quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

When the Vikings lose in such a bad way, it hardly matters that the Packer may have benefitted from a 'sway', but I'm going to mention it anyway.

I thought it was a little bit strange the Packers were favored by 3 in Baltimore, and so did many bettors as the line went to 2 at many locations. I thought the Ravens should have been favored by about 3. I thought if the refs were neutral, it was likely a Ravens' win. But there were NOT neutral.

The Ravens were given holding calls on a very high number of their drives, even on their last drive, which they overcame and scored a TD. The ref(s) probably didn't want the Ravens getting that TD and making the game so close.

The Packers also got away with quite a bit of holding with their 2ndary. There was even one play where, on the replay TWO Ravens' WRs were clearly held on the same play. Instead of saying that clearly should have been a flag, one of the commentators stated that the Packers were doing the right thing in trying to get away with holds as both guys on coverage were clearly going to get beat, and they DID get away with the holds.

Ignoring the fact that the Ravens might have had to beat both the Packers and an official or 2 that was 'swaying' the game, I think the biggest mistake the Ravens made was after getting 1st and goal at the 4 yard line, they ran 4 straight plays up the gut and got stopped.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

The play happened shortly after I had seen the holding call on Cook with the Vikings' game. It was almost surreal.

So the Packers can do anything they want, break all the rules. And instead of an announcer calling them out on doing it, or calling out the refs for NOT calling obvious holding when there are 2 Packer DBs holding WRs on the same play, but instead we get something that sounds like praise for the Packers for doing it, and that they should keep doing it until the refs called it.

Unreal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I can't get excited about ref bias for GB when we can't even compete with a 1 win Panthers team in our own building

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I can't get excited about ref bias for GB when we can't even compete with a 1 win Panthers team in our own building

Needless to say that the Packers wont need any help from the refs when they play us in two weeks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

The Packers got considerable help at Baltimore, the game my have been 'swayed'.

Here is what an announcer stated after looking at a replay, and discovering half way through the replay that PI was committed by a Packers CB, but not called:

"Good coverage here. He's [Devon House] left in the middle of the field all by himself, you see, as he slides over working the inside part of that slot. (announcer then sees the clear PI as he's talking about the replay) A lot of contact there, now what's gonna happen is, you know, keep playing that way now, challenge the officials to make those calls. If you're going to play physical, and it's going to be a lot of contact in the passing game, continue to do that until you get that flag on pass interference."

WTF ??? Do you see how he got a little bit discombobulated when he saw PI and was considering explaining it away or lying about it. Then he went ahead and justified it, making it sound just great, and that the Packers should continue to do it, like it's the smart thing to do. NO mention of how it's breaking the rules, or that a flag should have been thrown.

The biggest difference between the Packers' 2ndary and the Vikings' 2ndary is that the Packers hold and commit PI on nearly every play, with very few of them ever called. IF the Vikes cut Robinson and he were picked up by the Packers, he'd be taught to hold on nearly every play so his WRs wouldn't get so open, and so he could make better plays on the ball. IF he started doing that with the Vikes, he'd likely get flagged heavily.

What also bothers me is not just that the Packers are cheating and getting away with it, is the announcers that don't call them on it, and spin it positively, saying it's great play and that the Packers should just continue to do it until it's called, and even go as far as complimenting them on their physical play. IOW, the announcers many times actually have a Packers' bias. I could see some announcers with an anti-Vikings' bias, seeing a PI not getting called and saying 'it was disgraceful that the ref missed that, and that CB better watch it, better quit getting so grabby". Or a flag would be thrown, and the anti-Vikings announcer would be saying something like, 'he's just trying too hard playing on a poor 2ndary, trying to make something happen' or 'that's why this team doesn't have many games in the win column'.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ignoring all that (hard as it is), I think one of the keys to the Packers beating the Ravens was the Packers blitzing on many 3rd downs. 3 blitzes led to 3 key stops, and if they hadn't blitzed those plays, I think Flacco would have beaten them. Also, the biggest Packers' play on offense, was an impressive pass by Rodgers, a ball that went 60 yards in the air to Jordy Nelson, hitting him in stride. I would like to see Freeman doing some of that for the Vikes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

I hope the Packer fans don't think I was jinxing Aaron Rodgers when I suggested after last weeks game that it was like a chess match, and one team had a Queen (Aaron Rodgers), and the other team (the Vikes) didn't. In order for the lesser to team beat them, they either have to knock out the opposing teams' QB, or get a Queen of their own (Manziel or Bridgewater ).

Maybe the Bears picked up on that message subliminally, knew they were going to lose, unless they knocked out Rodgers, so they went into the game deciding to be physical.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

I hope the Packer fans don't think I was jinxing Aaron Rodgers when I suggested after last weeks game that it was like a chess match, and one team had a Queen (Aaron Rodgers), and the other team (the Vikes) didn't. In order for the lesser to team beat them, they either have to knock out the opposing teams' QB, or get a Queen of their own (Manziel or Bridgewater ).

Maybe the Bears picked up on that message subliminally, knew they were going to lose, unless they knocked out Rodgers, so they went into the game deciding to be physical.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Prescott, I don't my powers can be harnessed, nor can they be contained .

I think perhaps the Vikes should release Ponder, and sign Matt Flynn, just so the Packers don't get him for the next 5 years. He was a very good backup for them, and I would rather see them struggling trying to find a backup for him for a while. And maybe Flynn ends up being a good backup for the Vikes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

I didn't watch the game - was it on a sack that he was injured?

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Prescott, I don't my powers can be harnessed, nor can they be contained .

I think perhaps the Vikes should release Ponder, and sign Matt Flynn, just so the Packers don't get him for the next 5 years. He was a very good backup for them, and I would rather see them struggling trying to find a backup for him for a while. And maybe Flynn ends up being a good backup for the Vikes.