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 83 84 [85] 86 87 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Packers - 10/29/2010 8:06:44 PM

marty

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

I may well do that Craig. I'm not playing any games, I want to know.

I just went to do that, and ESPN wanted to post this on my FB wall, and I didn't want to do that. I just want to email this guy, and see what his response will be.

< Message edited by marty -- 10/29/2010 8:13:34 PM >

Post #: 2101

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 1:30:50 PM

marty

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

The Packers COULD be benefitting from a 'sway' today.

Baluga got away with a very obvious hold, and Woodson got away with VERY good PI. The announcers commented that Sanchez shouldn't have thrown it there, not noticing the Woodson pushing the WR before the ball was there. There was a play where a Packer guard moved before the snap, two Jets' DL moved and THEY were called for offsides, giving the Pack 1st and 5, instead of 1st and 15.

The Jets just got screwed on a play where the WR caught the ball, he was down, and then Tramon Williams pulled the ball away even though the WR had the ball and was down. They quickly ruled simultaneous possession when Williams only had a hand on the ball as the WR went down to the ground. It was a play where Mike Pereira was saying it shouldn't be reviewable because the bad call of simultaneous possession would have to stand.

So far all the calls and non-calls are going for the Pack, we'll see how this one holds up. Maybe there was a lot more money bet on the healthy Jets at home coming off a bye, as opposed to the very banged up Packers ?

< Message edited by marty -- 10/31/2010 1:36:02 PM >

Post #: 2102

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 2:40:15 PM

marty

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

The Pack picked up their first penalty of the game in the 3rd quarter, it was a delay of game penalty.

Later in the drive we got what I think is the first NON-call (or I should say CANCELLED call) that favored the Jets. To me, it didn't seem fair to the Pack, unless I don't understand the rules. On the 3rd down play, they called the defender for holding, but then called it off because the Rodgers was outside of the pocket. I thought it should still have been PI. Maybe the one that called it off, is NOT in on the 'sway' for the Pack to cover the spread.

The Jets next drive they drive down to about the 20 yard line, pick up a nice 1st down, but it's gets negated by a phantom holding call. I looked at the replay in slow motion and couldn't see anything that looked like a hold. Maybe the 'sway' is still in effect ? The Jets then do THEIR part and miss an easy FG.

Post #: 2103

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 2:51:54 PM

marty

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

WOW ! The next Jets' drive, you get the best penalty to kill a drive and do a 'sway', HOLDING, but this time it was fairly legit. Keller grabbed Matthews by the outside, didn't really effect him or the play, but did back the Jets up 10 yards. Funny how they haven't noticed ANY holding on the Packers' OL, even though there have been some pretty good ones.

Then, you get another play almost identical to the one in the first half, where a Jets WR makes a catch, except this time the Jets rolled over with possession, and Woodson strips the ball away even though the Keller is down. They let GB have possession, a mighty fine way to continue the 'sway'. An announcer said Jets couldn't challenge because they lost one in the first half.

< Message edited by marty -- 11/2/2010 10:04:59 AM >

Post #: 2104

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 3:14:14 PM

marty

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

That MIGHT have been a textbook 'sway' for the Pack to cover the spread or maybe even win. I wonder if most people watching realize that, or do they just think the Jets just missed their opportunities ?

IF the Jets had put up more of a fight, I wonder if the refs would have gotten more involved, either with penalties on the Jets, or with letting GB get away with penalties ? Hard to say.

This one ranked about a 2 on my 'sway' scale, which goes from one to 5. It's kind of a weak 2, or a strong 1.

Post #: 2105

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 3:37:56 PM

Cheesehead Craig

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

Packers 9 - Jets 0
Great shutout by the defense, Capers was brilliant with the play calling and the special teams were very good.

Offense

It was a mighty struggle for the Pack today.

Rodgers missed on a good number of throws, he's just off this season for whatever reason.

Catch that damn ball Jones!!!

Very solid job of pass protection

Defense

Wow, what a performance especially considering how many guys we have out on that side of the ball

Got enough of a pass rush to bother Sanchez and he folded

Great job at stopping the vaunted Jets running attack, probably the best run D of the season.

That Woodson pick wasn't a pick.

I think that signing of Green on the DL really helped them out. He looks like a keeper.

Special Teams

Fantastic punting day for Masthay. 5 punts inside the 20 were huge as he really helped swing the field position in our favor.

Crosby goes 3/4 for all of our points. Good enough for me.

Got real lucky on that fake punt. Clearly he didn't make it but that was close as hell.

Being 5-3 at the halfway point of the season is very good given the injuries. The whole defensive coaching staff is earning their money this season. The offense simply is off and Rodgers looks to have regressed some. I wonder if the expectations got to him. Hopefully he can pick it up as he needs to play better.

Top of the North baby!

