead of Chicago the rest of the way.

I don't think the schedule is the only reason people are.I think there are plenty of people who think GB is simply the better team.

And I agree with that.

They are better offensively and seemingly just as good defensively. and a big part of it is Rodgers > Cutler

Save for points scored, the Bears are top 5 in almost every defensive category (take aways, yards passing allowed, yards rushing allowed, etc.) - the Packers aren't even top 10 in ANY of those. I don't debate that Rodgers > Cutler, but to say the defenses are equally as good is simply incorrect.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Save for points scored, the Bears are top 5 in almost every defensive category (take aways, yards passing allowed, yards rushing allowed, etc.) - the Packers aren't even top 10 in ANY of those. I don't debate that Rodgers > Cutler, but to say the defenses are equally as good is simply incorrect.

Those picking GB are not looking very deeply at this issue, they are just counting on the Bears sucking. That's not out of line, but Green Bay has to step up their game in order to take a hold of the division. Not every week will they get to pick on rookie CBs like they did with Minny. When Rodgers doesn't have that, Jennings and he have been pedestrian. Yeah, they beat the Jets. The Jets are 8-2, but have had to come from behind to win several contests in a row now. Beyond their 9-0 "dismantling" of the Jets, Packer fans are hanging their hats on wins against ailing Dallas and Minnesota teams. Please.

 

[sho nuff]

Save for points scored, the Bears are top 5 in almost every defensive category (take aways, yards passing allowed, yards rushing allowed, etc.) - the Packers aren't even top 10 in ANY of those. I don't debate that Rodgers > Cutler, but to say the defenses are equally as good is simply incorrect.

Well...Im one that overrates points against over yards every time.Always have as games are not won based on yards but on points scored.They are even in points, even in INTs, Bears have more forced fumbles...Packers have a big advantage in sacks.I think the defenses are different in makeup (Bears more relying on the defensive front...GB more on the rush of Matthews and the play in the secondary)...but IMO they are about equally as good.

 

[sho nuff]

Save for points scored, the Bears are top 5 in almost every defensive category (take aways, yards passing allowed, yards rushing allowed, etc.) - the Packers aren't even top 10 in ANY of those. I don't debate that Rodgers > Cutler, but to say the defenses are equally as good is simply incorrect.

Those picking GB are not looking very deeply at this issue, they are just counting on the Bears sucking. That's not out of line, but Green Bay has to step up their game in order to take a hold of the division. Not every week will they get to pick on rookie CBs like they did with Minny. When Rodgers doesn't have that, Jennings and he have been pedestrian. Yeah, they beat the Jets. The Jets are 8-2, but have had to come from behind to win several contests in a row now. Beyond their 9-0 "dismantling" of the Jets, Packer fans are hanging their hats on wins against ailing Dallas and Minnesota teams. Please.

Step up their game?Check out the point differential.Check out giving up 10 points in the last 3 games.Funny you bring up picking on things...same can be said for the Bears..not every week can they pick on Tyler Thigpen and what has become of the Miami Oline.Jennings is on fire the last 5 games.6 for 81 against the Jets is pedestrian?Packers are not hanging their hats just on that...but your continual downplaying of the Packers is humorous.Still think they will be lucky to win just 1 more game?

 

[MarcO]

It sucks that the disgusting NFC West is going to take a spot from a good team. There might not be an 8-8 team in that bunch.

This I agree with 100%. You could have a 10-6 team stay home, while a 7-9 team goes into the playoffs. That's just wrong.

Mad 'cause the Seahawks beat the Bears in Chicago? yeah, imagine this - the Seahawks go into week 16 at 8-7 against a St. Louis team that is 7-8 and they can rest their starters since they will likely win the tie breaker with another win over either AZ or SF...

 

[Donnybrook]

Save for points scored, the Bears are top 5 in almost every defensive category (take aways, yards passing allowed, yards rushing allowed, etc.) - the Packers aren't even top 10 in ANY of those. I don't debate that Rodgers > Cutler, but to say the defenses are equally as good is simply incorrect.

