Who is really better in the NFC? Dallas or Green Bay? (1 Viewer)

[Sabertooth]

I was watching NFL live and Wingo said something about the Packers being a second tier team and that the Giants and Cowboys were playing well. He said the Packers battling the Broncos on MNF is a battle of weaknesses.

Now I understand that Dallas may be a cut above Green Bay. They haven't beaten anybody yet at all. They got pounded by the only good team they've faced. Are they really any better than the Packers? Are the Giants any better after having lost to the Cowboys and Packers both?

Cowboys:

In week 1, they beat the 5-2 Giants (45-35). So have the Packers.

In week 2, they beat the 0-7 Dolphins (37-20). Owen who? Owen Seven.

In week 3, they beat the 2-4 Chicago (34-10). I wonder how Griese would have influenced this?

In week 4, the beat the 0-7 Rams (35-7). Owen who? Owen Seven.

In week 5, they beat the 2-4 Bills (25-24) just barely. The Bills are 2-4 and starting a rookie QB. Not exactly the 85 Bears.

In Week 6, they got pasted by the 7-0 Patriots (48-27). Not beaten....demolished.

In Week 7, they beat the 2-4 Vikings (24-14). Not exactly anything to brag about.

So the reasoning behind saying that the Cowboys and Giants are a tier above the Packers is what exactly? The Packers have at least beaten the Redskins and Chargers.



Packers

In week 1, they beat the 2-4 Eagles (16-13). McNabb wasn't right, but Westbrook didn't rush for much either.

In week 2, they beat the 5-2 Giants (35-13) pretty handily. Basically went into the Meadowland and hammered them.

In week 3, they beat the 3-3 Chargers (31-24). Ladainian was shut down. Gates went wild. Favre carried the team.

In week 4, they beat the 2-4 Vikings (23-16) in the dome. Not a pretty game, Favre carried them again.

In week 5, they lost to the 2-4 Bears (27-20). Griese was the QB but the Packers' mistakes doomed them.

In week 6, they beat the 4-2 Redskins (17-14) in a sloppy game. They didn't look pretty but pulled out a win here.

In week 7, they had a BYE.

Opponents records of the teams they've beaten

Dallas (11-26)

Packers (16-15)

 

[timschochet]

I wrote about this in a post below, but-

1. Giants

2. Cowboys

3. Packers

Head to head is overrated because its still early. Giants can run the ball and stop the run, and their passing attack is good enough. Cowboys defense is suspect for the playoffs, and the Pack can't run the ball. I'm not at all sure this order will last, but this is how I see it as of now.

 

[Sabertooth]

So Green Bay has a 6-1 record vs. winners, and Dallas has a 6-1 record vs. losers and they are somehow better? I don't understand the logic there. It's halfway through the season, it's not early.

 

[Mustang Man]

Any of these 4 teams can come out of the NFC

Dallas

Green Bay

NYG

Washington

In that order. Green Bay has zero running attack and that is going to stop them from getting home field. New York will have problems with Dallas cause they do not have a very good defense. Washington offense sucks. Dallas has a weak secondary.

 

[eom]

the giants can stop the run, or they can stop the jets and atlanta from running?

 

[duaneok66]

Giants are the best team in the NFC . . .

 

[packersfan]

I think the Cowboys are the best team followed by Green Bay and the Giants. Given how the Packers have beaten the Giants I'd give them the edge for the No. 2 spot. Each of the teams has at least one serious flaw:

Dallas - suspect pass defense

Green Bay - horrible running game

Giants - suspect secondary

Any of those could end up being the Achilles' heel in their quest for the conference title but the fact each of them has a rather sizeable flaw opens up the door for any one of them (or another team) to emerge in the Super Bowl. I wouldn't rule out Tampa Bay or Seattle as contenders either. The Bucs aren't a great team but they play solid football and have a good enough defense to stay in the hunt. The Seahawks have major issues with Alexander but their passing game has a chance to be sensational when all their WRs are healthy and their defense has enough good days to indicate they could step up with a big game in a playoff environment. I'm not sold on the Redskins just yet. I don't think Campbell's ready to take the next step (although I like him quite a bit) and they have some serious issues at WR, where Moss is having an awful season.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Giants are the best team in the NFC . . .

