Game 8: Packers @ Chiefs - Sunday, October 27th 7:20PM

[homer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWQqArRDTdk

[nodakfan17]

The Chiefs will be Mahomeless. This is a huge opportunity to pick up a win at Arrowhead, which has been a house of horrors for the Packers (1996, 2011).

[HiAndTight]

The Chiefs will be Mahomeless. This is a huge opportunity to pick up a win at Arrowhead, which has been a house of horrors for the Packers (1996, 2011).

 

 

I don't think they will be. I have a feeling he plays, and this game becomes one of those legendary games for a young QB. The type that people point to. Like Favre playing with that brutal ankle injury and absolutely carving up that Bears defense for 4 or 5 TD's. Or like when Favre played after his Dad died(though that wasn't so much great QB play as great WR'er play on most of those).

 

 

Otherwise, if Mahomes doesn't play, I think Snapper was right about his take on this game. The Packers match up well with KC...they'd match up far better if they had Raven Greene back, but I can't fine anyone to give us any information on what his actual injury even was, but that's another story. The Packers should be able to put up 30 points on KC. Jones should be able to get going and get 100+ yards, our tackles should be able to shut down Clark and their pass rushers and the bulldozer Jenkins should be able to open some lanes.

 

If no Mahomes, I think we win a 30-27 type game. If he plays, I think it'll be a 45-28 type game.

 

 

I had the Packers at 4-3 here in a rather optimistic scenario after 7 games, and losing the next 2 heading into the season, so winning vs one of the two AFC favorites is just gravy at this point for me.

[nodakfan17]

Mahomes practicing has to be a smokescreen, right?

 

When you dislocate your knee (or any joint), it becomes increasingly easier to dislocate it again. There are too many parallels to the RG3 situation here. Rest him and get him right. The AFC is weak, anyway.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Mahomes practicing has to be a smokescreen, right?

 

When you dislocate your knee (or any joint), it becomes increasingly easier to dislocate it again. There are too many parallels to the RG3 situation here. Rest him and get him right. The AFC is weak, anyway.

 

RGIII was the first QB I thought about when reading that Mahomes was actually up and throwing...there's no way that knee is stabilized enough for him to be close to 100% mobile. He struggled when trying to play through a bum ankle with limited mobility, too.

 

whether he plays or not, I think the Packers have the advantage this game because of how bad KC's defense is. Still, Arrowhead is a tough place to play and GB has been pretty bad there overall. Could be a shootout-type game.

[MrTPlush]

The Chiefs are lucky Mahomes is even returning this year and has such a short timetable. There is no way they dare risk playing him in a tough game they could lose even if they do have him. May suck pretty much assuring a loss with Moore, but they will survive.

 

I can't imagine how terrible it would be and the absolute backlash if he played and got hurt.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Moore is no stiff. He's at least a backup who has real experience playing QB, to the tune of 7k yards and almost 50 TDs. There is value in that; a guy like that can have a good night or at least be good enough to give you a shot. A disappointing guy like Bridgewater has kept the Saints alive - this is why I was so vocal about the Packers adding a guy like that. If Rodgers goes down for a year, yeah, you're done, but if he's out for a month that can be the difference in playoffs or not.

 

At this point, I think this would be easier for the Packers if Mahomes did play. There is no way that knee is ready, he would probably be yanked in the 2nd quarter after they start getting blown out and he clearly isn't right. I don't see any way he actually plays. They have a better chance with a healthy vet that's had time to practice and be included in the game plan.

 

Either way I think it's still a tough game for the Packers, but one they should win.

[HiAndTight]

Moore is no stiff. He's at least a backup who has real experience playing QB, to the tune of 7k yards and almost 50 TDs. There is value in that; a guy like that can have a good night or at least be good enough to give you a shot. A disappointing guy like Bridgewater has kept the Saints alive - this is why I was so vocal about the Packers adding a guy like that. If Rodgers goes down for a year, yeah, you're done, but if he's out for a month that can be the difference in playoffs or not.

 

At this point, I think this would be easier for the Packers if Mahomes did play. There is no way that knee is ready, he would probably be yanked in the 2nd quarter after they start getting blown out and he clearly isn't right. I don't see any way he actually plays. They have a better chance with a healthy vet that's had time to practice and be included in the game plan.

 

Either way I think it's still a tough game for the Packers, but one they should win.

 

 

Yeah, the problem is Bridgewater is making 7.5 million. And he took a discount for that. Moore though...Chiefs didn't sign him until after Henne went down and he wasn't making much in Miami before that. With their weapons and YAC ability he could definitely lead them to a win. I don't really think it would have made a difference though before this year. This Packers team could win without great QB play. They should definitely look at a veteran QB next year.

