Getting Ugly - Time for a Turnaround

"Sweetness" photo from www.Packers.com

Before getting to the miserable Cowboys-Packers game, which the Packers lost 30-16, I will start off with a little Brett Favre joke, since this game was yet another Brett Favre tribute game, celebrating the receipt of his Pro Football Hall of Fame Ring, and the unveiling of his name on the stadium wall.  (As a semi-facetious aside, maybe it is time to stop having Favre tribute games, since the Packers look terrible whenever he is there for a game.)  The ceremony, which is worth a watch, can be found here.

Anyway, during the bye week, we spent a few nights in Arizona visiting family and friends, including a night at a beautiful resort in Scottsdale.  At breakfast, our waitress was a colorful woman from Wisconsin, who asked us as soon as she found out we were from Wisconsin if we were Packer fans. She proceeded to regale us with stories about how every team that stays at that hotel loses (the Patriots in the Super Bowl where the Giants ended their undefeated season, the Wisconsin Badgers, and the Packers in the playoffs vs. the Cardinals).  She then told us this joke, which she also told to Mike Holmgren when he stayed at the hotel.

Remember when Brett Favre retired, and then unretired and got traded to the Jets?  Then he got himself in trouble when he was caught sending pictures to that female reporter?  Well, did you hear what Deanna Favre said when she found out about it?  "Oh, those pictures were intended for me, but you know Brett, they were intercepted."

Which brings us back to the game.  No. 1 rushing offense meets no. 1 rushing defense.  Who comes out on top when the irresistible force meets the immovable object?  Sunday afternoon, it was not close.  The Cowboys' rookie sensation Ezekiel Elliott ran all over the Packers.  Let's face it, the Packers looked bad on both sides of the ball.  The defensive backs looked bad.  Sure, there were injuries that got worse during the game, but they did not play well Sunday.  The defensive line didn't make its presence known like it has done in other games.  The linebackers were relatively quiet, other than Julius Peppers knocking the ball out of Dak Prescott's hands early in the game.  Speaking of Dak Prescott, the game plan designed for him would have been a good plan for the Packers.  Lots of short, quick-release passes (you can call them dink and dunk if you want), punctuated by periodic shots down the field.  He missed some of those passes down the field, and he did give up his first interception of the year, but overall he thrived in this offense and looks as if he is the real deal, making things interesting when Tony Romo is healthy again.

But what is the deal with the Packers' offense?  The offensive line seems to be protecting Rodgers so well that sometimes I wondered if the broadcast feed had frozen, as everybody seemed to be standing still.  But in general, he was unable to do anything with the time they gave him.  Most of the pass plays seemed to be long-developing routes, which you would think would be fine given the time he was getting, but either the receivers weren't getting open, or Rodgers wasn't pulling the trigger.  And when he did pull the trigger, he was missing more often than not.  Given his sudden and unexpected loss of accuracy, this offense just isn't working.  They need to go with the dink and dunk, fast-release, screen pass, etc. game plan, then taking those periodic shots downfield.  Right now, opposing defenses don't seem to think they have to fear the long pass, they drop into a Cover-2 defense, and are prepared to concede the underneath passes, which the Packers seem to have no interest in taking.

The Packers' first drive, which ended in a field goal, was better than most of their other drives in the game, precisely because they combined the running game with the short passing game.  Later in the game, Rodgers was too frequently seen just standing around in the backfield looking for the big play, or trying to get the Cowboys to jump offside.  It is as if he just isn't content taking the available short passes to march down the field gradually.  Sure, he missed some of those short passes when he did try to take them, and receivers dropped catchable balls, but a strategy of marching down the field in small chunks would have been much more successful than what we saw out there.

On a short week, the Bears come to town for the first of their two annual meetings.  The Packers are incredibly banged up, with the following players either being out or at least questionable for tomorrow's game: Starks, Lacy, Adams, Cobb, Cook on offense, and Shields, Randall and Rollins on defense.  There are no gimme games in the NFL, particularly not when the team is not playing well, and with that many injuries.  And especially not in a rivalry game between storied rivals like the Bears and Packers.

Right now, neither team is playing well.  The Bears, at 1-5, have beaten only the Lions, and last week they let a win get away against the Jaguars.  Leading 13-0 at the start of the 4th quarter, the Bears were outscored 17-3 in that quarter and ending up losing, 17-16.  Can the Bears be just what the doctored ordered for the Packers, letting them end their homestand on a win and have a week and a half off to prepare for their next game?  Who knows, but I sure hope so.

Time Running Out for the Packers

Image by NBC Sports

The historic game on Thanksgiving night was perfect in so many ways - Bart Starr was able to make the trip, so the three great Packers quarterbacks in modern history were in the stadium at the same time, undoubtedly for the last time, given Starr's health problems.  Brett Favre, greeted by his old teammates, some of whom I could not immediately place, had his name and number unveiled on the wall of Lambeau Field.  The nostalgia and warm feelings were palpable, right through the big screen TV.

There were only two slight problems.  One, the weather.  I have been to plenty of cold games at Lambeau Field, including, I believe, two of the three coldest games in the history of the stadium.  But I have always thought that the worst possible weather for a game is a steady rain, with temperatures in low to mid 30's.  Which is exactly what the weather was Thursday night.  Kudos to Sam Freeman, who attended the game instead of me.

The other problem was the game itself, replete with the same problems we have seen over the past few weeks: dropped passes, errant passes, and insufficient commitment to the running game.  I don't have a lot of issues with the defense - they played pretty well, giving up only 17 points, 7 of which were aided by a Packers turnover, Eddie Lacy's fumble.  So the Bears, on the Packers' big night, won the game, 17-13.

I just want to focus on the running game for a minute, and then move on to tonight's game.  Lacy was averaging over 6 yards per carry, while Starks was averaging just under 6 yards per carry.  Lacy's fumble was horrendous, but in that kind of weather, with the problems in the passing game, the running game was by far the best thing they had going for them on Thanksgiving night.  And yet, in the last 10.5 minutes of the game, at a time when the Packers trailed by 4 points, the Packers had the ball in three different possessions, and called exactly one running play, right before the 2 minute warning, while calling 21 passing plays.  Eight of those 21 plays resulted in completed passes, while the other 13 resulted in incompletions, a sack, an interception, and a couple of scrambles by Rodgers.  That just won't cut it.  It is bad game management and bad play calling.  Period.  Any hope that we had that in giving up the play-calling duties, McCarthy would have more time to pay attention to in-game management seems to have been dashed.

Now, for the second Thursday in a row, the Packers are on Thursday night football, at the Lions.  The way that the Packers are playing, having won only 1 of the last 5 games, and the way the Lions are playing, having won 3 in a row, there just isn't any good reason to assume that the Packers will win.  And yet, I am picking them.  It is probably just letting my fan interests show through, but I think that somehow, they will get it together and beat the Lions to stay a little closer to the top in the NFC North.

Favreapalooza!

Rejuvenated Eddie Lacy, Photo by Jim Matthews, Press-Gazette

The difference between a win and a loss on Sunday was dramatic.  With a loss, the Packers would have trailed the Vikings by 2 games plus the tiebreaker, making a 5th consecutive division crown unlikely, and pushing the Packers very far in the direction of a Wild Card playoff spot, if they even made the playoffs.  A win, on the other hand, put them back in first place in the division, while controlling their own destiny for the division and even a number two seed, which comes with a much-needed bye.  So the convincing 30-13 win over the Vikings was a huge win for the struggling Packers.

