|
|
|
|
#1
11-20-2007, 02:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
Without going into detail I have Green Bay as a very strong play this week.
They are well positioned to exploit Detroit's weaknesses, whereas Detroit's singular offensive strength is offset by GB defensive strength. I have GB with a decided edge on both sides of the football. 
|
|
#2
11-20-2007, 02:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
[ QUOTE ]
Without going into detail I have Green Bay as a very strong play this week. They are well positioned to exploit Detroit's weaknesses, whereas Detroit's singular offensive strength is offset by GB defensive strength. I have GB with a decided edge on both sides of the football. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? Detroit's offensive strength is throwing the football, which is GB's defensive weakness.
|
|
#3
11-20-2007, 02:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Without going into detail I have Green Bay as a very strong play this week. They are well positioned to exploit Detroit's weaknesses, whereas Detroit's singular offensive strength is offset by GB defensive strength. I have GB with a decided edge on both sides of the football. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? Detroit's offensive strength is throwing the football, which is GB's defensive weakness. [/ QUOTE ] Both marginal, but yes.
|
|
#4
11-20-2007, 03:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Without going into detail I have Green Bay as a very strong play this week. They are well positioned to exploit Detroit's weaknesses, whereas Detroit's singular offensive strength is offset by GB defensive strength. I have GB with a decided edge on both sides of the football. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? Detroit's offensive strength is throwing the football, which is GB's defensive weakness. [/ QUOTE ] Both marginal, but yes. [/ QUOTE ] When you say marginal, do you mean Detroit's passing game and GB's passing defense are marginally better and worse than average, or that Detroit's passing game and GB's passing defense is marginally better and worse than Detroit's running game and GB's rush defense respectively? If it's the former, yes, I agree. If it's the latter, then I disagree.
|
|
#6
11-20-2007, 03:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Without going into detail I have Green Bay as a very strong play this week. They are well positioned to exploit Detroit's weaknesses, whereas Detroit's singular offensive strength is offset by GB defensive strength. I have GB with a decided edge on both sides of the football. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? Detroit's offensive strength is throwing the football, which is GB's defensive weakness. [/ QUOTE ] Both marginal, but yes. [/ QUOTE ] When you say marginal, do you mean Detroit's passing game and GB's passing defense are marginally better and worse than average, or that Detroit's passing game and GB's passing defense is marginally better and worse than Detroit's running game and GB's rush defense respectively? If it's the former, yes, I agree. If it's the latter, then I disagree. [/ QUOTE ] Given DET's lack of rushing attack - GB will be able to adjust and play against the pass better than #'s would indicate. That will ultimately come down to proper coaching - but GB def is capable of shutting down both the pass and the run. Look at the DET vs. WAS game - WAS is much better vs. the run than the pass - but with a capable DEF they were able to make the adjustment and shut down DET. GB has a much more capable offense than does WASH.
|
|
#7
11-20-2007, 03:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
Thremp,
Yes, definitely. But it's no longer the #20th best offense going up against the #9th best defense. Sure, GB still has the edge since Detroit won't throw every play, but they do matchup better than if GB had a killer pass defense.
|
|
#8
11-20-2007, 03:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
[ QUOTE ]
Look at the WAS game - WAS is much better vs. the run than the pass - but with a capable DEF they were able to make the adjustment and shut down GB. [/ QUOTE ] This isn't even close to being true.
|
|
#9
11-20-2007, 03:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Without going into detail I have Green Bay as a very strong play this week. They are well positioned to exploit Detroit's weaknesses, whereas Detroit's singular offensive strength is offset by GB defensive strength. I have GB with a decided edge on both sides of the football. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? Detroit's offensive strength is throwing the football, which is GB's defensive weakness. [/ QUOTE ] Dtroit's ONLY offensive strength is throwing the fb to their WR. GB has great def backfield & has been able to control the opposition's wideouts all year. Det is not adept at protecting Kitna. GB avg almost 3 sacks per game. Lions pass for 220 YPG & 1.3 TD per game - GB give up 190 YPG & only 1.2 passing tds per game. These stats for GB while having the lead most of the season requiring teams to throw more. Det has no consistent running game & GB very good against the run - not a viable option for Det either. The 3 teams that had offensive success against GB this year utilized their TE - Det doesnt have 1. I stand by my statement.
|
|
#10
11-20-2007, 08:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: No pumpkin pie from Vegas
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Without going into detail I have Green Bay as a very strong play this week. They are well positioned to exploit Detroit's weaknesses, whereas Detroit's singular offensive strength is offset by GB defensive strength. I have GB with a decided edge on both sides of the football. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? Detroit's offensive strength is throwing the football, which is GB's defensive weakness. [/ QUOTE ] Dtroit's ONLY offensive strength is throwing the fb to their WR. GB has great def backfield & has been able to control the opposition's wideouts all year. Det is not adept at protecting Kitna. GB avg almost 3 sacks per game. Lions pass for 220 YPG & 1.3 TD per game - GB give up 190 YPG & only 1.2 passing tds per game. These stats for GB while having the lead most of the season requiring teams to throw more. Det has no consistent running game & GB very good against the run - not a viable option for Det either. The 3 teams that had offensive success against GB this year utilized their TE - Det doesnt have 1. I stand by my statement. [/ QUOTE ] Okay so the line should be Green Bay -7 right?
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
