Packers-Bears Week (Finally) in Week 12

Fumbling the Game Away, photo by Michael Conroy, AP

After losing to the Colts last Sunday, 34-31, the Packers find themselves at 7-3, and in the driver's seat in the NFC North.  But they also find themselves only 3-3 in the last 6 games, after their impressive 4-0 start.  The Colts game was maybe not the most disheartening of the three losses; to me that was the loss to the clearly inferior Vikings team.  The Colts were 6-3 going into the game, and had the number one defense in the league.  The Packers were underdogs, so you can't say that a loss was shocking or even unexpected.  

But what was both shocking and unexpected to me was the way that the Packers blew a 28-14 halftime lead to lose this game, by sleepwalking through most of the second half, and then fumbling the game away in overtime.  You don't win many games when you give away three or four turnovers, but the Packers were in position to win this game until the fourth turnover, a fumble by Valdes-Scantling in overtime.

The Packers have been vulnerable to the run game all year, but in the first half, they kept Nyheim Hines and Jonathan Taylor in check, giving up only 43 yards on the ground.  They gave up some bigger gains through the air, and those plays combined with the Packers' two first half turnovers, kept the Colts in the game at halftime, trailing by 14.  

The second half and overtime were very discouraging.  The defense started getting gashed in the running game.  The offense had way too many 3 and outs, leading to the defense getting tired out and being gashed some more.  Throw in a special teams turnover, in the form of a Shepherd fumble on a kickoff return, add in one final turnover in overtime, and you have the perfect recipe for blowing a lead and losing a game you should have nailed down in the third quarter.  I think both sides of the ball, and you can throw special teams into the mix, too, let up in the second half, thinking they were going to coast to victory.  And then at the end, they could not convert for a touchdown in their final drive, and had to settle for the field goal to send the game to overtime.

Needless to say, this business of winning and losing on alternating weeks is not going to result in a successful season.  The Packers will almost certainly make the playoffs, but they need to play 60 minutes of every game if they want to avoid being bounced out of the playoffs in their first or second game.  But that worry, which is a real one, will have to wait just a bit.  It is now finally Packers-Bears week.  Can anyone remember a season where the Packers and Bears have not met until Week 12 of the season?  I couldn't, and I could not readily find the answer as to whether this is the latest first meeting between the two teams in history.

This will be the 201st meeting between the two historic teams, with the Packers leading the series 99-95, with 6 ties, including their two playoff games.  The game is being played in prime time on Sunday night, with one of the Packers' fan favorites, Mitch Trubisky, back behind center for the Bears.  This will be an excellent shot for the Packers to win their 100th game against the Bears.   

The Bears come to town, as usual, with a very good defense, and a much more questionable offense.  Before their current four game losing streak, they were at 5-1.  I had seen enough of their games to think that the 5-1 record was a mirage, and the fact that they have dropped to 5-5 tends to confirm this.  However, you can toss out there every cliche in the book, and most of them are true in Packers-Bears games, including the fact that the records don't matter when these two ancient rivals play each other.  The Bears are a dangerous team because they are desperate.  If they are going to turn their season around, it needs to start Sunday night.  And if they can't turn their season around, then Sunday night is still a big game, because beating the Packers makes a bad season palatable for the Bears.  Given the Bears strong defense, and the Packers' vulnerabilities on defense, I expect a close game, but one that the Packers should win.

Big Test Coming up Against the Colts

Using the Ref, Photo by Mark Hoffman, Milw. Journal-Sentinel

Well, the good news is this: the Packers' win over the Jaguars 24-20 last Sunday, combined with the Seahawks' loss, leaves the Packers with the number one seed in the NFC playoffs (as they always say, if the playoffs started today).  The bad news is, the way they played on Sunday, that number one seeding might not last long, maybe not past the upcoming game at Indianapolis on Sunday.  

For the second time in three weeks, in windy and cold conditions at Lambeau Field, the Packers seemed to play without energy or emotion, especially on offense.  And for the second time in three weeks, they played down to the level of an inferior team.  At least this time the Packers were close enough in the fourth quarter to be in a position to be able to rally for the go-ahead touchdown, and then the defense shut down the final Jaguars drives to preserve the win.  I'm sure I was not the only one who was having flashbacks when the Packers had the Jaguars at 4th and 26.  But unlike the more famous 4th and 26 in January of 2004, this time the pass was incomplete and the game was over except for a couple of kneel-downs.