The Packers looked better to me in every aspect of the game.  The offense finally looked more in sync, with Rodgers getting off more passes quickly, with fewer passes that were poorly thrown, and with a resurgent Eddie Lacy (at last!).  The defense, which had not registered a sack during the three-game losing streak, got six of them on Sunday.  And on special teams, the Packers had a nice Jeff Janis kickoff return, and Mason Crosby was flawless (if only he could have gotten the decisive kick last week against the Lions).

The Packers now have a short week before hosting the Bears on Thanksgiving night.  This will truly be an historic game.  It will be the first time since 1923 that the Packers have hosted a Thanksgiving game, the game will have serious playoff implications for the Packers (as it is likely every game will for the rest of the season) and of course the Brett Favre Ring of Honor ceremony will take place at halftime, with Brett Favre and (hopefully) Bart Starr in attendance.  Since I can't go to the game, I really hope that they show the ceremony on the broadcast.  When you think of the turmoil that other teams have had over the years at QB (think of the Bears, or the Lions, for example), you realize how blessed the Packers have been to have three outstanding, long-term, Super Bowl winning quarterbacks in the Super Bowl era.

As for the upcoming game against the Bears, I find it so easy to get caught up in Packers-Bears nostalgia.  How many of these do you remember?  Halas and Lombardi, Ditka and Butkus and Gregg and Starr and Nitschke.  More recently, Gregg and Ditka as coaches, Payton, Favre, Singletary, Sharpe, Rodgers, Cutler, and so many others I have left out.  You have the 49-0 whipping of the Bears in 1962 (the first Packers game I ever attended), the Instant Replay game in 1989, the Favre Halloween monsoon game in 1994, the Favre 99 yard TD pass to Brooks in 1995,  the game in 1999 where Walter Payton's ghost helped the Bears to block what would have been the game-winning field goal, the 2010 season NFC Championship Game, and the 2013 game marking the return from injury of Rodgers and Cobb, with the Rodgers to Cobb TD in the closing minutes clinching the division for the Packers.  So many of those Packers-Bears memories involve Brett Favre, so it makes sense that the Favre ceremony will take place during a Bears prime time game.

Let's not forget that this game is the chance for the Packers to finally tie up the all-time record with the Bears.  For all my life, the Packers have always trailed the Bears in all-time wins (while leading them in all-time Championships for most of that period!).  But now the record is 92-91-6 in regular season games, or 93-92-6 including playoff games.  A win Thursday evens the ledger.  The last time the Packers actually led in the series was 1932.  Favre and then Rodgers have been so good against the Bears that sometimes it is possible to forget how big a rivalry this is.  When you stop to realize that the NFL has put a Bears-Packers game in Prime Time for 10 years in a row, it becomes apparent that this is still probably the best rivalry in the NFL.

Happy Thanksgiving to all.  Here's hoping we have another Packers win over the Bear for which to give thanks.

Favre Week!

Brett Favre, Super Bowl XXXI, Packers.com

This should shape up to be a great weekend for Brett Favre and for the Green Bay Packers.  Favre will have his jersey retired, and be inducted into the Packers Hall of Fame on Saturday evening.

I could have done nothing all week but watch Favre videos, read Favre stories, and watch old Favre games, and believe me, I was tempted to do just that.  I have already watched the "One of a Kind" program at Packers.com, which is definitely worth watching.  And I will try to watch as much as I can of the non-stop Favre coverage on Saturday on the NFL Network, starting at 6:00 am California time.

It is hard to add much to everything that is being said this week, except maybe for some personal thoughts.  I have always been a Packers fan, but I didn't really appreciate the glory days of the 1960's until they were already over.  And then, like all Packers fans of my vintage, we suffered through the 1970's and 1980's.  Maybe it was better for me, in a way, to live outside of Wisconsin for most of that time, before DirecTV and the NFL Sunday Ticket.  I would get to see maybe 2 or 3 Packers games in a typical season, and usually go to one game in person.  The games were frequently disappointing, but it was still a special occasion to be able to watch my team.

Then things started to fall into place.  The Packers hired Ron Wolf, who certainly had a great pedigree, and then Wolf hired that year's star head-coach prospect, Mike Holmgren.  Expectations started to rise, as they always did in the off-season, but this time with more intensity.  And then they traded a first round draft choice for the Falcons' second round pick from the previous year, some southern kid named Brett Favre.  We didn't even know how to pronounce his name at first, and as one who does not follow college football, I truly had no idea who he was.  He made some noise in the off-season by getting into a bar fight down south, and as luck would have it, we happened to attend the first home pre-season game in 1992.  Don Majkowski played most of the first half, until Favre came in with 2 minutes to go and 80 yards away from the end zone.  With 2 minutes left, there was plenty of time for a respectable drive.  But the first pass I ever saw Favre throw in a game was one where he reared back and heaved it as far as he could throw it.  It was intercepted, and as the crowd grew quiet, someone a few rows behind yelled out, "better stick to bar-fighting, dude!"  We have always wondered what that guy must have thought a few years later.

In September of that year, we happened to go to a now-defunct Packers bar/restaurant in Redwood City, CA, with our 2 and 5 year old kids, for the third game of the season, against Cincinnati.  Majkowski was knocked out of the game, and Favre came in, and the rest was history, just like Wally Pipp and Lou Gehrig.  Our kids may have been born during the Don Majkowski era, but they are now in their mid to late 20's and the only regular Packers quarterbacks they have ever known are Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers.  And they were there, in that Redwood City bar, when the legend began.

What a time the 1990's and 2000's were with Brett Favre at the helm.  Favre, along with Reggie White, Holmgren and Wolf, made the Packers perennial contenders again.  Expectations were high every single season, but for a change there was good reason for high expectations.  When I attended my first home and road Packers playoffs games, Favre was the quarterback (he won both games).  When I attended my first NFC Championship game, and my first Super Bowl, Favre was the quarterback (he won both those games, too).  In my dynasty fantasy football league, he was my quarterback for basically his entire Packers career.

We lived through the great times with Favre, and the not-so-great times.  There was the Vicodin addiction, there were the first three home playoff losses in the history of Lambeau Field (to the Falcons, the Vikings, and the Giants).  There was the first ever loss by the Packers in a Super Bowl.  There were the wasted opportunities, such as the loss at Dallas in the NFC Championship game, and the ill-timed interceptions.  Looking back on it, I still can't believe that the Packers only won one Super Bowl in the Favre era.  While I wouldn't go as far as to call the Favre-era Packers a mere "fart in the wind," in Ron Wolf's immortal phrase, I can't help but feel that they underachieved with the amount of talent they had.

But notwithstanding all that, the Brett Favre era changed everything for the Packers and for their fans.  So it devastated many of us when he retired, un-retired, demanded to be traded, and eventually ended up playing for both the Jets and the Vikings.  We knew that he would eventually retire or leave the team, but we weren't ready for it, even though many of us knew that he could no longer play well in the cold (the NFC Championship game against the Giants was still fresh in our minds).

