Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Statistics Don't Lie, Packers Can't Lose to the Bears

By Category

Statistics Don't Lie, Packers Can't Lose to the Bears

There's every reason in the world for the Bears to be motivated to beat the Packers on Sunday.

All due respect to Custer, but this might be Cutler's Last Stand. If the Packers win, they clinch the NFC North and a home playoff game. And even though the Bears might not be eliminated from playoff contention if they lose, they might as well be.

If the Bears can't beat the Packers at Soldier Field, there's little hope they'll be able to do any damage in the playoffs, let alone qualify for the postseason.

The Bears' backs will be against the wall. They'll be looking make life miserable for their long-time rival.

The problem is, the Bears are near hopeless to get a victory, even with the home-field advantage. At least that's what the statistics say.

Nearly every metric imaginable says the Packers are going to win.

The Bears can't beat the them. Not right now. Not with their current coach and cast. Not with Brian Urlacher, Tim Jennings, Robbie Gould and Earl Bennett out for Sunday's game. Not with defensive linemen Shea McClellin and Henry Melton doubtful to play. Not with that excuse for an offensive line.

The trends are undeniable.

First of all, the Packers are winners of seven of their last eight games, a record only bettered by the Broncos since turning a corner in Week 6. The Bears, meanwhile, are losers of four out of their last five.

Head to head, the Packers have won five consecutive games and seven out of the last eight against the team from the Windy City.

Currently, the Packers are on an 11-game winning streak against NFC North opponents, the longest divisional winning streak by any team in the NFL.

Including the playoffs, the Packers are 13-4 away from Lambeau Field over their last 17 games. Specifically at Soldier Field, the Packers have won two straight and three out of the last four.

Since Mike McCarthy became head coach, the Packers have a 21-9 record in December and January regular-season games, a .700 winning percentage that's No. 4 in the league over that span.

Not only that, the Packers rank No. 4 in the NFL in December/January by scoring an average of 26.7 points per game and rank No. 6 in the NFL by allowing an average of 18.5 points per game.

Against the Bears in particular, the Packers defense has given up just 65 points to Chicago over the past five games, an average of only 13.0 points per contest.

All signs point to victory for a team gaining momentum against a team reeling from defeat. The road environment, the time of year, the division opponent; none of those appear to be giving the Packers much difficulty of late.

And that's before looking at the personalities that have influenced the recent history of the NFL's longest-running rivalry.

Mike McCarthy is 7-1 against Lovie Smith in their past eight meetings.

According to Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, "In seven starts for Chicago against Green Bay, Cutler's passer rating is 53.1.

"Meanwhile, Aaron Rodgers has gone 8-2 against the Bears. Both defeats were in Monday night games; Rodgers is 5-0 in day games against Chicago."

In the past three games against the Bears, Rodgers has completed 71 of 99 passes (71.9 percnet) for 799 yards, nine touchdowns and two interceptions, good for a passer rating of 117.4. Jermichael Finley has caught four of those touchdowns.

In the team's previous meeting, a Week 2 23-10 Packers win, the Green Bay defense had a season-high seven sacks, 3.5 by Clay Matthews. Tramon Williams had two interceptions.

If there was any doubt that the Packers would win on Sunday, just look at the stats and look at the trends. They say the Packers can't lose. Not to this coach, not to this quarterback, not to this team, not at this place, not at this time. Not now.

  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (74) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

packsmack25's picture


Brian Carriveau's picture

I speak the truth.

Oppy's picture

You speak history.

If these things really had any bearing on the present, the Packers success of the last 20 years would have been an impossibility, due to the trends that were established by the Packers of the 70's and 80's.

Absolutes are for suckers.

Oppy's picture

Let me some it up like this: Statistics don't lie (if the information is gleaned and culled in the appropriate manner), but they are not absolute predictors of future outcomes, by any stretch of the imagination.

the probability of getting "heads" on any given coin toss is 50%, and the more attempts, the more LIKELY you end up with a even distribution of heads or tails- that 50% probability.. However, it is not just possible- but LIKELY- that you will end up with streaks where you flip heads two, three or more times in a row.

Stats do not lie. Stats do not an absolute predictor of future outcome.

dullgeek's picture

"That's why they play the game" seems apropos here.

Walty's picture

We'll know who to blame if we lose. At least knock on some wood, Brian!