My favorite play on offense has to be the 78 yard TD pass to Valdes-Scantling, depicted in the photo.  He made a little cut that sent the ref flying into the path of one of the pursuing defensive backs.  I laughed at least the first 5 or 6 times I watched this play.  On defense, my favorite series was the final one, when the defense (Rashan Gary and Preston Smith) rose up on back-to-back plays and sacked QB Jake Luton to set up the 4th and 26 play.

I am not as despondent as some other Packers fans I know.  "We suck."  "We'll be one and done in the playoffs."  Yeah, they might.  I am pretty sure they will be one and done if they play like they did against the Jaguars.  I am trying to figure out which playoff-caliber team they could beat with an effort like they made on Sunday, and I am coming up blank.  But look, if the Packers lose all these poor effort games in the middle of the season, maybe they end up with a 9-7 record, playing on the road (if they make the playoffs at all).  But if they win ugly games like the Jaguars game, maybe they get a good enough record to host a home game, and maybe if things break right they end up with home field advantage.  The Packers certainly rode some ugly wins last year all the way to the NFC Championship Game.  And if (and it is a big if) the Packers can use the next seven weeks to get their act together, maybe they become the proverbial team that nobody wants to play in the playoffs.  

One of the things they ought to take a look at is creating more unpredictability in their offense.  This past week, Lamar Jackson of the Ravens complained that defenses are calling out the Ravens' plays at the line of scrimmage.  I wonder if some of that isn't happening with the Packers, too?  I understand the idea of sticking with the run, even if it is not working.  But if the Jaguars have been stopping the Packers' run game all day long, why, on 3rd and 1 with the game hanging in the balance late in the fourth quarter, do you just run Aaron Jones up the middle for no gain?  And how many times can you call a straight-up run on second and ten before the defense knows what to expect?  Four times on Sunday the Packers found themselves at 2nd and 10.  Three times they ran the ball in conventional running plays.  The only first down they gained on 2nd and 10 was the one time they passed the ball.

Anyway, I feel as if we will have a much better feel for who the Packers are after the Colts game.  The Colts lead their division at 6-3, so they are no joke.  They certainly looked good last Thursday in beating the Titans.  I think the Packers are a much better team on offense than the Colts, even if they don't look like it every single week.  I would not trade any of our starting "skill position" players to the Colts for their players at those positions.  But I think the reverse is true on defense.  I think the Colts have a better and more consistent defense than the Packers.  

Having said that, when I re-watched the Jaguars game, I realized that the Packers' defense looked better than I remembered.  While the final drive was the one that initially caught my attention, with the back-to-back sacks, actually the defense played pretty well the entire game.  They only gave up 13 points (the other 7 was on the punt return TD).  The only TD they gave up was on a short, 16 yard drive set up by Adams' fumble.  They gave up no long drives during the entire game.  They kept pretty consistent pressure on Luton, frequently without having to blitz.  Now, you can say, "well, sure, but the Jaguars aren't that good on offense."  Which is true, but in other games this year, all you had to do was hand the ball off and gain a lot of yards.  The Jaguars have a pretty good running back, in James Robinson, and yet he wasn't able to run all over the Packers.  In other words, on further review, it was the offense, with its two turnovers resulting in 10 points for the Jaguars, and the special teams, giving up another 7 points, that were the problems on Sunday, not the defense.

The Packers are actually underdogs this week, and maybe that sort of perceived slight can be used as motivation for the offense to go out and prove something.  We'll see, but if the defense can play as well as it played against the Jaguars, and again show some energy, and if the offense, in the absence of wind and cold, can play a clean game with more energy than they showed on Sunday, then I think the Packers will win this game.

Get a Grip, Fans!

Mike McCarthy, Speaking for All of Us, photo by Mark Hoffman, USA Today

Real life intruded to prevent me from posting anything about the Packers' loss to the Falcons last week (Falcons won, 33-32), and so now I have two unfortunate losses to look back on before turning to the Titans game this Sunday.  The Falcons game, as it turned out, was a tremendous disappointment.  I had come to expect the Packers to lose that game, especially when I saw the inactive list before the game.

