NFL 2008 Season Week 14 Picks

Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2018 Season Super Bowl Picks.

Jeremy's PicksMatt's PicksJon's PicksSarah's Picks
Raiders 7 @ Chargers 34
Final
Thu, 12/4/08 7:15pm
0 Picks - 0% 16 Picks - 100%
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Falcons 25 @ Saints 29
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 12:00pm
11 Picks - 58% 8 Picks - 42%
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Saints
Saints
Falcons
Falcons
Vikings 20 @ Lions 16
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 12:00pm
16 Picks - 84% 3 Picks - 16%
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Bengals 3 @ Colts 35
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 12:00pm
0 Picks - 0% 19 Picks - 100%
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Browns 9 @ Titans 28
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 12:00pm
1 Pick - 5% 18 Picks - 95%
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Texans 24 @ Packers 21
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 12:00pm
1 Pick - 5% 18 Picks - 95%
Packers
Packers
Texans
Texans
Packers
Packers
Packers
Packers
Jaguars 10 @ Bears 23
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 12:00pm
5 Picks - 26% 14 Picks - 74%
Bears
Bears
Jaguars
Jaguars
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Eagles 20 @ Giants 14
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 12:00pm
3 Picks - 16% 16 Picks - 84%
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Dolphins 16 @ Bills 3
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 3:05pm
13 Picks - 68% 6 Picks - 32%
Bills
Bills
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Chiefs 17 @ Broncos 24
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 3:05pm
2 Picks - 11% 17 Picks - 89%
Broncos
Broncos
Chiefs
Chiefs
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Jets 14 @ 49ers 24
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 3:05pm
19 Picks - 100% 0 Picks - 0%
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Patriots 24 @ Seahawks 21
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 3:05pm
18 Picks - 95% 1 Pick - 5%
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Cowboys 13 @ Steelers 20
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 3:15pm
6 Picks - 32% 13 Picks - 68%
Steelers
Steelers
Cowboys
Cowboys
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Rams 10 @ Cardinals 34
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 3:15pm
0 Picks - 0% 19 Picks - 100%
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Redskins 10 @ Ravens 24
Final
Sun, 12/7/08 7:15pm
5 Picks - 26% 14 Picks - 74%
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Buccaneers 23 @ Panthers 38
Final
Mon, 12/8/08 7:30pm
6 Picks - 30% 14 Picks - 70%
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Week Record11 - 5
0.688
10 - 6
0.625
13 - 3
0.812
First Place
12 - 4
0.750
Season Record137 - 70
0.662
138 - 69
0.667
133 - 74
0.642
136 - 71
0.657
Scotttime Record469 - 272
0.633
449 - 292
0.606
459 - 282
0.619
467 - 274
0.630
No-Pack-Vike Record2516 - 1476
0.630
2447 - 1545
0.613
2530 - 1462
0.634
2492 - 1500
0.624
Lifetime Record1146 - 662
0.634
1060 - 748
0.586
1129 - 679
0.624
1126 - 682
0.623
click me!
Other Nut Canner Picks
scott.jpg
Chargers
Saints
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Jaguars
Eagles
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Panthers

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:135 - 72
0.652
Lifetime:472 - 269
0.637
2887.gif
Chargers
Saints
Lions
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Panthers

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:133 - 74
0.642
Lifetime:456 - 284
0.616
images.jpg
Chargers
Saints
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Jaguars
Giants
Bills
Chiefs
Jets
Seahawks
Cowboys
Cardinals
Redskins
Buccaneers

Week:6 - 10
0.375
Season:123 - 83
0.597
Lifetime:449 - 287
0.610
face.bmp
Chargers
Saints
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Buccaneers

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:129 - 78
0.623
Lifetime:298 - 176
0.629
flower .jpg
OAK @ LAC - No Pick
Falcons
Vikings
Colts
Browns
Packers
Jaguars
Eagles
Bills
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Buccaneers

Week:8 - 7
0.533
Season:112 - 94
0.544
Lifetime:276 - 197
0.584
IMG_3063[1].jpg
Chargers
Saints
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Panthers

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:124 - 83
0.599
Lifetime:260 - 170
0.605
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpg
Chargers
Falcons
Lions
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Cowboys
Cardinals
Ravens
Panthers

