buckeyepackfan
11 years ago

We did win the turnover battle.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



One of the rare occasions, break the game down and this more than most was all about turnovers, not time of possession.

Packers fumble kickoff, go down 14-0, Packers force 4 straight turnovers, pull to 14-13.

The one glaring point here is that The Packers did not take advantage of the turnovers, only getting 13 points.(or it could be said The Bengals D stepped up)

Packers go up 30-14, while controlling the ball and the clock, then comes the 2 turnovers which The Bengals scored td's after each.

So yes, this one game, The Packers won the turnover battle but lost the game, that is a rarity, but it is what the teams did after the turnovers that determined the outcome.

The Bengals capitalized on them The Packers didn't.

When the Packers were +3 in turnovers they cut the lead to 14-13 then stretched it to 30-14.


Once again, all you can focus on are 2 things, time of possession and my favorite, The Packers, as a team or individually "shitting" themselves.

Once again I have to show you that neither has a huge determination on the outcomes of games.

Time of Possession, most of the time is altered by turnovers.

Shitting yourself I HAVE NEVER HAD A CLUE how that pertains to a football game, and have never found an official stat called by that name.

In your world I am sure it exists, not in mine.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
DakotaT
11 years ago
The Packers shit themselves because they handed the ball off to a 180lb running back instead of letting the quarterback dive under their 320lb LG for the first down. Everything Buckeye just said has merit, but he always gives our coaches a pass. That loss is on the person that called the fourth down deep draw for a first down.

I'm on Buckeye's ignore list so somebody will have to let him know how clueless he is.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
11 years ago

One of the rare occasions, break the game down and this more than most was all about turnovers, not time of possession.

Packers fumble kickoff, go down 14-0, Packers force 4 straight turnovers, pull to 14-13.

The one glaring point here is that The Packers did not take advantage of the turnovers, only getting 13 points.(or it could be said The Bengals D stepped up)

Packers go up 30-14, while controlling the ball and the clock, then comes the 2 turnovers which The Bengals scored td's after each.

So yes, this one game, The Packers won the turnover battle but lost the game, that is a rarity, but it is what the teams did after the turnovers that determined the outcome.

The Bengals capitalized on them The Packers didn't.

When the Packers were +3 in turnovers they cut the lead to 14-13 then stretched it to 30-14.


Once again, all you can focus on are 2 things, time of possession and my favorite, The Packers, as a team or individually "sh!tting" themselves.

Once again I have to show you that neither has a huge determination on the outcomes of games.

Time of Possession, most of the time is altered by turnovers.

sh!tting yourself I HAVE NEVER HAD A CLUE how that pertains to a football game, and have never found an official stat called by that name.

In your world I am sure it exists, not in mine.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 



Ok wait, we actually didn't win the turnover battle.

Ross's fumble, Franklin's fumble, two INTs by Aaron.

Four turnovers each way?

Anyway, no one's arguing that we shouldn't win the turnover battle.

Fact is, if time ran out, the game would have been over, and there would have been no comeback. Mike and Aaron like the no-huddle offense. We've had drives of 10 plays that burn less than 3 minutes. Fact is, even with the no-huddle, they could still run the clock down in between plays.

They don't do that, and it results in the other team getting more plays on offense and our defense getting worn down.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
buckeyepackfan
11 years ago

Ok wait, we actually didn't win the turnover battle.

Ross's fumble, Franklin's fumble, two INTs by Aaron.

Four turnovers each way?

Anyway, no one's arguing that we shouldn't win the turnover battle.

Fact is, if time ran out, the game would have been over, and there would have been no comeback. Mike and Aaron like the no-huddle offense. We've had drives of 10 plays that burn less than 3 minutes. Fact is, even with the no-huddle, they could still run the clock down in between plays.

They don't do that, and it results in the other team getting more plays on offense and our defense getting worn down.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



Did I not say, The packers did win the turnover battle this game, and it is a rarity that they would lose this game.

Packers scored 13 pts off 4 Bengal turnovers.

Bengals scored 17 pts off 3 Packer turnovers.

That's a 4 pt swing, hhmmm what was final score? oh yea 34-30.

Packers don't turn the ball over in 2nd half they win the game, the outcome has nothing to do with time of possession.


I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
gbguy20
11 years ago

Did I not say, The packers did win the turnover battle this game, and it is a rarity that they would lose this game.

Packers scored 13 pts off 4 Bengal turnovers.

Bengals scored 17 pts off 3 Packer turnovers.

That's a 4 pt swing, hhmmm what was final score? oh yea 34-30.

Packers don't turn the ball over in 2nd half they win the game, the outcome has nothing to do with time of possession.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 



you missed one
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
nerdmann
11 years ago

Did I not say, The packers did win the turnover battle this game, and it is a rarity that they would lose this game.

Packers scored 13 pts off 4 Bengal turnovers.

Bengals scored 17 pts off 3 Packer turnovers.

That's a 4 pt swing, hhmmm what was final score? oh yea 34-30.

Packers don't turn the ball over in 2nd half they win the game, the outcome has nothing to do with time of possession.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 



If time runs out prior to Franklin's fumble, we win.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
DakotaT
11 years ago

If time runs out prior to Franklin's fumble, we win.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



Quit making sense, it defeats his argument. That first down wins that football game. McCarthy called the wrong play, which is becoming a little too regular in my opinion.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
11 years ago

If time runs out prior to Franklin's fumble, we win.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



The Bengals had the ball 10:00 of the 1st quarter.

That means the Packers controlled the clock the rest of the game.

THEY TURNED THE BALL OVER!!!!!! TWICE!!! In the 2nd half

The Packers could have chose to go for a FG, or punt, but they decided to go for it so they could run more time off the clock, but THEY TURNED THE BALL OVER!!!!!

That is why they lost.

Not because there was still time left on the clock!!!!!
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
Fan Shout
dfosterf (1h) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo
Zero2Cool (2h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha
wpr (3h) : Tomorrow is almost here.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?
packerfanoutwest (3h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him
Zero2Cool (5h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.
packerfanoutwest (15h) : don't care
Zero2Cool (21h) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?
packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat
wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.
wpr (22-Apr) : now 3
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?
beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

21h / Packers Draft Threads / Zero2Cool

23h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.