Why can't Wisconsin sports fans have nice things?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Every year there is a team that's supposed to be a force for years and it almost never actually happens. I couldn't care less about the 49ers. The Packers need to keep doing what they're doing. Maybe they win one, maybe they don't, but they have as good a chance as anybody else if they do things right.

 

I've heard this "large gap" thing too many times to count. I've heard it about the Bears. I heard it 2 years ago when Minnesota's defense was amazing and under contract for 5 years. It basically never seems to mean anything unless Bill Belichick is in charge.

 

Rodgers is no impediment toward getting to the Super Bowl. His age IMO is getting a little overblown. There are two active QBs in their 40s still playing pretty well, well Brady was before this year. They have time.

[homer]

The loss to Duke was crushing for the simple fact that I doubt they will ever been in that position again in my lifetime.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

But the 49ers look like a really tough out for the foreseeable future in the NFC unless they really get bit by the injury bug or otherwise have bad luck.

 

Many people thought the same thing about the Rams a couple years ago. Almost verbatim. The NFL is set up for parity. Other than the crazy run the Patriots have been on for the last nearly 20 years, good teams come and go relatively quickly. Teams that look like potential dynasties crumble within a year or so. The 49ers certainly appear very talented, and after last night's game they may seem unbeatable. I would guess that won't be a long-term thing, though. Even in a game where they soundly beat the Packers, that looked like far from an unbeatable team to me. Take away Rodgers' interception and that fumble, and it's a much different game.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I think the Packers would have ended up getting crushed last night in any circumstance but the point is still true. That Atlanta team that ran them off the field was another team that was going to kill the NFC with its speed for a few years. They've won one playoff game since and have been 7-9 for 2 years.

[tmwiese55]

I've always felt that that loss in 2014 was a turning point for the fans. That was supposed to be the 2nd title and I've just sensed heightened skepticism since then. I'm not sure the franchise has shaken that moment.

 

would've also been the long awaited Rodgers/Brady Super Bowl showdown that would've been great for the league. I generally agree with your sentiment here, ever since then it seems the vibe is most people expecting GB to blow it somehow.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I've always felt that that loss in 2014 was a turning point for the fans. That was supposed to be the 2nd title and I've just sensed heightened skepticism since then. I'm not sure the franchise has shaken that moment.

 

would've also been the long awaited Rodgers/Brady Super Bowl showdown that would've been great for the league. I generally agree with your sentiment here, ever since then it seems the vibe is most people expecting GB to blow it somehow.

 

Bostick-induced PTSD?

 

I agree. The outcome of that game has made this fanbase overly cynical. However, nothing that has happened since then has rectified that cynicism.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Nothing will until they win it again. If we're talking about this 20 years from now it's going to get a nickname, a curse and the whole nine.

[homer]

I think I'd wonder about this more if Packers were heavy favorites in those NFC championship games. Packers have been heavy dogs in each NFC Champ game since they won the Super Bowl. Seahawks were -7.5 in 2015, Atlanta was -5 in 2017, San Francisco this year was -7. Be nice to get a home game one of these years.

[tmwiese55]

True. But the years preceding it were a home loss to SF, the blowout loss at SF, then the blowing the 15-1 season losing in a home game in the 2nd round. So it was kind of an accumulation with the icing on the cake being that Seattle collapse.

 

The hindsight thing is that they probably should've canned Capers 3-4 years earlier, who knows how things go then. The points they've given up in their playoff eliminations during Rodgers prime is ridiculous.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Neither SF loss was particularly upsetting, they were underdogs in both of those as well. The one that was actually close, they left everything on the field and played extremely well.

 

The 2014 team was better than the 2011 one IMO. Despite their records, I don't think it's even close. The latter had absolutely no defense. Especially by that point in the year, when the defense had started to look like one that was a force and probably top 5. I think it's arguable that was the best team they had with Rodgers because the offense was a lot better than the one that did win it.