The Giants got spanked by the Packers.....in NY. So without some semblance of explanation, it's hard to accept your assertion.

 

[spitkickers]

Philly and New Orleans are two teams not to count out, though Philly is in a ridiculously tough division and are currently 4 games out. Not looking good there. I like the Giants to take the wild card out of that division.

But in other divison fun let's look at NO:

New Orleans is turning a corner.

New Orleans can make the playoffs because even at 2-4 they are still only 2 games out of the lead and they have potential to make moves.

Oct 28 @San Francisco

Nov 4 Jacksonville

Nov 11 St. Louis

Nov 18 @Houston

Nov 25 @Carolina

Dec 2 Tampa Bay

Dec 10 @Atlanta

Dec 16 Arizona

Dec 23 Philadelphia

Dec 30 @Chicago

New Orleans can win the majority of those games.

Though to answer the original poster, Dallas is better than Green Bay. Both have comparable defenses, solid passing games...but only one of them has a decent running game.

And, apparently New Orleans isn't even part of the OP's post...so, move on folks!

 

[Sabertooth]

Giants are the best team in the NFC . . .

And yet the Packers and Cowboys pounded them pretty good.

 

[Sabertooth]

Philly and New Orleans are two teams not to count out, though Philly is in a ridiculously tough division and are currently 4 games out. Not looking good there. I like the Giants to take the wild card out of that division. But in other divison fun let's look at NO:New Orleans is turning a corner.New Orleans can make the playoffs because even at 2-4 they are still only 2 games out of the lead and they have potential to make moves. Oct 28 @San Francisco Nov 4 Jacksonville Nov 11 St. Louis Nov 18 @Houston Nov 25 @Carolina Dec 2 Tampa Bay Dec 10 @AtlantaDec 16 Arizona Dec 23 Philadelphia Dec 30 @ChicagoNew Orleans can win the majority of those games.Though to answer the original poster, Dallas is better than Green Bay. Both have comparable defenses, solid passing games...but only one of them has a decent running game.And, apparently New Orleans isn't even part of the OP's post...so, move on folks!

I think Green Bay's defense is quite a bit better than Dallas'. They pass rush with the front four, stop the run with linebackers, and bump a lot with the corners. They just line up and play, don't need to blitz much, and just play straight up football.

 

[duaneok66]

The Giants are a different team since their 0-2 start . . . the D is much better now . . .

 

[Traders2001]

So Green Bay has a 6-1 record vs. winners, and Dallas has a 6-1 record vs. losers and they are somehow better? I don't understand the logic there. It's halfway through the season, it's not early.

Exactly . Dallas has nt beaten any decent teams .They should have lost to BUF , they did nt deserve the win and got smacked big big big time by NE .They are a middle of the pack team not more .The jury is still out on the Giants .So today the Pakckers are the best team in the NFC.

 

[laughinboy_2000]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

 

[bcr8f]

I wrote about this in a post below, but-1. Giants2. Cowboys3. PackersHead to head is overrated because its still early. Giants can run the ball and stop the run, and their passing attack is good enough. Cowboys defense is suspect for the playoffs, and the Pack can't run the ball. I'm not at all sure this order will last, but this is how I see it as of now.

Now doesn't matter. If the Packers can develop a running game they will be tough to beat in the playoffs esp. at home.Still the AFC teams that miss the playoffs may beat all 3.

 

[laughinboy_2000]

I wrote about this in a post below, but-

1. Giants

2. Cowboys

3. Packers

Head to head is overrated because its still early. Giants can run the ball and stop the run, and their passing attack is good enough. Cowboys defense is suspect for the playoffs, and the Pack can't run the ball. I'm not at all sure this order will last, but this is how I see it as of now.