Those picking GB are not looking very deeply at this issue, they are just counting on the Bears sucking. That's not out of line, but Green Bay has to step up their game in order to take a hold of the division. Not every week will they get to pick on rookie CBs like they did with Minny. When Rodgers doesn't have that, Jennings and he have been pedestrian. Yeah, they beat the Jets. The Jets are 8-2, but have had to come from behind to win several contests in a row now. Beyond their 9-0 "dismantling" of the Jets, Packer fans are hanging their hats on wins against ailing Dallas and Minnesota teams. Please.

I think you need to give credit where it is due. Rodgers had several perfectly thrown balls last week that most DBs couldn't defend. GB oline is much better in pass protection than Chicago's. Given the amount of pressure put on Cutler, I would say he is more likely to make a mistake in the coming games than Rodgers.

 

[Eminence]

Division Winners: Eagles, Packers, Saints, RamsWild Cards: Giants, Falcons

LOL. I can't wait for week 16. We're gonna show y'all a mighty fine time. Div champs: Eagles, Packers, Falcons, SeahawksWC: Bucs and Bears.

I'd be shocked if New Orleans does not make the playoffs. They have a pretty easy schedule from here on out. Except for Baltimore and Atlanta. I see 11 wins this year. The Bucs are a good team, but not a playoff team just yet. I wouldn't bet against them because they find a way to win, but I'm thinking 2011 and beyond. I think the Bears are going to come back down to earth and show their true colors these last 6 weeks. Chicago has won a few games they should not have this year. I don't think they'll get that lucky the rest of this year. I think they'll end the year 9-7 and miss the playoffs.

Nothing unusual. Falcons fans are really full of themselves this year. They're just mad because of the Saints Superbowl win. The ONLY reason they beat the Saints this year is because of Garrett Hartley. It's something they're dealing with.

Isn't he also the reason the Saints went to the Super Bowl?

 

[reprisal]

It sucks that the disgusting NFC West is going to take a spot from a good team. There might not be an 8-8 team in that bunch.

This I agree with 100%. You could have a 10-6 team stay home, while a 7-9 team goes into the playoffs. That's just wrong.

Mad 'cause the Seahawks beat the Bears in Chicago?

yeah, imagine this - the Seahawks go into week 16 at 8-7 against a St. Louis team that is 7-8 and they can rest their starters since they will likely win the tie breaker with another win over either AZ or SF...

Why do people post stuff like this? Just makes you look like a jerk. You mad cause you're offensive and defensive lines been riddled by injury rendering you unlikely to compete? Of course were mad the Bears lost to the Seahawks, that doesn't make the sole basis for what he is saying bitterness. If anyone is likely to get unjustly screwed in this scenario its the Bucs. They could reasonably likely end up 10-6 and just short of a play off slot with their only losses to the Steelers, Ravens, Saints and Falcons. btw: the rest of your post doesnt make sense either. Seahawks play the Rams week 17 and all ready lost to them once, they'd need to avoid losing the tie break.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

The one worry I have with the Saints is 4 road games and they haven't been playing like the same team from last season.

Check 'em since Halloween -- they're turning the corner. The Saints are gradually getting healthy, too.

I don't disagree....but will it be sustained? Any game on the road is tough IMO.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Save for points scored, the Bears are top 5 in almost every defensive category (take aways, yards passing allowed, yards rushing allowed, etc.) - the Packers aren't even top 10 in ANY of those. I don't debate that Rodgers > Cutler, but to say the defenses are equally as good is simply incorrect.

Well...Im one that overrates points against over yards every time.Always have as games are not won based on yards but on points scored.They are even in points, even in INTs, Bears have more forced fumbles...Packers have a big advantage in sacks.I think the defenses are different in makeup (Bears more relying on the defensive front...GB more on the rush of Matthews and the play in the secondary)...but IMO they are about equally as good.

I think both defenses have played much better than most thought they would've preseason. Will they become even better when players come back from injury and the cold weather kicks in?I think it goes:Offense: GBDefense: close to evenST: Chicago