Packers outplay Bears, still lose· Page 12

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#111

I hate prevent offenses even more than I hate prevent defenses.

djcubez
Senior Member

16 years ago

#112

I myself am hoping we have used up all our bad luck this season, and will tear up the league next year.
With our lousy year, we should have a pretty easy schedule next season.

"Cheesey" wrote:

Anyone know what divisions we get? Being in third place we play every third place team in the NFC which is right now, Seattle, Tampa Bay and the Eagles. Not exactly easy.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

16 years ago

#113

They dominated the TOP (at least first half) and picked up a ton of first downs.

Offensive showcases don't just come in the form of 35-7 blow-outs.

"dd80forever" wrote:

33:43 to 26:17. Not exactly a huge difference. It's the Bears for god's sake. I would be surprised if they EVER held the TOP advantage.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

They dominated the TOP IN THE FIRST HALF!

Something like 20:00 - 10:00.

That's call domination. They didn't sustain it. But the Packers dominated the Bears for 45 minutes in the game, and they dominated the TOP in the first half.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

dd80forever
Registered

16 years ago

#114

They didn't sustain it.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

blank

wpr
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#115

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

"djcubez" wrote:

I absolutely would have.

"wpr" 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.

"all_about_da_packers" 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.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

I don't understand then. You pass but you don't do it to get a TD? If you're going to get a FG run out as much clock as you can first. Why pass and give the Bears time only to get a FG?

"djcubez" wrote:

Others were implying that if GB was not running the ball in order to wind the clock down and then go for a FG that ment that they HAD to be trying to throw the ball into the end zone for a TD on nearly every single play.
I was saying that they needed to run the same kind of passing plays that they had been doing and succeeding with all game long. Short passes off of play action. Screens and down and outs. Passes that we 6-10 yards down field. Mix them up a little and not play right into the strenght of the Bears defense. If they kept moving tha ball down field they would have eventually gotten the TD. If not kick the ball from the when the line of scrimage is the 3 instead of the 20. It may have made a difference.
I want to see a coach and team that tries for TDs 1st and FG only after they run out of options. This team, This coach tries to get FGs 1st and if they luck out and get a TD well so be it.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

16 years ago

#116

Do you realize you just called me a liar?

"wpr" wrote:

Whoa, really bad choice of words to start my post you quoted.

What I meant to refer to, with the "I don't think so" bit is the part where you said: "Even if they kick the FG if they run the ball 3 times it is still poor play calling."

I don't think so, with regards to that. It'd be completely idiotic (and out of character for me) to call you a liar when you say you would do something regardless. Didn't mean to imply that at all. Sorry.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#117

This is exactly what I've been advocating as well. I don't understand why everyone assumes that when we say "Go for the TD," we mean toss the ball into the end zone on every play. All we're saying is make a concerted effort to keep moving toward the end zone, instead of deliberately stalling to kill time and kick a field goal.

If you happen not to get it into the end zone on third down, so be it -- you kick the field goal. But at least you TRIED to put it out of reach. And you've killed time off the clock to boot.

djcubez
Senior Member

16 years ago

#118

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

"wpr" wrote:

I absolutely would have.

"djcubez" wrote:

"wpr" wrote:

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

I don't understand then. You pass but you don't do it to get a TD? If you're going to get a FG run out as much clock as you can first. Why pass and give the Bears time only to get a FG?

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

"djcubez" wrote:

+1. Despite my disagreement, I know you and drivel had been saying it all along, but if we had gotten that extra first, not only would the field goal have been closer and easier but we could run the clock down to 3 seconds if we needed. There's no reason to break off from what's worked the entire game. I mean, even if they DO run 3 straight times, why go directly up the middle for no gain every time? At least be a little creative and try to gain extra yards with maybe a misdirection or draw.

djcubez
Senior Member

16 years ago

#119

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

That's exactly spot on. I've seen this scenario so many times.

1. We get the ball and we throw a pass for maybe 3-5 yards. Second down we throw for the first.

2. Another first and ten but this time we run it. Loss of 2. So on 2nd and 12 we do the obvious and pass, but Rodger's gets sacked/throws an incompletion/throws it away. 3rd and 12 we do a run or dump off pass. Fourth down we punt.

Stubborness. It's costing us so much. If only we could call plays a little more aggressive. I believe Rodger's playing style as a QB is much more aggressive than his coaches, and they're not using it to their advantage.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

16 years ago

#120

This is exactly what I've been advocating as well. I don't understand why everyone assumes that when we say "Go for the TD," we mean toss the ball into the end zone on every play. .

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Well that clears things up.

I honestly didn't have a problem with MM's play calling, but I can see your point.

I've always said it's so easy to criticize the play calling when players don't execute, but you and wpr do make a valid point.

I don't know, I guess because we were well within Crosby's range + the INT's Aaron has thrown late in games (note: not saying they were all his fault) I can't blame Mike McCarthy for sticking with the run and playing it a little safe.

If I worry about the players losing confidence with this losing streak, it's only fair to wonder whether Mike McCarthy has gone into his shell, so to speak, with regards to play calling.

I'd have said no, but having your point cleared up... it's an interesting question to ponder.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

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

beast (41m) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (17h) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (18h) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious

beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere

beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.

beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.

beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...

beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered

wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.

wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.

wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet

beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury

beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State

beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Oh snap!!!

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Even Stevie Wonder can see that.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Nah, you see Lions OC leaving to be HC of Bears is directly related to Packers.

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ohhhhhhh Zero is in TROUBLE

packerfanoutwest (21-Jan) : Zero, per your orders, check Bearshome, not packershome

Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : Then he'll land with another team and flourish.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22