 

A Jordy Nelson drop in Buffalo was the difference between the NFCCG being at Lambeau vs. on the road. Watching the end of that game is hands down the worst night I've had as a fan in any sport. I've still actually never seen the winning TD. Shut it off with the ball in the air and I've never seen the replay or any of the celebration.

[AKCheesehead]

I wish it weren’t the case that the Bucks are our best shot. It’s the one team where if they win, cool, but I really cannot get myself excited or emotionally involved in the nba.

[adambr2]

If I told you back in January that the Bucks would not only not play for a championship, but not even reach Game 6 in the second round, you would have thought I was insane.

 

A virus ruins one of the greatest Bucks teams we've ever seen.

 

We are cursed.

[HiAndTight]

If I told you back in January that the Bucks would not only not play for a championship, but not even reach Game 6 in the second round, you would have thought I was insane.

 

A virus ruins one of the greatest Bucks teams we've ever seen.

 

We are cursed.

 

 

Especially in the manner in which they lost.

 

 

I'm not blaming the pandemic though. I love Coach Bud...and I think he'd have been great in past years when we didn't have a Two-Time MVP and DPOY, but I REALLY hope the Bucks Owners look at how this team has been out-coached by Nurse and Spolestra in back to back years and they take advantage of Billy Donovan suddenly becoming available.

 

 

I'm just gonna be sick if we watch Giannis have another MVP caliber season, get to the post-season, and watch a team committ almost exclusively to "building the wall," to slow him down...and then have absolutely nothing else they can do.

 

The Bucks in game 5 ran just a basic offense that every one of these guys learned in HS and it got them more open baskets than they were getting with Giannis in the game in the first 4 games.

You CAN rely too heavily on your 7 foot freak.

 

I'm officially on the Billy Donovan bandwagon(especially if these crazy rumors that Chris Paul is the Bucks #1 target this off-season...however the hell that could possibly work out given the contract issues.

[nodakfan17]

The logical answer to this question is that it is really, really hard to win a championship in pro sports leagues with 30+ teams, especially in ones where the field is often tilted in favor of large markets.

[PinaMadness]

Getting back to the Packers, something that few people realize is that despite being arguably the most consistent playoff team since 1993, they have only been a #1 seed twice.

[LouisEly]

Getting back to the Packers, something that few people realize is that despite being arguably the most consistent playoff team since 1993, they have only been a #1 seed twice.

That, and when you're consistently good, you're consistently drafting at the end of the rounds.

 

They haven't had a top-10 pick since 2009, and Raji was 9th overall.

[PinaMadness]

Getting back to the Packers, something that few people realize is that despite being arguably the most consistent playoff team since 1993, they have only been a #1 seed twice.

That, and when you're consistently good, you're consistently drafting at the end of the rounds.

 

They haven't had a top-10 pick since 2009, and Raji was 9th overall.

Yeah, that's frustrating too. Especially last season when our flawed, fraudulent 13-3 team has the 30th pick.

[HiAndTight]

Getting back to the Packers, something that few people realize is that despite being arguably the most consistent playoff team since 1993, they have only been a #1 seed twice.

 

 

The back to back SB years I'd assume?

[adambr2]

I don't think they were a 1 seed in the year they lost to Denver because I specifically remember them winning the NFC championship in San Francisco.

 

Post Super Bowl 2011 when they went 15-1 and lost to the Giants would be the other besides the '96-97 Super Bowl winner.

[HiAndTight]

I don't think they were a 1 seed in the year they lost to Denver because I specifically remember them winning the NFC championship in San Francisco.

 

Post Super Bowl 2011 when they went 15-1 and lost to the Giants would be the other besides the '96-97 Super Bowl winner.

 

I always forget about the 15-1 team, but that has to be right.

 

That second year when we lost to Denver was the year we lost to the 0-9 or 0-10 Colts and probably cost us HFA.