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:129 - 78
0.623
Lifetime:251 - 161
0.609
100_0732.JPG
Chargers
Falcons
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Cowboys
Cardinals
Ravens
Buccaneers

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:134 - 72
0.650
Lifetime:278 - 133
0.676
pyzamOmgWtf.jpg
Chargers
Saints
Lions
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Bills
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Panthers

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:118 - 69
0.631
Lifetime:208 - 128
0.619
070809_romo2_vmed_8p.widec.jpg
Chargers
Falcons
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Cowboys
Cardinals
Redskins
Panthers

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:129 - 77
0.626
Lifetime:230 - 127
0.644
me.jpg
OAK @ LAC - No Pick
Falcons
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Eagles
Bills
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Redskins
Panthers

Week:10 - 5
0.667
Season:120 - 69
0.635
Lifetime:205 - 120
0.631
Davis Anthony 2007.JPG
OAK @ LAC - No Pick
Falcons
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Jaguars
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Panthers

Week:10 - 5
0.667
Season:89 - 58
0.605
Lifetime:163 - 107
0.604
question_mark.gif
Chargers
Falcons
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Bills
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Ravens
Buccaneers

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:137 - 70
0.662
Lifetime:225 - 105
0.682
gove.jpg
Chargers
Saints
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Steelers
Cardinals
Redskins
Panthers

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:116 - 58
0.667
Lifetime:116 - 58
0.667
picture07.bmp
Chargers
Falcons
Vikings
Colts
Titans
Packers
Bears
Giants
Dolphins
Broncos
Jets
Patriots
Cowboys
Cardinals
Redskins
Buccaneers

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:125 - 65
0.658
Lifetime:125 - 65
0.658
blonde_gleam.gif
OAK @ LAC - No Pick
ATL @ NO - No Pick
MIN @ DET - No Pick
CIN @ IND - No Pick
CLE @ TEN - No Pick
HOU @ GB - No Pick
JAC @ CHI - No Pick
PHI @ NYG - No Pick
MIA @ BUF - No Pick
KC @ DEN - No Pick
NYJ @ SF - No Pick
NE @ SEA - No Pick
DAL @ PIT - No Pick
LA @ ARI - No Pick
WAS @ BAL - No Pick
Panthers

Week:1 - 0
1.000
Season:97 - 48
0.669
Lifetime:97 - 48
0.669
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

Raiders 7 @ Chargers 34

matt.jpg
Matt
Raiders....Chargers....the NFL on NFL.
jon.jpg
Jon
San Diego on reputation alone, right?
jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
Saying this season has been a disappointment to the Chargers is a bit of an understatement.

Vikings 20 @ Lions 16

sarah.jpg
Sarah
This'll be the week. The Vikings beat the Lions because of a foolish safety. C'mon Lions do something already!
matt.jpg
Matt
Well, it looks like Jimmy Kleinsasser is off the hook (for this week at least).
jon.jpg
Jon
Daunte!
jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
If you're a betting man bet the farm on the Lions. In fact, tell them they can keep the points, you want the Lions straight up. This is the exact kind of game the Vikings always lose.

Though I would like to add that the "Worst team ever" discussion surrounding the Lions is a little ridiculous. I'm not even so sure they're the worst team of 2008. The Lions have had a string of bad luck, and have held on to some games with some pretty good teams. Does barely sneaking a W into the column really make all those other pathetic teams that much better? Hell, the Chiefs and Raiders get to play each other twice, someone has to win those.

Texans 24 @ Packers 21

sarah.jpg
Sarah
The Packers have been less than stellar this season. A steady decline into suckiness.
matt.jpg
Matt
I like the Texans. Houston 37 - Green Bay 21.
jon.jpg
Jon
This is a must-win game for any team who wants to win this game.
jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
Go Texans! Apparently the Packers pass defense is only good until you start trying to pass the ball.

Patriots 24 @ Seahawks 21

sarah.jpg
Sarah
This looks like an interesting game..... maybe 3 years ago
matt.jpg
Matt
Matt Cassel is the worst Greatest QB ever.
jon.jpg
Jon
Matt Hasselbeck probably won't play. Otherwise this could have been called CasselBeck I.
jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
Use coupon code "30VS1" to receive 50% off your next game comment.