The ugliness of the summer of 2008 is well captured in a couple of articles by Peter King and Kevin Seifert.  It had the effect of forcing Packers fans to choose sides between Favre and the Packers.  In my own family, most of us took the Packers' side.  We felt that Favre had jerked the Packers around, off-season after off-season, with his melodramatic musings about whether he would retire or not.  Nobody really knew that Rodgers would turn out to be as great as he is, but we could see that the carefully groomed replacement for Favre could end up leaving as a free agent if he didn't get a chance to become the starter.  All of that left us with the feeling that Favre had more responsibility for the nastiness of the divorce than the Packers.

The minority position in our family was that the Packers bore more of the responsibility.  My wife, Judy, is the leading family proponent of this view.  She argues that the Packers forced him to decide whether to retire too early, at a time (in March) when he was not ready to make that decision.  She noticed in the tearful retirement press conference right away, from both the words and the body language, that something was wrong with what was happening.  The premature retirement decision ultimately led to his decision to un-retire, because he really still wanted to play.  And then to compound matters, having decided to make the change and move on to Rodgers, the Packers were unwilling to just release him (the argument was that a veteran of his stature deserves a release when he asks for one after being replaced as starter), or to trade him to a team of his own choosing.  This latter theme is echoed in some of Favre's own recent comments, to the effect that he was ticked off that the Packers felt he was not good enough to be their starting quarterback, but that he was good enough that they were not willing to trade him to a rival team.

That argument has raged in our family for the past seven years.  I am hoping that we can finally put it behind us now that Favre and the Packers are back in each others' good graces.  Here is another argument I will try to put to rest.  My wife is also insistent that Favre was more fun to watch than Rodgers, and that some of Favre's craziest decisions were part of what made him so much fun to watch.  I maintain that it is more fun to watch Rodgers, because I can watch him without living in fear, on every play, that he will pull a catastrophically boneheaded move.  I prefer the reliability and precision of Rodgers over the sometimes-reckless play of Favre.

But what I will say is that the joy of watching Brett Favre was that no player I can remember ever displayed the pure, almost-childlike love of playing the game that Brett Favre did.  He expressed this himself in one of the clips in "One of a Kind."  He said that if the team was down by 21 points with a minute to go, he wanted the ball in his hands.  He realized that the chance of winning was about zero.  But he still wanted to play.  Another example was his 6 interception playoff game against the Rams.  At the time he said something to the effect that what was he supposed to do - play it safe and worry about his stats as they were in the process of losing a playoff game?  He might as well take some chances and leave it all on the field.  I will always love and respect that aspect of Brett Favre's play.  And I thank him for all of the memories.

A Look Back at the 2007 NFC Championship Game

Well, the Packers got (in my opinion) the least favorable matchup for their first playoff game next Sunday.  I thought that either the southern dome team (the Falcons) or the northern dome team (the Lions) would have been easier for the Packers to handle than the Giants, who both play outdoors in cold weather, and have the confidence booster of having beaten the Packers in the NFC Championship game four years ago (Giants 23, Packers 20, in overtime - Favre's last game as a Packer).

There were at least 15 Packers who played in that ice cold overtime game four years ago who will be expected to play on Sunday.  The Green Bay Press-Gazette informs us that there was exactly one current player who suited up for that game but did not play: Aaron Rodgers.  Will he be the difference-maker?  I hope so.

Kevin Seifert of ESPN describes that game as one of the most disappointing Packer games ever, and it is hard to argue with that (although there are certainly other candidates: Super Bowl XXXII, the 4th and 26 Eagles game, and the Michael Vick playoff game come to mind).  I remember well the elation we all had when the no. 2 seed Packers, unexpectedly, got to host the NFC Championship game after the Giants knocked off the no. 1 seed Cowboys.  But the Packers did not play well that night, and of course everyone remembers Favre's final pass as a Packer, which was intercepted in overtime and led to the game-winning field goal.  To be sure, Favre was not the only one who played poorly.  My son and I went to this game, and I can remember saying to him, at the beginning of the overtime session, that the Packers might end up winning this game, but they certainly don't deserve to win it.

This is one of those games that I don't think I have ever gone back to watch again, even though I recorded it at the time (Super Bowl XXXII was another one).  But thanks to the NFL Network (I love these guys!) I am watching it again tonight, as they are replaying it right now.  There were some great individual plays (like the Driver 90 yard touchdown that took place while I was in the Lambeau Field bathroom), but overall, the Packers suffered from the total lack of a running game, an inefficient passing game, an inconsistent defense, and of course the interceptions.

*  *  *  *

In the midst of getting ready for this week's game against the Giants, the Packers' family has been struck by a terrible tragedy, as Offensive Coordinator Joe Philbin's 21 year old son, Michael, was first reported missing, and then was found dead after having fallen through the ice of the Fox River.  As the father of two young adults in their early 20's, I cannot imagine the anguish of the Philbin family.  My prayers are with them.  

Still Flying High

"I've been following football for 50 years. This was the greatest individual performance in a playoff game I have ever seen."

Mike Ditka, on Aaron Rodgers' performance in routing the Falcons last night, 48-21, on Sunday's NFL Countdown on ESPN. That is a hell of a statement from our old rival, Da Coach.

As of eight days ago, Aaron Rodgers' playoff record was 0-1 and some TV talking heads were suggesting that he can't win big games. Eight days later, his record is 2-1, and he has racked up some of the gaudiest playoff statistics imaginable for a young player who is really just coming into his own. And he did it in three games, all on the road, and (in the case of the two games this year) without two players who were expected to be among his most potent weapons this year, Ryan Grant and Jermichael Finley.

If he stays healthy, Aaron Rodgers could be fun to watch for a long time to come. And the Packers may have the best quarterback transition since Joe Montana gave way to Steve Young. Here are a couple of interesting stats. In all his playoff games, Brett Favre threw for over 300 yards 4 times, and the most yards he ever had in a playoff game was 331, in a loss to Dallas after the 1993 season. Rodgers has thrown for more yards than that in 2 of his 3 playoff games. Meanwhile, in all his playoff games, Brett Favre threw 44 touchdowns, as against 30 interceptions. No, it was not just our imagination that he threw an awful lot of interceptions. Aaron Rodgers has thrown for 10 touchdowns and 1 interception in his 3 playoff games.

Aaron Rodgers Career Playoff Statistics
Game	Attempts	Comp.	Yards	TDs	INTs
@ Arizona 1-10-10	28	42	423	4	1
@ Philadelphia 1-9-11	18	27	180	3	0
@ Atlanta 1-15-11	31	36	366	3	0
TOTALS	77	105	969	10	1

And then there was Tramon Williams. He sealed the win last week against Philadelphia with a leaping interception on the left side of the end zone. Last night, he had a mirror-image interception on the right side of the end zone late in the second quarter, to keep the game tied at 14-14. The Packers took the ball, went on one of their four touchdown drives of 80 yards or more, and went ahead by the score of 21-14. The Falcons tried hard to tie it up or at least get a field goal before the half, aided by a couple of defensive penalties against the Packers. They got as close as the Packers' 26, but a very timely Clay Matthews sack backed them up to the 35, and forced the Falcons to use their last time out. With 10 seconds left in the half, the Falcons decided to try to get a few extra yards on an out pattern, to make the field goal attempt a little shorter. The problem was, everybody knew the pass had to go to the sideline, including Tramon Williams, who recognized the formation, read the play perfectly, intercepted the ball at the 30, put a move on Matt Ryan and one other Falcon, and took the ball in for a 70 yard touchdown return on the final play of the half. Now that is a prime time play by a prime time player.

