Packers outplay Bears, still lose· Page 10

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

16 years ago

I am just sick of MM not being aggressive anymore. That's it... He's just being soft this season. I really don't think that is stretching the truth here.

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#92

While you certainly could be more aggressive, there is a time and place for it. I really don't think that would've been the time nad place.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

Why not? The season is already over. It's a meaningless game. Give the kid a chance to show us what he can do. Give him a chance to build his confidence with a clutch touchdown pass. If all you're going to do is hand it off to your running back for no gain, why not bring in Flynn and let Rodgers warm his hand by the heaters?

Why are we fretting about the theoretical possibility of a red zone interception (which hasn't happened even once all season) in a game that means absolutely nothing?

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

16 years ago

#93

Subtract 17 yards from 35 yards and you have 18. That means we could have obtained another first downs before hitting the end zone. We didn't need to run the ball to burn up the clock -- getting that first down would have taken care of that for us. And it would have put us in prime position to put the game entirely away.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

given the tendency of our D to blow leads, you really wanted to put the game in the hands of our D then?

Come on, if McCarthy gets too aggressive people would've been on him for not eating up the clock, for not trying the FG, for basically asking our D to step up and make a play at the end, when they haven't for the better part of a month and a half.

It's a no win situation. I'm willing to say that 9/10 the MM play calling will result in a win. I honestly don't have a problem with it.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

djcubez
Senior Member

16 years ago

#94

9-6 in the Packers division is tied for first place.

At least the Jets have a reason to play on Sunday other than to try to keep the Detroit Lions winless.

It's more than Favre, though you like to turn it directly into that. I still don't agree with the Favre move but believe me my list of grievances goes way beyond that. Justin Harrell anyone?

"dd80forever" wrote:

First game of the season Miami was ready to win the game against the Jets but what happened? The defense stepped up and made a pick IN THE END ZONE.

Against the Bills this season, the Bills should have ran the clock out but Losman rolled out and lost the football which Ellies returned for a TD in the last two minutes.

If the Packers had defensive stands like this in the end of games we would be in the playoffs.

"djcubez" wrote:

In a Black and White world that makes sense however there are lots of variables in play.

Perhaps had the Offense controlled the ball more with less 3 and outs, the Defense would have been relieved of some pressure. Perhaps had we had A QB who wasn't gun shy we could have converted some more first downs, controlled the ball, scored more points, and kept the Def. off the field, etc.

I have no desire to debate the Favre issue as the records IMO, speak for themselves. It's not all on Rodgers, alot of it has to do with mismanagement in other areas of the team, however to not explore that aspect is foolish.

"dd80forever" wrote:

I don't understand how you can just defer my opinion as "black-and-white", and then proceed to throw a bunch of "ifs" and "buts" onto yours. I had factual evidence as to why the Jets have more wins.

Stevetarded
Registered

16 years ago

#95

"dd80forever" wrote:

"djcubez" wrote:

"dd80forever" wrote:

less 3 and outs? you know they only had 1 of those right?

blank

djcubez
Senior Member

16 years ago

#96

While you certainly could be more aggressive, there is a time and place for it. I really don't think that would've been the time nad place.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

By calling the season over you're basically ending the discussion...

That fact is the game was meaningful (spirit, momentum for next season) and we wanted to win. If we had been playing like a lost season we should've just started Flynn?

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

16 years ago

#97

Why not? The season is already over. It's a meaningless game.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Meaningless? Hardly, especially to a team that needs some confidence and momentum going into next season. Win this game and you've got a chacne at a 5-1 division record. That's a confidence boost right there, that you are indeed the best in the division. This team needs all the confidence boosts it can get.

Why are we fretting about the theoretical possibility of a red zone interception (which hasn't happened even once all season) in a game that means absolutely nothing?

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

The 28 yard FG Crosby made in this game... the play just before that was one where Rodgers threw to Driver, and the ball bounced off the biceps of the LB covering Driver.

