Okay, so stevetarded mentions that the Pack threw 7 incompletions in a row. I'm not trying to get hung up on this on particularity, but I'm a little upset at the disconnect between the game itself and the little taglines we use to reanimate what happened.

Go back and look, in context, at the "7 straight incompletions." This wasn't a second-half failure -- it started in the 2nd quarter. A 2nd down incompletion was followed by a 3rd down sack and Crosby's 52-yard FG. Next drive, incomplete to Driver, followed by two consecutive drops by Jones on 2nd and 3rd down. Punt. The next drive, you ask -- you know the one that features the last 3 incompletions in the 7-pass-skid? It was with :13 seconds left in the half (and it also featured dropped passes). Were they supposed to run it with :13 seconds left? No. But you don't make that qualification -- instead you throw out "7 straight incompletions" to try to prove your point.

If you actually do the work to go back and look, in context, at the situations I think your opinion would change. Following those "7 straight incompletions" the game wasn't prohibitively pass-friendly. Green Bay used runs from Shotgun throughout the game to move the chains (if they didn't work people would be clamoring, like they have in the past, that we shouldn't run from Shotgun).

"Stevetarded" wrote:

"evad04" wrote:

Jesus guys, this isn't friggin' rocket science. You can't argue that the run game was this specter of dominance yesterday when a little less than half of the yards came on a single play. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING ABOUT THE "SKEWED" ISSUE.

"We didn't throw it enough." "We didn't run it enough."

I think we need nerdmann or PackFan to call our plays -- we'd light it up.

"nerdmann" wrote:

Give Jackson 20 carries a game and he'll give you 60-70 yards most of the time. There are always exceptions, but few of them.

"get_louder_at_lambeau" wrote: