Comparing NE, GB, and NO

[mosi]

I've seen enough of NO in a dome this year. I really think they would hang 40 on us if we make it to Indy. Fortunately, I can't see them going on the road and beating both SF and GB. Brees's arm is not strong enough to be accurate in the type of conditions he is likely to face in those venues.

You are not kidding. NO would put up close to 50+ on the Pats and GB. They are built for a dome. The big question is can they go outside and play in SF and GB?

On a side note, the Pats have now lost every type of playoff game, except one -an AFC championship game at home. I hope to god it is not this year.

 

[mgcolby]

You are not kidding. NO would put up close to 50+ on the Pats and GB. They are built for a dome. The big question is can they go outside and play in SF and GB?

On a side note, the Pats have now lost every type of playoff game, except one -an AFC championship game at home. I hope to god it is not this year.

Funny the Saints lose to the Bucs and the Rams and some how the Pats surely couldn't slow them down.

The Saints might be able to beat SF, but have little to no chance of beating the Packers in GB. However I think SF could go into GB and win. Atlanta and SF have the best chance of knocking off GB, both teams can run the ball: however SF's run game has slowed some over the past month or so.

 

[pherein]

You are not kidding. NO would put up close to 50+ on the Pats and GB. They are built for a dome. The big question is can they go outside and play in SF and GB?

I wouldn't swallow the GB myth of being afraid of going into Lambeau Field in January to soon

The Packers have lost three of their last five home playoff games at Lambeau, and their run to the Super Bowl last year was done entirely on the road. The last really ridiculous freezing bad-weather playoff game there (2007 NFC Championship game, wind chill -24 F) the Packers LOST so it's not like they're invincible when the weather is bad. Their home record playoff stat at Lambeau is just hype, padded by years of impressive wins in the 1950s and 1960s and the Ice Bowl etc. They are 2-3 at home in the playoffs in the recent era.

 

[pherein]

Funny the Saints lose to the Bucs and the Rams and some how the Pats surely couldn't slow them down.

The Saints might be able to beat SF, but have little to no chance of beating the Packers in GB. However I think SF could go into GB and win. Atlanta and SF have the best chance of knocking off GB, both teams can run the ball: however SF's run game has slowed some over the past month or so.

HUH? Falcons are a dome team like us, and have a way worse running game, how will they beat GB ? SF has a one dimensional running game and also a warm weather team with a ok QB. Just saying , saying atlanta can do it is just kind of weird. But, I'm pretty open to the giants

 

[mgcolby]

I wouldn't swallow the GB myth of being afraid of going into Lambeau Field in January to soon

The Packers have lost three of their last five home playoff games at Lambeau, and their run to the Super Bowl last year was done entirely on the road. The last really ridiculous freezing bad-weather playoff game there (2007 NFC Championship game, wind chill -24 F) the Packers LOST so it's not like they're invincible when the weather is bad. Their home record playoff stat at Lambeau is just hype, padded by years of impressive wins in the 1950s and 1960s and the Ice Bowl etc. They are 2-3 at home in the playoffs in the recent era.

Well the 2007 game was against another cold weather team. The Packers and Saints are mirror images of each other, but one plays and live in the cold and the other plays in a dome in a warm weather town.

I think the Saints can beat the Packers in a neutral warm weather site. I don't see them going on the road in January and winning against a good team in the sub zero cold. When I think of the Saints playing in January in the cold I think of the Bears game in January of 2007. But if the Packers get upset in the divisional round by the Lions or Giants/Cowboys then I think you guys will probably represent the NFC in the SB.

 

[mgcolby]

HUH? Falcons are a dome team like us, and have a way worse running game, how will they beat GB ? SF has a one dimensional running game and also a warm weather team with a ok QB. Just saying , saying atlanta can do it is just kind of weird. But, I'm pretty open to the giants

They may have worse "team" rushing stats than you guys, but your team run stats are helped by Sproles breaking long runs to the outside and running inside against two deep safeties. I don't think you guys can, or are even willing to try and line up and run the ball 25-30 times against 8 in the box. The Falcons would be able to line up and run it in between the tackles with Turner and would do it over and over again, as that is the only way they could beat them. If the Falcons got into a shootout with the Packers, they would get their ass kicked.