[nodakfan17]

I don't think they were a 1 seed in the year they lost to Denver because I specifically remember them winning the NFC championship in San Francisco.

 

Post Super Bowl 2011 when they went 15-1 and lost to the Giants would be the other besides the '96-97 Super Bowl winner.

 

I always forget about the 15-1 team, but that has to be right.

 

That second year when we lost to Denver was the year we lost to the 0-9 or 0-10 Colts and probably cost us HFA.

I’ll have a hard time picking the Packers when they visit Indy in Week 11 because of the clunkers they left there in 1997 and 2012. They also lost there in 2004 to a prime Peyton Manning - making them 0 for 3 in their last 3 trips. That 1997 loss sticks with me as the most unexplainable Packer loss in my memory. Runner-up would be the 2014 loss to the Bills that put the NFC Championship Game in Seattle instead of Green Bay.

[HiAndTight]

I don't think they were a 1 seed in the year they lost to Denver because I specifically remember them winning the NFC championship in San Francisco.

 

Post Super Bowl 2011 when they went 15-1 and lost to the Giants would be the other besides the '96-97 Super Bowl winner.

 

I always forget about the 15-1 team, but that has to be right.

 

That second year when we lost to Denver was the year we lost to the 0-9 or 0-10 Colts and probably cost us HFA.

I’ll have a hard time picking the Packers when they visit Indy in Week 11 because of the clunkers they left there in 1997 and 2012. They also lost there in 2004 to a prime Peyton Manning - making them 0 for 3 in their last 3 trips. That 1997 loss sticks with me as the most unexplainable Packer loss in my memory. Runner-up would be the 2014 loss to the Bills that put the NFC Championship Game in Seattle instead of Green Bay.

 

 

Yes...back in the days of that "idiot kicker." We're talking about a KICKER...a drunk idiot kicker!

 

That game seemed like it was 28-28 about 6 minutes into the game as neither team seemed capable of stopping the other.

[adambr2]

I don't think they were a 1 seed in the year they lost to Denver because I specifically remember them winning the NFC championship in San Francisco.

 

Post Super Bowl 2011 when they went 15-1 and lost to the Giants would be the other besides the '96-97 Super Bowl winner.

 

I always forget about the 15-1 team, but that has to be right.

 

That second year when we lost to Denver was the year we lost to the 0-9 or 0-10 Colts and probably cost us HFA.

I’ll have a hard time picking the Packers when they visit Indy in Week 11 because of the clunkers they left there in 1997 and 2012. They also lost there in 2004 to a prime Peyton Manning - making them 0 for 3 in their last 3 trips. That 1997 loss sticks with me as the most unexplainable Packer loss in my memory. Runner-up would be the 2014 loss to the Bills that put the NFC Championship Game in Seattle instead of Green Bay.

 

I always felt even in advance that that Bills road game had a loss all over it. I actually remember telling a buddy of mine weeks in advance that I thought we would beat the Patriots at Lambeau and then lose in Buffalo because he thought that was backwards.

[HiAndTight]

I always felt even in advance that that Bills road game had a loss all over it. I actually remember telling a buddy of mine weeks in advance that I thought we would beat the Patriots at Lambeau and then lose in Buffalo because he thought that was backwards.

 

 

I remember feeling confident that we would surprise the Pats(and we may have if not for an OL returning a kick to our ~5). Don't know that I thought Buffalo would be a threat at that time.

[adambr2]

I always felt even in advance that that Bills road game had a loss all over it. I actually remember telling a buddy of mine weeks in advance that I thought we would beat the Patriots at Lambeau and then lose in Buffalo because he thought that was backwards.

 

 

I remember feeling confident that we would surprise the Pats(and we may have if not for an OL returning a kick to our ~5). Don't know that I thought Buffalo would be a threat at that time.

 

We did beat the Pats in '14. You're thinking of '10. '14 was a great game too.