Packers 2024-25 Season Thread
- Thread starter Mark87
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,043
- Reaction score
- 1,910
# 6 Packers = 9 - 3
# 7 Washington = 8 - 5
# 8 Rams = 7 - 6
Washington plays: at Saints, host Eagles, host Falcons, and at Cowboys
Rams play: at 49ers, at Jets, host Cardinals, and host Seahawks
Packers play: at Seahawks, host Saints, at Vikings, and host Bears
2 wins probably gets us in. I'd hate to be going last week against the Bears to get in. You know the NFL would put that game at night which would mean it would be COLD and a detriment to a pretty passing team.
It sure would be nice to beat the Seahawks and then the Saints. I think that would do it because we hold tie breaker over Rams via head to head.
Oh well, make an old man eat crow. Go Pack Go!
# 7 Washington = 8 - 5
# 8 Rams = 7 - 6
Washington plays: at Saints, host Eagles, host Falcons, and at Cowboys
Rams play: at 49ers, at Jets, host Cardinals, and host Seahawks
Packers play: at Seahawks, host Saints, at Vikings, and host Bears
2 wins probably gets us in. I'd hate to be going last week against the Bears to get in. You know the NFL would put that game at night which would mean it would be COLD and a detriment to a pretty passing team.
It sure would be nice to beat the Seahawks and then the Saints. I think that would do it because we hold tie breaker over Rams via head to head.
Oh well, make an old man eat crow. Go Pack Go!
- Messages
- 5,851
- Reaction score
- 5,171
correct in one sense, for sure. but i was exploring the premise of which wide receivers who had the potential to become #1 wide receivers could we have taken in the 2023 draft instead of the questionable (to put it mildly) choice of lukas van ness.
- Messages
- 18,059
- Reaction score
- 6,113
1 win probably gets you in 2 locks you in. Packers remember have head to head over the Rams.
- Messages
- 6,388
- Reaction score
- 10,651
Fair. I don’t think either of them are #1 guys honestly. I’m quite happy with Reed, and frankly I think the issue with his production dip this year is scheme and calls than anything. They’re trying to run the offense through Watson but he’s not really a volume guy. Current lull notwithstanding, Reed has been arguably more productive than either of those guys over his first two years.
- Messages
- 4,820
- Reaction score
- 3,552
No, don’t need that bad attitude
- Messages
- 4,820
- Reaction score
- 3,552
At WR it’s less about drafting guys high and more about drafting guys who can catch the damn ball. Also need more solid route runners. You don’t need a first rounder to find guys like that. But you do need your scouting dept to be competent.
- Messages
- 2,043
- Reaction score
- 1,910
I still think we need 2. Rams are only team behind us that could get to 11 wins. Several teams could get to 10 wins.
I think Division Record is one of the early tie breakers and our's sucks at 1 - 3. If we only have 10 wins our best possible division record is 2 - 4, but we could be 1 - 5. I don't want to leave it to tie breakers.
And, I don't want to be playing the Bears last game in a win you're in - lose you're out situation.
- Messages
- 5,851
- Reaction score
- 5,171
to be fair, reed was fantastic in his rookie season. he had a drop rate of only 3.2% and was 6th in voting for offensive rookie of the year. but his drop rate has skyrocketed to 11.9%. he just needs to get back to his rookie level for drops and he'll be fine.
same with wicks. he had a drop rate of 5.2% last year, which is about average for starters in the nfl. this year his drop rate is up to 14.3%.
watson is the only one who has improved his drop rate. in 2022 it was 6.1%, in 2023 it was 5.7%, and this year it is 2.2%. in fact, i am a little surprised he isn't targeted more. in the nine games he played in last year, he was targeted a total of 53 times (5.9 targets per game). this year he has started 12 games so far and has only 45 targets (3.8 times per game).