 

[pherein]

Well the 2007 game was against another cold weather team. The Packers and Saints are mirror images of each other, but one plays and live in the cold and the other plays in a dome in a warm weather town.

I think the Saints can beat the Packers in a neutral warm weather site. I don't see them going on the road in January and winning against a good team in the sub zero cold. When I think of the Saints playing in January in the cold I think of the Bears game in January of 2007. But if the Packers get upset in the divisional round by the Lions or Giants/Cowboys then I think you guys will probably represent the NFC in the SB.

yeah but it won't be sub zero, it hasn't been for ages, and we are not mirror image of each other. Saints have a good run game, better OL, and our defense is playing better. Im not saying your wrong, that we can't win that game, but our offense has way more tools than GB. They rely on Rogers to heavily.
They will have to pass, and can't run on us. We can run and pass on them.

I really hope they don't get upset, we really want a shot at them.

 

[pherein]

They may have worse "team" rushing stats than you guys, but your team run stats are helped by Sproles breaking long runs to the outside and running inside against two deep safeties. I don't think you guys can, or are even willing to try and line up and run the ball 25-30 times against 8 in the box. The Falcons would be able to line up and run it in between the tackles with Turner and would do it over and over again, as that is the only way they could beat them. If the Falcons got into a shootout with the Packers, they would get their ass kicked.

No, thats not true at all. Thomas has no problem running against GB, and our OL had no problem opening holes on their DL. Watch the 1st game we played.
Our problem was using a rookie like ingram against them, he didn't do well and wasted TOP. Yes, I think anyone can run vs GB,lol, but seriously the falcons ?
they would get killed. We learned long ago with the falcons, kill turner the team dies. We are 10-2 vs the falcons. Ryan is a route passer, you knock his WR off he struggles.
GB will just watch our tape and it will be a very short game.

 

[mgcolby]

yeah but it won't be sub zero, it hasn't been for ages, and we are not mirror image of each other. Saints have a good run game, better OL, and our defense is playing better. Im not saying your wrong, that we can't win that game, but our offense has way more tools than GB. They rely on Rogers to heavily.
They will have to pass, and can't run on us. We can run and pass on them.

It was sub zero in 2007.

IMO, you are mirror images of each other. Heavy pass to run ratio. Defense that allows a lot of yards, and average in PPG allowed etc... You do have a better O-line, especially since their OT's started dropping like flies. I don't agree that your defense is playing better, I think you are about the same giving GB a slight edge for being better in the turnover department. You are both allowing about the same in the run game 4.7 YPC for GB and 4.8 YPC for NO. Green Bay has allowed more yards, but have had more attempts against.

Rely to heavily on Rodgers? The Saints have thrown 624 passes compared to 508 for GB. Rushing attempts is 396 (NO) to 371 (GB), NO averages 4.8 yards per carry and GB averages 4.0.

I think you could run on them to a degree, but not the way you would need to in order to beat them in a bad weather game. If it is a balmy 45 degrees in GB, then I think you could win. But I don't think Brees will be able to out duel Rodgers in a crappy winter day in Packerland.

 

[mgcolby]

No, thats not true at all. Thomas has no problem running against GB, and our OL had no problem opening holes on their DL. Watch the 1st game we played.
Our problem was using a rookie like ingram against them, he didn't do well and wasted TOP. Yes, I think anyone can run vs GB,lol, but seriously the falcons ?
they would get killed. We learned long ago with the falcons, kill turner the team dies. We are 10-2 vs the falcons. Ryan is a route passer, you knock his WR off he struggles.
GB will just watch our tape and it will be a very short game.