 

As for Mahomes, I'm not saying it makes sense or that I'd even consider it, but if there's no real structural damage and he is feeling good, who knows. I just have a feeling this will be one of those games that people talk about with him..."One week after dislocating his knee on the field, Mahomes started in a prime time game against the 6-1 Green Bay Packers...." I'm sure I'll end up being wrong, but just the news that he's not ruled out, he's practicing. It's not like it's RGIII and Cousins or Lamar Jackson vs Joe Flacco, it's Mahomes who's mobile, but not someone who completely changes the plays they're likely to call.

[pacopete4]

It'd be great for this Packers team to get this win away from Lambeau and to keep the Vikings a game behind. I think they can do it either against Mahomes or not as it should be a good ball game. I am interested to see our defense matchup against their speed.

[homer]

It'd be great for this Packers team to get this win away from Lambeau and to keep the Vikings a game behind. I think they can do it either against Mahomes or not as it should be a good ball game. I am interested to see our defense matchup against their speed.

 

Hopefully Burks is back to full strength. They'll need him in coverage against Kelce. Goodson was bad last week.

[RollieTime]

Patrick Mahomes is officially listed as out for the game against the Packers according to head coach Andy Reid.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It was going to be an asterisk win of sorts whether or not he played. I'm personally bummed he got hurt at all, it would have been a great measuring stick for the defense. They could still lose this game/get lit up defensively, but now they basically have to play well or it looks pretty bad. And winning won't be very convincing of anything. I'm really looking for that signature win, but Carolina, SF and @NY should give them a chance for that.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

It was going to be an asterisk win of sorts whether or not he played. I'm personally bummed he got hurt at all, it would have been a great measuring stick for the defense. They could still lose this game/get lit up defensively, but now they basically have to play well or it looks pretty bad. And winning won't be very convincing of anything. I'm really looking for that signature win, but Carolina, SF and @NY should give them a chance for that.

 

They could be facing a fossilized Elvis Grbac, and Arrowhead would still be a tough place to get a win.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

That's well and good, but another meh win where they get a 27-20 decision or something and Matt Moore throws for 300 yards really doesn't do anything to establish the Packers as a real contender. Beating healthy Mahomes does that, as does going into SF and winning. I still think there is a legitimate question right now as to what this team really is. If I'm picking apart all the one and two loss teams, the Packers are probably at the top of my list for which one is most likely a paper tiger. I am not saying they necessarily are one but there are several eek wins, several questionable defensive performances and just no real impressive wins thus far. Dallas is probably the best one.

[HarveysWBs]

That's well and good, but another meh win where they get a 27-20 decision or something and Matt Moore throws for 300 yards really doesn't do anything to establish the Packers as a real contender. Beating healthy Mahomes does that, as does going into SF and winning. I still think there is a legitimate question right now as to what this team really is. If I'm picking apart all the one and two loss teams, the Packers are probably at the top of my list for which one is most likely a paper tiger. I am not saying they necessarily are one but there are several eek wins, several questionable defensive performances and just no real impressive wins thus far. Dallas is probably the best one.

 

I get this. When there are so few games, one has to try and read the tea leaves to gauge a team’s quality. But it got me thinking: did the 2010 team have any signature wins in the regular season? The opener in Philly was nice, and ending the year with wins over NYG and the bears was big to make the playoffs, of course, but I don’t remember thinking those were ”signature wins” at the time (in fact, I was probably most impressed with the team during that New England game, and it ended up being a loss; sure Rodgers was out, but that was when I started to think that team could be really good).

 

We may not know if any win is a signature win until long after the fact. Maybe Dallas goes on a run in the 2nd half and so curb stomping them in their house will feel pretty good later this year. Maybe we blow out KC tomorrow, but their fade could continue even after a Mahomes comes back. I just don’t think we can be sure of anything right now, other than the Pats are going to coast to the AFC championship again.

 

Fun fact I learned while reminiscing: at no point all year did the 2010 pack trail by more than 7 points. My goodness, what a defense that was. I miss me some Charles Woodson. And BJ Raji. And young CM3.

[adambr2]

That's well and good, but another meh win where they get a 27-20 decision or something and Matt Moore throws for 300 yards really doesn't do anything to establish the Packers as a real contender. Beating healthy Mahomes does that, as does going into SF and winning. I still think there is a legitimate question right now as to what this team really is. If I'm picking apart all the one and two loss teams, the Packers are probably at the top of my list for which one is most likely a paper tiger. I am not saying they necessarily are one but there are several eek wins, several questionable defensive performances and just no real impressive wins thus far. Dallas is probably the best one.

