Hopelessly Devoted

When the movie Grease came out in 1978, I fell in love with it. Except for one song: Olivia Newton-John's sappy swimming pool lament, "Hopelessly devoted to you."

Yet that's what I'm singing this week.

The 49er-Viking game was not telecast here, but I was watching its progress online after the Packer game concluded. I was so excited to see that the 49ers were ahead and had the ball late in the 4th quarter.

As I watched the numbers changing on the NFL.com web site, however, I saw San Fransisco run three fruitless downs and punt, while the game clock moved hardly at all. Then it was Minnesota's turn. A sense of foreboding overtook me.

I watched the reports of subsequent plays with alternating emotions, until it came down to what promised to be the last play, and I saw that the Vikings were still more than 30 yards out. My arms were poised, ready to go up in a gesture of victory when Minnesota's last-ditch effort came up with the predictable incomplete or intercepted Hail Mary.

Then the score changed. Ugh!!

Just watching the numbers change online, I was thoroughly a Packers fan, and so I was really irritated by the end result.

But then, later, I saw the play shown (again and again!) on TV, and something inside me felt different. I still hated to see the Vikings win, of course, but there was something so familiar, so happy, so nostalgic about the scene, about watching Brett do it.

Oh my, I have a hard time rooting against him!

After so many years of pinning my football hopes on the aging quarterback, the ageless boy, one-of-a-kind iron man, the maddening gunslinger, I find it hard just to flip the switch. My conditioned reflex is to cheer for the guy. I fear that something Pavlovian within me will cheer when he does something heroic against the Packers next Monday Night. I fear that some wiring within me will short-circuit, and my football fan fuse will blow.

I'm Glad I'm Not...

As dismayed as I am by some elements of the Packers' performance in the first three weeks of the season, I look around the league, I see some other teams' situations, and I think to myself:


I'm glad that I'm not...


... A Tampa Bay fan. They were shut-out and demoralized by the New York Giants, who made it look easy, and the Bucs are now a dismal 0-3.

... A Tennessee fan. They have been competitive in each of their first three games, but they keep coming up on the losing end. Last season, they owned the league's best record at 13-3. This year, they head into October with as many losses as they had all last season!
... A Miami fan. After coming out of nowhere in 2008 to win the AFC East, they have started 2009 by losing all three of their games, and now it seems that they've lost their starting QB, too!

... Anyone involved with Washington -- fan, owner, player, coach, stadium vendor, parking attendant, anyone! The Redskins were the first team to lose to Detroit in nearly two calendar years, and they find themselves at the bottom of a very tough NFC East.

How Do You Spell Relief? R-A-M-S!

A trip to St. Louis was just what the Packers needed. Our team, which seemed to be in mid-season form during August, was full of kinks and mistakes so far in September. Clearly, there were still some things to be ironed out. And so it was nice to be able to get another week of work in while stilling getting a "W" in the process. Of course, it probably couldn't have happened against a better team.

I guess we'll find out next week, when we'll play an obvioulsy much better team.

What was Allen Greenspan's famous phrase? "Irrational exuberance," I believe. That is what I am trying to avoid in the wake of Green Bay's 19-point victory. Every win is a step in the right direction, of course, but some serious concerns remain. To wit:

How does our defense give up 17 points to a team that had averaged 3.5 so far in 2009? How does our offense come away with only field goals on those first three opportunities, especially given the short field? How does our kicker miss one PAT and get another one partially blocked?

Also, I'm afraid that pretty soon teams are going to figure out that, anytime they need to pick up 8-12 yards, they just need to throw something underneath against our linebackers in coverage. Capers' pass-rush schemes need to get consistent pressure on the opposing QB, othewise those linebackers are going to get eaten alive by some good, patient, dink-and-dunk quarterback.

Meanwhile, our protection of our quarterback remains a concern. Granted, giving up only 2 sacks this week is an improvement on the league-leading 10 that we came into the game with after two weeks. Still, it would have been more than 2 sacks yesterday if Aaron Rodgers weren't so mobile.

