The Packers Finally Reach the Bye Week!

Woodson Ceremony, Photo by Tim Flanigan, WLUK

If I had predicted, two weeks ago, the outcome of the Packers games against the Vikings and Rams, I would have predicted a win against the Vikings and a loss to the Rams.  Instead, just the opposite happened, with the Packers dropping the game to Minnesota, 31-34, and beating the Rams, 36-28.  Ultimately, I don't think it much matters which way the Packers went about winning one and losing one.  I don't really think that the (now) 5-6 Vikings will be able to catch the (now) 9-3 Packers to win the division.  And I doubt that the 7-4 Rams will catch the 9-2 Cardinals to win that division.  Of course, the fact that the Packers now have tie-breaker advantages over both the Cardinals and Rams could turn out to be important down the road.

The Minnesota game was a huge disappointment, but as mentioned a couple of weeks ago, the Vikings almost always play the Packers tough.  After all the injuries the Packers have had this year, losing Elgton Jenkins (the "Swiss Army Knife" offensive lineman) for the season seemed like a huge problem, especially with David Bakhtiari not quite ready to return.  But against the Rams, the Packers showed once again how resilient they have become this year.  Facing both Aaron Donald and Von Miller, this did not seem like a good time to lose yet another offensive lineman.  But the offensive line played remarkably well, giving up only one sack, and providing Rodgers enough time to throw for over 300 yards, 2 touchdown passes and a rushing touchdown.  The Packers got enough out of the rushing game and the short passing game to really control the clock, almost doubling the Rams' time of possession.

At any rate, they have managed (finally) to reach the bye week, and now get an extra week for players who have been playing through injuries (including Rodgers, Aaron Jones and Rashan Gary) to get healthier, and perhaps even allowing for injured players like Bakhtiari, Jaire Alexander, and Za'Darius Smith to return to the lineup.  If most or all of these players can get healthier and ready to play, the Packers have a lot of upside in the playoff stretch.

All year long, I have been concerned that Rodgers' ability to hit the long pass has declined this year.  It seemed as if he was missing way more of those throws than in the past.  But in the last couple of games, it seemed as if he was hitting more of them (the TD pass to MVS against the Vikings, and the long passes to Adams and Cobb and MVS against the Rams being great examples).  Turns out it was not just my active imagination.  The stats absolutely back up my impression that Rodgers has upped his game in the last couple of weeks.

The Rams game also included the Charles Woodson Hall of Fame ring presentation ceremony, and the unveiling of his place in the Ring of Honor.  Woodson was one of the all-time greats, and it was great to see him back in Lambeau Field, and to see the reaction of the fans.  It is hard to believe that he was only with the Packers for seven years, because the things he accomplished during that time were really something, culminating in the completion of the win in Super Bowl XLV, after Woodson had been knocked out of the game.  The ceremony from Sunday's game can be found here.

The Packers' schedule to the end of the regular season is not easy, but it could be a lot worse.  They play the AFC-leading Ravens and the Lions on the road, and they have home games against the Bears, Browns and Vikings.  Just for frame of reference, the goal is obviously to catch the Cardinals and secure the top seed in the NFC.  The Cardinals have 6 remaining games, at least 3 of which should be considered tough games: the Rams and Colts at home, and the Cowboys on the road.  Add in a weather game at the Bears, and a season-ending game against the Seahawks (who, just maybe, might be playing better by then), and you can see that the Packers have a decent chance of securing the top seed.  They just mainly need to guard against losing games they should win.  A week of rest and recovery should get them on the way to finishing out the season in style.  

Finally, Another NFC Champ Game at Lambeau Field

Kneel Down Time, Photo by Dan Powers, USA Today

Well, the Packers beat the Rams, rather handily, in their Divisional Playoff game on Sunday, 32-18.  In the process, they have brought the NFC Championship game back to Lambeau Field for the third time in the Favre / Rodgers eras, and for the first time with Rodgers as starting quarterback.  

For the first time all year, the Packers allowed some ticketed fans in the stadium, along with invited guests.  The total attendance was 8,456, which may only be a little more than 10% of capacity, but players including Rodgers commented on how much difference it made.  There were no fans in the stands (home or away) for the first few Packers games this year, and while the typical camera shot didn't display that, when they would show an end zone shot, the emptiness of the stadiums made it seem very sterile to me, like an organized scrimmage, except one that counted in the standings.  