All in all, you could say that Aaron Rodgers and Tramon Williams have made a pretty good case for why they should have been selected to the Pro Bowl. Then again, with one more win, they would not be able to play in the Pro Bowl this year anyway.

More on the NFC Championship Game later this week. But here is a great little fact I just heard on the NFL Network. If the Packers play the Bears in the Championship Game next week (which I expect - this article is being wrapped up just as the Bears game is about to start), it will be the first playoff game between the Packers and the Bears since the 1941 Western Division Championship Game.

A family note. My brother Bruce and his family decided to go down to Atlanta for the game, and evidently had a fabulous time - much better than when they went to the last Falcons game down there. I await his pictures from the game.

"Singletary Better Watch Out"*

After being blown out by the Green Bay Packers, with the Metrodome becoming more and more like a Packer home crowd as the Vikings fans left early, the Vikings fired Head Coach Brad Childress on Monday morning. This is the second game in a row where the opposing coach has been fired after being blown out by the Packers.

The Packers (7-3) visit the Falcons (8-2) this week. I don't know what could possibly happen in that game that could result in Falcons Coach Mike Smith being fired the next day, so I think he can rest easy. But the week after that, the 3-7 49ers visit the Packers, and Coach Mike Singletary might have a little more to worry about. * Or, as Scott Clendening put it, "Singletary better watch out."

For a game that ended in a blowout bad enough to be the final straw leading to the firing of the coach, how come I was so uncomfortable for the first quarter and a half of the game? Well, that is the sort of thing that happens when you gain a total of 15 yards on offense in the first 18 minutes of the game. The Packers' defense played a great game from the first snap, a run for no gain by Adrian Peterson. It is very obvious that Dom Capers' defensive game plan was to put lots of pressure on Favre, and to never let him get comfortable. Lots of players jumping around on defense, extra rushers coming from different directions on different plays. On the first couple of series, the Packers brought extra rushers, or at least had people jumping around creating confusion about who was rushing, on almost every play. On the second drive, the Vikings were able to string together three big plays to get close enough for a field goal, their only points in the game, but other than that drive, and the one that ended with Tramon Williams' interception just before the half, the defense was in complete control.

The offense was a different story. As noted, the game was 18 minutes old before the Packers could gain more than 15 yards (as it happened, they quadrupled their offensive yardage on one play, the 47 yard pass to Jennings). The Packers only scored a field goal to tie up the game on that drive, and we all know that you can't afford to have a close game against Favre. There is just too much risk of the old Favre magic returning, as it almost did in the first game this year at Lambeau Field.

The Packers went on to score 14 more points before halftime, and 14 more points in the second half. From about the midpoint of the second quarter, it was all Packers on both sides of the ball. From my point of view, the best thing about the way this game unfolded was the fact that the Packers kept their foot on the gas until there were 10 minutes left in the game, and the Packers were ahead by 28 points. I have seen too many instances of easing up with a lead, and letting the lead get away. We need more "killer instinct," and in this case the Packers had it.

In looking back at the slow start on offense, there is no single thing that explains the ineffectiveness, unlike other games where Rodgers just seemed off, or where there were multiple instances of miscommunication between Rodgers and the receivers. Against the Vikings, the first drive was disrupted by pressure on third down, leading to a rushed and incomplete pass, the second drive was disrupted by two sacks, and the third drive was disrupted by a well-timed hit on third down, resulting in an incompletion.

The Packers' blowout of the Vikings was certainly an important win. It keeps the Packers tied with the Bears, it got them to the point where, "if the season ended now," the Packers would be in the playoffs, it increases the confidence that can only help as they face four tough games out of their last six, it evens the Favre game record at 2-2, and it effectively puts the Vikings out of contention this year. Fellow Packer Blogger Jersey Al call this game one of the top 5 most satisfying wins of the last decade.

In my review of the Cowboys game, I pointed out what a classy guy Charles Woodson is. It turns out his ex-teammate, Al Harris, is a classy guy, too. Would you believe that an athlete, in this era, and after being released by the Packers, would take out an ad in the paper to thank the Packer fans for their support? Believe it.

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

Huge Win Against Vikings

Just last week, I was making my familiar complaint about not putting pressure on the quarterback. In big games last year, the Packers seemed to mostly sit in coverage, allowing elite quarterbacks to carve them up. They lost all the games in which they did this. In the Redskins game, they did it again, and lost to Donovan McNabb and the Redskins. In fairness, the Packers were without this year's defensive MVP, Clay Matthews III, so Dom Capers had more limited options.

When it began to look like Matthews would be back against the Vikings, I wondered if the Packers would learn from last year's debacles against the Vikings, and put more pressure on Favre. Yes, they certainly did. I was at the game (more on that below), so I wanted to get a chance to watch the game again before commenting on this. But the reality is that there is a strong correlation between pressure on Favre and good things happening for the Packers. Take a look at the game highlights (on NFL.com, here). Favre had one touchdown and three interceptions. On the touchdown, the pass is a quick one, but there is no extra pressure visible in the highlight. On the three interceptions, extra Packer rushers were either in Favre's personal space or on the way. This is not a mere coincidence.

There are no magic bullets in football. If you blitz on every play, good quarterbacks and offensive coordinators can find ways to beat you. My only argument is that without a judicious use of extra pressure on the quarterback, a team like the Packers is not good enough to beat an elite quarterback. With judicious blitzing, they have a fighting chance.

I had not originally planned to go to this game. We were going to be visiting our son on the East Coast, and getting to Green Bay on the way back to California would be complicated, since we were occupied in Providence on Saturday night. (While on the East Coast, we took a side trip to New York to see Lombardi on Broadway, a couple of nights before its official opening. I will report on that when I get a chance.) Our daughter (who lives in Chicago) encouraged me to stop back through Chicago and go to the game with her. In order to make that happen, I ended up getting four hours of sleep on Saturday night, and four hours of sleep again on Sunday night after driving back to Chicago. But what a great experience to be in Green Bay for this game. We got there in time to have dinner with old friends Laura and Mike at Curly's Pub in the atrium. Mike has always been a Packer fan, despite his Chicago upbringing, and Laura, a U.P. native, really should be a Packer fan, but for some reason roots for the Vikings. At least she had the discretion not to wear any of that purple stuff in the stadium.

In re-watching the game this week, I found that the TV broadcast did not come close to conveying the atmosphere in the stadium. Sure, you could hear the cheering and the booing, you could see the signs, you could see that people in the stands were excited, but that would be true of any game at Lambeau Field. But in the stands, the atmosphere was positively electric. The intensity was something that I can only associate with a playoff game.

This was obviously a huge win for the Packers. Whether they can keep the momentum going against the Jets, now one of the best teams in the league, remains to be seen. But at least they are in a position now to continue to contend for one of the top spots in the NFC.

Two More Losses, Vikings on the Way

A combination of travel and disappointment with two discouraging losses in a row have kept me from writing anything until now. It is a lot more fun writing about a game when there is something positive to talk about. But when the team loses two overtime games in a row, having had opportunities to win both games, it is a little harder.