 

I get this. When there are so few games, one has to try and read the tea leaves to gauge a team’s quality. But it got me thinking: did the 2010 team have any signature wins in the regular season? The opener in Philly was nice, and ending the year with wins over NYG and the bears was big to make the playoffs, of course, but I don’t remember thinking those were ”signature wins” at the time (in fact, I was probably most impressed with the team during that New England game, and it ended up being a loss; sure Rodgers was out, but that was when I started to think that team could be really good).

 

We may not know if any win is a signature win until long after the fact. Maybe Dallas goes on a run in the 2nd half and so curb stomping them in their house will feel pretty good later this year. Maybe we blow out KC tomorrow, but their fade could continue even after a Mahomes comes back. I just don’t think we can be sure of anything right now, other than the Pats are going to coast to the AFC championship again.

 

Fun fact I learned while reminiscing: at no point all year did the 2010 pack trail by more than 7 points. My goodness, what a defense that was. I miss me some Charles Woodson. And BJ Raji. And young CM3.

 

Signature win that year was beating the Jets on the road 9-0. Jets were the real deal at the time.

 

Beating up the #1 seed Falcons in the divisional round though is when I finally thought "Wow. We're going to win it all."

[OldSchoolSnapper]

The Jets is the game I would have picked as well. Without looking at the schedule that team also pitched 3-4 basically shutouts, there were at least 4 games where he held teams to 7 or less. They also started pummeling several teams right after the Jets. The 10-6 record was really an anomaly. I think I remember some stat where that team was never down more than 7 the entire season. But this team really doesn't have a performance like that - yet.

 

They played that Falcons team in the regular season too and lost either with a last second FG or in OT.

 

Edit: They held the opponent to 7 or less SIX times!

[areacodes]

That's well and good, but another meh win where they get a 27-20 decision or something and Matt Moore throws for 300 yards really doesn't do anything to establish the Packers as a real contender. Beating healthy Mahomes does that, as does going into SF and winning. I still think there is a legitimate question right now as to what this team really is. If I'm picking apart all the one and two loss teams, the Packers are probably at the top of my list for which one is most likely a paper tiger. I am not saying they necessarily are one but there are several eek wins, several questionable defensive performances and just no real impressive wins thus far. Dallas is probably the best one.

 

How do you come to the conclusion the Packers are most likely to be a paper tiger?

 

What about the Bills? Winning in the final 3 minutes against the 1-5 Jets or 0-7 Bengals? Sure they have a nice D, but their O is nothing special and have played a weak schedule.

 

The Ravens? Who squeaked past the 2-4 Steelers in OT and gave up 40 in a loss to the 2-4 Browns?

 

The Vikings who we already beat?

[DuWayne Steurer]

The NFL isn't college where you have to impress pollsters. Just win, baby.

 

The Packers have beat the Bears, Vikings, Cowboys, and a really game Lions (with the possible aid of questionable officiating). I don't care if they win by 1 point in 12 games..... just win.

 

Blah blah blah the Cowboys came back..... that happens in the NFL. They still won the game.

 

They're 6-1 against opponents with a combined record of 20-20-1.

 

I don't care if the Chiefs have Mahomes, or Matt Moore, Rich Gannon or Steve DeBerg. It's the NFL. Nobody cares how impressive the victory is. It still counts as one win. Every team deals with injuries all season long. Boo-hoo. The Packers don't have to prove anything to anybody. If they win the game 35-7 or 23-20, take the W and move on to next game.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It isn't about impressing pollsters, it's about looking against good teams, which the Packers really haven't done a lot of with the exception of Dallas who has three pretty garbage wins. That's a team that lost to the Jets and beat Washington and Miami.

 

The good QBs the Packers have faced have made their defense look pretty terrible, even Carr did so in a fairly lopsided game. I'm not at all convinced the Packers are better than Minnesota, who I think has a better defense but the QB discrepancy may be enough for the Packers to win the division anyway. Minnesota is already playing much better than they were when they opened the season, another problem I have with those stats like the 20-20-1 thing. A team you play in September at 0-1 is very rarely the same one in November.

 

Padding your record with Matt Moore and the Broncos is great but that is not who you end up playing in January. This Packers team, to this point, is more reminiscent of the one that started 6-0 in 2015 than some better teams that have had worse records.

 

People love to recite cliches about winning on the road in the NFL and every game is tough yadda yadda, but the Packers really have not put a complete, dominant game up yet. The defense is certainly better but had significant stretches of being pretty bad. The most encouraging thing of the past few games is that Rodgers looks like his old self. But sorry, that defense needs a statement performance and it hasn't done it yet. They need to show they can contain the best QBs.

