He might want to notice that the Pack scored the most points in their 90 years history in 2009 and have average 425 points from 2007-2009, but only had 388 after their running game went down and their difference making TE did too.

In 2010, the Packer D gave up the second fewest in Packer history in the 16 game era.

If the Pack put the two together in 2011, it will output the 9th best point differential in league history. If’s and but’s are a dime a dozen, but there’s no reason why they won’t. Luck has little to do with it. The Packers problem has been consistency – and given The Divorce in 2008 would put any team off their stride, 2009 having Her Majesty trying to stick it to the team, and 2010 having historic injuries, I can forgive inconsistency. It’s been a long, strange ride.

But the Pack were the 2nd best team in 2010 despite the injuries once they got in stride.

Again, healthy, the Pack should rip the rest of the NFL in 2011. Might not happen, but is very likely.

The Packers-
Scored 54 more points than the Bears
Gave up 46 less points than the Bears
Passed for 1099 more yards than the Bears
Gave up 84 less yards passing than the Bears

The Bears-
Rushed for 10 more yards than the Packers
Gave up 397 less yards rushing than the Packers

If Earlicker wants to say the Bears rush defense is better than the Pack, then fine. Congrats. Otherwise, he’s talking out of his ass.

Healthy, the Packers cleanup in 2011. The Bears go back to where they’ve been the last 20 years without unbelievable luck – below .500.

Go Pack!

That’s the best point. The one Chicago victory over GB was in a game that the Packers beat themselves.

The SB made up for it but WOW I lost alot of money on that first GB/CHI game (sigh).

And furthermore, please don’t be so blinded by your fandom that you think the Lions are somehow going to be second place in the division. The Bears statistically and physically trounced the Lions in that first game and it took 3 freak fumbles in the red zone for it not to be a blow out. This year is going to be all Bears and Packers again. Child Please.

Packers were lucky to even make the playoffs

uhmmmm…i think what you meant to say was the rest of the NFC playoff field (#1,#2 and #3 seeds) were extremely UNLUCKY that the Packers made the playoffs. Were they the best team during the season? No..mostly due to injury and inexperience..but at the end of the year every team in the NFL playoffs knew if they got in that they were the last team they would want to play. Were they lucky to get in? Yes , probably(thank you Desean Jackson)…but luck had nothing to do with the playoff run they had once they got in.

and if you do think they are, that says a lot about you”

Actually, it’s not the exact same scenario. The Pats finished 14-2 to the Jets’ 11-5 whereas the Packers finished 10-6 to the Bears 11-5. A three game difference is less fluky than a one game difference and boy was that one game difference fluky.

Let’s look at the Bears flukiness. They had the Lions non-TD victory. They got Tyler Thigpen when facing the Fins. They got Joe Webb when facing the Vikings (I’ll give you Vikings QB didn’t really matter). They got the indoor Vikings team outdoors. Their toughest non-division games (Philly, Pats, Jets) were all home games. Their non-division road games were against the Giants, Panthers, Bills, and the previously mentioned Thigpen-Fins. They got a home playoff game against a 7-9 team in the playoffs. Flukiest of all, they had zero significant injuries until Cutler “hurt” his knee and even that was a lucky break since Hanie bordered on competent in that game.

To answer your question, if the Jets and Pats played 10 times, I think the Pats probably win 6 of them. If the Packers and Bears played 10 times, we’re talking 7-8 in Green Bay’s favor. If you doubt me, look up Cutler’s career numbers against the Packers.

and if you do think they are, that says a lot about you

I knew Viking fans were this stupid, but Bear fans? Come on. The Bears finished 11-5, the Packers finished 10-6. You can say the Bears didn’t try in week 17, but they did leave their starters in the whole game – they were trying to knock out the Pack. In the first game in Chicago, the Bears won on a pass interference call – hardly a victory worthy of declaring dominance.

And again, the Packers won in Chicago – their third straight playoff road game. The Bears played their second straight home playoff game and their first against a real team.

Now even ignoring the fact that the Packers won 2 out of 3, the Packers finished the season 14-6 (.700), the Bears finished 12-6 (.667), the Packers had a higher ranked offense and defense, the Packers scored more points and allowed fewer points. Also, the Packers did this with 15 players on IR compared to zero Bears IR players.