Now doesn't matter. If the Packers can develop a running game they will be tough to beat in the playoffs esp. at home.

Still the AFC teams that miss the playoffs may beat all 3.

I'm not convinced that will ever happen.

 

[remote controller]

As a Pack fan, I am damn glad we have the giants in the rear view window. I am also glad we escaped the Chargers, and have played and beat the Skins. The Pack is a fine team, but currently the Giants are the best NFC team, in my book! I am not sold on the Cowboys yet, but have them above the Pack because of all of their offensive weapons. The Monday night game in Denver is going to be a very tough contest for the Packers.

 

[eom]

The Giants are a different team since their 0-2 start . . . the D is much better now . . .

yeah, now that they played atlanta and san fran --- if they meet them again in the playoffs they should kick ###.I don't even know why any of you dudes think there's a best nfc team.last year I had no idea who'd win any of those playoff games --- I thought they were all coin flips, and it could turn out that way again.

 

[clinton_c]

It really is a coin flip in The NFC.

I think many people are discounting the Cowboys win against the Giants in week 1 because The Giants played poorly at the start of the season.

However how is that any different than Green bay's win over Sand Diego? San Diego was also playing poorly at the begining of the season.

I would also not forget that the rest of the NFC East have a potential loss hanging over their head because they have yet to play New England.

 

[Sabertooth]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

 

[EdwardCat]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

 

[laughinboy_2000]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

 

[Routilla]

It's way too early to tell. It doesn't matter who looks better in week 8. Revisit the thread in week 14 or 15. I know Dallas is the only team to lead NE for more than a half so I would probably say they're better right now.

 

[EdwardCat]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

LambeauI'm sure they'll run the ball just fine. Funny thing is, how has Favre managed to do it in the past if it is going to be so impossible this year? Wouldn't Favre have a mediocre career if he was unable to move the ball through the air when the weather became bad on his home turf? This seems illogical.

 

[Sabertooth]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

LambeauI'm sure they'll run the ball just fine. Funny thing is, how has Favre managed to do it in the past if it is going to be so impossible this year? Wouldn't Favre have a mediocre career if he was unable to move the ball through the air when the weather became bad on his home turf? This seems illogical.

Favre has huge hands. I've been to the Packers HOF where they have a ball on display with his hand print outlined. His hands are very big. This enables Favre to grip the ball even in the cold and rain. He can grip the ball much like people with smaller hands can grip a softball and throw it in the weather.

 

[laughinboy_2000]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

LambeauI'm sure they'll run the ball just fine. Funny thing is, how has Favre managed to do it in the past if it is going to be so impossible this year? Wouldn't Favre have a mediocre career if he was unable to move the ball through the air when the weather became bad on his home turf? This seems illogical.

What evidence do you have of this ACTUALLY happening. They lacked a running game last year to and how far did that take them? Not to the playoffs. I like Brett Favre as much as the next person, but they desperately need a running game to be a favorite in the NFC.

 

[i2obertm]

It really is a coin flip in The NFC.I think many people are discounting the Cowboys win against the Giants in week 1 because The Giants played poorly at the start of the season.However how is that any different than Green bay's win over Sand Diego? San Diego was also playing poorly at the begining of the season.I would also not forget that the rest of the NFC East have a potential loss hanging over their head because they have yet to play New England.

I think the reason the Giants may have played so poorly early in the season is because they started off the season against the 6-1 cowboys and 5-1 packers. hmmmm....possibly the reason for their sudden resurgence have anything to do with starting off against the elite and getting their recent wins against the likes of the 1-6 Falcons, 1-6 Jets, 2-4 49ers, and 2-4 Eagles? And perhaps that San Diego played so "poorly" at the beginning of the season may have something to do with the fact that in losing 3 of their first 4 games, all the losses came against teams currenty in FIRST place in their divisions. The other game being a physical Charger victory against the Bears.