As soon as the Packers started playing before even a few hundred fans, at home or on the road, I felt as if I could detect some increased energy on the part of the players.  And Saturday, with the stands 10%+ filled, there was no doubt.  You could see the players interacting with the fans in the stands.  Rodgers acknowledged what it meant to him to hear the "MVP!" chants late in the game.  With a similar number of fans to be in the stands on Sunday, and with "better" weather (i.e., colder and with a good chance of snow), the Packers should finally have a real home field advantage in an NFC Championship game.

If there was a lull period in the Rams game, it was in the late 3rd quarter.  In my own family, I found very different reactions to that part of the game, when the Rams pulled to within 7 points, at 25-18.  Some of them had a "here we go again" kind of vibe.  Especially since that last Rams score was sandwiched by the only two Packers punts of the game.  Had the momentum really shifted that far in the direction of the Rams?  To state the obvious, when it is a 7 point game, the ball can take a funny bounce, or a ball can be tipped, or a ball can be stripped, and all of a sudden the game is tied.  So the game was at risk at that moment, but I never really felt as if the game was in much doubt.  The Packers had been controlling the game all day long, outplaying the Rams on both sides of the ball, and I was confident that they would put up some more points to seal the win.  And they did, with a near-perfect play action pass to Allen Lazard.  The ball was a little too far inside, which made it a harder catch for Lazard, but as soon as he secured the catch it was clear that he was gone with the "dagger" of a 58 yard touchdown catch.

The hype going into the game was that it was the irresistible force against the immovable object.  The Packers' number one offense against the Rams' number one defense.  But the final stats of the game make a real mockery of the pregame hype.  The Packers almost doubled the offensive output of the Rams, 484 to 244, gaining more yards on offense than the Rams had given up in any game all season.  The Packers controlled the ball for over 36 minutes.  The Packers almost doubled the rushing total of the Rams, 188 to 96.  And while the Packers gave up no sacks or turnovers, the Packers defense registered 4 sacks of Jared Goff, the most sacks he sustained all year.  Goff, by the way, played very well despite his broken thumb, much better than he had the previous week when he was pressed into service against the Seahawks.  So the credit for holding the Rams in check goes to the Packers' defense, and not to an ineffective Jared Goff.  

Rashan Gary, in particular, had one of his best games, contributing 1.5 sacks, 3 quarterback hits, and 1 tackle for loss.  The Packers showed again, as they have in a number of games later in the season, that they can control the line of scrimmage sufficiently to prevent a talented running back from gashing them.  And then the defensive backs, combined with the pass rush, have proved up to the task of controlling the passing game.  So as the game played out, the Packers had the far superior offense, and the far superior defense.  The Packers' special teams had some problems (a botched extra point and some long-ish kickoff returns) but no game changing plays.

The offensive line played magnificently, and were the MVPs of this game, even without David Bakhtiari, and without ever needing to bring in a substitute.  On regular offensive plays (not including special teams) the starting 5 linemen (Jenkins, Turner, Wagner, Linsley and Patrick) played 100% of the snaps.  I doubt that has happened all year long.  Steve Mariucci joked on Sunday morning that the equipment manager won't even need to wash Rodgers' jersey for next week, as the protection was so good that he was hardly ever touched.  The Packers, behind that consistent offensive line, stuck with the running game, rushing (not counting Rodgers) 32 times for 191 yards.  That is the perfect way to open up the passing game, especially on play-action passes, and it worked, with significant contributions from Adams, Lazard, Tonyan and MVS in the passing game.

The interesting thing to me is that the Packers did not play their best game against the Rams.  Rodgers, uncharacteristically, missed some passes that would have been completions if they had been closer to the mark.  And there were a number of dropped passes, too.  On defense, again, as well as the defense played on Saturday, they did not come away with a single turnover, and in most games they do get at least one turnover.  So you can look at this in two ways.  You can say that the Packers better clean up those offensive mistakes on Sunday, and they better force some turnovers, or they will be watching the Super Bowl from their couches.  Which might be true.  But the way I am looking at it is that, as good as the Packers were against the Rams, they can (and I hope, will) play even better against the Buccaneers.  They didn't even need to be at their best to beat the number one defense of the Rams.  Imagine what they could do if they play at, or closer to, their best.