Knowing all that, you’re still willing to say the Bears are better based on what, finishing one game better in the standings? I suggest you head over to the front page on PFT and look at the Packers sporting their shiny new rings.

————————————————–
you mean home field advantage? like every team has in professional sports?

as a packer fan from day one of my life, i LOVE that other fans hate us, its a sign of respect, as many hate the yankees, lakers, north carolina, ect,ect it shows everyone else realy wishes their organization was run like ours , because in the end we have a hardware.

oh and keep talkin brian, rodgers will throw a laser right at the side of your head when your turning to TRY to cover a tightend or back out of the backfield, prob knock some sense back in ya

because the Calvin call was the CORRECT one. They even ruled that it was the correct one afterwards and didn’t change the rule, I don’t hear anyone saying that the Foster scenario a week later was an incorrect call?

We’re not talking about disputed decisions, we’re talking about facts. and the fact is, the Bears would have had something to play for in week 17 even if Calvin got the call (plus the Bears still had 30 seconds, 3 timeouts and the best returner in the history of the game to get 3 points to take it to overtime anyway) and who knows what would have happened then.

Saying you’re a better team that you finished ABOVE in the division is simply true facts. Much like how the Pats are better than the Jets, even though they lost to them in the playoffs… Are you saying the Jets are better than the Pats now?

And they’ve lost numerous games because of the refs too, so what’s your point? Remember the missed helmet-to-helmet call in the playoffs against Arizona last year? How about the missed facemask a few plays later? Or this season, remember the missed head shot on Rodgers in OT against the Redskins? It would have negated in INT. How about a week later when they were called for lining up too close to the long-snapper keeping a Dolphins drive alive? Two weeks in a row, bad calls cost them the game.

Bad calls happen to every team. The good teams get over it. The bad teams (cough Vikings) cry about it to the media.

Letting Week 17 slide for the sake of argument, the facts remain that with home field advantage, the Bears couldn’t beat the Packers in the NFC Championship. Chicago had a bye and the Seahawks (also known as two byes). Green Bay went to Philly, went to Atlanta, and went to Chicago. Given every competitive advantage going into that game, the Bears couldn’t get it done. The Packers did.

On a side note, for those who are like “GB was lucky to be in…” you can say that about a lot of teams. For example, if the Calvin Johnson catch is ruled correctly, the Lions beat the Bears in Week 1. This places the Packers and Bears in a tie and the Packers win the division based on a better conference record. This places the Bears and Giants in a tie for the Wild Card which the Giants win based on their victory earlier in the year. The Bears then miss the playoffs. What difference does it make if the luck happens at the beginning or the end of the year?

The better team doesn’t always win…

Packers were very fortunate in the circumstances with which they made the playoffs. They could have been out of it if, for instance, the Bucs didn’t choke against the Lions, DeSean Jackson hadn’t return the punt against the Giants.

Then they were fortunate the Bears had nothing to play for when they met in week 17, and even in that nothing game, it came down to a couple of plays (Tillman being one tackle away from making it 10-0)

It’s not that big of a statement to say you’re better than a team that, whenever they did play in games that mattered to both teams, it came down to a play here and there and it was 1-1 overall.

“Drunk, stupid, and body-surfing in the urinal troughs at Wrigley Dump is no way to go through life son.”

Packers were lucky to even make the playoffs

———————————————-

Some days it is better to be lucky than good but if you really think the Bears are a better team, then why didn’t they – rather than the Packers – win the SB?

Surely, an intelligent person such as you wouldn’t think that a team could get lucky for an entire season.

I mean all of those injuries were certainly not lucky…

Those games were so great because they were two teams knowing every move of the other team.

But the Packers won fair and square. Packers fans like to always bring up the 18 penalties in game one. If it weren’t for those penalties, blah blah blah. But sloppy football loses you games fair and square too.

But the Bears need to remember that sloppy offensive play lost the next two. Cant make excuses, we had to play better. Congrats to the Packers, at least its the NFCN.