 

[EdwardCat]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

LambeauI'm sure they'll run the ball just fine. Funny thing is, how has Favre managed to do it in the past if it is going to be so impossible this year? Wouldn't Favre have a mediocre career if he was unable to move the ball through the air when the weather became bad on his home turf? This seems illogical.

What evidence do you have of this ACTUALLY happening. They lacked a running game last year to and how far did that take them? Not to the playoffs. I like Brett Favre as much as the next person, but they desperately need a running game to be a favorite in the NFC.

They also didn't start the season 5-1 last year. Why should you base their inability to run the ball as an indication that the same lack of ability means doom for them this year?

 

[SharkBait]

So Green Bay has a 6-1 record vs. winners, and Dallas has a 6-1 record vs. losers and they are somehow better? I don't understand the logic there. It's halfway through the season, it's not early.

Until Green Bay gets themselves a running game, let's try to keep them out of conversations concerning teams that can legitimately compete for the ring, mmkay?

 

[Ariakis]

Dallas lost to NE but they did NOT get destroyed. It was within one score until late and Dallas just didn't look sharp either. I think being down their #1 CB in Henry hurts their pass rush and eventually will add Tank Johnson to the mix. On offense they are still down Glenn. I am not sure the Cowboys can beat either the Colts or the Patriots but I don't see any other team in the NFC other than maybe the Giants that pose a major concern to Dallas.

 

[[scooter]]

So Green Bay has a 6-1 record vs. winners, and Dallas has a 6-1 record vs. losers and they are somehow better? I don't understand the logic there. It's halfway through the season, it's not early.

Until Green Bay gets themselves a running game, let's try to keep them out of conversations concerning teams that can legitimately compete for the ring, mmkay?

The 2007 Green Bay Packers are averaging 3.26 yards per carry. I don't think a team has ever made it to the Super Bowl with such a low YPC.

 

[Ghost Rider]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How do you figure? What makes the Cowboys so much better than anyone else?

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

Because Favre has never done well in cold weather before...???

The 2007 Green Bay Packers are averaging 3.26 yards per carry. I don't think a team has ever made it to the Super Bowl with such a low YPC.

That is possible, but on the flip side, teams with poor run defenses used to never do well in the playoffs or Super Bowl, but the '97 Broncos and '06 Colts did pretty well, I'd say.

 

[Billy1x]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

LambeauI'm sure they'll run the ball just fine. Funny thing is, how has Favre managed to do it in the past if it is going to be so impossible this year? Wouldn't Favre have a mediocre career if he was unable to move the ball through the air when the weather became bad on his home turf? This seems illogical.

Favre has huge hands. I've been to the Packers HOF where they have a ball on display with his hand print outlined. His hands are very big. This enables Favre to grip the ball even in the cold and rain. He can grip the ball much like people with smaller hands can grip a softball and throw it in the weather.

The cold weather thing is becoming a wives tale. All the fields are heated before the game and it hardly ever snows or sleets during the game. Other than the air being heavier and your hand being dryer (gloves take care of that) you only have to worry about playing the Patriots at home where they cheat by turning off the heat to the field.

 

[Yenrub]

It really is a coin flip in The NFC.I think many people are discounting the Cowboys win against the Giants in week 1 because The Giants played poorly at the start of the season.However how is that any different than Green bay's win over Sand Diego? San Diego was also playing poorly at the begining of the season.I would also not forget that the rest of the NFC East have a potential loss hanging over their head because they have yet to play New England.

I think the reason the Giants may have played so poorly early in the season is because they started off the season against the 6-1 cowboys and 5-1 packers. hmmmm....possibly the reason for their sudden resurgence have anything to do with starting off against the elite and getting their recent wins against the likes of the 1-6 Falcons, 1-6 Jets, 2-4 49ers, and 2-4 Eagles? And perhaps that San Diego played so "poorly" at the beginning of the season may have something to do with the fact that in losing 3 of their first 4 games, all the losses came against teams currenty in FIRST place in their divisions. The other game being a physical Charger victory against the Bears.