I was rooting for the Saints to beat the Buccaneers on Sunday; every Packers fan I know was rooting for the same thing.  The Packers beat the Saints in the dome, 37-30, in Week 4, whereas the Buccaneers dealt the Packers their worst loss of the season in Week 6, 10-38.  So having to play Brady and the Buccaneers again in the Championship Game seems, in a way, a little too reminiscent of last year, when the Packers were manhandled by the 49ers during the season, and then had to go back to Santa Clara for the Championship game, where they were manhandled again.  

I reject that comparison.  Last year, both the Packers' offense and their defense were just not up to the job against the 49ers.  They were just beaten solidly, on both sides of the ball, on the road in both games, with regular-sized hostile crowds.  This year, the Packers' offense has played better in the LaFleur system from the first week on.  And while the defense drove fans crazy early in the year, toward the end of the season, the defense has played with much greater consistency.  Since the Week 11 loss to the Colts, the Packers have won seven straight games.  They have given up an average of 18 points in those games, and allowed more than 20 points only twice.  Meanwhile, they have been scoring an average of 33 points over that same stretch, and scored fewer than 30 points only once.  

OK, but what about the Buccaneers, you might say?  What happened in that game, and why is it likely to be different this time?  That game was a weird one, that actually started out well, and then suddenly went to hell in a hand basket.  The Packers were leading 10-0 after the first quarter, when the Buccaneers got a pick 6 to make it 10-7, and then a tipped ball resulted, one play later, in another Buccaneers touchdown on the next possession to make it 14-10, and it was all downhill from there.  In other words, I think that was a game that took an abrupt turn and then snowballed out of control (if you will excuse the expression) in the 88 degree Tampa weather.  The Packers dug the hole even deeper by the end of the half (28-10), and at that point they were forced completely out of their game plan.

So sure, it could happen again, but unlike last year, I don't feel any sense of inevitability about it.  The Bucs game was early in the season, when they were regularly getting gashed by strong running games, and indeed, the Bucs running backs gained 158 yards that day.  And while the Packers' offense had been playing at a high level early in the season, except for the Bucs game, they are playing way more consistently now.

The Packers need to commit to the running game to set up the passing game, and from re-watching the prior Bucs game, they should run the ball inside more than to the outside.  At least on a dry, hot field, the Buccaneers' linebackers were too fast to allow much in the outside running game.  And, obviously, the Packers can't give the ball away again.  On defense, the Packers need to play like they have later in the season, and hold the running backs more in check than they did in Week 6.  While I realize that Mike Pettine isn't about to change his approach dramatically, I hope he will remember that Brady needs to get some pressure.  You can't just rush 3 and drop into zone coverage against Brady, as he can carve you up.  

Right now, there is a 50% chance of snow on Sunday, with temperatures in the high 20's.  That won't phase Brady or Gronkowski in the least, but it is an open question what it will mean for the rest of the Buccaneers.  Weather can freak players out if they are not used to it, but the weather Sunday is not likely to be severe enough to have this effect.  Beyond this, I think it is mostly about footing.  If you are not used to playing or practicing in this weather, you don't have a very good feel for what you can and can't do in those conditions.  Think of how careful you are, watching each step, when you are walking on icy or wet surfaces.  The field won't be icy, but it might have an accumulation of snow, as in the Titans game, and it will definitely be damp or wet.  The Buccaneers won't be used to this, and it can have a real effect on the game.  The Packers and their fans will have a mutually reinforcing vibe going, and I think that will help the Packers as well.

The Packers can definitely win this game, and I think that they will.  The Buccaneers' defense is not as good as the Rams' defense was, but their offense is better.  So the Bucs will score some points, and the Packers need to keep the pedal to the metal all day long.  I think something like 38-30 sounds about right to me, so Go Pack!

Thursday Night Preview

My handful of readers might be wondering where I have been.  We have been travelling out of the country for almost a month.  We were able to watch most of the Rams game online, but could not find a video feed of either the Patriots or Dolphins game.  I was able to listen to the Patriots game on the Packers Radio Network in the middle of the night, but for some reason could  not get through on the Dolphins game and had to rely on the written play-by-play online.  These are not ideal ways to follow games, to say the least, and don't allow me to comment meaningfully on either game.  We just got back in the country yesterday, and I haven't been able to watch the prior games yet, but the good news is, I only have to wait until Thursday night for a real, live Packers game!

