Greenbay struggles on artificial turf

6-11 over the last 3 seasons with wins over the following juggernauts...
Vikings x2(13/14), Ravens(13), Cowboys (13), Rams(12), Lions (12)

Alot of the losses were against some really terrible teams also btw.

With a 4-4 road record, a gympy QB and that shoddy Defense Im loving our chances guys.

Go Hawks!

wouldnt matter if this game was played in the street . Seahawks > Packers

And it's the NFC Championship, both teams will be very ready for this one. Don't expect a blowout at all. Aaron Rodgers on the other side. Hope to be way wrong and they smoke em :th2thumbs:

12thManHawkFan":24s4o61h said:

6-11 over the last 3 seasons with wins over the following juggernauts...
Vikings x2(13/14), Ravens(13), Cowboys (13), Rams(12), Lions (12)

Alot of the losses were against some really terrible teams also btw.

With a 4-4 road record, a gympy QB and that shoddy Defense Im loving our chances guys.

Go Hawks!

Click to expand...

Some of the teams you have listed above use artificial turn and some use field turf. There's a big difference between those two differences. Or are you trying to say they struggle on all non grass surfaces?

Besides, the Packers practice indoors on field turf very frequently. If they lose this game, it will not have be due to the playing surface.

I was just looking at the road losses from this season and realized that 3 out of 4 of their losses were on non grass playing fields. All of their home games are on grass obviously, but I check all of their road wins and all but one of them were on grass.

So I looked a little bit further, 3 years and found it pretty interesting that 11 out of 17 times GB played on non grass over the last 3 years they lost.

I realize this won't be THE deciding factor, but to a betting man, it's a factor if you ask me. That's a 65% losing trend and hold just as much weight as Drew Breeze sucks playing out doors in the rain, or Manning sucks in cold games.

The common thread in the three artificial turf games had more to do with those three teams being hot when we played them. No one was beating Seattle week one.
Detroit was scary good the first part of the season and GB hadn't yet found it's identiity.
New Orleans was just one of those games for Drew Brees that he was hot.

The Packers record on artificial turf probably has more to do with the fact they are road games rather than anything to do with the playing surface. I'm sure you could make the case that the Seahawks play worse on grass than field turf simply because any time they play on grass they are on the road.

I heard a interesting nugget from John Clayton this afternoon on the subject.

16:30 mark

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9982200&p=1026&n=Cold Hard Facts

E.Lacy27":1by1a76i said:

12thManHawkFan":1by1a76i said:

6-11 over the last 3 seasons with wins over the following juggernauts...
Vikings x2(13/14), Ravens(13), Cowboys (13), Rams(12), Lions (12)

Alot of the losses were against some really terrible teams also btw.

With a 4-4 road record, a gympy QB and that shoddy Defense Im loving our chances guys.

Go Hawks!

Click to expand...

Some of the teams you have listed above use artificial turn and some use field turf. There's a big difference between those two differences. Or are you trying to say they struggle on all non grass surfaces?

Besides, the Packers practice indoors on field turf very frequently. If they lose this game, it will not have be due to the playing surface.

Click to expand...

Yea, I was going to ask...do they even use artificial turf anymore ? That stuff is nasty: you get strawberries any place you're not covered, it feels like you're getting tackled on concrete, and when you slide you leave a trail of skin. I didn't think they even had turf anymore because of all the injuries. I don't remember players suiting up for playing on turf for a while.

The difference between artificial turf and field turf is damn near as big as turf and natural grass.