FITZCORE 1252'S EVO's picture

"Packers can't lose to the bears"

No shit Sherlock.


some guy's picture

There's a reason that players seem to always end their "hasn't done bad thing X their last Y games/attempts/wahtever" streaks immediately after being praised by the announcers for their play: by the time the streak gets noteworthy enough for the announcers to call it out, the probability that the play in question is going to continue has already gotten pretty slim. Are the Packers going to beat the Bears? Yeah, I think so. Urlacher and Jennings are going to be big losses, teams are starting to run on the Bears and from what we've seen the last few years the Packers are obviously the team you'd expect to be more resilient in the face of injury.

All that said? Come on. Division streaks (the Packers beat the Lions last year, therefore they'll beat the Bears this season! ... lolwhut?) December W/L records and what the Packers did against the Bears last season (when 2 of those 'last 3' games were played) have no predictive value whatsoever. Why choose to give us the 7-1 figure over the last 8 games, Brian? Maybe because the 9-5 figure over the last 13 games -- aka McCarthy's tenture -- doesn't line up quite so well with this rosy little homer-tinted-glass picture you're painting for us?

If I want someone to list me off a bunch of that pre-digested homer-friendly nonsense I can always turn on ESPN. I don't expect CHTV to be Football Outsiders, but Pack Fans are the best in the league and we deserve a little better than "our team's gonna win because it has a good record in games it won." I mean, on that note, have you noticed that Green Bay has a 1.000 winning percent over their last game? It follows from this that victory is -- literally -- guaranteed. Obviously.

some guy's picture

And you know what, dead horse, I need one more whack at you. Over the last 3 games! Rodgers vs. Bears! So superb! No mortal could play QB like that!

So uhh, how does that break down, exactly?

Rodgers vs. Bears


28/38 73.7% 297yd 3 TD 1 INT 7.8 Y/A 111.4 Qbr



21/29 72.4% 283yd 5 TD 142.7 Qbr



22/32 68.8% 219ytd 1 TD 1 Int 85.3 Qbr

So he was amazing last year! And in one game this year he was... Cutleresque. Well, it's not like diminished performance relative to last year has been an ongoing thing for the 2012 team right? There's probably every reason to expect that he'll play more like 2011 Rodgers. Other than the O-line, and the lack of Nelson, and reversion to the mean, and...

Stop being such a hack, Brian. You're better than this.

Brian Carriveau's picture

No, really, I'm not.

FITZCORE 1252'S EVO's picture

Fan. Tastic. Response.

You may or may not be a hack, but at least your not just... Some Guy.

cow42's picture


to think the packers CAN'T lose to the Bears is ridiculous.
on every snap it'll be 11 world class athletes vs. 11 world class athletes. anything can happen.

when you look at THIS game (not the last 8 meetings or whatever)... you might find that the Packers have the edge at only qb and db.

wr - push
ol - Bears
dl - Bears
lb - push

if Rodgers doesn't have one of those "how the hell did he do THAT?!" games, the field tilts towards the Bears.

Jamie's picture


FITZCORE 1252'S EVO's picture

Cow, I'm really starting to think that you may in fact be a flat-out JackWad. I used to find most of your posts funny, but it has occurred to me that... Maybe your posts aren't a joke... Maybe you actually believe the garbage you write. Not trying to be a dick here, but what exactly is your deal? Are you a Packer fan... Or are you a mouse?

cow42's picture

what do you mean by a "mouse"?

oh - and, "yes" i am a Packer fan.

ted, of bill and ted's picture

cow's list, adjusted (imo)...

rb- bears (correct)

wr- packers (push? really?

jennings/cobb/jones vs...marshall?)

ol- push (bears' sucks, packers...yeah probably sucks too i can see it, though i think the pack have the slight edge in this category)

dl- bears (correct)

lb- push (correct)

cow42's picture

"wr- packers (push? really?"

yes - really.
wr is the most overrated position on the team...

jones is just a guy.

cobb is good but not as good as marshall. not even close.

jennings? seriously? when was the last time he was a factor in a game? try week 13 OF LAST SEASON.

as for the oline - the Packers' is the worst in the NFL. their opponent always gets the edge in this category.