I think you are missing my point. I give the Falcons a chance because they would be willing to pound the ball in an attempt to keep the ball out of Rodgers hands. And would put the onus on GB's rush defense, and they have enough fire power in the passing game to take advantage of the GB secondary if they over commit to the run. It would take the Falcons to play mistake free and convert some plays in the passing game, but I think they could upset them. As I said before if they get into a shootout with Rodgers its over.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

It was sub zero in 2007.

IMO, you are mirror images of each other. Heavy pass to run ratio. Defense that allows a lot of yards, and average in PPG allowed etc... You do have a better O-line, especially since their OT's started dropping like flies. I don't agree that your defense is playing better, I think you are about the same giving GB a slight edge for being better in the turnover department. You are both allowing about the same in the run game 4.7 YPC for GB and 4.8 YPC for NO. Green Bay has allowed more yards, but have had more attempts against.

Rely to heavily on Rodgers? The Saints have thrown 624 passes compared to 508 for GB. Rushing attempts is 396 (NO) to 371 (GB), NO averages 4.8 yards per carry and GB averages 4.0.

I think you could run on them to a degree, but not the way you would need to in order to beat them in a bad weather game. If it is a balmy 45 degrees in GB, then I think you could win. But I don't think Brees will be able to out duel Rodgers in a crappy winter day in Packerland.

Based on the games I save seen, New Orleans pass attack can be adapted to the cold easily. Graham, Sproles, and the other RB's are all competent threats.

If it's freezing, the Saints should double Jennings/Nelson and make the other
guys beat them.

If that game comes to fruitition, it will be decided on turnovers.

 

[mgcolby]

Based on the games I save seen, New Orleans pass attack can be adapted to the cold easily. Graham, Sproles, and the other RB's are all competent threats.

If it's freezing, the Saints should double Jennings/Nelson and make the other
guys beat them.

If that game comes to fruitition, it will be decided on turnovers.

Anything is possible. But I think GB beats NO if they meet in the NFCC and the weather is crappy, just one man's opinion.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Based on the games I save seen, New Orleans pass attack can be adapted to the cold easily. Graham, Sproles, and the other RB's are all competent threats.

If it's freezing, the Saints should double Jennings/Nelson and make the other
guys beat them.

If that game comes to fruitition, it will be decided on turnovers.

Agree 100%. GB might have a more defensive talent as they tend to pick off a bunch of passes but I think NO has a little more talent offensively (if that is possible). Both coaches are outstanding. Home field will play a factor but as you say, NOs offense is diversified enough so that they can run the ball effectively and throw short passes so that there is the opportunity for RaC.

How Jennings comes back from his MCL injury I think is pretty important for GB. He had 7 catches vs NO in the Week 1 match-up and was clearly a favored option vs NO's CBs.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Anything is possible. But I think GB beats NO if they meet in the NFCC and the weather is crappy, just one man's opinion.

It's extremely possible.

The flip side is these "pressure" oriented defenses seem to be too one dimensional and predictable. The Saints would probably best served to think up something creative.

My guess is that the turnovers deciding the game will be game plan based not individual talent based.

This game could be the ultimate chess match.

 

[ivanvamp]

It's extremely possible.

The flip side is these "pressure" oriented defenses seem to be too one dimensional and predictable. The Saints would probably best served to think up something creative.

My guess is that the turnovers deciding the game will be game plan based not individual talent based.

This game could be the ultimate chess match.

I really, really want to see this game happen. It will be phenomenal. NO-GB and Pit-NE would be the best matchups.

Actually, at least according to reputations, NO-GB and Pit-Bal would be the best. NFC = offense; AFC = defense.

(of course I want NE in there no matter what)

 

[RobertWeathers]

I really, really want to see this game happen. It will be phenomenal. NO-GB and Pit-NE would be the best matchups.

Actually, at least according to reputations, NO-GB and Pit-Bal would be the best. NFC = offense; AFC = defense.