Things can happen in any game. A player drops a pass he should have caught, a ball is stripped out at the worst possible moment, the ball slips out of the quarterback's hand. "That's why they play the games," as Chris Berman likes to say. But at a certain point, those things become a pattern, or at least suggest that there is some kind of a problem. And I think there is a problem. The most obvious problem is the injuries, but everyone has injuries during the year. And even though the Packers have had more than their share this year, it is no excuse for the way they are playing. Take our division rivals, the Bears. They lost their starting quarterback for a game a couple of weeks ago. Their backup quarterback, the very far over the hill Todd Collins, played poorly. He threw for a total of 32 yards, with no touchdowns and 4 interceptions. Not exactly the kind of stats that will usually lead to a victory. But the Bears won, by the score of 23-6. Matt Forte, the kicker (Robbie Gould) and the Bears defense made that happen.

No, I think the real problem is not injuries, but coaching. We are seeing repeated coaching mistakes: not putting pressure on the quarterback, not throwing the ball near the goal line, bad clock management, and lack of discipline leading to too many penalties.

One of my complaints last year was that the Packers seemed to hang back in coverage against elite quarterbacks, like Favre, Roethlisberger, and Kurt Warner. My feeling was that the Packers (either McCarthy or Capers) wanted to avoid looking bad on long pass plays resulting from the elite quarterback beating the blitz. But the result was less spectacular but just as bad: these quarterbacks picked the Packers apart when given the time to sit in the pocket and wait for the open receiver. Last week, against the Dolphins and without Clay Matthews, I saw the Packers doing the same thing. There was no pressure on the quarterback, and McNabb had plenty of time to pass. Coaches study game tapes. All they have to do is look at the tapes of the games against the Vikings last year to realize that the sit back in coverage strategy was not working. So try something else.

The only thing keeping the Packers in contention right now is the fact that there is no dominant team in the NFC. They may have lost three of the last four games, but at 3-3 they are still only a game behind the teams with the best records in the conference (the Giants, Eagles, Bears, Falcons and Saints). Clay Matthews is expected to be back this week, and even Atari Bigby and Al Harris may be activated. Donald Driver expects to play despite his injured quad. So they still have time to turn this around.

The Vikings don't have the magic they had last year, and Favre is hurting and much less effective. Some serious pressure on Favre obviously carries risks, but it also has the promise of causing Favre to make some of his trademark mistakes. If the Packers don't win this week against the Vikings, they will have squandered the chance to stay near the top.

Review of 1st Preseason Game

I had to wait a couple of days to watch Saturday night's game until it was shown on the NFL Network on Monday. It was pretty much exactly what I expected based on the box score and a couple of stories I had seen. The first string offense looked great, except for Ryan Grant's fumble on the first play and him getting knocked out of the game a couple of carries later. Thankfully, the injury does not seem to be serious, although it does bring into play the new tougher NFL rules on concussions. Since he only fumbled once in all of 2009 (in a loss to Cincinnati, leading to the go-ahead points), it would be nice to think that this gets his fumble of the year out of the way.

The first string defense was another story. It is unfortunately accurate to say that it picked up right where it left off last year, in such games as the playoff loss to Arizona, the loss to Pittsburgh, and the losses to Minnesota. And the special teams were pretty much a mess, giving up too many yards on returns, and not doing well on Green Bay returns.

You can't make too much out of a preseason game, especially the first one. We need to see how the team looks in the next couple of weeks before getting too worried, and maybe even then worry would be premature. Suffice it to say that I did not see any strong evidence that the Packers are Super Bowl contenders, during this first preseason game.

Oh, and in other NFL news, the "Cirque du Favre" continues. By the time you read this, the official announcement will probably have taken place, that the Packers will get another shot at beating Favre.

"They Warned Us"

"They warned us. Remember?

The embedded Packers fans amongst us warned us that Brett Favre would break our hearts, whether on the field of play or in the absurd theater of his mind. He would throw the killing interception when you least wanted or expected it, would turn our summers into melodramas that teased, then annoyed, then infuriated us.

Could they have been more right? Could they have asked for any more reason to say, 'I told you so?'"

So begins a not-to-be missed article from Tuesday in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune by Jim Souhan. I expressed some skepticism myself on Tuesday, but not nearly as much as was justified. It only took one day for Favre to walk away from Tuesday's stories, saying that he is in fact undecided, and that he will play if he is healthy.

Meanwhile, ticket brokers are biding time on the pricing of tickets for the Vikings' visit to Green Bay, and for everyone except Favre, training camp continues.

Favre Retires Again (!?)

It doesn't take long for word to spread, when the story out of Minnesota is that Favre is retiring again. This still has not been confirmed as of this writing, and I kind of line up with those who say that they will believe it on opening night at the Superdome (September 9). My wife heard the report on the radio early this morning, and it has been pretty much non-stop Favre coverage ever since (after taking a little time out for a business call shortly after the news came out).

I was pretty sure he was coming back. His off-season surgery only made sense if he was planning to come back. The Vikings must have thought they had a great opportunity to go to the Super Bowl if Favre returned, and Favre (no shrinking violet, he) must have thought the same thing. So if he is not coming back because of his ankle, as reported, it must be a pretty serious issue with the ankle. One can make the case that the Vikings will be better off without Favre (see here), but I don't find that convincing. At all. With Favre, the Vikings would be serious contenders this year. With Tarvares Jackson? Or Sage Rosenfels? Give me a break.

And yet, parts of this story don't add up. Why would he have talked to Ryan Longwell, today, without mentioning that he is retiring? (Unless Longwell is covering for him, I suppose.) Why would he send text messages to friends saying he is retiring, but not officially notify the head coach, who has to make plans for the upcoming season. (Upon further review, forget that question. It has been obvious for several years that he doesn't care about the dilemma facing his head coach as he dithers about whether to retire.)

The bottom line is that even if this is confirmed later today, we won't really know for sure until the regular season, or possibly even later. In the meantime, I agree with my daughter's reaction, which was that this is sort of sad, because we won't have the chance to get our revenge on Favre this year.

Vikings-Saints Comments

At last, the civil war among Packer fans is over, for this year at least. I know that it is a bit weird that I am writing to comment on the Vikings-Saints NFC Championship game before I have even finished and published a post about the Packers' loss to the Cardinals. But with the Vikings having lost to the Saints, and the Saints heading off to their first-ever Super Bowl, it seems like a good time to pipe in with a few comments.

If my own family and friends are typical, there has been a sometimes-heated battle going on for the last two years about Favre's post-Packer career. It was bad enough last year, but at least Favre was playing outside the division, and not against the Packers. And, in any event, the Jets didn't even make the playoffs. But it really got bad this year, when he signed with the Vikings, when he beat the Packers, solidly, twice, and when he continued to play as close to a flawless season as he ever has, all the way to the NFC Championship game.

I have one cousin whose "status" on Facebook today was wishing Favre an awesome day. Another cousin admitted to experiencing schadenfreude over the outcome of the game. One friend was rooting for Favre, mostly just because it is incredible that he can play the game at this level at age 40. Another relative (and here I really do need to be discreet to protect the guilty) has been photographed wearing a Vikings' Favre jersey, and seems to have been rooting for him all year.