The Giants looked bad on both sides of the ball against the Packers.Against the Cowboys the offense looked good scoring 35 points but the defense was horrible.That game was 38-35 with 4 minutes left to go, the Cowboys put the game away on a 3rd and long from midfield.The Giant defense blew a chance to force the Cowboys to punt on 3rd and long giving up the long catch and run to I think Hurd (not really sure who caught it)

 

[laughinboy_2000]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How do you figure? What makes the Cowboys so much better than anyone else?Answer: They are the second highest scoring team in the NFL

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

Because Favre has never done well in cold weather before...???Answer: No, not without a running game.

The 2007 Green Bay Packers are averaging 3.26 yards per carry. I don't think a team has ever made it to the Super Bowl with such a low YPC.

 

[Gnat Berries]

The real issue is this -

Who doesn't think the Pats, Colts, or Steelers could beat any NFC team on neutral turf?

Any of those three teams would crush Dallas, Green Bay or the Giants.

The NFC is a joke.

 

[Ghost Rider]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How do you figure? What makes the Cowboys so much better than anyone else?Answer: They are the second highest scoring team in the NFL

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.

There's Dallas...

and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

Because Favre has never done well in cold weather before...???Answer: No, not without a running game.

The 2007 Green Bay Packers are averaging 3.26 yards per carry. I don't think a team has ever made it to the Super Bowl with such a low YPC.

So, Dallas is so good because they have scored the 2nd most points in the NFL? Where do you then put Cleveland and Cincinnati, whom have scored the 4th and 5th most points per game this year, respectively?

The real issue is this -

Who doesn't think the Pats, Colts, or Steelers could beat any NFC team on neutral turf?

Any of those three teams would crush Dallas, Green Bay or the Giants.

The NFC is a joke.

Please take the Steelers out of that equation. They are not in Indy or NE's league.

 

[Challenge Everything]

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

You don't pay attention to the weather do you? The last couple of years the first snowfall was late December and it was not much at all. Sure, it will get cold, but the snow, sleet, rain will happen in January/February if it at all impacts the football season.

 

[laughinboy_2000]

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

You don't pay attention to the weather do you? The last couple of years the first snowfall was late December and it was not much at all. Sure, it will get cold, but the snow, sleet, rain will happen in January/February if it at all impacts the football season.

I find this VERY hard to believe up in Wisconsin, but whatever you say buddy.

 

[Challenge Everything]

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

You don't pay attention to the weather do you? The last couple of years the first snowfall was late December and it was not much at all. Sure, it will get cold, but the snow, sleet, rain will happen in January/February if it at all impacts the football season.

I find this VERY hard to believe up in Wisconsin, but whatever you say buddy.

I have lived here for ~9 years. You dont think I know or remember the weather up here? It is the end of October and it is currently 53 degrees out and sunny. No gloom and doom weather in Green Bay yet this year.

 

[sho nuff]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How can Dallas be the best team in the NFL if they cannot stop a good offense?Notice also the run defenses GB has played against.

 

[sho nuff]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

Do you want to look up Favre's record in the cold?I keep hearing this...but the Packer's passing game right now is based upon short passes. The kinds that are not affected as much by weather.And the other thing. How come the Packers will be so affected by the cold...but the Patriots and Brady are still projected to throw so many TDs? Last time I checked...it gets pretty cold in Foxboro.

 

[sho nuff]

So Green Bay has a 6-1 record vs. winners, and Dallas has a 6-1 record vs. losers and they are somehow better? I don't understand the logic there. It's halfway through the season, it's not early.

Until Green Bay gets themselves a running game, let's try to keep them out of conversations concerning teams that can legitimately compete for the ring, mmkay?