Seattle and Green Bay is not a natural rivalry.  For most of their early history, the Seahawks weren't even in the NFC.  But since around 2000, this has become the kind of rivalry where a single phrase is all it takes to bring back vivid memories.  The "Al Harris pick 6 game," also known as the Matt Hasselbeck "We want the ball, and we're going to score" game (January 4, 2004).  The "Seattle Snow Globe" game, also known as the "Ryan Grant redemption" game, also known as Favre's last win as a Packers player (January 12, 2008).  The "Fail Mary" game, also known as the "Replacement Ref" game (September 24, 2012).  And of course, the "Colossal Collapse" NFC Championship Game (January 18, 2015).  Not to mention Mike Holmgren's return to Lambeau as the Seahawks coach, a game in which, as I recall, Holmgren had to go to the Packers' locker room to console Brett Favre after his 4-interception performance (November 1, 1999). 

Thursday's game is actually a big game for both teams.  The Seahawks aren't about to catch the Rams (9-1) with their 4-5 record.  But they are certainly in the Wild Card hunt (the Wild Cards, "if the season ended today," would be the 6-3 Panthers and the 5-3-1 Vikings).  But a loss to the Packers will be a serious blow to those hopes.

For the Packers, at 4-4-1, they are not only in contention for a Wild Card spot, but the division is not out of the question, if the Bears stumble and the Packers go on enough of a winning streak to pass the Vikings and catch the Bears.  Those of you who saw the last two games are in a better position to judge than I am whether the Packers are actually capable of going on a winning streak.  But I heard an intriguing statistic on Good Morning Football today: when Aaron Rodgers throws for less than 200 passing yards (as he did Sunday against the Dolphins), the Packers have a very high winning percentage.  All of which suggests that a strong running game (think of some of the early Eddie Lacy years) are a large component of a winning game strategy for the Packers.  I may not have seen the Dolphins game, but I know that Aaron Jones finally was the feature running back, and rushed for 145 yards, with an average gain per run of almost 10 yards.  Some combination of the departure of Ty Montgomery, plus the idea finally getting through Mike McCarthy's stubborn skull, resulted in Aaron Jones playing the role the rest of us thought he should all year long.  I don't think it is too strong to say, as some articles have this week, that Aaron Jones is the key to the Packers making the playoffs.  I look forward to a win Thursday night and a run for the playoffs.

The Ultimate Preventable Loss

Photo by PackersWire.USAToday.com

Today's blog post will be short, and necessarily so.  I am travelling out of the country, and only saw about 60% of the game live, and have no ability to re-watch it since NFL Game Pass (US) doesn't work outside the US.

Most of the focus post-game has been on Ty Montgomery's regrettable decision to try to return the Rams' kickoff after they went ahead, 29-27.  His fumble handed the ball right back to the Rams, and sealed the win for them.  There has been speculation that Montgomery returned the ball out of frustration or spite for having been benched in a prior series ("I'll show them!" - style).  But Montgomery says that is not what happened, rather he thought the ball was going to land close to the goal line, where he can't let a live ball bounce, or take a chance on an official's ruling as to whether he was in or out of the end zone when he caught the ball.  So he made a disastrous, split-second decision to return the ball.

Let me say that I don't really care that much which version is correct.  If the Packers think Montgomery deliberately disobeyed the order to down the ball, they should have cut or traded him on Monday.  If they believe his version, then it is appropriate that he is still on the team as of now (although today is the trade deadline, so we will see).

My bigger concern is that 5 of the Packers' first 7 games have either been decided in the closing seconds, or have been decided by dumb and inexplicable errors.  The Packers pulled off a miraculous comeback against the Bears to win.  They had numerous opportunities to either win or lose the Vikings game, so it was almost fitting that it ended in a tie.  A Mason Crosby flame-out of epic proportions cost them the Lions game.  Another miracle comeback against the 49ers.  And now a boneheaded mistake by our number 3 running back costs Aaron Rodgers the opportunity to pull off a significant upset win.  In these 5 games, the Packers are 2-2-1, so it obviously could be worse.  But a championship team finds a way to win all, or at least most, of those winnable games.  And they typically don't make them close; they put them away early on.

