RE: The Packers

Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

RE: The Packers

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk >> RE: The Packers

Page: << < prev 73 74 [75] 76 77 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Packers - 12/17/2009 6:30:30 AM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

Craig

A few weeks ago i thought woodson had no shot and Allen was a given

Now

Not so sure

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 1851

RE: The Packers - 12/17/2009 8:30:25 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

I don't think it's anything as organized as that. I think that refs, being human, have subconscious favorites and it can manifest itself in the way they call a game. I don't think there is any pre-game meeting in which they agree on a sway - but I just think they see things differently for one team versus another. I know that, as fans, we tend to overlook our own team's transgressions and want a call on every little thing that the other team does.

Human nature.

Lynn

Where this runs into trouble is where we can correctly predict WHICH WAY the bias is going to go before the game. If we can predict they'll either leave it alone, or else they will favor THIS team, and be right EVERY time, then something might be up.  IF we picked out 20 games, 10 of them appeared to be left alone, 10 of them had the bias towards the team we picked, but not a single ONE appeared to have a bias the opposite way, the odds would seem to be almost astronomical that not ONE would go the opposite way.

With Vikes at Arizona, it seemed like the betting would be on the Vikes as they beat Arizona EASILY last year with TJACK, and the Vikes are a better team this year. Add the fact that Favre threw 5 TDs on them in one quarter last year, and it wouldn't be surprsing to learn that MUCH more was bet on the Vikes in this years' matchup. I think the game was either left alone, or the refs favored the Cards.  It could NOT be argued that the refs favored the Vikings in that game.

We know for a fact that going into the Vikes/Bengals game, the spread changed from Vikes -7, to Vikes -6. Unless there was a surge at the end, there was MUCH more bet on the Cincy.  We would expect if there was any kind of 'sway' going on, it would be likely the refs would favor Minnesota, and it appears they DID, or you could argue they left it alone, but they did NOT favor Cincy.,

Now that is just 2 games, but if we picked out 20 games like this, and not a single ONE appeared to have biased officiating the other way, then we might wonder if something is up, or we just seemed to have defied some GREAT odds. It would seem unlikely that it was just human nature causing bias at that point, there was a pattern emerging.

Post #: 1852

RE: The Packers - 12/20/2009 8:30:53 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

Anybody catch the end of the Packers/Steeler game ?

On the Steelers' last drive, the Packers committed PI 4 times, it was called twice. Had the refs just called 1 of 4, the Packers probably would have won. The Pack appear to have NO regard to the PI rule. Now you could say it costed them the game, but it also helps them quite a bit in other games, and it took some pretty fine QBing from Roethlisberger, and the great catch by Wallace to win the game.

I would guess there probably aren't many Packer fans that want their DBs coaches fired because they are teaching them to commit PI EVERY play, and that it could prevent them from winning a SB in the next few years.  My guess is they like their odds that officials are probably going to let it go in the final minutes of most games, it takes a pretty bold official to KEEP calling it. The NO calls give them a TREMENDOUS advantage and it can end up taking quite a QB performance to beat their defense.

It's quite possible the Pack would have gotten away with another PI offense on the Steelers last drive IF the Packers hadn't gotten away with one on the Steelers' previous drive. In THAT drive, the Steeler WR was REALLY complaining, and Aikmen commented that it was a good NON call.  I have to disagree as you could see on the replay it clearly disrupted the WR's route, stopping him as he was held for a second.

Ignoring the officiating, it was REMARKABLE performance by Aaron Rodgers. IF the Packers beat the Vikes in the playoffs, I would like it to be from GREAT play, not because the refs allowed Packer DBs to commit PI in the final minutes. I've seen Woodson make PLENTY of plays without commiting PI. The Packer WRs also played quite a game in this one, sometimes making Rodgers look good.

Post #: 1853

RE: The Packers - 12/20/2009 8:41:35 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

Tough loss today in Pittsburgh.

The offense certainly did enough to win but the Packers pass defense was bad. That loss of Harris really showed this game as we had absolute scrubs out there at DB. Worst defensive performance of the season.

Tip of the hat to Big Ben. He played great.

Post #: 1854

RE: The Packers - 12/21/2009 6:19:14 AM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

I am a big Tomlin fan and his decision turned out right, but how do you repair the damage you have done to the pryche of the defense? They cant stop anyone without Polomalu.