It's not fretting over a non-likely scenario... the drive before we came close to seeing Rodgers throw an INT in the Red-zone.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#98

given the tendency of our D to blow leads, you really wanted to put the game in the hands of our D then?

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

But we wouldn't have been putting it back in the hands of the D. If we had gotten the first down at the 8 yard line, we could have burned up the clock and left the Bears no time left after we scored. If we failed to score the TD on third down, we'd kick the field goal as time expired.

I'm willing to say that 9/10 the Mike McCarthy play calling will result in a win.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

Except that it hasn't. Every time we go into that mode, every single one of us knows we're going to lose. And we do. Every single time.

It's a no win situation.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

You're right. We haven't won in weeks.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

16 years ago

#99

less 3 and outs? you know they only had 1 of those right?

"Stevetarded" wrote:

LMAO.

dd80 just got owned.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

wpr
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#100

If Crosby had made that kick, would everyone still be questioning McCarthy's decision to run 3 straight times at the end?

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

I absolutely would have.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

That'd be your right, but his decision would've led us to a win.

At the end of the day, as Holmgren would say you have to take the sure points each and every time.

Mike McCarthy was doing that, well at least a FG is surer than attempting to throw for a TD.

We're not talking about a 50+ yarder or something, we're talking about a FG around 35 yards. That's very makable.

"djcubez" wrote:

Crosby has shown all year long that there is no such thing as a sure FG.
Keep in mind I am not asking for GB to try to pass on a TD on any one particular play. I am asking them to try and move the sticks by passing the ball. I am not saying to pass every single down either. But a 35 yard kick in sub zero weather is anything from a sure kick even if the ball is not blocked.
The coach can not say that he isn't going to call a pass because it might be intercepted. They could say we don't want to run the ball because it might be fumbled just as easily.
As long a they had the time and the field position they could call any play. pass on 1st down and get 4 yards and run on 2nd down. Pass again on 3rd down. Rodgers has shown that he completes a high % of his passes. If the receiver breaks a tackle he is going to get a 1st down or more. A run up the middle with 8-9 guys in the box is most likely going to get 3-4 yards if you are lucky. And we have seen all year that GB is not a good running team.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

dfosterf (11m) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from

dfosterf (18m) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy

Zero2Cool (18m) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!

dfosterf (20m) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40

dfosterf (22m) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in

packerfanoutwest (23m) : beer and brats woke? say whom?

beast (28m) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...

beast (29m) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based

beast (30m) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based

beast (31m) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?

dfosterf (1h) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol

dfosterf (1h) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.

dfosterf (1h) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise

dfosterf (1h) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...

beast (7h) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...

dfosterf (25-Jul) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?

Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : In your face, HBO!

Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”

Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : *years

Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates “many Packers games” being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea

dfosterf (25-Jul) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Maybe a low flying drone

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?

Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career

Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim

Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )

dfosterf (25-Jul) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?

Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Savion concussion ... not good.

packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off

Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name

Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk

Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Who's Theo?

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : How is Theo alliteration?

Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Bad week for people whose names are alliterations

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hulk Hogan gone too.

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Oh, it's toe injury

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hope it's not serious. that would stink

dfosterf (24-Jul) : Sounds like an ankle not a knee for Fields

dfosterf (24-Jul) : Ya Flaccp on Browns

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Maybe Tyrod Taylor instead

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : He's on Browns, right?

dfosterf (24-Jul) : They would probably go with Flacco is my guess if Fields out

dfosterf (24-Jul) : Fleece 'em again!

Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Malik Willis might be someone Jets come after

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2025 Packers Schedule

Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM

COMMANDERS

Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM

Browns

Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM

Cowboys

Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM

BENGALS

Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM

Cardinals

Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM

Steelers

Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM

PANTHERS

Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM

EAGLES

Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM

Giants

Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM

Lions

Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM

Broncos

Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM

Bears

Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM

RAVENS

Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM

Vikings