Packers-Cardinals: It’s the Schedule, Stupid

The most common argument I’ve heard to diminish the accomplishments of the Packers, and to back up the Cardinals, is the following: “Yeah, the Packers are 11-5, but they haven’t played anyone all year.”

This has been thrown around, both by fans and commentators, as fact. But, when compared to the Cardinals, the Packers’ schedule has been pretty rigorous.

I’d like to go through both teams’ schedules piece by piece. Both teams went 4-2 against their own divisions. The NFC West, apart from the Cardinals, was 14-34. The NFC North, apart from the Packers, was 21-27. Neither are great records, but Green Bay’s division is better, and both teams performed equally.

In addition, both teams played the the other’s entire division. The Packers went 4-0 against the NFC West, while the Cardinals went 3-1 against the NFC North. Even taking away the game the two played against each other, in which Arizona chose to rest starters, the records are equal.

In addition, both teams played an AFC division. The Packers went 2-2 against the AFC North, which had a combined 33-31 record. The Cardinals went 2-2 against the AFC South, which had a combined 38-26. Slight edge to Arizona.

Finally, both teams played two more teams, the teams in the NFC East and NFC South that finished in the same position as they did the previous year (for the Cards, first, for the Packers, third). Green Bay beat Dallas, and lost to creamsickle-clad Tampa Bay, while Arizona beat the Giants, and lost to Carolina. Once again, a tie in performance, and what would be a slight edge in combined record of opponents to Arizona (Dallas and Tampa were a combined 14-18, whereas Carolina and New York both finished 8-8).

Altogether, seems like Arizona and Green Bay have had comparable schedules, right? Well, let’s take a look at some other stats. How about games against playoff teams?

The Packers played twice as many as the Cardinals: six (Minnesota twice, Dallas, Arizona, Cincinnati, and Baltimore) to three (Green Bay, Minnesota, and Indianapolis).

The Packers have three wins in those games (Dallas, Arizona, and Baltimore) to Arizona’s one (Minnesota).

Now, how about record against teams with winning records for the year? Arizona is 2-2, having beaten Minnesota and Houston and having lost to Green Bay and Indianapolis. Green Bay is 3-4, having beaten Dallas, Arizona and Baltimore and having lost to Minnesota twice, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh.

Note that Green Bay has played twice as many playoff teams, and nearly twice as many winning teams as Arizona. And though Green Bay has a comparable record to Arizona in those types of games, Green Bay is the team with the supposedly suspect schedule.

Now, I can’t say with any amount of certainty what will happen this weekend. Green Bay has played at Arizona in preseason-style matchups twice this year, and was winning at halftime of both games by the respective scores 38-10 and 26-0, stats I would hope would bode well for Green Bay.

Whatever may happen, contrary to what you hear from the talking heads out there, the Packers’ season has brought them far more playoff-quality opponents than Arizona’s has, and they will be well prepared to start postseason football on Sunday.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

Fragile Ground: Packers Win in Spite of Running Woes

The three most important stats from the Packers-Bears game on Sunday night:

1. The Packers’ defense held Chicago’s offense to 13 points.

2. The Packers were plus-4 in turnover margin.

3. The Bears’ most powerful offensive force, halfback Matt Forte, was held to 55 yards on 25 carries, an average of 2.2 yards a carry.

When those three stats are taken into account, this question arises: why did a team that did so well defensively need a game-winning 50-yard touchdown in the final two minutes?

The answer lies on the offensive end. In my article, I’m going to talk specifically about the ground game, which, with the exception of one quality series in the second half, left much to be desired.

The stat line for Ryan Grant: 16 carries for 61 yards (a 3.8 yards per carry average) and a touchdown. On the surface, not a bad outing, but the stats don’t tell the whole story. There are a few positives and a few negatives to take away from this performance.

On the positive side, Ryan Grant is not running like the Ryan Grant of a year ago; he’s fighting for extra yards, breaking tackles, and in general seems to have a greater fire for the game. He wasn’t able to break the big run in his first game, but he seems poised to, which is good news considering he only had six runs of 20 or more yards last year, as opposed to 11 the year before. Add that John Kuhn is quickly becoming the Packers’ most solid blocking fullback since William Henderson, and Grant looks likely to improve on his 1200-yard season the year before.