And then came the Colts game (Colts won, 31-26).  That one I expected the Packers to win.  They were at home, the Colts have not been playing up to expectations, they don't have a very good offensive line, I was assuming that the Packers would get back Montgomery and maybe Cobb and maybe Matthews, so I just didn't see them losing the game.  But they did, obviously, starting with the opening kickoff which even the NFL Sunday Ticket didn't give to us since the local station was carrying the Packers game and they were still in commercial at the time.

Games like this make some people crazy.  Here was the Facebook status of one of my Packer fan Facebook friends shortly after the game.  Remember, this is a Packers fan, not some troll or some Bears fan or whatever:

"THE PACKERS ARE GARBAGE ..... GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS."  

Long ago, when I was a law clerk working in the Federal Court of Appeals in Chicago, I learned that typing your motion or brief in all caps definitely adds extra persuasiveness to your position.  In those days, petitioners and brief-writers couldn't easily change the size of the font, but if they could have, all caps and huge font size would really have been extra super duper persuasive.  

Look, I am not trying to make fun of my Packer fan Facebook friend, but rather I am trying to make the point that people need to get a grip.  The Packers are not playing very well right now.  They don't have the killer instinct, or they would have at least found a way to win one of the last two games against the Falcons and Colts.  You might even say that they are a mediocre team at 4-4.  Maybe being a 4-4 team is the very definition of mediocrity.  They certainly are not as good as I assumed they would be at the beginning of the year.  Right now, I am not confident that the Packers will even make the playoffs, much less make any noise in the playoffs.  But I think it is a little early to give up on the season.  If they start to turn things around right away, they can squeak into the playoffs, and as they showed in 2010, once you get in, anything can happen.

This week they travel to play the Titans.  It is always harder to win on the road, other things being equal, but this game is a chance to start to turn things around.  The Titans aren't exactly tearing up the league, either, at 4-5, although Marcus Mariota at QB is looking better all the time, and DeMarco Murray is one of the best running backs in the league.  But they give up a lot of points, and they have only beaten Cleveland and Jacksonville in their home stadium.  So let's just say that the Packers win the game, and have another week to get Clay Matthews (who will not play this week) and some of the other players healthier going forward to additional games.  5-4 looks a lot better than 4-5, and if the Vikings happen to lose again, what with the Lions being on bye, we could have a three-way tie for first in the North after Sunday.  

Best Performer Last Sunday, Photo by Mike De Sisti, USA Today

Which Packer Team Will Show Up?

Green Bay Press-Gazette Photo

The game against the Giants two weeks ago left me in a very foul mood.  You figure that a team will lose some games in a season.  Every team since the 1972 Dolphins has done so.  But the Packers in 2012 have found some creative and different ways to lose games this year.  The opening day loss to the 49ers was just a case of getting beat by what was, on that day anyway, a better team.  The Seattle "Fail Mary" loss was one for the ages - but in a bad way.  We will be talking about that game 20 years from now, the way the Bears fans still talk about the Majkowski-Sharpe "Instant Replay" game from 1989 (except the call in this case really was a travesty, unlike the call in the "Instant Replay" game).  The Indianapolis "Epic Collapse" game was shocking and disgusting at the time, but now that the Colts are 8-4, we can see that they are a much better team than we assumed.

But the Giants game was just an old-fashioned ass-kicking.  The Giants beat the Packers in every facet of the game, and it wasn't even close.  How bad was it?  Kevin Seifert of ESPN gives the ugly details.

The Giants may or may not "have the Packers' number" (whatever that means), but they have shown repeatedly over the last 6 seasons that they know how to exploit the weaknesses in the Packers' team.  The thing that made me more angry than sad is to read that the Packers' players said that they played the game without emotion.  This has been repeated in many venues, including Packers.com.   I can excuse the players for making physical mistakes (like taking a bad angle on a tackle), or for not being good enough (like Tramon Williams trying to cover Hakeem Nicks) a lot easier than I can excuse them for not playing with emotion.  The division lead is on the line, after a long, hard slog to get back in first place in the NFC North.  The Packers had two playoff losses to the same Giants in the last 5 seasons, interrupting what looked like Super Bowl runs.  The Packers (arguably) play better on the road than at home.  And then they come out and get man-handled, and their excuse is that they "played without emotion?"