MarkinMadison's picture

Brandon Marshall may be better than the Packers #1 at this moment, but the rest of the Bears' receiving corps is not worth mentioning. All that $h95 Marshall was talking about in the past week was BECAUSE the Bears' cannot win a game when teams double-cover Marshall. The Packers, on the other hand, have clawed their way to the top without their #1 and #2 receivers for most of the season. Push? Seriously Cow, Push? Always annoying but YOU have generally been much better than THIS line. Push. Just admit you were wrong and move on to a better point.

cow42's picture

i will not admit i am wrong.
because i don't think i am.

would you take Cobb and Jennings over Marshall and Hester RIGHT NOW?
Remember - we're talking about the wf's as they stand RIGHT NOW.

give me Marshall/Hester.

Hester has been just as productive as Jennings has been for over a calendar YEAR (actually more so). even the games Jennings has actually played - he hasn't done squat.

and you can't even argue Cobb/Marshall... that's ridiculous. Marshall by a mile.

why does Rodgers hold the ball for 5...6...7... seconds?


I'd take Marshall all by himself over Cobb and Jennings together. Rodgers' #'s would be stupid with Marshall.

people get stuck seeing Jennings as what he WAS not for what he IS.

Point Packer's picture

Cow isn't worth reading. I wish CHTV's readers would just ignore his posts. If you didn't watch any games this season and then for some reason unknown to me read all his posts from the pre-season onward, you'd think the Pack were 0-13. But they are not, they are 9-4 and one game away from winning the division.

cubFan90's picture

Marshall has had 75% of his tds scored in garbage time

Nick Perry's picture

OMG!! Did you really give a push to the WR's? Even without Nelson, I'd take Jennings and Cobb over Marshall and some other hack 101 times out of 100!

cow42's picture

2011 Jennings - yes.
2012 Jennings - no. he's a non factor.

2012 Alshon Jeffery > 2012 Greg Jennings
2012 Brandon Marshall > 2012 Randall Cobb

nunobow's picture

Jeebus guys. I'm just negative-nanny here... and semi-drunk at the moment. BUT.

Stats may tell a lot.

But first and foremost - they also will a hide a lot. Maybe they'll even lie to you too.

I don't say that we'll lose this game per rule (rule = stat). BUT: The Packers haven't played many easy games there (the Space Ship as [email protected] calls it). When the opposing QB completes more passes to our DBs than to his own guys - it's an easy game.... but this isn't New Years Eve 2006/07 and the opposing QB isn't Rex Grosman (although Cutler also - at times - isn't so picky about who he completes passes to).

So even though Cutler is banged up and Urlacher is out. I don't call this an easy game... stats or not.

To me - the primary objective for us is to exit the game healthy at all crucial positions - only second in priority is a victory... even though it's "da Bears" (I know... I know - sorry)

Rocky70's picture

This game isn't nearly as vital as everyone makes it out to be. This game will have zero effect on the 1st round of the playoffs. Still, the Pack will prevail due to Bear turnovers.

Tommyboy's picture

Two things:

1) The last time the Packers lost at soldier field, a fan spit on Nick Collins and called him a nigger. Collins...did something, I can't remember what. I remember the NFL "investigated" it, but the outcome was never published (at least to the best of my knowledge...although admittedly, I'm an idiot). I still can't stand that...

2) I've seen it WELL documented that the Bears Still Suck. It's science people. You really just can't fight it :)

Jake's picture

I don't know how that really plays in here, but as I recall he threw his mouth piece at the fan. Pretty understandable considering the circumstance.

Tommyboy's picture

I was just saying that it still pisses me off. I wish the league office would have banned that fan from ever attending another game. I certainly wasn't suggesting Collins was the one out of line.

Cuphound's picture

Brian, it's not that I disagree. Of course the Bears still suck. But the football gods look with disfavor on phrases like "The Packers can't lose." Have you become so enamoured of statistics that you have no sense of superstition at all? I've always looked to you to be the sedate and decorus voice of CheeseheadTV. Even though, as the song says, the Packers are the greatest team to ever play the game, it's equally true that, from time to time, they've been a little lame. Don't tempt the fates, brother. It won't be Christmas if we don't beat the Bears.

Jay's picture

I've got a lock down argument for why the Bears will win. A bit of history first.

2010: @ DET wasn't watching game bc at gf's house. Loss
2011: @ KC. was traveling home from college. Loss
2011: NYG playoff game. Was traveling to college, but listened on radio. Loss
2012: @NYG. Traveling back from Thanks giving. Loss.

As luck has it, I scheduled an exam review session at 12 CST, thinking the game would be later. So I don't get the watch the game. No big deal? Pure coincidence?? Small sample size??? You are wrong, my friend....