The main factor holding the running game back is the game plan, which is very pass-heavy. Including quarterback runs and sacks, the offense called 35 passing plays on Sunday night, as opposed to only 19 runs.

There may be extenuating circumstances: this game was close, so there were fewer runs than there would be in a game in which Green Bay was winning handily. Also, you would expect to see a greater emphasis on the run later on in the season, as the weather in Green Bay and elsewhere slowly deteriorates and passing becomes more difficult.

But there were several plays on third and short where Aaron Rodgers was lined up in the shotgun with an empty backfield. Mike McCarthy’s game plan will likely be the main hindrance to Ryan Grant and the running game.

All told, I would expect about a much better looking season for Ryan Grant, even if he doesn’t see that large of a corresponding jump in his numbers. I’d expect around 1300-1450 yards and eight to ten touchdowns. Those numbers, however, are highly dependent on him seeing enough carries.

A note of caution to Mike McCarthy: last year’s Arizona Cardinals proved that you can make a Super Bowl without running the ball, but no team has ever won a Super Bowl while having the No. 1 quarterback in terms of yardage that season. You aren’t going to win games if you’re regularly out-gained by more than 125 yards and beaten in time of possession, as was the case last night. To put it simply (and in rhyme), if you want to win it all, you have to run the ball.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

Strong Preseason Makes Green Bay Look Like a Contender

Only one thing is certain when it comes to predicting how the NFL season: no one, not even the “experts,” have a clue. There will always be the team that is the popular sleeper pick that goes nowhere, (e.g., last year’s Browns or the Dolphins of two years ago, who were picked by Sports Illustrated to go to the Super Bowl just before embarking on their 1-15 campaign), and that team that was expect to go 4-12 that ends up winning their division or even making the Super Bowl.

Nevertheless, I have been asked to make a few predictions for Green Bay’s year, and being the obliging gentleman that I am, I will do so.

First, we must take a look at some facts:

1. Green Bay’s defense forced 13 turnovers in their first three preseason games, and the first team only allowed 10 points in that span.

2. Green Bay’s first team offense scored 38 points in the first half against Arizona’s first team defense.

3. Aaron Rodgers was top five in yardage and touchdown passes year, top 10 in completion percentage, and had better than a two to one touchdown to interception ratio.

4. Ryan Grant ran for over 1,200 yards in 2008, despite having a “down” year by most accounts.

5. Both Greg Jennings and Donald Driver caught over 70 passes for over 1,000 yards last season.

6. Dom Capers, the new defensive coordinator, has had a top 10 defense in his first year with every new team he’s coached for in recent memory.

Taking all these factors into account, it is hard not to be optimistic about this year. Next, you have to look at the schedule.

First, the divisional games:

The Vikings have arguably the best half back in the NFL in Adrian Peterson, who is now joined by former Packer Brett Favre in the backfield.

Brett looked good in his game against Houston, but he didn’t do the one thing I think he needed to: complete a long pass down the field. He threw two passes that qualified; the first was the pass to the corner of the end zone that seemed to be alligator-armed by the receiver, the second he overthrew his man by a good five yards.

It’s obvious that the focal point of Minnesota’s offense will be Adrian Peterson, and when teams start moving the secondary up to play the run, they will risk giving up the deep pass.

Brett’s long range accuracy has been slowly deteriorating over the past few years, and if he can’t make teams pay when they stack the box, Minnesota will struggle to have a good year, even with their quality defense and running game. Since I believe that will be the case, I think that the Packers will likely split their two games with Minnesota.

Chicago also has a new quarterback in Jay Cutler, who ironically was called “the next Brett Favre” when he was drafted. Many people, including Peter King of Sports Illustrated, think that the Bears are a playoff team this year.