His decision was correct BECAUSE it gave GB a short field. That meant they gave up the inevitable TD they still had enough time to score.

With two bad pass defenses, if the Pack plays the Vikings in the playoffs the first team to 40 wins!

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 1855

RE: The Packers - 12/21/2009 8:45:07 AM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

IF the refs let the Pack 2ndary get away with PI enough times, they become a GOOD 2ndary in ANY game.

Post #: 1856

RE: The Packers - 12/21/2009 8:53:10 AM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

Clearly the refs don't favre the Pack like they did when Brett was there.

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 1857

RE: The Packers - 12/21/2009 4:12:03 PM

Lynn G.

Posts: 33037
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

That last second miracle touchdown by the Steelers yesterday afternoon sure looked an awful lot like Nathan Poole for Arizona a few years ago.

_____________________________

Put our country back in the hands of people who actually want to do things to help everyday citizens. Elect Democrats.

Post #: 1858

RE: The Packers - 12/21/2009 4:17:28 PM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 39282
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

That last second miracle touchdown by the Steelers yesterday afternoon sure looked an awful lot like Nathan Poole for Arizona a few years ago.

Why? Did the Packer's star DT get pushed 20 yards down the field?

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”

Post #: 1859

RE: The Packers - 12/21/2009 6:15:33 PM

Lynn G.

Posts: 33037
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

Well - I hadn't thought out all the details. I was just thinking that a last second touchdown handed them a loss which helped the Vikings. Which was the mirror image of the Nathan Poole incident.

The difference is that we're not likely to give the Steelers receiver (was it Holmes?) the key to our city.

_____________________________

Put our country back in the hands of people who actually want to do things to help everyday citizens. Elect Democrats.

Post #: 1860

RE: The Packers - 12/22/2009 7:31:36 AM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 39282
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

Well - I hadn't thought out all the details. I was just thinking that a last second touchdown handed them a loss which helped the Vikings. Which was the mirror image of the Nathan Poole incident.

The difference is that we're not likely to give the Steelers receiver (was it Holmes?) the key to our city.

It was Mike Wallace. He took a break from 60 minutes to ruin the Packers come from behind victory.

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”

Post #: 1861

RE: The Packers - 12/27/2009 8:43:18 AM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

The Steelers got away with a hold/block in the back on Johnny Jolly on the last play of the game.

Also, it would have been ticky tack (and I had already counted 4 GOOD PIs the Pack commited on the Steelers last drive, 2 were called), but Bell could have been called for PI on that last play, grabbing the WR and getting positioning. But Wallace, instead of just turning to make the catch (although he may have lost his balance as he had been grabbed), PUSHED Bell off him, and could aso have been flagged for offensive PI for doing so.

I suppose it's best that it's just offsetting and you make no call. It's just "letting them play" in the world of the Packer defensive (or is it 'OFFENSIVE' ?) backfield.

But, even with those being offsetting, the Pack should have gotten the hold/block in the back on Jolly, it WAS pretty offensive.

Post #: 1862

RE: The Packers - 12/28/2009 4:01:23 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

That was a nice blowout win against Seattle. But more importantly got us in the playoffs!

Every part of the team was working great. The offense was dominant and the defense really stiffened up after that first drive of Seattle. Got to rest up some of the starters which I'm sure Rodgers appreciated.

The team is looking good and it looks very promising that we can have a good playoff showing.

Post #: 1863

RE: The Packers - 12/28/2009 5:16:50 PM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

I said on the other thread that I have never seen a year in the NFC Playoffs where so little separated seeds 1 through 6.

The Packers have a decent shot to at least make the divisional round

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 1864

RE: The Packers - 12/29/2009 12:59:48 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I said on the other thread that I have never seen a year in the NFC Playoffs where so little separated seeds 1 through 6.

The Packers have a decent shot to at least make the divisional round

I agree on the lack of separation. Every team has shown flaws and nobody is a clear favorite to win it in the NFC.

I think the Pack have a damn good shot at making a deep run because of that.

Post #: 1865

RE: The Packers - 1/3/2010 6:03:01 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

Easy win vs the Cards today. It was nice to see the Pack play the starters for just over 3 quarters.

Charles Woodson = Def MVP. Game. Set. Match.