By that measure, the Packers don't look like a championship team right now.  They may not even make the playoffs absent a significant improvement.  An optimist would say that there were signs of improvement in the Rams' loss.  The Packers finally seem to have realized that Aaron Jones is their feature back.  And Jaire Alexander was making the kind of plays that justify the Packers' use of a high draft choice on him.  But "signs of improvement" just won't cut it anymore.  If the Packers are going to make anything out of this season, they are going to have to start winning the close ones, and putting away the easy ones.  Beating the Patriots would not seem like such a "must-win" game if the Packers had pulled off the comeback against the Rams.  But they didn't.  And now they need a win to avoid falling below .500 at the halfway point of their season.  In the immortal Super Bowl XLV words of Kevin Greene, "it is time" to go out and get it done.

Packers Charging into the Bye Week

Quinten Rollins' Pick 6 - Photo by Jim Biever

For the second week in a row, the Packers' defense had to carry the day, as the Packers struggled on offense, but came away with a 24-10 win over the Rams on Sunday.

There now seems to be a clear game plan to stay close to the Packers, for teams that have the horses on defense.  They have to have a strong front line, to put some pressure on Rodgers without blitzing, and to keep him from stepping up in the pocket.  Then they have to play a lot of Cover Two defense, which is generally effective against a West Coast Offense, and has always been frustrating for Rodgers.

But there are some problems with this strategy.  First, most teams don't have a strong enough front line to make this work.  And second, even if you can keep the Packers' offense somewhat in check, you still have to deal with the Packers' newly dominant defense.  So these past two weeks, the 49ers and Rams have caused problems for the Packers' offense, but they had no answer at all for the Packers' defense, which has allowed a total of only 13 points in those two games.  And maybe a third problem with this strategy is this: even if you have the defense to play this game against the Packers, the Packers have traditionally beaten this strategy with the deep outside threat.  In past years, Jordy Nelson was the guy who most frequently provided that threat.  That won't happen this year, but if the Packers can develop that threat, either in Davante Adams when he returns, or in Jeff Janis (who has the speed but not the trust of Rodgers or the coaching staff), or in Ty Montgomery (who has the trust but not necessarily the speed) there may be no stopping the Packers' offense.

The Packers intercepted Nick Foles 4 times (thanks in large part to a ferocious pass rush), once for the pick-six depicted in the photo above, and they sacked Foles three times.  I realize that the Packers gave up 159 yards rushing to Todd Gurley, but 95 of those yards were in the second half, i.e., many of them were garbage-time yards, and they produced a total of 0 points.  Time will tell if the Packers can continue to play like this on defense, but so far they look very good despite the defensive injuries sustained this year.

Sunday, the Chargers come to Green Bay, on a short week after their Monday night game.  This will be the last game before the Packers' bye week, and it would be a huge plus to be 6-0, with two weeks to get healthy before their trip to Denver for a Sunday night game.  The Chargers already trail the Broncos by three games after five weeks, so they would love nothing more than to be able to beat the Packers and at least keep pace with the Broncos for another week.  And the Chargers do have a good offense; in fact Philip Rivers leads the league in passing yards.  But his offensive line was a mess Monday night, and is still expected to be on Sunday.  That, combined with the way the Packers have been rushing the passer while keeping the running game mostly contained, is not a good combination for the Chargers.  I was not all that impressed with the Packers' offensive game plan last week, and I assume they realize, just like the fans, that it was lacking.  I expect them to correct this on Sunday, come out with a much better game plan, and put up a lot more points.  I think this should be a big win for the Packers.

Packers Fast Start - 4-0 For the First Time Since 2011

The Packers' Game Day Captains, Plus a Photo-Bomber

The Packers' first visit to the 49ers new stadium was a success, as they beat the 49ers 17-3 on Sunday, in the process beating Colin Kaepernick for the first time.

On the way into the stadium, we spent some time talking with an old-timer 49er fan.  He dated back to the days when the 49ers played in Kezar Stadium.  He was in a somber mood, apparently expecting the 49ers to lose to the Packers, but also lamenting the way that everything has changed since the move to the new stadium.  Ordinary fans were priced out of the market for season tickets, he said, this changed the demographics of the people who own season tickets, and to make matters worse, now that the team is on the down-slope, people will stop caring and jump off the bandwagon.  He told us that his $10,000 worth of PSLs are now only worth about $2,000 if he were to re-sell the rights to his season tickets (apparently you can sell the rights to 49ers season tickets, unlike the situation in Green Bay).

