Does the market think Packers at home?

Strange price atm, will surely get bigger later in the week.

Maybe the masses are looking at the gulf in class in qb's are then betting accordingly.

Will be a tough game, but fancy the Pack more than ever after the last 4 weeks.

Playing the Bears this time with more of a running game threat, and a qb in ridiculous form

Can't see the Packs estblishing a good run game against the Chicago defence this week. Don't think Rodgers will get the time/space to exploit his receivers that he got in Atlanta. Expect a low scoring game with Bears edging given home advantage.

Hi Happy Lagger, I didn't make it clear but the reason I say the weather will be a factor is because the Bears have a more proven run game.  Not because GB doesn't get cold weather.  This guy Starks has had one and a half good games and GB all of a sudden have a good run game according to some pundits.  Not buying it myself. 

Green Bay can win but I'm actually in mild shock about their Superbowl odds.  Haven't people learned anything from Jets beating Pats and Seahawks beating Saints? And those two results are far greater upsets than Bears beating Packers in Soldier Field would be. They've already done that it once this season, anyway!

They have a good running game because they are getting great blocking...the running game is enough to open up the passing game..rodgers will rip them apart.

I don't want to criticse Green Bay, but I find it very interesting that Football Outsiders has the odds at around.

Pittsbugh - 2.7
Green Bay - 3.9
Chicago - 4.8
New York - 6

They also have the Green Bay / Chicago match up as 50.4% to 49.6%.

I'd say that is generous to Chicago but the fact remains that, like the Patriots, the market is obsessed by a good looking offense who have turned in a very good recent performance.

However, taking Aaron Rodgers out of the equation, it is asinine to expect Green Bay to be able to throw the ball as well in Chicago as they did in Atlanta.

For one, Atlanta was a dome. Chicago is likely to see a very cold, windy day and has a horrible field.
Secondly, Chicago's pass rush, secondary and general defence is better than Atlanta's.
Thirdly, you won't be able to complete 50 - 75% of your throws against a Dime CB who has no coverage skills.

The current price of 1.56 is beyond words. It is one of the most ridiculous I have seen on here.

But then again - the market has a love towards Aaron Rogers and a pure hatred of Jay Cutler.

The Bears are one dimensional, stop Forte and GB win. Chicago tried their best to knock GB out in week 17, and failed to move the ball all game. GB can pass, and also have more of a run game than they've had al season. Don't see the conditions being a problem to a west coast offence, the screen pass has helped GB kill teams all year. The pitch is a leveller, but GB will overcome that.

The earlier win at Soldier Field was a fluke, GB penalised to almost 200 yards, ahd Td's and interceptions wiped out. The Bears MVP that game was the officials. If the Seahawks can put points on the Bears, i'm damn sure Rodgers can.

lefgend

Yeah it's been a crazy season.
I just think the Pack have too many all round weapons - Bears were 11-5, managed to lose games at home to Skins and Seahawks (13-19 season record, 6-10 road record) and were generally regarded as one of the worst #2 seeds in memory, probably because of the Cutler factor, they've not struggled with injuries and nicked the vital win against a depleated Pack when Pack gave up something like 165 yards in pens.
The bigger issue for them is how they leaked so many yards and points in the 4th quarter against Seahawks last week when more ruthless teams would have shut them down.
I may well be proved wrong but the Bears just don't have what it takes to win a championship IMO.
Jets are a different story, they can squeeze the life out of most offences, though I think the way Rodgers is playing and the way his receivers break open they'd come unstuck against the Packers.
Steelers for my money have a decent pass rush, great run defence, a solid running game and can get it done through the air, they seem string in all depts for me.
I agree that the Packers are too short for the championship game and for superbowl, but they look worthy favs for me and if Jets can find a way of beating Steelers and assuming Pack get past Bears, Packers will be sub 1.5 for the big gig

CJ - How are Bears more one dimensional than the Packers? The way I see it, either Rodgers wins it for the Pack or he doesn't although in your opinion the Bears are dependent on Matt Forte? Strange view and some would say completely wrong.

I've decided that Pack are so short because they are seen as a "blowout" team.  Its hard to see Steelers blowing out Jets or vice versa, its hard to see Bears blowing out the Pack so people are basing their assertions on the strong win against Atlanta. 

Dangerous, when you consider Atlanta were a good but unspectacular team who got a boost in their record by playing the NFC West and teams like the Bengals, Panthers x2 and Browns.

The two games at Soldier Field and Lambeau were close and the same people who are calling the Bears win "lucky" (why? Because the Packers lacked discipline and gave up 150 yards of penalties?) are failing to mention that Packers played Bears in what was fundamentally a dead rubber game for them.

You're right. Who said Packers were one-dimensional? I disagree with them.

Bears didn't played at Lambeau as if it was a dead rubber though. Their starters played for the whole game.

They played to put the Packers out so as to avoid Sunday's scenario and they couldn't do it.

Regardless of your views, i'm pretty sure the odds will shorten the closer we get to game time.  The Pack backers will see an opportunity to profit take on some good green wary of the risk of yet another (mildly) surprising NFL result, the casual punters will see a genuine four horse race and back the long shot.  If you're backing the Bears i'd take the very generous prices on offer now.

But do you think the odds fairly reflect that reality Harry?

Cheers :)

Not sure if you can look at the last 2 games...think a few people have went over this a few times,their is no dominant team in the league..lot of people thought it was the patriots,they prob were if you go off who they have beaten in the regular season..detroit are now a team who you cant take for granted who would of thought...i thought the bears away was always going to be more difficult than atlanta just because its outdoors and potential bad weather and they have a much better D and special teams...odds are too short but i hope they live upto their hype

Shut the Pack down at Lambeau, remind me who scored 3?

;) We'll win, keep the faith, keep the green.

CJ Joined: 22 Jul 01
Replies: 1548 21 Jan 11 16:52 
Shut the Pack down at Lambeau, remind me who scored 3?

yes they never seem to mention this just that they stopped the packers,ermm who won the game

Horse - They'd already sewn up the game and won by 11 despite the 21 4th quarter points.  I wouldn't read much into that at all. Yes, they tried in Lambeau but they still fundamentally had very little to play for and the Pack were fighting for their lives.  For example, Bears gameplanning could easily have been built around staying healthy and a long run in the playoffs in the week preceding the game, regardless of the rivalry between the two teams.

Fair point lefgend but I don't buy that, any team leaking 170 yards and 21 points in 4th quarter tells me they have holes, and if Hass can exploit them then you can bet your life Rodgers can.
For me Bears are a poor #2 team, I'm not saying they can't win but they don't strike me a side who should be making the big gig, Cuttlers pick showed us that he hasn't lost the bonehead play.
Yes I'm talking through my pocket but Pack should have too much for Bears, I doubt I'll be playing because I have enough on Pack outright, but I'm not thinking of chopping because I don't see how the Bears can get past Packers.
Just my view

im not going to argue with anyone on here as its the last refuge of the morons

but the packers are not far superior to the bears harry.. they are a very good side i agree, but far superior?

i dont think so

And atlanta away...dont think the bears would of had their record if they had them 4 away games.