Anyway, this left the Packers trailing the Bears by a game for the division lead, with 5 games to go.  The toughest remaining game for both teams is the week 14 matchup between the two, which in many scenarios will decide the division.  But given the beat-down administered by the Giants, could anyone be faulted for fearing that the Packers would drop another game somewhere along the way, making the game with the Bears irrelevant?  That, I have to admit, is what I was worried about going into the Vikings game.

And there were moments during that game when it looked like that was exactly what would happen.  After getting off to a 10-0 start ("hey, this is going to be easy after all") thanks to an unbelievable catch in the end zone by James Jones, the game started slipping away.  When the Packers started practicing their "Olé!" tackling technique on Adrian Peterson, another 10 point lead was blown, and the Packers trailed 14-10 at halftime.  It was about to get worse, when Morgan Burnett (MVP of the game, according to my daughter) pulled in the first of his two interceptions to cut off a Minnesota scoring drive. 

Of course, the Packers went on to win the game, so everything was good.  On top of that, the Bears lost in overtime to Seattle, and the 49ers lost to the Rams in overtime.  Which put the Packers back in first place in the division, and got me to thinking about the possibility of passing up the 49ers for the second seed and the bye.  Until my daughter brought me back to earth by pointing out that it is crazy to think about that, with the Packers looking as inconsistent as they have this year. 

So which Packer team is the real one?  The team that looks great in beating the Texans?  Or the team that gets crushed by the Giants and blows a huge lead to the Colts?  If the "good" Packers are the real team, this is the time of year for them to step up.  We will start to find out, tonight, against the Lions.  The Lions obviously have some talent, and the Packers obviously have lots of injuries.  But if this is a team that is going to contend for a championship, there is no excuse, this time of year, at home, for not going out and taking care of business.

Scary Preseason Predictions

The Packers' preseason loss to the Chiefs this week was so boring that I had to write this blog post during the latter part of the game. The Packers chose to sit most of their starters for the game, which makes some sense, but must irritate anyone stuck with a full-price ticket for the game.

Meanwhile, the preseason accolades for the Packers continue to roll in. NFL.com polled its seven experts, and all seven picked the Packers to be the NFC representative in the Super Bowl. Four of them have the Packers winning the Super Bowl, while three of them have the Packers losing to the Colts, Ravens and Bengals.

The last time the Packers were the consensus Super Bowl pick was probably 1996. I remember it well, including the Sports Illustrated cover predicting the Packers and Chiefs for Super Bowl XXXI.

I love seeing this stuff, but it scares me almost as much as it pleases me. I also guess I am not yet a complete believer. In 1996, the Packers had gone to the playoffs the prior three seasons, and they were coming off an NFC Championship Game loss to the Cowboys. The Packers had led the game in the fourth quarter. To name a few players, the Packers started the season with Favre at quarterback, Edgar Bennett and Dorsey Levens at running back, Robert Brooks and Antonio Freeman at wide receiver, and Keith Jackson at tight end. On defense, they had Reggie White and Sean Jones at defensive end, and Leroy Butler, Craig Newsome and Eugene Robinson at defensive back. On special teams, they had Desmond Howard. This was an impressive team, and it was obvious at the beginning of the season. Sure, they might not win it all, but there was no team in the NFC that you would have thought had a better shot at it.

I don't see the 2010 Packers as being at the same level. I like the 2010 Rodgers as much as I liked the 1996 Favre, and Driver/Jennings/Finley compares pretty favorably with Brooks/Freeman/Jackson. I am a Ryan Grant fan, but I don't think he stacks up well against Bennett and Levens. On defense, where are the pass rushers to match up with White and Jones? Where are the defensive backs to match up with Butler, Newsome and Robinson? Charles Woodson is probably better than the 1996 defensive backs, but with Al Harris (as well as Atari Bigby) spending the first six weeks of the season on the PUP list, I just can't make a case that the defensive backs as a whole are close to being comparable. And, of course, the special teams have been shaky for most of the preseason as well as last year.