On the other hand, you have to love this about Rodgers: 3 games, 12 sacks, but no intereceptions. That's a cool customer, who is facing continual pressure, is taking a lot of hits, but doesn't throw the bad ball.

Also encouraging was what we were able to do with a lead in the 4th quarter. The great fear -- and not an unfamiliar sight -- is that your team turns into "prevent" mush on defense and three-runs-and-a-punt on offense. The Packers showed a little more killer instinct with the lead on both sides of the ball this week, however.

Another welcome sight was the return of the big play on offense. Indeed, the big play was really our offense's best weapon on Sunday. (Perhaps that's why we only got field goals when we were given the short field -- it was TOO short! We couldn't squeeze in one of our 50-yard passes!)

Well, in the end it was a win, which is most important. It was a Conference win, which is strategically important. It was a road win, which is excellent. And it was a win in a game we were supposed to win, which is essential.

Next week, however, is not a game that we are supposed to win. But we need to! 'More about that another day...

Week Three -- A Look Ahead

The week after a loss can't go fast enough for me. I am impatient to move on to the next game, hoping for a remedy to the bitter taste in my mouth. And this week, I am particularly hopeful, for I think a trip to St. Louis may be just what the doctor ordered for the struggling Packers.

So, here's a quick glimpse at the week ahead...

Packers at Rams

The Rams were one of the poorest teams in the league in 2008, and they haven't shown any early signs of having turned things around in 2009.

On the other hand, our offensive line has given us real cause for concern during Weeks One and Two, and the recent shuffling in the defensive backfield doesn't inspire confidence. The abrupt jettisoning of Aaron Rouse seems like a panicky overreaction, and you have to wonder if the new guy they brought in can possibly get up-to-speed fast enough with the system to be able to contribute. That whole series of events strikes me as very hasty and unnerving.

Still, I'm sure that we're going to trot more talent onto that field than our opponents will. So, unless we make another hero out of some previously unheralded defensive lineman, I like the Packers to get a win in this situation.

Redskins at Lions

The Lions are still looking for their first win since 2007. Amazing. Like the city of Detroit doesn't have enough sorrow. Well, at least they have the Tigers!

Meanwhile, with every additional week of futility, the prospect of losing to the Lions becomes more and more humiliating. Who will be the unlucky team that allows Detroit to break their unhappy streak?

The Redskins come to town this Sunday. There's no question that Washington is the better team, but something's gotta give sooner or later for the Lions. They're not as bad as last year's club. Perhaps this will be the week -- though I'm not betting on it.


49ers at Vikings

The Vikings enter Week Three having coasted to two easy wins over two lousy teams. The 49ers, however, should pose a different sort of test for them. I suspect that Minnesota is the better team, but San Francisco is a comer under Mike Singletary, and their two wins so far have been significantly greater accomplishments than the Vikings' have.

Minnesota's team seems to have been built on such a fundamental principle -- run the ball and stop the run -- that I'm afraid they're going to have a very good year. And all that effective running, of course, is going to set up Favre's passing in a way that hasn't really needed to be utilized so far in 2009. (At present, Minnesota ranks 32nd in the league in passing yards.)

I'm sure the 49ers will be more of a challenge than either the Browns or Lions were. I'm not confident, however, that they'll be able to go into Minnesota and get the win. Maybe if the game were out west, but... I think the Vikings are going to go into their first date with the Packers at 3-0.

Bears at Seahawks

If Seattle was at full strength, I might like the Seahawks to win this game out on the West Coast. As it is, however, I'm afraid Chicago is likely to get a road victory here.

The truth is that, even though Jay Cutler stunk up the joint when the Bears opened their season at Lambeau, the team has played very sound football during their first two weeks. Like the Vikings above, the abilities to run and to play solid defense seem to be the hallmark of Lovie Smith's squad.

In the end, I think everyone in the NFC North but the Lions will get a win this week... and perhaps the Lions will, too!


Elsewhere...

Looking at some other games on tap for this weekend, the Browns' trip to Baltimore should work out about as well as a Christian's trip to the Colosseum.

The Giants at Bucs, likewise, is a contest of two teams going opposite directions -- and those directions should both continue for another week.