And sure enough, the atmosphere in the stadium was different.  You can't really compare the way the fans react to a team that is obviously losing its way, as the 49ers now are, to a team on the upswing, as the 49ers were the last couple of times the Packers played the 49ers at Candlestick Park.  But we certainly noticed the difference, from the empty seats scattered all over, to the exodus of the fans starting early in the 4th quarter, to the lack of enthusiasm shown for their adorable little stadium gimmicks, such as chanting "Aah-oo!, aah-oo!, aah-oo!" after a first down.  Want more proof?  The 49ers owner could not offer to give away some extra tickets to the Packers game without getting roasted by 49ers fans for having dismantled the team.  I mentioned last week that the 49ers seemed to be in serious disarray as a franchise, but I am not sure I realized how bad it really is.  Peter King tallied it up this past summer and came to the conclusion that of the 25 most important 49er players and coaches, 14 of them left this off-season.

The image to the left (taken at the stadium on Sunday) reflects a sort of inside joke in our family.  Starting with the great Joe Montana days, people started referring to the "49er Faithful."  We considered it a joke, because in 1980 you could walk in and buy season tickets; that is how "faithful" the fans were before the 49ers won their first Super Bowl.  Most of them seemed to think that NFL history started sometime around 1980.  Anyway, it looks like a new era for the "faithful" is now beginning, and for someone like me who lived with the insufferable 49ers fans and media for years, I welcome it.

Despite all of that, the 49ers played very well on defense, and kept the Packers' offense in check better than any other team this year so far.  Rodgers' accuracy may have been a bit off by comparison to other games, there were a couple of dropped passes, and Don Barclay continues to be less than ideal as a replacement for Bryan Bulaga, but I think most of the credit goes to the 49ers defense.

On the other side of the ball, though, the Packers' defense probably had its best game of the year.  They obviously set out to stop the run by playing safeties close to the line of scrimmage, in effect daring Colin Kaepernick to beat them with the passing game, or by scrambling.  They succeeded in stopping the conventional running game (Carlos Hyde gained only 20 yards), Kaepernick could not beat them with the passing game (he only had 160 passing yards and was sacked 6 times), and they did an admirable job of containing Kaepernick's scrambling, holding him to 57 rushing yards, with no rush longer than 12 yards.  I did not anticipate that the Packers' defense would play this well this soon, especially considering the injuries they have sustained.  But they are doing it and, I might add, playing with more creativity and aggression than they did at times last year.

The Packers now return home for a pair of home games, against the Rams and Chargers, both currently having a record of 2-2.  If the Packers can win both those games, a good likelihood given the Packers' record at home, they will be 6-0 heading into the bye week.  The Rams have a very strong front seven, and if Don Barclay continues to play in Bulaga's absence, they will get some pressure on Rodgers.  But, interestingly enough, despite the reputation of the Rams' front seven, at this point the Packers' defense is outperforming the Rams' defense in rushing defense, passing defense, and points allowed, while the Packers' offense is similarly outperforming the Rams' offense in all those categories.  I don't see any reason not to expect a Packers' victory this week.

Ponder-ing the Vikings Game

(Green Bay Press-Gazette photo of Charles Woodson and Al Harris embracing after the game)

"Boring." That is the description that a family member, and the Packergeeks, both used to describe the Packers' 24-3 win over the Rams last week, bringing the Packers' record to 6-0, and leaving them as the last undefeated team in the league.  I didn't really agree with that, until I tried to watch the game again, and found myself day-dreaming about other things.  But hey, boring isn't a bad thing when your team is 6-0.

One of the more "interesting" plays in the game was turned in by Sam Shields.  He made a great play on the ball to intercept Sam Bradford's pass in the end zone.  But he ended up getting a concussion after running around in the end zone trying to decide whether to try to return the ball.  I have to say that was one stupid play on his part. Watching it on TV, it is always difficult to know what the player sees, or thinks he sees, from his angle. Here he makes a great play to intercept the ball in the end zone, but instead of either running the ball out, or kneeling to end the play, he ran all the way from one edge of the end zone toward the other, evidently trying to find a seam to run the ball out. Instead he was hammered on the play and did not return. That is one painful way to get a touchback.