Are the Packers better, going into the season, than the Saints, the Falcons, the Vikings, the Cowboys, or the 49ers? (The same NFL.com experts pick the Cowboys, the Saints or Falcons, and the 49ers to win their respective divisions.) Maybe. But I don't see it as being so clear cut as to make the Packers a consensus pick for the Super Bowl.

Most Points Since . . . When?

The Packers, in beating the Colts last night 59-24, scored the most points they have scored in a single game since they beat the Cedar Rapids Crush, 75-0, in the 1938 pre-season. (The guys on TV said it was the most points "in a league game" since the victory over the Crush, but I think that was a mistake since the Crush never made it to the NFL.)

I wasn't happy to see 3 fumbles in the game (by Ryan Grant, Brandon Jackson, and Will Blackmon), and I wasn't happy to see Peyton Manning carve up the Packers' defense in the first few possessions. But this game answered a lot of questions for me.

Yes, the Packers are capable of putting some pressure on a quality NFL quarterback. Even though they were still not playing this as a regular season game, Dom Capers at least gave us some indication that he is willing to bring some pressure against a quality QB. The result was an interception and a strip of Peyton Manning.

Yes, the Packers offensive line looks like it is still capable of giving Rodgers the kind of protection he got toward the end of last year. Rodgers was never sacked, and this was without rookie Bryan Bulaga even dressing for the game.

Yes, the Packers continue to look very sharp on offense, even though Greg Jennings did not play last night. But Finley, Driver and James Jones picked up the slack and gained 195 yards in passing offense in the first half.

Yes, it looks like the Packers got some good players in the draft or as free agents. Although, again, Bryan Bulaga did not play, safety Morgan Burnett had a good showing. After struggling early on in the pre-season, he made some plays, most impressively including one interception he made and another that got away. Free agent linebacker Frank Zombo (why do I keep thinking of Frank Zappa?) made a bunch of tackles and stripped the ball out of Manning's hand. I would not want to be the person charged with cutting down the roster, as there are going to be some tough decisions here.

And yes, the special teams are capable of making some positive plays. While they gave up one kick return that was way too long, they also scored two touchdowns, one on a muffed punt recovered in the end zone, and another on a punt return. That is not a bad night's work, and it helps to relieve the sick feeling I have been getting whenever the special teams are on the field.

Week 2 Comments & Week 3 Preview

Time to write a quick few words about last week's game against Seattle, since the next game comes tomorrow night (Thursday) on ESPN against the Colts.

• The Packers' first-string offense continues to look great. Rodgers is in fine form, and in the first two games, the Packers have marched up and down the field with their first team, interrupted only by Ryan Grant's fumble in the first game.
• Jermichael Finley is going to be a monster for the Packers this year. His skill became more and more apparent as the year went on last year, but he seems unstoppable in the pre-season this year. A worthy pickup in any fantasy league that has separate roster spots for tight ends.
• The first-string defense continues to look spotty, but since the Packers were missing at least 6 starters on defense, I would not want to hit the panic button just yet.
• Special teams were again disappointing, but maybe not quite so disappointing as a week ago.

Traditionally, the first-string teams have their longest pre-season outings in the third game, so normally I would look forward to the Colts game with great anticipation. But it is not clear to me that the first-string offense has anything left to prove this pre-season, so I would not be surprised to see them take their seats early, maybe early in the second quarter.

I do hope to see more of the starters return on defense, and it would be nice to see a little more aggressive play-calling on defense. I don't fault Dom Capers for calling the first two games conservatively - it makes sense for him to do that early in the pre-season. (Besides, there will be plenty of time to criticize him for conservative play-calling during the regular season!)

But since there are going to be some changes on defense from last year when the season opens (Al Harris looks like he won't be ready, and of course Johnny Jolly and Aaron Kampman are gone), I am sure that Capers wants to see how some of his replacement starters perform in different pressure packages. I have no idea how long the Colts' starters on offense will play (heck, they don't always play even when the games count). But for however long they play, they will provide exactly the kind of test for the Packers' defense that I would think the coaches would want to see.