In another undefeated-vs.-winless match-up, the Titans game against the Jets should be fascinating. New York has become quite the sexy pick after an impressive first two weeks, but the Titans are desperate and they're good. Should be a fascinating game.

I don't think that Steelers are as good as last year, and I don't think the Bengals are as bad as last year. It might be a changing-of-the-guards as the two AFC North rivals meet in Cincinnati.

For the game of the week, however, I'm going with the Falcons' trip to New England. Frankly, this game wouldn't be as interesting to me if both teams were 2-0. But the fact that the Patriots stumbled against the Jets last week and now have to host a hot Falcons team makes this a bit of a defining moment for them.

The Patriots are an interesting story. They pulled off that unbelievable perfect season in 2007, only to get upset in the Super Bowl. I can't imaging the bitter taste that left in those mouths. And then, in 2008, their hopes for revenge went down with Tom Brady in Week One. They struggled through with a previously unknown but very effective back-up, and they ended the season as the best team (and record) not to make the 2008 playoffs. The conventional wisdom at the time was: If only they had Tom Brady, then...

So, now he's back. But how good is he and how good are they in 2009? The struggled to win in Week One and lost in Week Two. Can the Brady-Belichick Patriots possibly open 2009 at 1-2? And then they have to host the Baltimore Ravens in Week Four. Interesting stuff.

Left to Right on Your Radio Dial

After football, my second favorite spectator sport is politics. It has good guys and bad guys. It has teams and seasons. It has games of greater and lesser importance, wins and losses, and its own versions of the playoffs. And I find that it gets a lot of the same sort of coverage and analysis as sports do.

Accordingly, I was very intersted in this recent Wall Street Journal article about the political leanings of football coaches:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574386952311239532.html

I'm not enough of a political junkie that a coach's politics would influence how I root, just as I don't let the political leanings of a given actor diminish my enjoyment of his or her movie. But the underlying thesis is an interesting proposition: namely, that there may be some values native to coaching that resonate more naturally with conservative politics.

I don't think the article reflects a broad enough pool of coaches to qualify as proof of its thesis. Still, the hypothesis is an interesting one. What do you think of it?

Solace

They say that misery loves company. In the wake of this past Sunday's miserable performance, therefore, you've got to love the company we're keeping this week.

Going into both Week One and Week Two, Don Banks (SI.com) listed the Packers at #3 in his power rankings. Ahead of us, in his judgment, were the New England Patriots and the Pittsburgh Steelers. After Week One, Banks observed that all three top teams struggled to get their victories (Pittsburgh over Tennessee, New England over Buffalo, and Green Bay over the Bears), but he kept them all in their top perches.

Now, in Week Two, all three of those teams lost. The Bears bested the Steelers, the Jets outlasted the Patriots, and the Bengals upset the Packers.

While I'm genuinely troubled, therefore, by the Packers' performance last Sunday afternoon, I am trying to keep it in perspective. After all, if we follow the trajectory of the Patriots and the Steelers all season long, I'm guessing that I'll be happy with that. Those are the two teams almost universally chosen to make it to the AFC Championship Game, and they both struggled to win in Week One and then lost in Week Two.

Meanwhile, the other team that often entered the preseason discussion of AFC elite teams was the San Diego Chargers. And guess what... They also won their first game and lost their second.

One final word of perspective to give grieving Packer fans a bit of consolation... The team that owned the league's best regular season record in 2008 -- the Tennessee Titans -- is 0-2 so far in 2009.

It's early. It's a long season. And the St. Louis Rams are next on the schedule.

On The Other Hand...

The old joke tells of a man with one good hand and one mangled hand. He went to a plastic surgeon and said, "I want my one hand to be just like the other hand." When he awakened from surgery, both hands were mangled.

We came out of Week One with one good hand (our defense) and one bad hand (our offense). Our hope was that the one would be like the other in Week Two, but not quite like this.

After the Packers' opening drive stalled, the Bengals took the ball and gained twelve yards per play on their way to a touchdown. It looked way too easy. And Cincinnati continued to show an ability to move the ball on us throughout the game.