The Packers continue to look pretty much unstoppable on offense, although I suppose it sounds strange to say that when the team did not score in the second half.  But when you are ahead 24-3 at halftime, and when the opponent does not score in the second half either, it might be a little obsessive to worry much about that.  On defense, the Packers continue to give up way too many yards, and have not seemed, all year, to be as dominant as they were at times last year.  But, for whatever reason, they seem to be able to make plays and stiffen in the red zone.  The challenge for the defense would be to learn to play that way on the rest of the field, so you don't have to come up with the big play in the red zone.

"We're 7 days from being 7-0, and that's our message."  When I first saw this quote from Mike McCarthy, I almost cringed.  Bulletin Board Material!  And I suppose it is bulletin board material.  But on second thought, this is just the new Mike McCarthy, the one we have seen since late last season.  The one who said "we are nobody's underdog" in connection with the game against the Patriots.  The one who had the team measured for Super Bowl rings the night before the Super Bowl.  The one who has an empty frame in the team meeting room, waiting for the portrait of the next Packer Super Bowl Champions.  He seems to have a strategy here, that expressing high expectations for the team, and challenging them to meet those expectations, serves as motivation.  Motivation is a funny thing, but this technique seems to be working.  You would think that at this level, players can motivate themselves, and that nobody needs emotional halftime speeches to get ready to play the second half.  You would think that a player like Aaron Rodgers doesn't need to use long-ago perceived slights as motivation to play better, but he does, and it also seems to be working.  As long as the Packers continue to win most (or all!) of the games against good teams, and avoid letdowns against the bad teams, they are going to continue to win a lot of games.

Since joining the NFL in 1921, the Packers have been 6-0 only 5 other times, and in all 5 of those seasons, they won the league’s championship:1929, ’30, ’31, ’62 and ’65.  And here is another obscure stat for you:  5 of the last 6 teams to start 6-0 have made it to the Super Bowl.

The Vikings have announced that they are benching Donovan McNabb, and that Christian Ponder will be the starting QB for the rest of the year.  It will be interesting to see how he plays.  It is a daunting task to make your first start against the undefeated defending World Champions.  On the other hand, you' have nothing to lose in that circumstance.  You are expected to lose the game, and everyone will understand if you do.  It is all upside, just like when Cam Newton lost to the Packers and all anyone could talk about was how good he looked.  I expect the Packers to be 7-0 going into the bye week, so the stats junkies should get ready to pour through the record books looking for 7-0 teams and how they do.

A Perfect Day

I don't know about you, but I can't find much of anything to complain about from last Sunday. First, I woke up to find out that Saddam Hussein had been captured. That was a good start. Then, the Rams beat the Seahawks (that one I expected) and the Bears beat the Vikings (I didn't have enough courage to come right out and predict that one). I was flipping back and forth between these two games, enjoying both very much. I hope you saw the way the Vikings game ended. In the closing minutes, with the Bears leading 13-10, the Vikings got the ball back and had driven to the Bears' 10 yard line. Then, Culpepper went back to pass, Moss went up for the ball in the end zone, it was in his hands for what would probably be the winning touchdown, when the Bears' defensive back just scooped it out of Moss' hands and came down with the ball for the
game-preserving interception. That might be the best play by a defensive back of the new millennium so far. It sort of looked as if he was trying to bat the pass out of Moss' hands, but it was a controlled bat, instead of smacking the ball as hard as he could, and he literally just scooped it away from the great Moss. What a way to win a game and help the Packers out.

Now it was time to switch to the Packer game, although somehow the NFL Sunday Ticket (and I guess the whole FOX network) forgot to throw a switch, so that the Packers were actually ahead 7-0 by the time they switched to the game. Other than a few really painful minutes at the start of the 4th quarter, this game went exactly as I had hoped. [Ed. note - the Packers beat the Chargers, 38-21.] The result: the Packers are now tied for first in the division (with complicated tie-breaker implications at the minute) and tied for the first wild card (with a clear tie-breaker advantage over the Seahawks). If the Packers win their last two games, it is almost certain (but not yet 100% certain) that they will be in the playoffs.

Looking forward to this weekend, the Chiefs play at the Vikings on Saturday. The Chiefs are not as good as they seemed at times this year, and the Vikings might not be quite as bad as they have seemed in recent weeks. Still, I think the Chiefs have enough strength and motivation to beat the Vikings. On Sunday, I don't think it is reasonable to think that the Cardinals will beat the Seahawks, so the Packers will not likely get any help there. It is debatable whether it is better for the Packers for the Cowboys to win, or to lose, but in any event I expect them to beat the Giants.