Buccaneers 23 @ Panthers 38

sarah.jpg
Sarah
AFC South is on fi-ah.
matt.jpg
Matt
Both these teams are good, but I don't really care about this game all that much.
jon.jpg
Jon
South Carolina vs. St. Petersburg!!!!
jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
A late, meaningful, game between to good division opponents? This isn't the MNF we've come to know and love. Was the Dolphins/Bills smackdown not available?
question_mark.gifjay6666
12/02/2008 @ 04:02:42 PM
 Quote this comment
Last time I'm picking the Packers!!!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
avatar2345.jpgPackOne - 1528 Posts
12/02/2008 @ 04:17:24 PM
 Quote this comment
The Vikings defensive line has just been suspended.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/02/2008 @ 05:13:48 PM
 Quote this comment
What a crock of shit. Could the NFL's system be anymore screwed up? Plaxico Burress faces 3.5 years minimum jail time and will likely finish out the season. Matt Jones was busted with cocaine. Players get in fights all the time, beat their wives all the time, and some have hurt and killed people. Hell Bryant McKinnie had to be arrested 234 times before it warranted a 4 game suspension. Now you're suspending a group of guys 4 games for taking a substance that contains trace amounts of a substance that could be used, in copious amounts only, to mask steroids, even though there is absolutely no actual allegation of steroid use? On top of all that, you're going to drag your feet on this and sandbag the players with a 4 game suspension with 4 games to go?

The language is clear, these players broke the rules. The language, however, is stupid, the rule, moronic, and the NFL's priorities are so far out of whack it's sickening. The language is also a complete and utter "cover our asses" cop-out so the NFL can do things like withhold information that could help protect players health, or for that matter, outright lie to players, and still go "Well, it doesn't matter what we do, you need to read the fine print, sucker."
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 3 times, last at 12/02/2008 5:25:44 pm
flower .jpgPackOne - 1528 Posts
12/02/2008 @ 05:38:28 PM
 Quote this comment
Didn't the players appeal first?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - 2078 Posts
12/02/2008 @ 07:32:21 PM
 Quote this comment
They appealed last week Tues or Wed in New York. DENIED
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - So's your face
12/02/2008 @ 07:34:37 PM
 Quote this comment
"Angelo Wright, the agent for Pat Williams, said he planned to file a motion in federal court in the next 24 hours, presumably to put off his client's suspension. Tom Condon, the agent for Kevin Williams, said he hadn't yet determined what course of action to take."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3740122

It aint over 'til it's over.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
avatar2345.jpgPackOne - Non-Creator
12/02/2008 @ 10:45:26 PM
 Quote this comment
Sarah Wrote - Today @ 07:34:37 PM
"Angelo Wright, the agent for Pat Williams, said he planned to file a motion in federal court in the next 24 hours, presumably to put off his client's suspension. Tom Condon, the agent for Kevin Williams, said he hadn't yet determined what course of action to take." http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3740122 It aint over 'til it's over.


From what I hear, it's over.

Example: http://tinyurl.com/5cjjgw
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
IMG_3063[1].jpgjthompto - 209 Posts
12/03/2008 @ 07:00:39 AM
 Quote this comment
Well the player from Atlanta, Grady Jackson, has had his suspsension delayed and another player who was already suspended is in the process of suing to regain his salary. So I don't think it's over just yet. I think the only reason the NFL is takign such a hard stance on this is because it went public so long ago. So we can all blame Jay Glazer and his sources deep inside the league for leaking the information. If it was confidential like these tests are supose to be, the NFL could have taken the time to make sure they made the right ruling.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - A Vote for me is a Vote against Terrorism! ...or atleast just wasted.
12/03/2008 @ 07:31:18 AM
 Quote this comment
How is the rest of the Vike season? How screwed are they if they're both out the rest of the year?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/03/2008 @ 08:43:23 AM
 Quote this comment
Realistically they just need to beat the lions and then win one game against the Falcons, Cardinals, or Giants (who might have nothing to play for)

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/0-6-257/Impact--Vikings-still-have-fair-shot-at-title.html
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
12/03/2008 @ 12:59:43 PM
 Quote this comment
Man, now I'm conflicted. I've been rooting hard for the Lions to pull off 0-16, but it would be huge for the Packers if the Lions could beat the Vikings. Given that Culpepper is going to tell the defensive coaches everything he knows about the Vikings offense, I'm switching my pick.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
IMG_0311_edited.JPGzndstage
12/03/2008 @ 01:04:56 PM
 Quote this comment
Who's keeping the stats on the Titans? I do believe they are no longer undefeated or amI missing something?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - www.digi.com
12/03/2008 @ 01:05:27 PM
 Quote this comment
Alex Wrote - Today @ 12:59:43 PM
Man, now I'm conflicted. I've been rooting hard for the Lions to pull off 0-16, but it would be huge for the Packers if the Lions could beat the Vikings. Given that Culpepper is going to tell the defensive coaches everything he knows about the Vikings offense, I'm switching my pick.


Hlarious!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Super Chocolate Bear
12/03/2008 @ 01:12:12 PM
 Quote this comment
Yeah, if the Vikings lose to the 0-12 Lions, again, it will have little, if nothing, to do with Daunte spilling the beans about a different system with different coaches. Hell, Daunte wasn't even teammates with half the starters, so he can't even spill the beans on "personal" things like "Adrian has severe OCD, sneeze on him and he'll immediately do down and leave the game for 10 minutes to go shower."
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 12/03/2008 1:12:51 pm
face.bmpCarlos44ec - "The tallest blade of grass is the first to be cut by the lawnmower."
12/03/2008 @ 01:16:16 PM
 Quote this comment
AP does that? What a wierdo!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - I believe virtually everything I read.
12/03/2008 @ 01:16:35 PM
 Quote this comment
zndstage Wrote - Today @ 01:04:56 PM
Who's keeping the stats on the Titans? I do believe they are no longer undefeated or amI missing something?


I'm not sure what's going on there. I'll look into it later.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
matt.jpgMatt - Ombudsman
12/03/2008 @ 07:21:35 PM
 Quote this comment
A judge issued a temporary restraining order on the suspensions until he can hear further arguments in the case, so it looks like they may be able to play this Sunday (unless he hears the arguments and rules by then).

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3743006
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Matt edited this at 12/03/2008 7:21:57 pm
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - Washington Bureau Chief
12/03/2008 @ 07:24:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Of course, this could backfire if the suspensions are delayed a week or two and then the players' argument is rejected. Then they may end up missing playoff games.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - How do you use these things?
12/03/2008 @ 08:11:16 PM
 Quote this comment
Matt Wrote - Today @ 07:24:57 PM
Of course, this could backfire if the suspensions are delayed a week or two and then the players' argument is rejected. Then they may end up missing playoff games.


I think they'll miss the playoffs regardless of their suspensions.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 3 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/03/2008 @ 10:48:23 PM
 Quote this comment
Obviously this is all speculation, but I've read these suspensions only apply to regular season games. I guess that would mean the Vikings would be without them for week one 2009 as well. Which means get ready for another week 1 Packer-Viking game.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 12/03/2008 10:48:42 pm
IMG_3063[1].jpgjthompto
12/04/2008 @ 06:57:41 AM
 Quote this comment
I am starting the feeling that there is no way to beat the big bad NFL on this one. They might as well take the suspensions and try to win 2 games without them. I haven't heard anything about playoff games not counting.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - Knuckle Sammich
12/04/2008 @ 07:40:50 AM
 Quote this comment
I'm taking a sideline on this issue. I don't care too much about the outcome, but it's interesting to watch the drama unfold.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - You had me at "Hello"
12/04/2008 @ 08:12:41 AM
 Quote this comment
I need help with my college picks. I'm in the semifinals in my office pool, and 1, 2, 3 get paid while 4 gets nothing. NFL I have pretty well down, but can you help here?

Pittsburgh at Connecticut- picked PITS
E Carolina at Tulsa- picked Tulsa
Navy at Army- ARMY!!!
BC at VT- VT
Bama at FLA- FLA
USC UCLA- USC, but the intrawebs claim UCLA may upset!
Missouri at Oklahoma- OK
AZ State at AZ- AZ wildcats
S. Florida at W VA- WVA
CInci at Hawaii- Cinci

then... this one sucks- FCS Div I AA PLayoffs:
Weber State at Montana
New Hampsh at N Iowa
Richmond at Appalachian St
Villanova at James Madison.

