Well, the Rams had a winning record when we beat them and knocked them down to .500cstelter wrote:As I look at the standings, there is not a team we've beaten with a winning record.

Moderator: Moderators
Well, the Rams had a winning record when we beat them and knocked them down to .500cstelter wrote:As I look at the standings, there is not a team we've beaten with a winning record.
Unfortunately, Aaron Rogers has proven too often that he can be successful against any defense. That's what concerns me.cstelter wrote: Where did the words 'can't beat a top rated Defense' come from? I read 'Don't like playing playing teams with a good D.' I haven't followed the Packers, but it seems you lost two in a row and beat one earlier against good defenses. That puts you 1-2 against good defenses which qualifies for 'don't like playing'. You've admitted you don't like playing on the road and you're 2-2 on the road. So if they don't like that at .500 how could they possibly like playing good D's at 1-2???
You are rejecting a premise that you alone have put forward in this thread. And from where I sit you have absolutely confirmed the OP's position.
But you seem respectful in your attempts to defend your position which I sincerely appreciate. But you'll forgive me if I sincerely state what I see.
Negative. We have both won 100% of our division games. So it keeps going down the tie breaking procedures. Nonetheless, it doesn't matter. It's still early in the season. There is 8 more games to go and 2 against the pack. Lets see how the standings are two weeks from today.porky wrote:We have the tiebreaker, we have played 3 in the division and have won.
The Packers have played 1 in the division and won.
Tie records goes to division wins if regular record is tied: Vikes 3....Pack 1.
We have tiebreaker.
That's incorrect.porky wrote:We have the tiebreaker, we have played 3 in the division and have won.
The Packers have played 1 in the division and won.
Tie records goes to division wins if regular record is tied: Vikes 3....Pack 1.
We have tiebreaker.
Trust me, you're quite wrong. That's ok though.porky wrote:I am not wrong.
It goes based off of win percentage. Not number of wins. Both teams have won 100% of their division games. Think of it this way:porky wrote:I am not wrong.
Google does not apply tie breaking procedures. When in doubt, ALWAYS go with the OFFICIAL league source. NFL OFFICIAL Division Standings. Unless you're going to tell me the NFL is wrong?
porky wrote:Google it *****
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=c ... ngs%202015
Win % lol we are both 6-2
yep...wrongakvikingsfan wrote: Google does not apply tie breaking procedures. When in doubt, ALWAYS go with the OFFICIAL league source. NFL OFFICIAL Division Standings. Unless you're going to tell me the NFL is wrong?
Yikes - you're woefully wrong. You don't know - you just don't know. Here let me show you:porky wrote:Google it *****
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=c ... ngs%202015
Win % lol we are both 6-2
It goes regular record to division then the other stuff which we don't need to go to at this point.
That depends on what you called me above in your 'google it #####' post...porky wrote:So now I'm a dick?