Post #: 2106

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 3:43:37 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77939
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig
Capers was brilliant with the play calling and the special teams were very good.

He was the one coach for either team that brought it today.

Post #: 2107

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 6:57:10 PM

John Childress

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

Great game Craig

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2108

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 8:24:37 PM

marty

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

The Packers benefitted from a 'sway' where 3 of the oppositions' drives were killed by holding penalties (while they called NO holding penalties on the Packers' OL), Woodson got away with an obvious PI, and the Packers were given 2 turnovers they had no business getting, both WRs had possession and were down.

Matthews was a beast, Green was a good addition, and the Jets for some reason backed off BIG TIME from blitzing, which was strange because just about everytime they blitzed it was a good play for their defense. I'm not sure Matthews has that kind of game if the Packers hadn't benefitted from so many calls, it might have been a TOTALLY different game. I'm sure more bettors lost money on this game, than won.

The funny thing is, I think the Vikes may have ALSO benefitted from a 'sway', but they did NOT take advantage of it. I gave that game a 1 (out of 5) in favor of the Vikings, while the Packers got a 2. The Vikes need a change at HC, and they need to do it FAST.

Post #: 2109

RE: The Packers - 10/31/2010 8:36:43 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77939
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online

If there was a 'sway' in the game, Rex Ryan was in on it.

Post #: 2110

RE: The Packers - 11/1/2010 9:00:35 AM

marty

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

FTR, I think the VIKINGS might have been befitting from a 'sway ' also, but they weren't good enough to take advantage of it.

Most of the calls and non-calls favored the Vikings (except for NEs' OL got away with a lot, but they must have just been letting both OLs just play), but not to the extent as the Packers where they killed 3 Jet drives with holding penalties on the OL, and gave the Packers 2 turnovers they should NOT have been given. Turnovers like that didn't come up with the Vikes, so maybe if there HAD been turnovers like that, the refs would have ruled in the Vikes' favor, if there were in fact a 'sway' going on in favor the Vikes ? They didn't put enough fight for us to to know.

Ignoring the possibility of 'sways', I think the Packers' season changed on one play, and that was Harvin not getting his feet down in bounds in the end zone last week. I think that win was a boost for the Pack that they carried into this week, and will probably ride into winning the division. Had Harvin got his feet down, I think it very well could have led to a loss THIS week to the Jets, and a collapse of the season for the Pack. I think they would have set into that mentality where as soon as the Jets did something positive, 'here we go again', and then another loss. But instead, the Packers are now starting to believe in themselves.

Post #: 2111

RE: The Packers - 11/1/2010 9:20:33 AM

Lynn G.

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

Just ONCE I want the kind of sway where we're spotted 14 points in a game.

_____________________________

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

Post #: 2112

RE: The Packers - 11/1/2010 10:03:34 AM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 19461
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: offline

Rodgers missed on a good number of throws, he's just off this season for whatever reason.

He was off against us too. I wonder what's going on there. Too be we couldn't take advantage

Post #: 2113

RE: The Packers - 11/1/2010 10:27:42 AM

John Childress

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

I think Rodgers is off because of the physical pounding he is taking with no running game

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2114

RE: The Packers - 11/1/2010 12:10:31 PM

Cheesehead Craig

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

That Woodson pick wasn't a pick.

You know what, I'm changing my stance on this. I watched the replay again. Keller never has control of the ball, it was rolling around while still on his body. Woodson simply took it off of him. The ball doesn't hit the ground and Keller never caught it from what I can tell. Not the sterotypical pick, but a pick nevertheless.

Post #: 2115

RE: The Packers - 11/1/2010 2:59:18 PM

John Childress

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

Well Craig

You guys will win the division walking away now

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2116

RE: The Packers - 11/2/2010 10:15:39 AM

marty

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

Watch it again Craig.

Keller catches it, has possession with his back on the ground and Woodson on top of him. There is NOT simultaneous possession as Keller catches it first with his hand.

The ball does NOT move around on Keller's body, Woodson's arm is right there after the catch (amazingly not BEFORE the catch, as is usually the case with Woodson, but this was a quick pass). Woodson DOES strip the ball, THAT is the movement of the ball, Woodson's hand pulling the ball away. But that was too late, that is why they were whistling the play dead. It should have been Jets ball right where Keller caught it.

The Packers played allright, and benefitted from a 'sway'. The Packers could have poorly and still won the game, as there appeared to be a 'sway' going on where they were the 'preferred' team.

Post #: 2117

RE: The Packers - 11/5/2010 8:09:24 AM

thebigo

Posts: 28303
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

If there was a 'sway' in the game, Rex Ryan was in on it.

He's one of those guys that can tilt the field.

Post #: 2118

RE: The Packers - 11/5/2010 8:39:44 AM

Lynn G.