24-20 Bears =P Boo

FITZCORE 1252'S EVO's picture

Jay, it's pretty simple... Don't go. No Packer fan worth their salt misses bears week, especially if they think doing so guarantees a loss for gods team.

Ruppert's picture

This is a big game. The division title is on the line and Duh Bears are fighting for their playoff lives.

When Cutler wins his next big game, let me know. Because it will be his first.

And I'm sorry, but anybody's credibility disappears when they predict a 14 point home loss to the Lions.

cow42's picture

the Packers didn't beat the Lions... the Lions beat the Lions.

the Bears won't beat themselves.

packeraaron's picture


ohenry78's picture

The Bears won't beat themselves? Have you watched the last few games that Cutler played against the Packers' defense? It confuses the hell out of him. I'm going to say at least two interceptions this weekend for the Packers' defense.

cow42's picture

he's too good to continue to play as poorly as he has.
law of averages have to catch up eventually.

ohenry78's picture

Nope, you're wrong cow.

Think baseball. I know baseball isn't football, but its easier to see certain trends because of the amount of games. Sometimes, a batter just has trouble against a certain pitcher. Not much in the way of explanation, but you'll see otherwise good hitters look foolish against pitchers who may not even be as good otherwise.

Compare Cutler's career, or by-team, stats to his stats vs GB:

2009: 3td, 6int, 55.6% completion percentage and 55.7 QB rating.

2010: 1 TD 3 INT 56.1% CP and 59.5 rating.

2011: 2 TD 2 INT 56.8 CP and 78.9 rating.

2012: 1 TD 4 INT 40.7% CP and 28.2 rating.

Those stats, vs other division rivals and other opponents in general, are far better.

Sometimes players just have trouble against certain other players and schemes. And Cutler can't figure out Dom Capers' defense. That won't change magically this week.

Ruppert's picture

"Cutler" and "too good" do not belong in the same sentence. Ever. Unless it's something like "it is just too good to see Cutler play like garbage, fake injury, and act like a baby...AGAIN!"

madmanjack's picture

Jay...simple. Don't go to the exam review session...PACKERS WIN!

The poster formerly known as Bearmeat's picture

For once these two teams face each other with similar injury lists. Chicago does not have the depth across the field that GB does.

GB Prevails 28-10. Cuthead throws three picks and is sacked 4 times. GB runs for 150 yards on Chicago's depleted front 7.

Teams are going to have to come out of that cover 2 soon...

cow42's picture

"Teams are going to have to come out of that cover 2 soon…"

any DC that takes his D out of cover two because he's concerned with Green, Grant, Harris should be fired on the spot.

"and is sacked 4 times"
4 sacks? 4? 4?
that's like 3 or 4 games worth of sacks for this Packer team.
Clay (on a rep count) ain't gonna help THAT much. not on THAT field.

Walty's picture

I guess there will be a lot of DCs fired on the spot this playoffs then.

Teams are going to try to stop the Packers enough to win the game. If we continue to be able to run the ball well defenses won't be able to sit back in Cover 2 as consistently as they have been.

The question mark is whether we'll be able to keep running. As a troll, I suppose you'll be a bit more pessimistic on that front, however.

cow42's picture

so after 2 GAMES you're convinced that the team that hasn't been able to run for 2 SEASONS now will be so good at running that defensive coordinators will have to change their schemes...

got it.

Another cow correction's picture

"4 sacks? 4? 4?
that’s like 3 or 4 games worth of sacks for this Packer team."

Sigh. The Packers have 35 sacks through 13 games. Thats 2.7 sacks per game. So, they average 4 sacks every 6 quarters.

By comparison, the Bears have 33 sacks. Plus, the Pack have managed that sack total with Clay missing 4 games this year.

But don't let the facts get in the way of proving how right you are. Proceed with informing us just how truly terrible the Packers are...

cow42's picture

how many sacks since Clay's been gone?
how much do you think Clay's gonna do in his first game back, on a slow track, in limited reps?

stats shmats.

if GB gets 1 sack today, i'll be surprised. and i'm not counting any Cutler running out of bounds behind the line of scrimmage or falls on a bad snap and gets tagged while lying on the ground crap.

cow would rather light his hair on fire than admit he's wron's picture

Huh. Pack sacked Cutler 4 times (I'll give kudos to "the poster formerly known as bearmeat" for his accurate prediction since I know you're constitutionally incapable of doing so), Clay was a force of nature, and all four sacks were legit.