A Packer fan I met yesterday said she was rooting for the Vikings to win the Super Bowl so that Favre would retire. It may take awhile before we find out, but I am pretty sure he will retire anyway. Now, the cynical might say that it doesn't take Nostradamus to predict that Favre will retire, and that the real question is whether he will play again. We'll see, but I don't think he will.

In my immediate family, all four of us were rooting for the Saints today, with differing sets of reasons and intensity. One of us would have been OK to see Favre go to the Super Bowl again if it turned out that way, while the rest of us (including me) did not want to see that happen. I have been very unhappy with Favre the last two years, so I suppose I am at the more militant end of the spectrum.

The thing that I have probably found most irritating about this year was that Favre played so magnificently. Favre's best two years as a Packer were probably 1995 (which ended with a loss to the Cowboys in the NFC Championship game), and 1996 (which ended with the Super Bowl victory against the Patriots. In the regular season in those two years, Favre had three times as many touchdowns as interceptions (38-13 in 1995 and 39-13 in 1996). That was as good as it got for Favre, with a much closer ratio of TDs to interceptions in every other year.

Until this year. Favre had 33 touchdowns and only 7 interceptions this year in the regular season. Almost 5 to 1 touchdowns over interceptions. This is the year he chooses to play flawlessly, for the Vikings? And he had several other career-best stats for the Vikings this year. Of course, there are reasons for this. I am no fan of Brad Childress, but I have to give him credit for reining in Favre's wildness, probably better than any coach in Favre's career. Favre probably never had as dominant a running back in the backfield as he had this year. Favre certainly had a better offensive line with the Vikings than he did in recent years with the Packers. Favre always made the receivers around him look better than they really were, so I am not giving a huge amount of credit to the receivers, though they were good. To sum it up, with the exception of the 1996 team, I don't think Favre ever had the combination of great offensive line, dominant running game, dominant passing game, and dominant defense that he had this year. So it makes sense that Favre and the Vikings had a great year.

But still, for the Vikings and their fans to get the benefit of all the good side of Favre, and almost none of the downside that Packer fans lived with every year, was infuriating to me. Today, the downside returned. Because of the pressure the Saints brought on Favre all day long, he was hit often, hit hard, and he was hurting badly by the end of the game. It is no accident that both of Favre's interceptions took place in the second half. (As an aside, the Saints did to the Vikings this week and to the Cardinals last week exactly what the Packers should have done, and could have done with a better defensive plan, but that is another column for another day.)

It was poetic justice for Favre to effectively end the Vikings' season with an interception on his final pass, just as he had done to the Packers two years ago. The pass tonight was just as incomprehensible as the one against the Giants two years ago. Yes, the late throw back across the field is the sort of thing that he has done his entire career, and he has gotten away with it many times over the years. But it is still a stupid throw. Michael Irvin (believe it or not) said it well on the NFL Network when he said that the real problem with the throw was the situation. He was at a point on the field where the Vikings had some shot at the game winning field goal even with an incomplete pass, and a much better shot if he gained a few extra yards, with his legs if necessary. To throw a low-probability, high risk pass in that situation is inexcusable. (By the way, although I did not remember this, Favre's last pass for the Jets was also intercepted - I think I am detecting a pattern here.) [Ed. note - upon further review, it was Favre's second to last pass for the Jets that was intercepted. His last pass, with 17 seconds left in his last game, was completed to Leon Washington, who then lateraled it back to Favre, who then tried to pass it again to Jerricho Cotchery, which of course resulted in a penalty for an illegal forward pass. You can't make this stuff up.]

But despite how critical I have been of Favre, my hat is off to him. He was really battered today, and was limping around for much of the second half. He demonstrated again today that he is probably the toughest quarterback in the league. He was largely responsible for keeping the Vikings in the game, despite their six fumbles. He has always showed a lot of heart in his play, and today was no exception.

Playoff Berth Clinched

I had the great fun of attending Sunday's game against Seattle, with my son, Ben. The Packers absolutely spanked their opponents, by the score of 48-10. Simultaneously, the New York Giants were losing to the Panthers, something I did not expect after the Giants' domination of the Redskins the previous Monday night. The effect of these two events was that the Packers clinched a wild card spot in the playoffs, thus avoiding the dreaded final week drama about whether the Packers make the playoffs. And finally, on Monday night, the Bears (of all teams!) beat the Vikings, in what sounds like it was a great game. This makes Brett Favre's record 0-7 in road games below 40 degrees since 2005. Now that is what you call a great week of football!

We were flying back from Chicago to San Francisco on Monday night. If the flight had left on time, we could have listened to the end of the game on the radio, driving home from the airport. But because the flight was 2.5 hours late (due to unspecified "security issues"), we missed it all. We got exactly 2 updates from the pilot during the game (remember, this was a flight from Chicago, so you might think there was some interest). He came on to tell us that the score was tied, 30-30, with 16 seconds to go in the 4th quarter. No sense of the drama that led up to that, but he did add that the dispatcher had said that the Bears had multiple opportunities to put the game away but, quoting the dispatcher, "naturally, they didn't." He came back on later to announce that the Bears had won, 36-30, in overtime. The reaction to both announcements was the same: stone cold silence. I guess nobody flying from Chicago cares? I suppose I can understand that in a way, given the Bears' season, but still, I expected some reaction. It certainly differed from the reaction on the Chicago to San Francisco flight during the playoffs two years ago, when the announcement that the Cowboys had lost to the Giants was greeted with cheers.

A couple of notes from the game, things that you probably did not see if you watched the game on TV. First, Milwaukee native and American Idol finalist Danny Gokey sang the national anthem, and did a fine job of it (see video here). And at the end of the game, since it was (barring a miracle) the last game at Lambeau Field this year, Charles Woodson and Donald Driver did victory laps around the perimeter of the field, high-fiving all the fans in the bottom rows of the stadium.

The Packers now travel to Arizona for the final regular-season game, with there being at least a 2/3 chance that they play Arizona again the following week in the playoffs. That makes for weird incentives for both teams. Both teams would surely want to play well and win the game, to increase their own confidence that they can do it again the following week. But neither team wants to show all its cards this week, lest they tip off the opponent as to how they intend to play the game that really counts. With the Packers having won 6 of the last 7 games, and barely lost the 7th game, they have to feel pretty good about themselves about now. Peter King, of Sports Illustrated, says that he wouldn't want to play the Packers right now.

At the same time, the Cardinals have played well in most of their games this season. They have the same record as the Packers (10-5), but in the NFC West, that is easily enough to win the division. Although I don't follow their games very closely, they have seemed less impressive in recent weeks, during which time they lost twice, and didn't look that great in some of the wins. Their quarterback, Kurt Warner, is only a little younger than Brett Favre, and at times he looks pretty old out there. But there is no doubt that he can pick apart a defense if given the time to throw. So the Packers would be well advised to bring some pressure on defense.

Another issue for the Packers this week is whether, and if so to what extent, to rest starters. The Packers are a wild card team no matter what, and are highly likely to be the number 5 seed. They could drop to the number 6 seed if the Packers lose and the Cowboys win, but the only real difference between no. 5 and no. 6 is that no. 5 has a very slim chance of hosting the NFC Championship game, while no. 6 has absolutely no chance. So one could take the view that there is not much at stake here. If this team had been performing at a high level of precision for weeks, maybe you could argue that the Packers should rest starters. But they haven't. The Packers took awhile to get into a rhythm against the Seahawks. The Packers' defense gave up ridiculous yardage and point totals to the Steelers. The Packers trailed the Bears in the fourth quarter. The Packers started a bit sluggishly against the Ravens. To me it seems clear that the Packers still have lots of things to work on. So I come out very strongly on the side of playing the starters, playing the game to win, and resting the starters only if the game is well in hand toward the end of the game.