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

_____________________________

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

Post #: 2119

RE: The Packers - 11/5/2010 9:25:02 PM

marty

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

If Ryan was in on it, he might not have blitzed AT ALL, since just about every blitz play was successful.

The Pack didn't have huge day offensively. The difference was the 2 turnovers that should NOT have been turnovers that the Packers got, and 3 holding penalties essentially killed 3 offensive drives. Unless they are going to change the rules and start letting players strip the ball from other players that are down, have their backs on the ground, the Packers got 2 nice gifts from the refs.

Matthews getting sacks was just icing on the cake. He seems to come alive lately in the 4th quarter. You could say HE was the difference in the game, if you ignore the 'sway' the Packers were given.

Post #: 2120

RE: The Packers - 11/8/2010 9:29:57 AM

Cheesehead Craig

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

Packers 45 - Cowboys 7
The Cowboys have given up, that much is obvious.

Offense

Rodgers looked outstanding. Needed a game like this to help the confidence factor.

Jackson did everything right. Picked up blitzers, caught passes, make good moves when running.

Jones had a heck of a game, but the mental lapses continue with the fumble and the dropped TD pass.

Defense

Matthews was a beast yet again. That 3rd and 1 stop was just WOW! DPOY right now, no question.

Shields had a heck of a pick, got it one handed. He's really progressed this season being an undrafted FA and position change from WR to CB

Just overall another suffocating defensive effort.

Special Teams

Punt coverage was very good

Kickoff coverage was hot and cold. That wasn't a fumble on that kickoff return and the Packers got a gift. It didn't really play into the final outcome of the game though.

This was just a laugher. A W is a W though. The Packers didn't have a let-down game and did what good teams do to bad ones - beat the hell out of them. This team has come a long way since they were 3-3 and had lost 2 straight heartbreakers. The schedule will be tough after the bye week, but 6-3 is a great place to be at right now.

Also, it appears that Al Harris will be released. It seems that the Packers don't think his knee has recovered enough to warrant a spot on the roster and they don't want to IR him and pay his salary. Loved having Harris on the team and was an outstanding guy both on and off the field. He's going to be missed by Packer fans. This is one of those financial decisions that I don't like. Best of luck to you Al.

Post #: 2121

RE: The Packers - 11/8/2010 11:05:37 PM

marty

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

That wasn't a fumble on that kickoff return and the Packers got a gift. It didn't really play into the final outcome of the game though.

True, but it COULD have. They need to get calls like that right.

There are Packer fans that won't miss Al Harris AT ALL. He was slow, and was really just a decent nickelback, highly over-rated started that played VERY aggressively, committing PI on nearly every play (like Woodson), minus the big plays that Woodson comes up with once in a while.

Harris will most be remembered for allowing a badly injured Randy Moss to burn him twice in an important playoff game, the ONLY meeting ever of the 2 teams in the playoffs. A great historic win for the Vikes.

Post #: 2122

RE: RE:The Packers - 11/15/2010 12:39:19 PM

John Childress

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

5. Green Bay (6-3). Now we find out if the Pack's for real: Starting Sunday, three of their games within the next month are at Minnesota (in their last meeting, presumably, with Brett Favre), at Atlanta and at New England. Killer sked, Pack.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/11/14/monday-morning-qb-week-10/2.html#ixzz15NU8DLBl

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2123

RE: RE:The Packers - 11/15/2010 9:45:20 PM

marty

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

I think the Packers will win at Minnesota and Detroit, beat the 49ers at home, that's 3 wins in the next 5. At Atlanta is probably a tossup (I think Atlanta has plenty of holes), and I think the Pack will not underestimate, and the Pack will pull the upset there.

So I think the Pack COULD win 4 of the next 5, IF they win at Minnesota. I think IF Childress is still in Minnesota, the Pack might UNDERESTIMATE the Vikes and get beat, I could EASILY see that happening. So I think the Packers will win 3 of the next 5.

Post #: 2124

RE: RE:The Packers - 11/21/2010 3:21:25 PM

Cheesehead Craig

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

Packers 31 - Vikings 3
Total domination.

Offense

After a brutal first quarter, Rodgers was almost unstoppable. One of his best days ever.

Welcome back Greg Jennings. We missed you.

Running game was, eh. Not great, but not horrible either.

Defense

Great job getting tons of pressure on Favre.

Overall a good job on AP

Woodson with a great forced fumble right when the Packers needed it.

Williams will a great INT and also came at a much needed time.

Defense really stood tall today.

Special Teams

Overall no complaints. Punting and kickoffs were good.

The win keeps the Packers on pace with Chicago for the division lead. Great adjustments during the game to get the Packers offense back into a good flow. Tip of the hat to the coaching staff on this one. Capers and MM were great.

Post #: 2125