 

Their second half schedule is a lot harder than their first. They won't be coasting to a division crown on a weak schedule so they will get several chances to show their mettle. There are 5-6 very losable games on that schedule.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

That's well and good, but another meh win where they get a 27-20 decision or something and Matt Moore throws for 300 yards really doesn't do anything to establish the Packers as a real contender. Beating healthy Mahomes does that, as does going into SF and winning. I still think there is a legitimate question right now as to what this team really is. If I'm picking apart all the one and two loss teams, the Packers are probably at the top of my list for which one is most likely a paper tiger. I am not saying they necessarily are one but there are several eek wins, several questionable defensive performances and just no real impressive wins thus far. Dallas is probably the best one.

 

How do you come to the conclusion the Packers are most likely to be a paper tiger?

 

What about the Bills? Winning in the final 3 minutes against the 1-5 Jets or 0-7 Bengals? Sure they have a nice D, but their O is nothing special and have played a weak schedule.

 

The Ravens? Who squeaked past the 2-4 Steelers in OT and gave up 40 in a loss to the 2-4 Browns?

 

The Vikings who we already beat?

 

Because the Packers have still shown they struggle a lot with slowing down any good QB. Wentz carved them up when he had to in the second half, Carr was unstoppable until he threw the ball in the back of the end zone, Dak threw 500 yards on them (sorry, garbage time is not an excuse).

 

I haven't seen anything from the defense that gives me a lot of confidence in them going up against Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, Jimmy G, etc.

 

Minnesota is playing really good football too. I'm not putting a lot of weight in beating them in Week 2. It was a good win, but it's not like I look at them as a team I'd expect to crush. Their offense is playing a lot better than it was to start the year. Beating them there is going to be very difficult so I'm really hoping they're several games back by then.

[areacodes]

That's well and good, but another meh win where they get a 27-20 decision or something and Matt Moore throws for 300 yards really doesn't do anything to establish the Packers as a real contender. Beating healthy Mahomes does that, as does going into SF and winning. I still think there is a legitimate question right now as to what this team really is. If I'm picking apart all the one and two loss teams, the Packers are probably at the top of my list for which one is most likely a paper tiger. I am not saying they necessarily are one but there are several eek wins, several questionable defensive performances and just no real impressive wins thus far. Dallas is probably the best one.

 

How do you come to the conclusion the Packers are most likely to be a paper tiger?

 

What about the Bills? Winning in the final 3 minutes against the 1-5 Jets or 0-7 Bengals? Sure they have a nice D, but their O is nothing special and have played a weak schedule.

 

The Ravens? Who squeaked past the 2-4 Steelers in OT and gave up 40 in a loss to the 2-4 Browns?

 

The Vikings who we already beat?

 

Because the Packers have still shown they struggle a lot with slowing down any good QB. They've been carved up by Wentz, Carr was unstoppable until he threw the ball in the back of the end zone, Dak threw 500 yards on them (sorry, garbage time is not an excuse).

 

I haven't seen anything from the defense that gives me a lot of confidence in them going up against Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, Jimmy G, etc.

 

Minnesota is playing really good football too. I'm not putting a lot of weight in beating them in Week 2. It was a good win, but it's not like I look at them as a team I'd expect to crush. Their offense is playing a lot better than it was to start the year. Beating them there is going to be very difficult so I'm really hoping they're several games back by then.

 

I must have missed the memo where going 16-27 for 160 is carving up a D...because that is what Wentz did to the Packers. And guess what, lots of teams struggle to stop Wilson, Brees, etc. - they are all-pro, HOF caliber players for a reason. You also don’t seem to factor in the loss of Savage and the effect on our pass D.

[homer]

Obvious there is not going to be a "good" win for him unless they beat New England.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Moore is no stiff. He's at least a backup who has real experience playing QB, to the tune of 7k yards and almost 50 TDs. There is value in that; a guy like that can have a good night or at least be good enough to give you a shot. A disappointing guy like Bridgewater has kept the Saints alive - this is why I was so vocal about the Packers adding a guy like that. If Rodgers goes down for a year, yeah, you're done, but if he's out for a month that can be the difference in playoffs or not.

 

At this point, I think this would be easier for the Packers if Mahomes did play. There is no way that knee is ready, he would probably be yanked in the 2nd quarter after they start getting blown out and he clearly isn't right. I don't see any way he actually plays. They have a better chance with a healthy vet that's had time to practice and be included in the game plan.

 

Either way I think it's still a tough game for the Packers, but one they should win.

 

But it wouldn't be a "good" win if they do?

[MrTPlush]

To be fair the Kansas City defense is not very good whether it be pass or run. Heck, in recent weeks the people of Wisconsin would refer to it as ‘swiss cheese’. The offense is good, except the greater majority of why it is good will be wearing a head set and hat today.

 

Also they are 1-2 at home.

 

I’m not really sure if KC is a .500 team without Mahomes...but let’s just consider they are. I would still consider that a good win on the road. It, historically, is a tough place to play. It just won’t be the super bowl relevant matchup the world was hoping for.