Keeping some of the game plan in reserve for the following week is quite another question. That makes a lot of sense. So I would see no problem in playing a plain vanilla game plan, on offense and defense, but playing hard to win the game. Save the trick plays, the new offensive and defensive wrinkles for the playoffs. But if the Packers bench a lot of starters at the start of the game, or start resting players in the second quarter, that to me would show a foolish degree of over-confidence in how ready the Packers are for the playoffs.

Meanwhile, congratulations to Charles Woodson, Nick Collins and Aaron Rodgers for being selected to the Pro Bowl squad.

Great Win Over The Cowboys

Last Sunday's Packer victory against the Cowboys (even though I did not predict it) represented about two-thirds of what I hoped for and expected from the Packers this year. A dominant, aggressive defense controlling the game, combined with a special teams unit at least good enough not to cause problems for the team. The third that was not quite there was of course the offense. I was looking for an offense powerful enough to grind it out whenever that is needed, with a combination of the running game and the short passing game, and explosive enough to put the fear of the big play in the mind of the opposing defense.

When the defense comes within a garbage-time touchdown of shutting out a team like the Cowboys, that is news. I have complained, several times this year, about the "play-it-safe" defensive strategy. I wanted to see more aggressiveness, putting the opposing quarterback back on his heels, not knowing where the next rush is coming from. Now, obviously, every time you devote more players to rushing the quarterback, you take the chance of giving up a big play. And yet, in the Vikings games in particular, the opposite philosophy led to the quarterback being way too comfortable in the pocket, and able to pick the Packers to pieces. So I was very anxious to see the Packers put more pressure on, and that is exactly what they did on Sunday.

Kevin Seifert of ESPN.com says it all: "Capers Brings the Heat." I'm glad somebody at ESPN keeps track of these stats, so the rest of us don't have to: in the first 8 games, the Packers devoted 5 or more players to rushing the QB on 40.6% of the snaps. On Sunday: 51.3%. The result was what one would hope for: the Packers sacked Romo 5 times, more than three times their average per game of 1.6. Now let's face it, the Cowboys didn't play very well on offense. But there is no doubt in my mind that the Packers' defense helped to bring about that result. Romo, at this point qualifying as a veteran quarterback, looked confused and harassed all throughout the game. Charles Woodson, of course, had an amazing game, and was rewarded by being named NFC Defensive Player of the week. What with the two forced fumbles, the interception, and the sack, this is probably the sort of game Woodson was thinking of when he said, after the first Vikings loss, that the Packers have a lot of tools in the bag that they were not using.

In the lead-up to the 49ers game this week, the local SF Bay Area media are focusing, more than on any other thing, on the connection between Aaron Rodgers and 49er quarterback Alex Smith, going back to draft day in 2005. (For example, here: "49ers' Alex Smith, Packers' Aaron Rodgers Forever Linked.") My wife heard the same basic story line on KGO radio, which used to carry the 49er games. The consensus seems to be that Rodgers was lucky to be Favre's understudy for three years. By contrast, Smith was the starter for half of 2005 and 2007, all of 2006, none of 2008, and then half of this year. This is the first regular-season meeting of the two quarterbacks, although they both played in a stinker of a game in San Francisco last year (written up here).

There is a lot of history in this match-up of the Packers and 49ers, most of it in the Brett Favre era. A lot of coaching connections, too, going back to the time when the Packers hired Mike Holmgren off of the 49ers staff, and including the 49ers hiring ex-Packer assistant Steve Mariucci, and even including the Packers hiring Mike McCarthy away from the 49ers, after he was one of those at the 49ers who decided not to draft Aaron Rodgers. Brett Favre had an uncanny mastery over the 49ers, playing 11 games, and losing only in the "Terrell Owens game." This will be Aaron Rodgers first chance (in a game that counts) to show that he can keep it going.

Wanted: Accountability

One of the problems involved in waiting five days to write about a game is that sometimes the real world rises up in the interim to remind us that, after all, football is just a game. And that, of course, is just what happened this week with the massacre at Ft. Hood, Texas. Fortunately, the Uniform Code of Military Justice provides for the death penalty (18 U.S.C. § 1111) and I hope it is used, swiftly. May the memories of those killed be as blessings to their family and friends.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The reason I waited so long was that I wanted to take another look at the game to see if it confirmed my initial impressions. Boy, did it ever. The biggest problem with this game was that the Packers' defense put very little pressure on Favre. Beyond this weakness on defense, the Vikings' offensive game plan was smarter than the Packers' offensive game plan, in a couple of respects.

First, the Vikings relied heavily on the running game to take pressure off Favre. Obviously, given the nature of the Packers' running game, and the differences between Adrian Peterson on one hand and Ryan Grant on the other, the Packers did not have the luxury of being able to place the same amount of emphasis on the running game.

Second, the Vikings were smarter in mixing in a heavier dose of quick-release passes by Favre. This allowed the Vikings to counteract the Packers' emphasis on stopping the running game, while still protecting Favre by getting the ball out of his hands quickly. The Packers could have done the same thing, and they did occasionally, but usually when Rodgers went back to pass, it was with a full drop-back, where, in too many instances, he held the ball too long and was sacked.

The irony is that the Vikings didn't really need the quick-release passes to protect Favre, because even when he did a full drop-back, the Packers rarely tried to put any pressure on him. And, as a result, he carved them up. I complained about the same thing after the first Vikings game (here). In fairness, the Packers probably did blitz a little more this time, without much success. But I still think the Packers did not do enough in their defensive scheme to put pressure on Favre.

I can't help but ask for some accountability by the coaching staff. From my perspective, they made many of the same mistakes in this loss that they made four weeks earlier. We would like to think that the coaches learned something from the first meeting with the Vikings, as well as from watching the tapes of the Vikings' loss to the Steelers. But I just don't see the evidence that they learned much, if anything, from those games. And speaking of accountability, how many more times do we have to listen to Mike McCarthy talk about eliminating the stupid penalties before we conclude that he is either not serious about this, or not effective as a coach, or both? The Johnny Jolly head-butting penalty probably did not make the difference between winning and losing this game. But it is one of the dumbest penalties I have ever seen.

Finally, as a sidelight on the game itself, I want to point out three interesting articles I have seen in the past week, all of which shed additional light on the dysfunction that led to the Packers trading Favre away last year. Two of the articles are by Andrew Brandt, former Packer Vice-President. In the first one, Brandt explains why, in his view, Favre retired in the first place - basically because he perceived (correctly or not) that Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson were indifferent to whether he retired or continued to play. (First Brandt article.) From the article itself, it appears that Ted Thompson probably forced Brandt out of his position, so take the articles with whatever grains of salt seem justified. In the second article, Brandt picks up on Troy Aikman's comment, during the game broadcast, to the effect that maybe Favre never wanted to play for the Packers after his brief retirement last year. He lays out in some detail why this comment makes him think that this is something Favre must have said directly to Aikman. (Second Brandt article.) The last article is by the writers of the Packer Geeks blog (Stephen and Andrew Hayes). In this article, the Hayes brothers argue, with references to some of the things said at the time, that Favre was less than truthful in some of his public statements made during the retirement/unretirement saga. (Hayes brothers article.) All three of these articles are essential reading.