While I agree that Cutler, when combined with last year’s rookie sensation Matt Forte, make Chicago’s offense far more formidable, the facts remain that a) their first string wide out is a kick returner who had only three touchdowns and about 650 yards last year, neither of which I find overwhelming. And b) that their defense is getting older by the year, with Lance Briggs being the only member that doesn’t seem to be affected. I predict a minimum of one win against Chicago, probably two.

The Lions didn’t win a game last year, and while I don’t expect a repeat performance, the modest improvement they are likely to see will not be enough. Two wins on the board.

In addition, the Packers play the entirety of two divisions.

First, the NFC West. The Cardinals are the only team with a winning record from the division at 9-7, but they did make it all the way to Super Bowl XLIII from there. Since Green Bay plays them on the road, I’m going to count that game as a loss.

The Seahawks are a threat with Hasselbeck at the helm, but even if he’s healthy, I have trouble envisioning them coming into Lambeau in late December in likely poor conditions and winning a game with either Julius Jones or Edgerrin James at half back, Jim Mora Jr. at head coach instead of Mike Holmgren, and Julian Peterson, their best defensive player last year, in Detroit. Count the win.

Apart from Stephen Jackson, the Rams are a complete mess, and Rodgers isn’t the dome-a-phobe that Favre was. Put it on the board.

I love Mike Singletary as a coach, but it is tough to win in this league without a quality quarterback, and Shaun Hill has only proved that he’s better than quarter-bust extraordinaire Alex Smith. Add that it’s a home game, and I’m counting it as a W.

The AFC North looks a little different from the NFC West. True, like the NFC West, the AFC North has a team that was in the Super Bowl last year, and that again Green Bay plays that team on the road, and again I’m going to count the game as a loss. But that’s about where the similarities end.

The Ravens looked solid on defense and, for the first time in a while, adequate on offense under rookie signal-caller Joe Flacco last year. True, it’s a home December game, which normally means Green Bay has the advantage. But I think that between their defense and the three-headed monster of Ray Rice, Willis McGahee, and Le’Ron McClain running the football, Baltimore can win in the Frozen Tundra. Count it as an L.

The Browns won 10 games two seasons ago, but that seems far away now. A new coach, an undecided quarterback situation, an aging Jamal Lewis at half back, Kellen Winslow in Tampa, and stone-handed Braylon Edwards at wide-out won’t add up to much this season. I predict yet another win.

To say that the Bengals can be very dangerous if Carson Palmer’s healthy is the same as saying, “The Bengals can be very dangerous if you don’t take into account reality.” Green Bay gets Cincinnati in Week Two, so he may still be playing, but even so, I believe the Packers’ defense will get more stops than Cincinnati’s. Another W on the board.

Finally, Green Bay plays the two teams in their conference in the divisions they are not playing the entirety of who finished in the same position in their respective divisions as the Packers did (I wish there was a simpler way to explain that. Suffice it to say, since Green Bay finished third in the NFC North last year, they play the two teams that finished third in the NFC South and the NFC East last year, since they are playing the entirety of the NFC West).

The NFC South team is Tampa Bay, whom we play on the road. However, given how that team has looked in the preseason, I think that a win is likely.

The NFC East team is Dallas. They were a playoff team until the last week of the season last year, and even with the departure of Terrell Owens, this team is loaded with talent.

If the Packers were going into Dallas, I don’t think they would come out with a win. However, this game is at home, so while I believe it to be a close matchup, I will give the nod to Green Bay again.

All told, if Green Bay plays to expectations, they should win 11 or 12 games this year. That being said, I don’t think I’ve ever seen them play to expectations (they’re usually a few games over or under), so that number must, as with all preseason predictions, be taken with a grain of salt.

One thing I’m fairly certain of: for the first time the NFC North looks like it has three teams that can make the playoffs, and it’ll be very interesting to find out how many of them do.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

NFL Sport Channel Latest

• Just How Far Would You Go?
• Sorry Rex, But It Isn’t Happening
• Super Bowl Predictions: Five Stat-Free Reasons Why the Eagles Will Reach The Super Bowl
• Seahawks Attempt to Turn Corner With Heavy Pursuit of Pete Carroll
• Bill Cowher Unlikely to Coach in 2010