Any help or commentary is BEGGED FOR especially in the FCS crap.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
question_mark.gifjay6666 - 29 Posts
12/04/2008 @ 08:46:39 AM
 Quote this comment
Cmon now if you really think the Lions will win...you really are a nutcan.. I can probably run 100 yrds on the Lions. AP will have 2 maybe 3 td's himself. The Viking's D will still punish Detriot!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/04/2008 @ 09:39:34 AM
 Quote this comment
Playoff Situationizer

Edit: If you assign by Offense a scenario plays out where the Packers take the Division at 8-8 and host the 11-5 Falcons. Talk about a nightmare for the NFL. And if you swap the Packers/Bears game there's a scenario that has the Vikings taking it at 8-8.

Edit again: Though neither is as bad as this: Raiders at 7-9!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Jeremy edited this 3 times, last at 12/04/2008 9:44:37 am
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - A Vote for me is a Vote against Terrorism! ...or atleast just wasted.
12/04/2008 @ 09:59:15 AM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 09:39:34 AM
Playoff Situationizer Edit: If you assign by Offense a scenario plays out where the Packers take the Division at 8-8 and host the 11-5 Falcons. Talk about a nightmare for the NFL. And if you swap the Packers/Bears game there's a scenario that has the Vikings taking it at 8-8. Edit again: Though neither is as bad as this: Raiders at 7-9!


That just took too much of my work time. Good toy though
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
12/04/2008 @ 01:09:23 PM
 Quote this comment
jay6666 Wrote - Today @ 08:46:39 AM
Cmon now if you really think the Lions will win...you really are a nutcan.. I can probably run 100 yrds on the Lions. AP will have 2 maybe 3 td's himself. The Viking's D will still punish Detriot!


It was 12-10 last time, and Orlovsky won't be in there to spot them 2 points again.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/04/2008 @ 01:30:22 PM
 Quote this comment
Alex Wrote - Today @ 01:09:23 PM
jay6666 Wrote - Today @ 08:46:39 AM
Cmon now if you really think the Lions will win...you really are a nutcan.. I can probably run 100 yrds on the Lions. AP will have 2 maybe 3 td's himself. The Viking's D will still punish Detriot!


It was 12-10 last time, and Orlovsky won't be in there to spot them 2 points again.


They doubled up the Lions in yards, they just kept turning the ball over and getting killer penalties. In fact, the only reason they were in position for Orlovsky to forget where he was was that Adrian coughed up the ball on like the 5 with a lot of daylight ahead of him.

(Though to be fair, they were also put in position to win on a questionable penalty, though there was still plenty of time for them to go win it themselves, thought I have my doubts they would have.)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 12/04/2008 1:39:26 pm
matt.jpgMatt - 3354 Posts
12/04/2008 @ 03:08:34 PM
 Quote this comment


I guess you have to ask yourself which is worth more, the office pool, or your loyalty to the Army, because Navy is going to win the game.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - www.digi.com
12/04/2008 @ 03:33:53 PM
 Quote this comment
Matt Wrote - Today @ 03:08:34 PM
I guess you have to ask yourself which is worth more, the office pool, or your loyalty to the Army, because Navy is going to win the game.


I have been served with reality. Thank you.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
flower .jpgPackOne - She's got the whole wide world singing baby's song.
12/04/2008 @ 03:51:15 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 10:48:23 PM
Obviously this is all speculation, but I've read these suspensions only apply to regular season games. I guess that would mean the Vikings would be without them for week one 2009 as well. Which means get ready for another week 1 Packer-Viking game.


Case will be heard and decided tomorrow afternoon in federal court. With a non-Minnesota judge.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
matt.jpgMatt - Washington Bureau Chief
12/05/2008 @ 03:15:29 PM
 Quote this comment
Judge blocks the suspensions of the five players while he considers the arguments.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3747957

So, it looks like they will play this Sunday at least.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
avatar2345.jpgPackOne - 1528 Posts
12/06/2008 @ 11:29:38 AM
 Quote this comment
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - 3354 Posts
12/06/2008 @ 11:53:36 PM
 Quote this comment
Carlos44ec Wrote - 12/04/2008 @ 03:33:53 PM
Matt Wrote - 12/04/2008 @ 03:08:34 PM
I guess you have to ask yourself which is worth more, the office pool, or your loyalty to the Army, because Navy is going to win the game.
I have been served with reality. Thank you.