More Bad News

Oops, as Chris Berman might say, "that's why they play the games." After fumbling the game away against the Bears, they found themselves in a shoot-out against the Colts, somewhat reminiscent of the game Joe Theisman calls the "shoot-out at Lambeau Field," the famous 1983 Monday night game against the Redskins, featuring overpowering offenses and non-existent defenses by both teams. That game wasn't decided until Mark Moseley missed a field goal at the end of the game, preserving the Packers' 48-47 game. The Colts' victory on Sunday was not assured until Javon Walker's disastrous fumble in the fourth quarter. What a shame. Walker had a monster game. The Packers had pulled to within 7 points, at 38-31, had the ball back and had just crossed midfield in an effort to tie up the game when Walker was stripped of the ball. The Colts scored again, to go ahead 45-31, and the game was effectively over.

So, the Packers find themselves at 1-2 after three games. Ironically, that is exactly the record I would have predicted at the end of the pre-season, but it is demoralizing to get there after such a great opening day game. And, today comes word of more bad news. The Packers' starting center, Mike Flanagan, will undergo season-ending knee surgery. So much for the experience and continuity of the Packers' offensive line. This is a very unfortunate development, leaving Grey Ruegamer as the Packers' starting center. Ruegamer was acquired last year as an unrestricted free agent.

Anyway, here come the New York Football Giants to town, for the first game between the two teams since the 2001 season. It is truly remarkable to contemplate how much the world has changed since the last meeting. You may recall that the Packers were scheduled to play the Giants, in New Jersey, on September 16, 2001. The attack on the U.S. by Islamic terrorists ended up canceling all of the games for that weekend, and those games were rescheduled for the very end of the season, in January, 2002. When the Packers finally came to the New York area for the game, New York native Marco Rivera led a group of players and coaches to the World Trade Center site to pay their respects. The game itself is memorable mostly for being the game in which Michael Strahan "sacked" Brett Favre as the clock was winding down, giving Favre's friend Strahan the all-time record for sacks in a single season. The Packers won the game, 34-25. Let's hope that by the fourth quarter of this week's game, the Packers will again be far enough ahead to be able to afford to give away free sacks to the Giants.

Still Alive?

My last column was written after the discouraging loss to Detroit, when the Packers were 2-4 and going nowhere. Five weeks later, they are 5-6, and most likely still going nowhere. But there are some signs of life in the last few weeks. They barely beat San Francisco, but then they should have beaten Miami but let the game get away in the second half. Then they beat Minnesota on the "improbable bobble" play in overtime. Then they lost at Tampa Bay, although they certainly had their chances, even with Favre gone for most of the second half. And this week they hung on to beat the Colts in the snow flurries.

Considering that the Dolphins, the Vikings, the Colts, and probably the Buccaneers are playoff teams, to go 3-2 the last 5 weeks is not bad. If I had guessed the results after the Lions game, in the mood I was in at the time, I would have predicted 1-4 over that stretch. What do the next five weeks hold for the Packers? Only two home games (Detroit and Tampa Bay), with a third road game in "Packer weather" at Chicago, and two other games at Carolina and at Minnesota. It will take another three wins to get to 8-8, and it will take 4-1 or 5-0 to make the playoffs.

The Packers could win this coming Monday at Carolina, they could win at Chicago, they might beat Detroit at Lambeau Field, and history tells us that they probably will beat the Buccaneers in the cold on December 24. It will take something just as improbable as the bobble for the Packers to win at Minnesota, however, and my guess is that they will also lose another game somewhere along the way. That would put them at 8-8, same as last year, and home for the playoffs for the second year in a row. Then we will be able to debate about whether the 8-8 this year is more encouraging than last year's 8-8, and whether Mike Sherman should meet the same fate as Ray Rhodes.

But all of that is a few weeks away. For now, they are still alive. We should take some encouragement from the fact that the Packers have beaten two of the best teams in the league in the last 3 weeks, and hope that they can continue to improve as the season winds down.

Packers on December Roll!

At the beginning of the season, the late-November to mid-December part of the season looked rather daunting for the Packers.

November 23, Cowboys at home. True, the game would be at Lambeau at last. But the Cowboys had won 7 in a row against the Packers - maybe they just had the Packers' number.

And then comes a three game road trip. Not again!

December 1, at Minnesota. The dome jinx. True, the Packers have to win one sometime, but something weird always seems to happen.

December 7, at Tampa Bay. At least it is on grass, but weren't the Bucs much improved at the end of 1996? And didn't the Bucs beat the Packers here in December a couple of years ago?

