wpr;197686While I would love to have the NFC CG game played in GB, I don't think it will hurt them to play it in SF.
The warmer weather will give Rodgers and a better opportunity to put up points than they will have in a sub zero windy maybe even icy game in GB.
That said, SF may not even make it to the CG as they may loose the prior week.
Like Seattle last year they could fall victim to a softer schedule and weaker division.
time will tell.

Rodgers can play in shitty weather.
I'm thinking a game in the frozen tundra would actually give us an advantage by giving our defense a chance to stop a passing game for once.

The 49ers are 7-1 because of their defense and running game. Smith is hardly lighting it up, but he's doing enough in the passing game and is protecting the football. That being said though, the 49ers are ranked 21st in pass defense, so a good passing team can probably exploit their secondary.

No doubt the defense arguably had it's worst game of the season probably outside of Week 1. The front 7 is not getting home as consistently as they were a year ago and is exposing our secondary more often. Miscommunication between Peprah and Williams certainly didn't help in the 4th quarter either.

You definitely want HFA though. I think the offense has shown it can move the ball in not ideal conditions including tonight in a rainy mess. The defense isn't nearly as good as it was a year ago, but the offense is markedly improved over a year ago. The turnovers the defense has produced along with the offense putting up some gaudy numbers are why we're 8-0 so far.

Personally, after this game I wouldn't mind seeing So'oto getting a few snaps opposite Matthews. Zombo just can't stay healthy and the defense needs some sort of spark in pass rush. Walden is solid but nothing spectacular and Matthews can't do it all by himself. Hopefully getting Neal back in the next few weeks might help but it's easy to say the secondary needs to get on the same page more and the front seven needs to start generating better pressure. You fix those two things, and the defense probably improves quite a bit.

mi_keys;197691Rodgers can play in shitty weather.
I'm thinking a game in the frozen tundra would actually give us an advantage by giving our defense a chance to stop a passing game for once.

As RainX is saying, certainly we want HFA.
And you are correct that Aaron can play in poor weather.

I said he and the offense can do better in good weather.

A bitter cold, icy, windy day tends to produce low scoring games more times than not.
Weather like what I describe would play to SF strength.
But GB will beat them anyhow.

Someone on this site actually looked at Rodgers' performance in cold weather.
Didn't he come to the conclusion that Rodgers' passer rating actually climbs toward the end of the season?
That probably won't happen this year, since Rodgers has typically started out a bit slow in the first two or three games of previous seasons, but needless to say, I am not worried about playing the NFCCG at Lambeau Field.

Good points were raised by others about San Francisco's defense.
Obviously, I think the Packers could take care of business on the road, if necessary -- they're already 5-0 on the road this year -- but wouldn't be just that much sweeter to play the game at home?

I think it's awesome that the Packers still have 5 home games on the docket.

*Sigh*
1.
I would prefer Lambeau as well.
2.
IF they were to play in SF Aaron would do fine.

Is that so hard to comprehend?

The only weather element that pisses a QB off is a wet ball. Snow falling, no big deal. Wind blowing, not a big deal (Kickers disagree). Cold temperatures don't have much effect either, but a ball that is wet is not fun for a QB unless he has big hands and his receivers catch the wet ball.

I believe historically QB's tend to taper off towards the end of the season when they already have their playoff seed solidified.

This game really made it obvious how much Collins is missed.
It seemed last year that Collins somewhat disappeared as he wasn't making as many INTs but that's because he was the guy back there protecting the deep passes and they weren't testing him.
This year on these huge plays we give up the safeties are nowhere to be found.
I guess that's the difference between a 6-7 year starter and a 2 and 1 year starter.
Hopefully these guys get fixed whatever is keeping them out of position on so many plays.

Stevetarded;197709This game really made it obvious how much Collins is missed.
It seemed last year that Collins somewhat disappeared as he wasn't making as many INTs but that's because he was the guy back there protecting the deep passes and they weren't testing him.
This year on these huge plays we give up the safeties are nowhere to be found.
I guess that's the difference between a 6-7 year starter and a 2 and 1 year starter.
Hopefully these guys get fixed whatever is keeping them out of position on so many plays.

this is true.
we definitely see problems with safety help.