Will be an interesting game next week against the Cards when Wisenhut brings out the full gameplan.

Finishing 11-5 when being 4-4 is a great feeling.

Post #: 1866

RE: The Packers - 1/3/2010 6:15:22 PM

Dave Odle

Posts: 8376
Joined: 7/21/2007
From: Caddo Mills, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

Easy win vs the Cards today. It was nice to see the Pack play the starters for just over 3 quarters.

Charles Woodson = Def MVP. Game. Set. Match.

Will be an interesting game next week against the Cards when Wisenhut brings out the full gameplan.

Finishing 11-5 when being 4-4 is a great feeling.

Easy there, Craig. When Viking fans steal my Game, Set, Match it's one thing, but when a Packer fan does it, that's just unacceptable. I should have copyrighted that line when I threw it out several years ago during a debate.

If JB can get a copyright, then why not me, ya know?

Post #: 1867

RE: The Packers - 1/3/2010 6:17:58 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave Odle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

Easy win vs the Cards today. It was nice to see the Pack play the starters for just over 3 quarters.

Charles Woodson = Def MVP. Game. Set. Match.

Will be an interesting game next week against the Cards when Wisenhut brings out the full gameplan.

Finishing 11-5 when being 4-4 is a great feeling.

Easy there, Craig. When Viking fans steal my Game, Set, Match it's one thing, but when a Packer fan does it, that's just unacceptable. I should have copyrighted that line when I threw it out several years ago during a debate.

If JB can get a copyright, then why not me, ya know?

If you can get that copyrighted, you'll make a killing from tennis.

Post #: 1868

RE: The Packers - 1/3/2010 6:21:15 PM

Dave Odle

Posts: 8376
Joined: 7/21/2007
From: Caddo Mills, TX
Status: offline

No doubt! No, it was funny. I threw that out on somebody like it was a faux "I'm done w/ you and wiping my hands kind of moment." Then, it just caught on like wildfire. Since I'm not typically a boastful person and way more tongue in cheek, I was hoping that the irony of such a manufctured arrogance would be funny. Either way, it seemed to stick.

Tennis, OTOH. Hmmm.

Post #: 1869

RE: The Packers - 1/3/2010 10:10:43 PM

TheGonz

Posts: 4353
Status: offline

I just wonder how much of Matt Leinart and Brian St. Pierre we're going to see next week.

(Probably not much.)

_____________________________

The question is not "Who will let me?" Rather, the question is "Who will stop me?"

Post #: 1870

RE: The Packers - 1/4/2010 11:22:56 AM

So.Mn.Fan

Posts: 20313
Status: offline

Man, what a fine line .... do what Indy did (pulling starters) and get skewered, or play it like you need the game like the Pats did, and lose Welker.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Pack had to be holding its breath when Woodson went out.

< Message edited by So.Mn.Fan -- 1/4/2010 11:35:23 AM >

Post #: 1871

RE: The Packers - 1/4/2010 11:50:19 AM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 19462
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: offline

I wonder if Woodson's muscle memory instincts makes him grab GB WR's as they run on to the field after a punt??

Post #: 1872

RE: The Packers - 1/4/2010 12:20:08 PM

Lynn G.

Posts: 33037
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: So.Mn.Fan

Pack had to be holding its breath when Woodson went out.

They didn't seem too fazed because they kept Rodgers in until almost the end, even though they were well ahead on the scoreboard.

_____________________________

Put our country back in the hands of people who actually want to do things to help everyday citizens. Elect Democrats.

Post #: 1873

RE: The Packers - 1/5/2010 8:43:56 AM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

quote:

ORIGINAL: So.Mn.Fan

Pack had to be holding its breath when Woodson went out.

They didn't seem too fazed because they kept Rodgers in until almost the end, even though they were well ahead on the scoreboard.

Rodgers only played one series in the 3rd. It was a long series but that was it in the second half.

Woodson should be fine.

Post #: 1874

RE: The Packers - 1/5/2010 8:47:59 AM

Lynn G.

Posts: 33037
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

Really? I didn't start watching until late in the third and I could have sworn he was still in into the fourth.

Of course, I used up most of my brain cells during the holiday season....

_____________________________

Put our country back in the hands of people who actually want to do things to help everyday citizens. Elect Democrats.

Post #: 1875