I think the Bengals' coaching staff saw in their film study that the Bears gave up on the run too easily. They responded by pounding Cedric Benson at us, and he performed very effectively against our defense. I hate to think what Adrian Peterson is going to do to us.

From the first play -- a well-executed rollout that resulted in a dropped pass -- the Packer offense was never in sync. The protection for Rodgers was no better than it had been against the Bears. And the running game, to which McCarthy always says he is committed, never really got on track.

On the defensive side, meanwhile, the Bengals beat us the old-fashioned way. They ran it, ran it, ran it, and that made us vulnerable to the pass. We forced a few punts, but we never forced a field goal. Cedric Benson broke tackles right and left. And we let the Bengals convert 9 of 14 third down opportunities.

And, like the Bears did last week, the Bengals beat us in time of possession by some seven minutes.

So the team that looked like a Super Bowl contender in the preseason now looks more like last year's 6-10 squad.

Of course, it's a long season. That's good news for the team. But it may be bad news for Aaron Rodgers, who can't withstand the kind of weekly beating that he has endured against the Bears and Bengals.

Finally, a football team has a third hand. In addition to the offense and defense, there's also the special teams unit. Hmmm.... No better news there. We gave up a couple of big kick returns, our own punting was mediocre, and we missed another field goal attempt.

So between now and next Sunday in St. Louis, we have two or three mangled hands that need to get fixed. Fast.

Week Two -- A Look Ahead

I admit, it's very early. Still, the Packers emerge from Week One exactly where we want them to be: undefeated and at the top of their division. And Week Two looks promising.


Bengals at Packers

I believe that the Packers stand an excellent chance of going 2-0 as they host the Cincinnati Bengals this week.

The lingering question mark after Week One is which Packer offense is the real one: the efficient machine of the preseason or the Keystone Cops of the Bears game.

I read a story years ago about an unspectacular college player that Bill Walsh had drafted during his halcyon days with the 49ers. The player turned out to be a star in the NFL. When asked how he was able to see the potential no one else saw, Walsh referred to one particular play he had seen the player make in college. That play, Walsh said, showed him what that player was capable of doing.

Well, I believe the preseason showed us what our offense is capable of doing. And both the preseason and Week One showed us what the defense is capable of doing. So I'm still a believer, even after last week's losing effort (see post below). I pick the Packers to beat the Bengals, who still seem to be trying to find themselves, but have become perennial underachievers.


Minnesota at Detroit

Meanwhile, the Minnesota Vikings also stand an excellent chance of improving to 2-0 as they travel to Detroit. The Lions were the worst team in the league last year, and I doubt that they have improved enough to beat a loaded Vikings squad.

In a sense, Minnesota should feel a certain pressure to be 2-0, for the schedule can't get any easier than playing the Browns and the Lions.

Peter King of SI.com, meanwhile, is going against conventional wisdom and picking the Lions to upset the visiting Vikings. Detroit did play Minnesota close last season, and goodness knows that anything can happen in the division.

Still, unless Detroit can arrange for Adrian Peterson to miss the team bus, I think the Vikings win this one.


Pittsburgh at Chicago

In Chicago, things are going from bad to worse. Playing in Lambeau on Week One was a tough start. Losing a close game is painful, and losing Brian Urlacher is disastrous. And now they have to host the defending champion Steelers!

On the other hand, Pittsburgh's debut against the Titans was not altogether impressive. They won, but without much of a running game. They needed Big Ben's heroics to pull out the victory, and they didn't show much ability to protect him against a good defensive line and scheme (which the Bears also have). Also, they'll have to face the Bears without the benefit of their best defensive player (Troy Polamalu).

I hate the Steelers enough that I will be happy with either result, but the Packer fan within me will naturally pull for a Chicago loss.

Around the League

Elsewhere, there are some other games that have no immediate impact on the Packers, but which promise to be interesting match-ups.

The Patriots at the Jets doesn't quite have the same soap opera quality now that Mangini is gone from New York, but it's still a divisional rivalry, so it's important. Also, the Jets looked considerably stronger in their Week One win than the Patriots did in theirs.