Guess you must be awfully surprised, right?

Then again, since you are so consistently wrong, I would think "surprise" would be reserved for when you're actually right about anything.

Barutan Seijin's picture

cow, i get the skepticism about the Packers. At the very least, it's a necessary corrective to homerism. But shouldn't one apply the same skepticism to the Bears?

Rich Beckman's picture

I just hope no Green Bay players read Carriveau's post.

Lucas's picture

I'm Brazilian, the Packers Fan, and I agree with every word in this text! If you have a typo sorry because I am using the google translator! lol!!

Bugeater's picture

Look for a very professional, businesslike win for the Pack on Sunday. Green Bay will finally control both sides of the line of scrimmage and we'll get some nice in the trenches play. A solid performance out of Jennings and some sparkling receptions from Cobb and a TD or 2 for Jones will allow them to pull away comfortably by mid third quarter as Bears fan politely stream out of the stadium so the Packers fans can enjoy their celebration of clinching the North.

Dontcha just love December?

woodson4president's picture

Hahaha wrs - push....I needed a good knee slapper. Is it weird being forced to wear a helmet at all times cow?

cow42's picture

both squads at full strength? then yes - it's obviously Packers.
but i'm talking about RIGHT NOW.

i guarantee that at the end of the game Marshall + whoever the Bears' next leading receiver is will have more yards and td's than Cobb + Jennings + Jones.

MarkinMadison's picture

I'll take your guarantee and raise you. If the your guarantee pans out I will never post on this web site again. If it does not, then you must post everything on this web site from now on under your REAL NAME. Why? Because I don't think you would say half of what you do if people knew who you were. You must provide to Carriveau or Nagler enough info to verify your identity. Are we on?

FITZCORE 1252'S EVO's picture

Oh no... Another one of these. Ain't worth it Mark.

MarkinMadison's picture

LOL. Looks like you guys are still stuck with me Fitz. But I'd like to take a moment here to say THANK YOU to the folks here at CHTV. They pump out content for our discussion, enlightenment and criticism every single day. And they have always stood behind what they wrote and used their real names, even though some of them are still stuck in real jobs like the rest of us.

Walty's picture

What good is a guarantee with nothing behind it? Man up and take MarkinMadison's challenge.

cow42's picture

f that.

i'm not providing personal identification to anyone.
why don't i just throw out my SS# while i'm at it?

that's silly.

MarkinMadison's picture

Quick, who will be the Bear's #2 CB tomorrow? #3? Hint the #2 is 5'8". I'm not sure even Lovie Smith knows who the #3 will be tomorrow. You are dodging the bet because you will lose the bet. Rodgers is going to throw for over 300 tomorrow, and even with spreading the ball around the Packers top 3 receivers will beat Marshall + whoever you like. And Hester? Seriously? I thought the Universe understood years ago that this guy is a return specialist, not a WR.

cow42's picture

i can't even remember the last time Rodgers threw for 300+. hard to do that when your overrated receivers can't get separation and your horsesh*t line can't keep you off your back.

27 rushing (for his life) yards
sacked 5 times

the offensive players surrounding #12 have turned him from Aaron Rodgers into Matt Schaub.

woodson4president's picture

U have guaranteed a lot lately. How has that panned out for ya?

cow42's picture

I don't see a disagreement in your post, do I?

MarkinMadison's picture

"How to tell yourself you are the smartest football guy on the internet," by Cow42. 1) Trash your team as much as you can. Point out their flaws. Make up a few. 2) When your team does not make the playoffs/gets bounced from the playoffs/loses in the championship game/loses the Super Bowl point out how the failure to make the playoffs/etc. proves your point. 3) On the odd occasion when your team wins the Super Bowl say how glad you were to be wrong. Don't worry, if you are a Vikings fan this will never happen to you. 4) Repeat next season.

cow42's picture

not claiming to be the smartest.
just pointing out flaws in this "perfect team" you all seem to think we've got rollin' here.


sure - my prediction of 9-7 may not come to fruition but ask yourself...

when was the last game that this Packer team actually looked like they could even bother anyone in the playoffs.

i'll tell you - it was the Texans game... and that was a hell of a long time ago.

i guess i was spoiled by having the Packers win the SB. now that's all i care about.

who cares about individual wins?
who cares about winning divisions?
who cares about MAKING the playoffs?

if you're not a team that has a legitimate shot at WINNING THE SUPER BOWL then, in my opinion, you have work to do.

this Packer team CAN NOT win the Super Bowl.

ol = bad
rb = bad
wr = playing below capabilities
qb = SB worthy

dl = average, not a difference maker in the bunch
lb = average to below average as a group
db = very vulnerable

st = wish they had a kicker who could... i don't know... mmmm... KICK.