December 14, at Carolina. Omigosh, the NFC Championship game rematch, in their stadium.

Back at the beginning of the season, this looked like a stretch where the Packers could easily go 2-2, even though I hoped for better.

Now fast forward to the aftermath of the Colts debacle on November 16. Deep down, didn't you feel that the Packers could lose 2 or maybe 3 of these 4 games if they continued to play like they did in that game? I did.

What a difference 3 weeks and three W's make. The Packers now seem to be on the best roll they have been on since last December-January. They have exorcised two demons, won the division for the third year in a row, and have clinched a bye week for the playoffs. They ought to win the next two games and cruise into the playoffs with another 13-3 record. As a matter of fact, an objective observer might just conclude that the Packers have put it all together at exactly the right time.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look as if 13-3 will be good enough for home-field advantage. I think the 49ers will lose Monday night to Denver, but I think they are good enough to beat a fading Seahawks team the following week. And if they do, they get the home field advantage for the NFC Championship game ASSUMING that they get past their first opponent on the weekend of January 3-4. They probably will, but I don't take that as a given with the 49ers.

Here in San Francisco, the fan sentiment seems to be that the 49ers have very little chance against the Packers if they have to play them in Green Bay. I agree with that. If the game is in San Francisco, the consensus is that the 49ers have a much better chance, but just beneath the surface I detect the belief that the Packers are probably a better team. I think they are right about that, too.

We'll know soon enough. The Championship games are less than a month away, and at this point it sure looks like the NFC opponents will be the Packers and the 49ers. In the AFC, my guess would be Kansas City and Pittsburgh. Could we be heading for a rematch of Super Bowl I? That would be an interesting matchup.

Packers Spank Cowboys - Head for Last Turf Game

I have to admit that I was nervous about the game against the Cowboys. I picked the Packers to win, I felt that the Packers were the better team, I believed that nobody beats the Packers at Lambeau Field.

But still - what if they didn't win? After all, they got beat by the Colts last week. They couldn't stop anybody, including people none of us ever heard of, and gave up 467 yards of offense and 41 points to an 0-10 team. If they could lose to the Colts, surely the Packers were capable of losing to the Cowboys, especially if the breaks went against them. And if the Packers were to lose, the
devastation, at least to the fans, would be total. How would the team react? Would they go into a tailspin, having left it all on the field against the Cowboys?

Fortunately, we don't have to find out. Despite a slow start, during which the Packers wasted good field position on two successive drives, and despite a Deion Sanders interception for touchdown, that allowed the Cowboys a tie at halftime, the Packers rolled like they have not rolled all this year, crushing the Cowboys in the second half. And so they moved into sole possession of first place in the NFC Central, with Minnesota and Tampa Bay looking up at them.

They did this, in my opinion, through a more aggressive approach, especially on defense. Last week, it seemed that after Gilbert Brown went out, the Packers played very conservatively on defense, and perhaps as a result, never got any pressure on Paul Justin. This week, they blitzed, they took chances, and they came through. And they did so even though it seemed as if both Gilbert Brown and Reggie White missed substantial portions of the game.

So one major monkey is off of the Packers' back. And now they get a chance to try to remove the other one. Next week, the Packers travel to Minnesota to try to win for the first time there in the Holmgren-Wolf-Favre era. I'm worried about this game. Heck, I'm worried about every game this year. There could be a letdown factor after the big Cowboy game. There could be funny bounces of the ball, like there always are at the dome. And there is no question that the Packers remain a team built for grass, not turf. But win or lose, this should be the last turf game for the Packers this year, as the last 3 regular season games are all on grass, and the post-season games will be in Green Bay, maybe in San Francisco, and, just maybe, in San Diego.

POST SEASON PROGNOSIS

I've given up on getting the number 1 seed. The 49ers don't seem interested in providing any assistance to the Packers whatsoever. The 49ers will get the number 1 seed. (There, I've said it. Maybe NOW they will go on a losing streak.) So here are my predictions for final records in the NFC:

NFC Central: Green Bay (12-4, DIV); Minnesota (11-5, WC); Tampa Bay (9-7, out).

NFC West: San Francisco (13-3, DIV).

NFC East: NY Giants (10-5-1, DIV); Dallas (10-6, WC); Washington
(9-6-1, WC).