marty -> RE: The Packers (10/25/2010 11:50:06 PM)
|
I think this was the game the Packers were looking forward to all offseason, and Rodgers played about as well as he could play, but DID falter at the end. I think IF the Vikes had scored when Harvin didn't quite get his feet down in bounds, the Packers would NOT have gotten a FG with 30 seconds left on the clock. The Packers had GREAT effort, OL played VERY well, playcalling was even better than Dallas', running the screens away from Winfield. I was also glad to see the Vikes have Harvin in the backfield, and the dumpoff to Peterson was also awesome. It's as though the Vikes have been reading our posts, but maybe the Packers were spying in there also ? But despite all this great effort, homefield, lots of help from the officials, and everything else, the Packers EASILY could have lost this game. Last season, the Vikes fate turned positive on a last second catch against SF, this season it went the other way with the miss to Harvin. I felt like the Vikes were the superior team, but the inept HC of the Vikings would have them find a way to lose. The game was in the VIKINGS' hands. GB had to feel like they really didn't control their own destiny, they're just lucky the Vikes didn't pull it out. Was the game a 'sway' for the Packers ? IF one ref were in on the 'sway' and he overturned the Shiancoe TD, he probably should have done MORE as the Vikes still had a chance to win it at the end. When I saw the Vikes driving, I was starting to think that if there is a 'sway' going on, they better do something really soon. Then, all of a sudden it was 1st and THIRTY. So maybe they were trying. The penalty on Loadholt was legitimate, but in most cases could have been easily MISSED. But, if there is a 'sway' going on, you can bet they are alert to ANYTHING like that, and will be quick with the flag. I doubt there was a 'sway' going on, as the Vikes still had a very good chance of winning -- but the preferred team DID win. You know, the team that was all banged up, the team that was swept by the Vikes last year, the team missing their starting RB, the team that had lost their last 2 games, the team that was FAVORED (?) by 3 points. Yeah, THAT team won. I'm sure there were A LOT of bettors that were thinking GB would EASILY win by 4 or more [&o]. I'm sure there were FAR fewer bettors on Minnesota [&o] Matthews taking his helmet off. I didn't see him adjusting the helmet, it looked to me like he was making a statement, making his presence known, as sort of an intimidation. He knew the game was now at crunchtime, that he was coming, and as the leagues' sack leader, was coming to rush the QB. "This is who I am, I am Clay Matthews, and if anyone holds me, you BETTER call it !". That got the refs attention, and the refs did NOT miss the hands to the face by Loadholt. It was legitimate, but before that, they SHOULD have flagged Matthews for taking his helmet off on the field of play. I would be VERY surprised to see the Packers beat the Jets, but you never know, the Vikes almost did it, and that was with some pretty poor QBing for almost 3 quarters.
|
|
|
|