Jay's picture

"this Packer team CAN NOT win the Super Bowl."

This is just false and wrong for you to portray this opinion as though it's a fact. We care about making the playoffs because we all know everything is wiped clean for the playoffs. The Packers didn't play like world beaters during the 2010 regular season; they barely got in and ended up winning. Same thing with the Giants. Will history repeat itself? I have no idea? Will it be tough? It's the NFL: it's ALWAYS tough. But crazy things can happen in one game. You have to play your best football when the right time comes. That right time is the playoffs.

MarkinMadison's picture

I'll apologize for that post. It was a bit harsh. I don't even disagree much with your breakdown of the player groups above. I'll even note that when you go through the Packers record and look at who they've beaten and who they have lost to that the Ws don't appear to have been against more than 1 or 2 play-off bound teams, and the Ls have all come against teams that appear to be headed for the playoffs. And that worries me. But seriously, who the heck ever said that the Packers were perfect? And the Bears do not look like a playoff team. So don't hold your breath waiting for the Bears to win tomorrow, because they will not.

Chad Toporski's picture

Wow... I think a lot of people have read this article the wrong way. I'm sure Brian is using the information to show how the recent history of these two teams has played out, and IF it's any indicator, then the Bears have a lesser chance of winning. Brian's statements of "absolutes" seem more hyperbole and artistic license to me, rather than a cold hard commandment of truth. Plus, I think the information used is recent enough that there is some value. Many coaches and players are the same as they have been, even though others have changed.

Brian Carriveau's picture

Thanks, Chad. Appreciate the kind words.

woodson4president's picture

I'm with jay. We don't all come on here and talk about how amazing the packers are. We come on here to discuss what we are doing right and what the pack could improve on. If you (cow) would just get a life and go hang out on some 49ers site and stop downing our team so much ( cause you are obviously a packers fan and want them to do well) then you would have nothing at all to say about the comments that are made on this site. I am with you though jay....several of the past teams have played subpar throughout the season and still ended up winning the superbowl. THAT is why we watch. Not to be a pescimistic little bitchboy and point out a teams flaws and point out every little mistake a team makes and hope to be right so they can say I told you so and enjoy their 3 minutes of being smart.

Jamie's picture

Fact is, by choice or by pure ignorance, cowpatty lives in his own little jaded reality.

I'm an optimist by nature, and often get frustrated by the genuine and often times overwhelming negativity posted on this site by folks that are obviously REAL fans...that want the best for their team and just tend to see things from a different perspective than I.

For cow

Jamie's picture

Fact is, by choice or by pure ignorance, cowpatty lives in his own little jaded reality. IMO, it's fairly obvious he is not a Packer fan, but rather a fan of a team that has repeatedly l

I'm an optimist by nature, and often get frustrated by the genuine and often times overwhelming negativity posted on this site by folks that are obviously REAL fans...that want the best for their team and just tend to see things from a different perspective than I.

For cowpatty to turn this on us, the REAL fans, for thinking our team is perfect is simply

Jamie's picture


Cowpatty continually...

• uses blatantly false over-generalizations (ie, we consider our team perfect)
• randomly projects unsubstantiated success by opponents (ie, Cutler is too good to play as poorly as he has (for three years))
• makes negative claims against our team that completely ignore recent history in an effort to diminish the idea of possible success (the Packers CAN NOT win the SB, for reasons that allowed them to have recently won the SB)

Put in simpler terms, cowpatty is a troll. And I would think smarter people than me, who run this site, would have rules in place to protect us (mostly) cordial and genuine fans (of any team), and allow us to enjoy all facets of this site without having to be subjected to daily trolling. Be it by banishment of said troll, or the ability to block posters.

cow42's picture

ban me for having an opinion that differs from yours.

that's weak.

i never attack anyone.
i'm never offensive.

just simply expressing my opinion.

Jay's picture

One coda on your predictions:
Predicition: Marshall+next WR will have more than Jones+Cobb+Jennings

Jones: 60
Jennings: 50
Cobb: 115

Marshall: 56
Jeffrey: 15

Just saying

denniseckersley's picture


Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook



"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"