Green Bay Packers-Detroit Lions: Season Finale Preview

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

On paper, this one is a rout. Packers by 20. Over by halftime.

But we are not playing a Paper Lion (for you youngins, that was the name of a book by George Plimpton), we are playing on an actual field, a place neither team has done well of late.

So why does that favour the Lions? Because they have more to play for, and still have less pressure.

They are expected to lose. They are on the road. They are underdogs. They are the consensus worst team in the league, arguably in the history of the league. (Incidentally, even if you adjusted for the superior size and speed of today's players and the more sophisticated playbooks, there is no way this team loses to the 1976 Buccaneers).

The Packers were in first place and lost five in a row. Four of those five were by four or fewer points, all of which we had a fourth-quarter lead in. Clearly, there are jobs on the line; a loss to a team that has already established some history and on the verge of a mark that could never be broken would be unforgivable.

Mark Murphy is the Chief Executive Officer of the Green Bay Packers, the guy above the General Manager (since the Packers are publicly owned, he serves the role of owner in the organization). If I had that job, I would have the following conversation with GM Ted Thompson, head coach Mike McCarthy, and defensive coordinator Bob Sanders:

"Bob, you've had a tough job this year—a lot of injuries. But you have not made adjustments to fit your personnel, and your unit is the worst one we have. You were good last year, but you have to be able to adapt if things aren't working, and there are no more excuses.

"Mike, you were the best coach in the league last year, but you have made serious mistakes at the end of all of these games to choke them away. Calling timeouts that should not have been called, challenging plays that should not have been and failing to challenge plays that should have been, being too predictable in your play-calling...and there are too many penalties. Your performance last year has bought you some leeway, but you have used it all up.

"Ted, you badly mishandled the Favre divorce and put our franchise quarterback in a terrible situation. He has thrived, but many fans are still not behind him because they are so bitter about the way things went down. You traded away Corey Williams and relied on a player you drafted who has a history of injuries.

"You keep telling me it is better not to spend on free agents and build through the draft, but your draft picks have yet to make an impact and we are further from the salary cap than almost any other team—maybe a free agent would have gotten us that one play we needed last January, or kept us competitive this year. I need to see results now.

"This will stay between us—publicly I am backing you all the way. But we better win Sunday or you're all in the unemployment line like a lot of our fans. We better make the playoffs in 2009 or you'll be out of a job by this time next year. You're all in this together—now get it done."

That's pressure, but it's also fair because oh how do the teams match-up on paper...

Intangibles, special teams, and miscellaneous: big advantage, Detroit (-3)

Obviously, I have the intangibles as a huge advantage for the Lions. But the Packers are plus-six in turnover margin while the Lions are minus-eight. This is one reason that Green Bay is the sixth-best scoring team in the league, with an average of 25.9 per game, while the Lions give up more than anyone (32.4). Meanwhile, the Lions are 27th in scoring (16.5 average) and the Packers are 24th in points against (23.9 average).

Green Bay and San Diego are the only two teams in the league with losing records who outscore their opponents (by two points per game for Green Bay). What this means is that, with the Lions outscored by an average of 15.9 per game, there is a huge difference of 17.9 points per game in favour of the Packers. However, you cannot rely too much on this stat: Green Bay either wins big or loses close, and we already know who wins if it is not close.

As far as special teams, Jason Hanson is not just one of the best kickers in the game, he is one of the best ever. He can kick it almost as deep as Mason Crosby, and has only missed one of his 22 attempts, while Crosby is 25 of 32. The comparison between the teams' kick returns and coverage also favours Detroit by 2.5 yards.

On punts, the Lions punting average minus their opponents' average return puts them at a disadvantage of just inches; the Packers have an advantage over their opponents in this stat of just a couple feet. Thus, special teams also favour Detroit, although not decisively.

Packers pass offense vs. Lions pass defense: big advantage, Green Bay (+3)

The Packers rack up an average of 236 yards per game, ninth in the league. The Lions, despite facing teams trying to run out the clock, give up 229.5 per game, better than only six teams. Aaron Rodgers has thrown more passes in the red zone without an interception than any other quarterback.

Packers run offense vs. Lions run defense: slight advantage, Green Bay (+1)

Green Bay is ranked 21st in the NFL with an average of 106.3 yards per game. The Lions yield an average of 169.5 per game, worst in the league. However, teams spend much of the fourth quarter running out the clock, so the Lions ranking is misleading.

Lions pass offense vs. Packers pass defense: advantage, Green Bay (+2)

Detroit racks up only 182.7 yards per game, ranked 26th in the NFL, even though they are forced to pass a lot. The Packers give up 201.6 yards per game, ranked twelfth in the league. But the Packers are trending down here since their win over Chicago, and are no longer getting much of a pass rush.

Lions run offense vs. Packers run defense: toss-up

The Lions are ranked higher than only two teams in the league running the ball with an average of 82.4 yards per game, but again, they usually have to abandon that early. The Packers are not very good stopping the run, either, giving up 133.9 yards per game; only six teams are worse.

Final outcome: Packers 23, Lions 13.

Do not mistake this for confidence in this game: I actually put the Packers' chances of winning at only about 2:1. While the analysis came up with a difference of three points in favour of Green Bay, that considers the possibility of the game being close and the Packers tendency to lose those games, a tendency the Lions share.

Since my analysis still has Green Bay winning, I will throw out that component. Thus, excluding the intangibles favouring Detroit, the Packers have a big edge in the first analysis. Thus that comparison would swing from a -3 to a +4 for Green Bay. Therefore, the Packers should win by ten rather than three.