If one cares about the NFC West, then the Seahawks' visit to San Francisco will make for interesting viewing. Both teams are coming off significant Week One victories, and the winner of this game takes the early lead in the divisional race.

And, on the other side of the NFC, the Giants travel to Texas to face the Cowboys. Both teams are 1-0, and it should be an instant classic. This game is the coming out party for the Cowboys' fabulous new stadium, and you know the Giants would love nothing more than to spoil that party. It's the Sunday Night game on NBC, and it should be one of the best games of the weekend.

A Losing Effort

A quick glance at the final statistics from the Packers/Bears affair on Sunday Night are a little unnerving. Consider the following:


The Bears picked up 18 first downs; the Packers just 12.

Chicago won the time of possession battle 33 minutes to 27.

The Bears (3 for 25) had fewer penalties for less yardage than the Packers (6 for 45).

Chicago's offense put up more than 100 more yards passing than Green Bay (266 to 150). (A third of those passing yards, you recall, came on a single, game-winning play near the end of the game.)

And it's not as though the Packers compensated for that deficit by having a terrific ground attack. Neither team ran the ball well. But, again, Chicago at least ran it less badly (86 yards) than we did (76 yards).

On paper, therefore, you'd have to conclude that it was a losing effort on Sunday Night. We are fortunate to have come away with a win, owing largely to the fact that Jay Cutler was so fond of giving us the ball.

Because the Week One performance was such a departure from our preseason accomplishments, one has to wonder which team is the real one. Perhaps this Sunday against the Bengals the real Green Bay Packers will please stand up.

Did You See That?

Did you see the way those green shirts were swarming around the ball on defense?

Did you see the aggressiveness of our kick and punt retunrers -- like guys who really want to go all the way?

Did you see the competitive fire and desire inside Aaron Rodgers?

Did you see the ball-hawking of those Packers defensive backs?

Did you see that constant in-your-face pressure the Green Bay defense put on Cutler?

Did you see Johnny Jolly's amazing interception?!

Did you see the Chillar hurdle and one-armed sack?

And then came the second half.

I'm not sure how you win the turnover battle 4-0 at home and still almost lose the game. I don't know how the most dynamic offense of the preseason could become so impotent in Week One of the regular season. I cannot understand how the Bears could lose so many defensive players to injury and still stymie our offense so completely.

It was an unbelievable game. In many respects, the Bears truly outplayed the Packers, but they just made SO many mistakes. Really, it would be embarrassing to be a Bears fan this week.

Living in southern Wisconsin, I pick up a fair amount of Chicago sports talk radio. It will be a delight to listen to a week's worth of post-mortem from frustrated Bears fans. For so much of the offseason and preseason, they were so full of themselves after the Jay Cutler acquisition. Yet Cutler turned out to be their devastatingly weak link. Their running game was productive (though under-utilized), and their defense was very effective. If they had gotten just an average performance from their quarterback, the Bears would have won that game easily.

Meanwhile, the Cutler-less Broncos are 1-0.

In the end, the Packers got the best kind of win. Winning your first game, winning your home game, winning a division game -- that's all good. More than that, though, it was an escape win: the coaching staff has plenty to correct, the players have reason to redouble their focus and effort during the week of practice, yet they still get a "W" out of it.

The Packers' Place in SI's Crystal Ball

SI.com has just released its experts' predictions for the 2009 NFL season. Fascinating stuff. Here's the link to the whole story: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/09/08/crystalball2/index.html?eref=sihpT1

Of particular interest to us are these tidbits...

• 1 of their 9 experts picks the Bears to miss the playoffs. He says the NFC North won't send 3 teams and the Bears will be the one to miss out.
• 4 of the 9 believe the Lions will have the worst record in the league (again).
• 3 of 9 expect Favre to be the star that has a sub-par season.
• 2 of 9 pick Packers (WRs Finley and Jennings) to be the non-stars that have breakout seasons.
• 5 of 9 say Favre won't be back next season.
• 5 of 9 pick a Packer game as the "Game I'm Looking Forward To Most."
• And 4 of 9 pick Green Bay to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl (though against 3 different AFC teams, and none of them pick Green Bay to win).