More Pressure Needed on Defense

As a Packer fan and a Brett Favre critic, last Monday night's game 30-23 loss to Brett Favre and the Vikings was about as discouraging as it gets. Aaron Rodgers was harassed and hit all night long, taking 8 sacks including a safety and a fumble, as well as an interception. He had lots of yards, but only two touchdowns, and he was battling from behind since late in the second quarter.

On the other side of the ball, Brett Favre was never sacked, rarely hurried, had no interceptions, and threw for three touchdowns. And all this in a game in which the Packers did a pretty good job shutting down Adrian Peterson.

So what gives? Obviously the two most glaring problems were the Packers' offensive line, and the fact that the Packers got no pressure on Brett Favre. The line is a problem, but one that may be on its way to improvement. According to the Packer Report, the week 1 line will be back intact this week against Detroit. This means that Chad Clifton will return at left tackle, and all the others who have shifted over will return to their original positions. Plus, the Packers signed Mark Tauscher. If he is healthy enough to contribute, he should provide extra depth at OT.

Other things that would help would include Rodgers doing a better job of getting rid of the ball (some of those sacks were attributable at least as much to Rodgers as to the shaky offensive line), and better play calling. Given a shaky line, it would be nice to see more roll-out plays and screen passes to take some of the pressure off. The Packers tried some of these, without a lot of success, but they should do this more.

The lack of pressure on Favre is another story. You would think that the Packers would have a lot of familiarity with Favre's strengths and weaknesses. Did the coaching staff just miss the fact that, for all his strengths, he does tend to make big mistakes when he is getting a lot of pressure? Not likely. When a guy like Charles Woodson makes note of the fact that something was missing from the defensive game plan, something must be going on. He was quoted in the Journal-Sentinel as saying "Well, I think we've got a lot of tools in our bag that we're not using. For whatever that reason is, I don't know."

Re-watching the game confirms that the Packers rarely tried to bring much pressure on Favre. Why? It makes no sense. I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but the only reason I can think of is that they didn't want to take big risks with the resulting big downside. If they blitzed Favre, he might hit the home-run bomb, which would look really good on the highlight reels for Favre, and really bad for the Packers. So if they were unwilling to have Favre beat them with flashy big plays, then what? I guess they were content to try to stop the run, drop into coverage, and let Favre dink and dunk them to death, in the hope that he might make mistakes anyway, despite the lack of pressure. Well, he dinked and dunked them, and didn't make the mistakes, and won the game. If this was the plan, they need a better one come November 1.

One of the side-effects of locating and formatting all of my old articles is that I am re-living some of the great and not-so-great memories of past games. A recurring theme is soft coverage in critical situations. There are other examples, but the most egregious one was the 4th and 26 situation against Philadelphia in the playoffs. I am afraid that the Monday night Vikings game fits into the same category.

Favre Hit Hard on FOX News

Worth repeating, from panelist Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard, on today's FOX News program, Special Report with Bret Baier.

Hayes: Well, speaking of tawdry behavior and betrayal, Brett Favre will be playing on Monday night wearing a Minnesota Vikings uniform. It is appalling and it is, I think, the worst possible outcome of his two-year long betrayal of Green Bay Packers fans, peppered with lies, peppered with mis-statements, and now he is going to be playing for the enemy.

Charles Krauthammer: He might be worse than Roman Polanski.

Hayes: He might be, if you are a Packer fan. If you grew up in Wauwatosa, he might be worse.

Favre Week Number 1

So much for making any progress in the NFC North standings this week. While the Packers finally started to look like themselves after the first few series against the Rams, and were closing in on their victory yesterday, I was also watching the 49ers and Vikings on another TV. Wouldn’t you know it, the old Favre magic against the 49ers was in evidence, with the old man connecting on a last second touchdown pass to beat the 49ers. Sort of a mirror-image of the old Terrell Owens game so many years ago in San Francisco.

Meanwhile, although I was paying no attention to it at the time, the Lions were in the process of wrapping up their first win in over a year. And in the afternoon, the Bears managed to win a back and forth battle against the Seahawks. Which, unfortunately, leaves the Packers exactly where they started the day. Tied with the Bears for second place, a game behind the Vikings, a game ahead of the Lions.

So the week 4 visit to Minnesota should be interesting. We will be seeing a lot of Favre highlights on the sports shows this week. The local papers here on the west coast are full of the thought that "Yes, Brett Favre did it once more to the 49ers." While I have been and remain highly critical of Favre for his retirement/non-retirement dramas the last two years, I have to admit that his mastery of the 49ers was always one of the best things about him, at least for me, living in the SF Bay Area. Of course in yesterday's game, it was a little different. I always root for the Vikings to lose, for obvious reasons. And I always root for the 49ers to lose, just because a 49er loss brings me pleasure. In this case, I had to root for the 49ers, for NFC North divisional reasons.

In light of the Vikings' come-from behind victory, the pressure is on the Packers. Yes, it is early in the season. Sure, they get another crack at the Vikings in another month. But the Packers can ill afford to fall two games behind the Vikings this early. The fact that they gave up so many rushing yards to the Rams is not a good sign, since the Vikings have an even better running back in their lineup. But given that the Packers' offense started to come alive yesterday, there is some reason to hope for a good result.

The Pressure is On

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — Tonight's game at New Orleans will go a long way toward showing if the Packers are going to make a run at the playoffs this year. After an abysmally bad showing against Minnesota, where they were lucky to even have a shot at winning the game, the Packers proceeded to crush their other historical nemesis, the Bears, the following week.

This marked the first time in Lovie Smith's tenure as head coach of the Bears that the Packers had beaten the monsters of the midway in Green Bay. As a result, the Packers were put back in charge of their own destiny. If the Packers win all their remaining games (admittedly, a long shot), they will win the division. But at least as of today, they don't need to rely on any other team. Let's hope that state of affairs continues.

The burning issue of the day, though, is which Packers are the real Packers? If the real Packers are the team that can't stop the run, can't get a running game of their own going, and misfire at the most inopportune moments, the team is in big trouble. If, on the other hand, Ryan Grant continues to run as he did last week against the supposedly good Chicago Bears rushing defense, if they continue to shut down the run like they did last week, and if the truly sensational Green Bay defensive backs continue to control some of the premier wide receivers in the league, then it is hard to see how they can lose another game.

So a visit to the Superdome, in prime time for all the nation to see, could not come at a better time. Sadly, with the departure of Brett Favre to the Titan-beating New York Jets, there are no remaining player links on the team to the Super Bowl XXXI Champions, who won their Super Bowl game in New Orleans almost 12 years ago. If I am not mistaken, Packers running backs coach Edgar Bennett will be the only member of the Super Bowl Champion team to be on the Packer sidelines tonight. Drew Brees and the Saints will present quite a challenge to the Packers tonight. The Saints have been scoring a lot of points, but the good news is that they give up lots of points, too. The Saints are in the bottom half of the league in both rushing and passing defense. So the Packers should have some opportunities to score some points. Wear some Mardi Gras beads and get ready for a good game.