Until Dallas can stop a legit offense, lets try and keep them out of conversations concerning teams that can compete forthe ring.And BTW...none of the NFC will really be competing for the ring. The Super Bowl is the AFC title game again this year.

 

[Sabertooth]

So Green Bay has a 6-1 record vs. winners, and Dallas has a 6-1 record vs. losers and they are somehow better? I don't understand the logic there. It's halfway through the season, it's not early.

Until Green Bay gets themselves a running game, let's try to keep them out of conversations concerning teams that can legitimately compete for the ring, mmkay?

I don't believe any teams outside of the Colts and the Patriots have a shot at the ring. MMMkay. Certainly Dallas showed they don't.

 

[Sabertooth]

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

You don't pay attention to the weather do you? The last couple of years the first snowfall was late December and it was not much at all. Sure, it will get cold, but the snow, sleet, rain will happen in January/February if it at all impacts the football season.

I find this VERY hard to believe up in Wisconsin, but whatever you say buddy.

I live 2 hours north of Green Bay and we didn't get a flake of snow until mid January last year. Just sayin'

 

[Challenge Everything]

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

You don't pay attention to the weather do you? The last couple of years the first snowfall was late December and it was not much at all. Sure, it will get cold, but the snow, sleet, rain will happen in January/February if it at all impacts the football season.

I find this VERY hard to believe up in Wisconsin, but whatever you say buddy.

I have lived here for ~9 years. You dont think I know or remember the weather up here? It is the end of October and it is currently 53 degrees out and sunny. No gloom and doom weather in Green Bay yet this year.

http://www.aos.wisc.edu/%7Esco/clim-histor...sts-2006-07.gifThis is the best data I could find. The graph is the 2006-2007 snowfall graph. Unless we get a freak blizzard or something... there is little snow during football.

http://www.aos.wisc.edu/%7Esco/clim-histor...rb-tts-2006.gif

This is the temperature range for 2006. We had some cold weather in the beginning of December. Other than that the temps are in the ~20s at least during football time. It is those playoff games that teams have to worry about as the temps fall in January and February.

 

[Torque666]

The Giants are a different team since their 0-2 start . . . the D is much better now . . .

Gotta love the battlecry of the losers!!

 

[GreenNGold]

How can the Packers be the second best team in the NFC if they can't run the ball? Eventually that is going to catch up with them.There's Dallas...and then there's the rest...

How are they 5-1 without running the ball? The idea isn't to run the ball. Its to win games.

They are 5-1 without needing to rely heavily on running the ball. I think that is different from being unable to run the ball. I agree...the idea is to win games.

OK, we'll see how good they are when the weather gets colder and they NEED to run the ball. It gets awfully hard to throw the ball and run routes in the snow, rain, sleet which hits Lambou in November and December.

Favre can throw the ball in any weather. I don't see how that is even debatable. Also, Brett Favre's tears cure cancer. The only problem, is that Brett Favre is so tough he never cries. Also, there is not a team in the NFC that is the for sure #1. Any NFC rankings are purely opinion. However, it is safe to say that these are the top 2 teams in the NFC are Dallas and Green Bay. Week 11 will give us a much better picture on which team is better. Until then it is all speculation. Also, neither team is so much better than the likes Washington, NYG, Tampa bay, maybe even Carolina, and even New Orleans if they can keep turning things around. The NFC Championship is wide open and for the taking. But to make statements like Dallas, Green Bay, or the Giants are the clear cut #1 team is just ridiculous. Also, the only game the Packers have lost so far has been the game where they actually had a rushing game. Pass every down if you ask me.

 

[Pipes]

The Giants are a different team since their 0-2 start . . . the D is much better now . . .

Yeah it's amazing how much better a team looks when they start playing crappy teams.

 

[EdwardCat]

The Giants are a different team since their 0-2 start . . . the D is much better now . . .

Yeah it's amazing how much better a team looks when they start playing crappy teams.

Aye, Dallas has most certainly benefited from this fortuitous arrangement as well. They barely beat Minnesota...