Well, I just consider much of the game luck when it comes to play calls and players on the field. Like the Fake FG. It took the defense to be in the wrong formation (wrong for them) for the play to work. And we were lucky chicago was in that defense. I mean it is not like Slocum knew Chicago was going to line up that way. If they handn't they would have just kicked the FG.
Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins
I guess I am lost with the analogy.. the Fake Field goal. That play was schemed precisely on what they had seen on tape, the Bears overloading one side of the formation.. they got to the line, seen the formation and proceeded with the fake. Bears alter that formation.. the Packers probably burn a TO or just kick the FG.
So no.. I don't think it to be luck alone. It was a predictive call in which the Packers increased their chances with preparation ahead. Excellent blocking by Sitton and crew..
But yes, there was an element of luck involved.. all plays have luck to some degree.
But it is what you do to improve your odds that is the key.. in other words, making your own good luck.
Now the part about our expectations being to high.. I concur with 100%.
But I also think the replacement refs and their impact in passing game penalties, which has brought some teeth back into the defense is helping as well, especially with option based routes like we have. A tug of the jersey here.. a slight bump there, and the reads and timing become slightly off.
I think that is playing into some of the offensive numbers for us being down and the brand of passing game we have developed.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"