Finally, Rodgers, McCarthy, and Kampman are occasionally predicted to win some of the end-of-the-year individual awards.

I can't imagine that Green Bay would have gotten so much love if these guys had made their predictions back in July. Did anyone really expect the Packers to turn around so quickly and dramatically from their 6-10 season last year? And so I suspect that all these great expectations are rooted in our very impressive preseason display. Is that enough to go on? No. But we don't have to go on it for long -- our season starts this Sunday!

Week One -- A Look Ahead

Well, after so long a wait, the time is finally here!

The 2009 NFL regular season kicks off this Thursday evening with the defending champion Steelers hosting the Tennessee Titans. Then comes a full complement of games on Sunday afternoon and evening, followed by two Monday Night match-ups.

For our purposes, there are three games of particular interest.


Detroit at New Orleans

After setting a new standard for failure last season, it's really hard to root against the Lions this season. Still, they're an NFC North foe, and so they have to be on our 'public enemy' list.

Meanwhile, Don Banks picks the Saints to win the NFC South. At the end of the season, therefore, when I assume the Lions will be long-gone from the playoff race and the Packers and Saints may be vying for home field advantages, we may wish that the Lions had won this game.

And so I am divided about this one. It's too early in the season to cheer for a division rival, but if the Lions do win, I won't be too sad about it.


Minnesota at Cleveland

Here are two teams with surrounded by completely different expectations.

Almost all of the offseason and preseason press about the Browns has been bad. They remain an embarrassingly dysfunctional franchise, and the lasting impact of Eric Mangini's distinctive style remains to be seen. For the moment, he is being widely ridiculed for his handling of the starting QB competition between Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn.

Brad Childress, meanwhile, has also come under much criticism for his handling of his QB situation: his willingness to take Favre on Favre's own terms ("I'm interested." "I'm retiring." "I'm available." Plus, the unspoken but unmistakable message: "I don't do training camp anymore."); his willingness to demote so quickly his other two QBs; and the potential damage he has done within the locker room by his handling of the whole affair. I won't shed any tears if Childress has done damage to the Vikings. I do know these two things, however: (1) On the one hand, winning heals a lot of wounds, and so the Favre gameble could pay off big. (2) The Jets are arguably worse off in 2009 for having had Favre in 2008, and the same thing might happen to Minnesota.

Still, the expectation of the 2009 Browns is that they will be bottom dwellers again (Banks predicts they'll finish 4-12 and last place in the AFC North), while the Vikings are widely expected to be a playoff team, perhaps even a Super Bowl contender.

Naturally, I'm rooting for the Browns. I can only hope that the optimism and enthusiasm that come with Week One will make the Cleveland stadium the kind of difficult environment that the old Dawg Pound used to be for visiting teams. Also, Mangini may have some strategic advantage is coaching against his QB from last year (though both are with different teams now).

I'm sure Minnesota is the much better team, and so if I had to put money on it, I'd go with the Vikings. But, "on any given Sunday....!"


Bears at Packers

Is it possible for the first game of a season to be a must-win game?

All games are equal in the W-L column, but not all games are equal when it comes to the end-of-the-year tie-breaking system. If we lose on the road against Pittsburgh, for example, that is not nearly so costly as losing at home against the Bears.

You've got to win your Conference games. You've especially got to win your division games. And you especially-squared have got to win your division games at home.

The NFC North promises to be a very competitive division this year, and the Bears are one of the three serious contenders. We cannot afford to lose to them at Lambeau.

There's been a lot of hype about Jay Cutler and the Bears finally having a franchise quarterback -- their first since Sid Luckman, some say. I'm not sure that Cutler's name will ever end up next to Luckman, but he has brought a new capacity to the Bears offense. Add in the Devin Hester factor and a perenially stout defense, and the Bears figure to be a formidable opponent.

On the other hand, the Packer offense has shown signs of being a scoring machine, and the 2009 version of Green Bay's defense looks smothering. Honestly, both my head and my heart say that Packers will win this game. More specifically, though, I would say this: If everything clicks for Green Bay the way it did in the preseason, I think we'll win comfortably. If it's a close game, however, I fear that our special teams may prove to be a weak link. So I envision either a comfortable win or a close loss. I'll put my money on the former.

A Quick Look at the Schedule

You'll see on the right a copy of the Packers' 2009 regular season schedule. Obviously we'll take a closer look at each game as it comes. From a distance, though, let's give a little thought to the schedule as a whole.

First, we have to concede that home field advantage at Lambeau is not what it used to be. I'm afraid the mystique went out when Michael Vick and the warm-weather Falcons came to town in the dead of winter and handed the Packers their first Lambeau playoff loss. Ugly stuff and a miserable game.

Even so, it would be nice to be able to host some southern-tier team -- or some dome team -- after Thanksgiving. No such luck in this year's schedule. In fact, three of our final home games are on the road.

Speaking of the final quarter of the season, if we're still in the playoff hunt at that stage of the game, we're really going to have to earn our berth, as we play both of last year's Super Bowl teams, and on the road, at that!

Those games against Pittsburgh and Arizona, however, are not the two games on Green Bay's schedule that everyone will be talking about. Rather, all eyes will be on the October 5th and November 1st games: Green Bay at Minnesota and Minnesota at Green Bay. The Packers vs. Favre match-ups will be part sports, part romance, part tragedy, and part tabloid. And, boy, will they get high ratings!

Meanwhile, there must be a blue moon this November, for the Cowboys are coming to Lambeau. It seems that they come north one time for every fifteen trips we have to make down there. Anyway, they're coming this year -- America's Team vs. America's Team at Lambeau Field on November 15th.

All in all, the Packers enjoy a surprisingly easy schedule -- statistically, at least. ESPN ranks Green Bay's strength of schedule at #30 out of 32 NFL teams. Our opponents combined to have just a .428 winning percentage in 2008. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/news/story?id=4027503)

That sounds very promising, although the list features two misfortunes... (1) The Super Bowl Champion Steelers have the 29th-ranked schedule, which seems terribly unfair. (2) The two teams with 'easier' schedules than the Packers are the two teams that finished ahead of us in our division last year (Minnesota at 31 and Chicago at 32).

And speaking of Chicago, they are our first opponent in 2009. We host them at Lambeau on Sunday Night (which seems to have surpassed Monday Night as a football big event) during Week One. Chicagoland has high hopes since the arrival of Jay Cutler. We shall see.

Green Bay gets two Monday Night appearances in 2009, but one Sunday Night game, and a Thanksgiving match-up with the Lions.

So, given the strength of schedule, the division, and the arrangement of our games, what's your prediction? Enter your prediction on the right.

For myself, I'm saying we split the four games with the Bears and Vikings, sweep the Lions, beat the Bengals, Browns, Rams, and 49ers. Meanwhile, I envision us winning just two of our games against the Bucs, Cowboys, Ravens, Steelers, Seahawks, and Cardinals, bringing us to a 2009 record of 9-7. But that's just my head talking... my heart says 16-0!

The Pack is Back -- In Expectations, At Least

Don Banks of SI.com has just released his predictions for the 2009 NFL season, and he has even higher expectations for the Packers than Peter King did.

King, you recall, predicted that the Packers would win a wild card berth, eventually losing to the Bears in the NFC Championship Game. Banks, meanwhile, predicts that the Packers will win their division outright, and eventually go on to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl against the New England Patriots. Both King and Banks expect New England to go all the way and win the Super Bowl this year.)

Here is the link to Banks' playoff picture: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/03/2009.predictions/index.html

These great expectations are exciting to read. Of course, in just about a week, expectations will be replaced by reality. Will that be as exciting?

Another One Bites the Dust

Do you remember the old Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck "duck season, rabbit season" routine? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgAVroI6_34

Well, there's no question what season it is in the NFL... It's Offensive Coordinator season!

The bloodletting began with the Kansas City Chiefs releasing Chan Gailey from that position on their staff at the beginning of the week. Then, on Thursday, the Buccaneers surprised everyone by letting Jeff Jagodzinski go. And now, just a week before the start of the regular season, Buffalo has fired their O.C., Turk Schonert.