Hopefully you went with Navy because they crushed Army 34-0.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
IMG_3063[1].jpgjthompto - 209 Posts
12/07/2008 @ 09:30:02 AM
 Quote this comment
Just so you guys know, the Patriots-Seahawks game was flexed out of sunday night. So no reason to comment on it. You should have been commenting on Ravens-Redskins instead.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - So's your face
12/07/2008 @ 03:54:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Favre = rushing TDs, Rodgers = just learned how to throw yesterday
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
flower .jpgPackOne - Sit down your rockin' the boat.
12/07/2008 @ 06:08:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Favre = sucked it up a hell of alot more than Rodgers lately.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - How do you use these things?
12/07/2008 @ 06:25:13 PM
 Quote this comment
PackOne Wrote - Today @ 06:08:57 PM
Favre = sucked it up a hell of alot more than Rodgers lately.


Did you watch the game? I watched both, and while Favre did not have a great game, Rodgers overthrew everyone and the passes he did complete were because our WRs are awesome-o.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
avatar2345.jpgPackOne - 1528 Posts
12/07/2008 @ 08:39:22 PM
 Quote this comment
I watched both too. Rodgers had a QB rating of over 104 today. They both threw a pick and Rodgers threw a touchdown. Rodgers also threw for twice as many yards, and Favre got a gimme two yarder which he barely made.

Rodgers chucked one of the the most perfect deep balls you will ever see into double coverage and directly into the hands of Greg Jennings. You can't overthrow everyone and have a QB rating over 100. Which coincidentally is higher then Big Bens, Cassel, and Romo to name just a few this week.

The Packers defense is horrendous. They cannot stop anyone. This has nothing to do with an Aaron Rodgers vs. Brett Favre (perhaps the third best acquisition this off-season for the Jets) argument.

Kind of as a side note, I find it funny they are our WR's when they are awesome, but not our QB. Seems to me that that would be a blanket word if used.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
PackOne edited this at 12/07/2008 8:45:39 pm
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
12/08/2008 @ 07:29:21 AM
 Quote this comment
I'll go out on a limb and say that Rodgers has not been the problem this season.

Anyway, it's high time the Packers just start preparing for the draft.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - 2078 Posts
12/08/2008 @ 09:47:52 AM
 Quote this comment
Matt Wrote - 12/06/2008 @ 11:53:36 PM
Carlos44ec Wrote - 12/04/2008 @ 03:33:53 PM
Matt Wrote - 12/04/2008 @ 03:08:34 PM
I guess you have to ask yourself which is worth more, the office pool, or your loyalty to the Army, because Navy is going to win the game.
I have been served with reality. Thank you.
Hopefully you went with Navy because they crushed Army 34-0.


I followed your advice and am sitting pretty.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/08/2008 @ 09:54:05 AM
 Quote this comment
The team was 13-3 last year and basically everyone, minus one big name, returned and now you're looking at having to win out to not have a losing record. Either you think the Packers over-performed last season, or Rodgers is a large part of the problem.

It's not like the game is played in a vacuum. Maybe your offensive line always looked so good before because that extra second Rodgers holds the ball makes all the difference in the world. Maybe your defense wasn't that good last year, but it's easy when you're playing with a bunch of leads. Maybe Ryan Grant put up so many yards down the stretch last season because teams were lined up in their nickle to stop Favre. Just because it's a different area of the team doesn't mean it isn't traceable back to something Rodgers did or Favre would have done.

The fact that Rodgers puts up decent numbers is somewhat irrelevant, for whatever reason a QB's numbers aren't a terribly good way of predicting wins and losses.

Now, if you're pointing to THE problem it's probably that your defense has given up 1300 yards of offense since beating up the Bears. However, many of these games are still close, and if you STILL think the Packers wouldn't be better with Favre in there you are a crazy person who needs to tear the green IV drip out of their arm. Every time Matt, Jon, and I flipped over to the game for a couple minutes during Viking commercials we either saw the Texans doing everything possible to lose the game, or Rodgers overthrowing a wide open receiver. You really don't think the Packers are a handful of yards here, another first down there, better off with Favre? Because that's really what a a lot of close games come down to.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this 2 times, last at 12/08/2008 9:58:28 am
IMG_3063[1].jpgjthompto
12/08/2008 @ 01:14:23 PM
 Quote this comment
I'll agree with the Packer fans that A-rod is not the reason they are 5-8 this season. But I would have to think the record might be a little better with Favre at the helm. The Packers made the move to their young guy and I think it was reasonable to think they would take a step back before stepping forward.