(of course I want NE in there no matter what)

A NE vs NYJ AFCCG match-up will surely test the compute and storage capacity of Ian's Patsfans.com platform let along the nervous system of everyone who is a member of this board.

 

[ExpatPack]

yeah but it won't be sub zero, it hasn't been for ages, and we are not mirror image of each other. Saints have a good run game, better OL, and our defense is playing better. Im not saying your wrong, that we can't win that game, but our offense has way more tools than GB. They rely on Rogers to heavily.
They will have to pass, and can't run on us. We can run and pass on them.

I really hope they don't get upset, we really want a shot at them.

Seems like every Saints fan I run into thinks it's a done deal already, that NO is just gonna come up to Lambeau after steamrolling whoever else they play the first two weeks, where they will play just as brilliantly as if they were at home, and stomp the Packers because they're just so much better.

Well there's a lot of football to be played yet before any meeting in Lambeau. . .

Saints' defense is playing better--against the run, but against the pass they are every bit as vulnerable as the Pats or the Packers, even more than the Packers in some cases. NO likes to blitz a lot as a way of getting pressure on the QB and try to force the QB to hurry his throws and make mistakes. That strategy has a very good chance of backfiring against a Rodgers or a Brady, 2 QBs that are among the very very best at reading the blitz and making adjustments. A lot of blitzing by the Saints on 3rd down (assuming they both end up in the NFC champsionship game) and Rodgers will likely smoke them.

Yes, the NO OL has been better, but the GB OL played very well against the Bears and their two starting tackles, Bulaga and Clifton are due back, so the OL is probably going to be in a lot better shape come playoff time.

Hey, Saints are a beast and have as good a chance at making the SB as anyone, but it's not like teams aren't going to be able to make adjustments before the playoffs. Packers are getting about 4 or 5 key players back--Jennings, Bulaga, Clifton, Starks, and Pickett, not to mention Bishop, their #1 tackler. Some will play against the Lions, most of whom will sit. That isn't a guarantee, but that could sure change a lot when Jan 14 rolls around.

 

[DarrylS]

it seems to me that these three teams are almost identical in almost all categories except:

rushing offense
defense
T.O.P

NO has the best running game, NE has a minor run game, and GB does not have one

whereares NO is the more complete defense, the GB pass defense is no joke, where areas the NE team has NO strength on the defense

both GB and NO have some really nice T.O.P numbers, we do not, NE seems to barely have the ball....

from these i would say GB and NO are about equal, and NE is a half step below them

but no team has been as hot as NE, and no team has gone through as much as NE....plus i predicted NE to win it all so....

what the stats dont show is this: we have the best out of the three amazing coaches....where McCarthy and Peyton are incredible coaches, our is GOAT

we have the best of the three QB's and by far the most clutch of the three, not because of what they lack, but because of what Brady has in such excess

and we have the hunger more than either of those two teams....GB won it last year, NO a couple of years ago.....we have not won a PO game since 07.....we will not lose, stats be damned

Beautifully written, brings a tear to the eye.. I believe

 

[LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady]

I think the Saints will be playing in the sunshine vs. 49ers' where the niners offense will likely keep Brees off the field, resulting in a NO loss, and then the niners will get embarrassed by the Patriots in the SB.

The Patriots defense are the worse out of the 3, but NO and GB defenses are terrible as well, just a pinch better than NE's. NE and GB have the huge TO's because the opposing QBs are either plain garbage to start with or playing catch up, so it's easier to get the INTs, but other than that they look awful on the field. NO's defense looks just as bad they just don't have the TOs and they face awful QBs so of course, no-one's getting much yardage on them, but they suck too.

 

[ivanvamp]

A NE vs NYJ AFCCG match-up will surely test the compute and storage capacity of Ian's Patsfans.com platform let along the nervous system of everyone who is a member of this board.

LOL. I agree. For that reason alone I'm not sure I want that game to happen.