So evidently it's open season on Offensive Coordinators. Fortunately for Joe Philbin, the Packers (first-team) offense has been legendary in its preseason performance, so he ought to be safe. For now.

The Rises and Falls of Jeff Jagodzinski

Did you see the news about Jeff Jagodzinkski (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-bucs-jagodzinski&prov=ap&type=lgns)?

The Wisconsin native had shown tremendous promise on the Packers' coaching staff with his effective zone blocking scheme. In fact, he had shown promise wherever he went, which I suppose is why he kept going from one place to another. One year here, two years there, one year in the next place, and then two years in another.

Jagodzinski kept working his way up the coaching ladder until, in 2007, he got his first head coaching gig -- at Boston College. He had a sensational first year with the Eagles, as well as a very solid second year. But then, in spite of a clear risk of being fired from that job, "Jags" pursused the head coaching vacancy with the New York Jets in 2008.

The New York Jets didn't hire Jadodzinski, and Boston College did fire him. Ugh.

Still, he managed to land on his feet, more or less. Not unemployed for long, he joined the Tampa Bay staff as Offensive Coordinator in January of this year.

But now the news has come out, practically on the eve of his first regular season with the Bucs, that Jagodzinski has been fired.

It's a remarkable resume for a not-very-old guy. He's been a lot of places, but for just a few years -- or, in this most recent instance, months -- at a time. And after so much promise and promotion, now he faces a second consecutive football season without a job. Strange business.

2009 Preview and Predictions

Well, Sports Illustrated has released its annual NFL preview, including predictions for all 32 teams, plus a tumbnail analysis of each, including our beloved Packers http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/08/31/packers/.

In the end, SI figures Green Bay to finish 10-6 (a significant improvement over 2008), but still 3rd place in the division (just the same as in '08). Still, in keeping with their confidence in the NFC North, they figure on our division sending three teams to the playoffs.

I wonder how the NFC East feels about that.

Also in keeping with their newfound love for the old black-and-blue, SI foresees the Bears and Packers in the NFC Championship Game, with the Bears prevailing in order to go on and lose to the Patriots in the Super Bowl.

All that love for the Bears springs primarily from the acquisition of Jay Cutler. The long-dormant Chicago offense is now expected to be a world beater. We shall see. I don't remember seeing the Cutler-led Broncos in the Super Bowl.

I buy the conventional wisdom that QB is the most important position in football (perhaps in sports), and Chicago has clearly upgraded there. Logically, therefore, they should be much improved. But their back-up situation is as suspect as Green Bay's, and I'm not sure that the 2008 Bears were just a quarterback away from championship ball.

Personally, I'm more afraid of the package that the Vikings have put together. But if the new 3-4 defense can do to Cutler and Favre what it has done to its preseason foes, then I'm not too afraid of anybody.

Lots of Love for Green Bay

When it was 1-0 after a game against the Browns, no one paid attention. When it was 2-0 against the Browns and Bills, still no one outside of Wisconsin noticed. Now that it's 3-0, however, and the latest victim was the NFC Champion Cardinals, the Packers are starting to get some love.

Don Banks has crowned Green Bay the most dominant team of the preseason http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/01/winners.losers/index.html?eref=sihpT1. And while he recognizes that that is an achievement without a reward, he believes it has its benefits, and that it may well be a sign of things to come for the 2009 Packers. Banks thinks Green Bay may be the best team in the NFC North.

And, speaking of the old black-and-blue division, Peter King thinks it may be one of the best divisions in football http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/09/01/mail/index.html?eref=sircrc. Understand what a strong statement that is... to be in the same division with the Detroit Lions (0-16 in 2008) and be considered as the best or second-best division in the NFL: that's a lot of love for the Packers, Vikings, and Bears!

King says that he can imagine all three of those teams winning 12 games in 2009. Since each team plays four of its games against the two others, that means doing a lot of damage to the teams we're playing outside of the NFC North.

This isn't exactly one-plus-one-equals-two, but consider the implications of what Banks and King are saying this week: that the Packers are perhaps the best team in perhaps the best division in the NFL...?! Hmmm. If only we all still have reason to think and write such things come December!