It's probably a good thing for the Packers that the Jets have lost 2 in a row. Because if the Jets were 10-3 right now, everybody would be all over them for not keeping Favre.

I really don't like the QB rating stat that much when measuring the skill of a QB. Tavaris Jackson had a 143 rating yesterday.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - 2078 Posts
12/08/2008 @ 01:18:31 PM
 Quote this comment
could be a mental glitch. well, that and they were overrated last year.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/08/2008 @ 02:49:04 PM
 Quote this comment
jthompto Wrote - Today @ 01:14:23 PM
The Packers made the move to their young guy and I think it was reasonable to think they would take a step back before stepping forward.


Yes, that would be reasonable. Actually, it would be unreasonable to think there wouldn't be a drop off. The argument is: Would the 2008 Packers be better off than 5-8 with Favre at the helm? There are many packer fans out there who seem to have convinced themselves not, which is silly to me.

Would they be 12-1 with Favre? No.
Is it even fair to compare them? No.
Isn't Rodgers allowed a certain amount of leeway? Yes

None of that means it's not also fair to conclude that they would be better off, this year, with Favre. Which also doesn't mean the move was wrong or not for the long term. Just don't sit there with a straight face and pretend Favre would have this team sitting at 5-8 right now.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - 2078 Posts
12/08/2008 @ 03:18:15 PM
 Quote this comment
oh, FYI I made it too the finals for the office pool- guaranteed 50 bucks, if I win it, 100.

how much "hookers and blow" can a guy get with a "c-note"?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on?
12/08/2008 @ 03:22:24 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:54:05 AM
You really don't think the Packers are a handful of yards here, another first down there, better off with Favre? Because that's really what a a lot of close games come down to.

I've been told we need to strike these comments from the record. This is the rule, not the exception, apparently.

the packers have given away leads or ties late in the 4th qtr in at least 4 games. That is on the defense.

The Packers run defense is horrible. Every packer writer is attributing this seasons' woes to the defense and some pretty conservative play calling in key times. Would Favre have the Packers in a better position? Maybe. Is Rodgers to blame for the poor record. Absolutely not.

Also, the team has seemed to lack any sort of passion from the head coach down to the ball boy. They just didn't have the fire that we're used to seeing.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
matt.jpgMatt - Ombudsman
12/08/2008 @ 03:25:04 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:22:24 PM
Also, the team has seemed to lack any sort of passion from the head coach down to the ball boy. They just didn't have the fire that we're used to seeing.


I think it's because A-Rod just isn't a gamer. emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
Matt screwed with this at 12/08/2008 3:29:22 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - As Seen On The Internet
12/08/2008 @ 03:43:34 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:22:24 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 09:54:05 AM
You really don't think the Packers are a handful of yards here, another first down there, better off with Favre? Because that's really what a a lot of close games come down to.

I've been told we need to strike these comments from the record. This is the rule, not the exception, apparently.


Jon declared statements like about your team being a few plays from 3 more wins or whatever "illegal" because any team, even the Lions, could say that. This isn't really that situation, not every team sent a hall of fame QB packing a few months after taking the NFC Championship game to OT.

Maybe the team doesn't feel as comfortable taking chances with play calling with Rodgers. Again, nothing happens in a vacuum, and I think "blame" is going too far. Something might not be Rodger's "fault", that doesn't mean he didn't impact it negatively.

If your response to "Would Favre have the Packers in a better position?" is "Maybe" than your response to "Is Rodgers the reason the team is in as bad of a position as it is?", or as you said, "Is Rodgers to blame* for the poor record**?" also has to be "maybe." You can't have it both ways, those are corollary statements.

*Where "blame" might mean things that aren't necessarily his fault.
**Again, we're taking about relative to where this team might be if Favre were the QB. I don't think anyone*** is making the case that Rodgers is single-handedly to blame for any game under 13-3, just that their record is poorer than it would be.
***Well, maybe Sarah is.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 3 times, last at 12/08/2008 4:04:38 pm
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
12/08/2008 @ 04:02:46 PM
 Quote this comment
I'm still in the process of trying to convince myself that the Favre move will be better off in the long run (which I believe it will).
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
2887.gifAlex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel
12/08/2008 @ 07:27:15 PM
 Quote this comment
I'd say it's probable they'd have one or more wins with Favre, but it's not guaranteed. There are a lot of variables, and some of them, like team chemistry are impossible for anyone to really measure/predict what might have been plus most of us don't know diddly about what the team chemistry is like even now.

As far as the basically everyone returned from last year goes, KJB and Clifton became washed up and the lines have been their biggest problem. And I'll give you that the O-line would probably have an easier time of things with Favre in there, but even factoring that out they just haven't played to the same level as last year. And I think they've had more injuries in general this year, other than at RB.

Either way I'm more upset about Harrell being worthless and the fact that they used a high pick at their strongest position by taking Nelson.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/09/2008 @ 10:25:06 AM
 Quote this comment
13-3, now that's more like it. Now I have to buckle down and come up with some good picks over the next 3 weeks if I want to reclaim my title from 2006!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 12/09/2008 10:51:46 am
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
12/09/2008 @ 10:54:09 AM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 04:43:34 PM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 04:22:24 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 10:54:05 AM
You really don't think the Packers are a handful of yards here, another first down there, better off with Favre? Because that's really what a a lot of close games come down to.
I've been told we need to strike these comments from the record. This is the rule, not the exception, apparently.
Jon declared statements like about your team being a few plays from 3 more wins or whatever "illegal" because any team, even the Lions, could say that. This isn't really that situation, not every team sent a hall of fame QB packing a few months after taking the NFC Championship game to OT.


Seriously, stop comparing the Packers situation to the Lions. Obviously there's a difference between a team possibly getting a few more wins and making the playoffs vs a team getting a few more wins for a total of 2 wins on the season. I'm trying to be somewhat intelligent, as opinionated as it might be. I'm not trying to just through out rediculous statements that have no relevance to anything.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Pie Racist
12/09/2008 @ 11:08:29 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:25:06 AM
13-3, now that's more like it. Now I have to buckle down and come up with some good picks over the next 3 weeks if I want to reclaim my title from 2006!

13-3 is a good week. You should swap out the proven NFL picking portion of your brain for a new exciting method of doing picks to see if you can improve on that next week. I don't see how you could go wrong.
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:54:09 AM
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 03:43:34 PM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 03:22:24 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:54:05 AM
You really don't think the Packers are a handful of yards here, another first down there, better off with Favre? Because that's really what a a lot of close games come down to.
I've been told we need to strike these comments from the record. This is the rule, not the exception, apparently.
Jon declared statements like about your team being a few plays from 3 more wins or whatever "illegal" because any team, even the Lions, could say that. This isn't really that situation, not every team sent a hall of fame QB packing a few months after taking the NFC Championship game to OT.


Seriously, stop comparing the Packers situation to the Lions. Obviously there's a difference between a team possibly getting a few more wins and making the playoffs vs a team getting a few more wins for a total of 2 wins on the season. I'm trying to be somewhat intelligent, as opinionated as it might be. I'm not trying to just through out rediculous statements that have no relevance to anything.

I wasn't aware I was "comparing situations." I was just repeating what Jon meant, so I could differentiate why it was different than our wild speculations regarding Favre still being on the team. I wasn't "comparing" the Lions and Packers, it's just that, unless you're undefeated, any team can play the woulda/shoulda/coulda game.

Besides, it's still theoretically possible, though unlikely, the Lions end up 3-13 and the Packers end up 5-11, so don't go declaring yourself the vastly superior "just missed the playoffs" team yet. emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this at 12/09/2008 11:09:04 am
jon.jpgJon - 2846 Posts
12/11/2008 @ 01:19:53 AM
 Quote this comment
PackOne Wrote - 12/07/2008 @ 08:39:22 PM
I watched both too. Rodgers had a QB rating of over 104 today...


jthompto Wrote - 12/08/2008 @ 01:14:23 PM
I really don't like the QB rating stat that much when measuring the skill of a QB. Tavaris Jackson had a 143 rating yesterday.


I am making a declaration. And this doesn't really have anything to do with the whole favre/rodgers thing.
Passer ratings (not qb ratings, since they only measure passing) should only be discussed when the minimum timeframe of that rating is one whole season. I think the rating is given too much weight as it is, we don't need to make the sample size any smaller than a season. It doesn't hold up. I won't go so far as to say the "stat" is meaningless when it is used for small time frames, but I think it really only shows you whether the passer was on fire or terrible or somewhere between the extremes. And even then there are anomalies.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.