Which brings us, of course, to Monday night. The re-match of Super Bowl II. Another game between the same two teams who were playing the day that Leroy Butler invented the Lambeau Leap. Most likely the last time the Raiders will ever play against Brett Favre, and most likely the last time the Packers ever play against Jerry Rice and Tim Brown. Lots of history in this game, and despite the fact that most of the Raiders' home games have been blacked out here in the Bay Area, so that I have not seen as many Raider games as you might expect, I cannot believe that the Raiders are as bad as their 4-10 record. In fact, the Raiders' victory over the Ravens last week (who were fighting for a playoff spot) tends to prove the point, and hopefully will help the Packers to avoid complacency.

My wife was driving during the Raiders game last week, and heard the radio announcers say that the Raiders' attendance was the lowest of the year. Bear in mind, even if the Raiders were out of the playoffs, the Raiders sort of had a score to settle with the Ravens, since the Ravens kept them out of the Super Bowl a few years ago. Still, the paid attendance was 45,398 in a stadium that holds over 63,000 in football configuration. I just checked (Friday afternoon)on Tickets.com, and it looks as if there are nothing but single tickets left for the game Monday night. Who bought all those extra tickets for the game this Monday? You know as well as I do who bought the tickets. I think that means that the crowd will be approximately one-third Packer fans on Monday night. Including yours truly and family, of course. (A little advice to Packer fans attending the game: be careful, some Raiders fans are just as crazy as they appear.)

I am not saying it is going to be easy, but I think the Packers will win this game, probably convincingly. The Packers' running game is too strong for the Raiders' depleted defense, and if they try too hard to stop Ahman Green, I think that Favre's thumb is now getting healthy enough for the passing game to do the trick. The Packers' defense may have some deficiencies, but are Rick Mirer and a couple of the oldest receivers in the league going to beat them? I don't think so.

If all goes well, the Packers will be in sole possession of first place in the NFC North by late Monday night.

Eerie Parallels?

Much has been made in the last few weeks about the parallels between this season and the 1996 season, which ended with the Packers' victory over New England in Super Bowl XXXI. The Packers rolled their way to an 8-1 record in 1996, before injuries started to take their toll. With a depleted group of receivers, they lost a couple of games in a row (to the Chiefs and then to the Cowboys) to drop to 8-3. Then, the team rallied, after signing Andre Rison as a replacement receiver, and did not lose a game for the rest of the year, including the crowning glory Super Bowl victory in New Orleans.

But before getting back on track, they looked like they were in danger of losing their third straight game, at St. Louis (not a very good team at the time), where they trailed 9-0, and then 9-3 at the half. Doug Evans sparked the comeback in the third quarter when he intercepted Tony Banks' pass and ran it in for a touchdown to put the Packers in front, and they never relinquished the lead.

The same general story can be told about the 2002 season, so far. The Packers had an 8-1 record, before injuries (most recently to Chad Clifton) started to catch up with the Packers. The Packers lost consecutive road games at Minnesota and at Tampa Bay. They then played a game against a lesser opponent, the Chicago Bears, and they played poorly in the first half, trailing 14-6 at the half. And once again, defensive plays sparked the comeback, first, an amazing all-out effort by Javon Walker (playing defense after Favre's pass was intercepted on the last play of the half), running down the Bears' ball carrier who seemed surely on his way to a touchdown. And then, the other Walker, Rod, pulled an equally amazing defensive play in the second half to steal the ball away from the center and quarterback just as it was being snapped, with the Bears poised to score from the Packers' 1 yard line. The Packers roared back to win that game, and continued the win streak this week against Minnesota.

So, are the Packers on their way to home field advantage, a cruise through the playoffs, and another Super Bowl win? Who knows, but it looks like it will be much harder to pull off a Super Bowl victory this year. The parallels simply don't hold up when you look more closely. The Packers, in 1996, were a really dominant team, except for that stretch in the third quarter of the season. They started strong, and they finished strong, and they were never in much danger of losing any of the three playoff games that year.

This year, the Packers had a few convincing wins in the second quarter of the season, but otherwise every game has seemed in danger of being lost. Unlike 1996, when Desmond Howard was the Packers' secret weapon on special teams, this year, the Packers' special teams have been ordinary at best. But why take my word for it? During the Tampa Bay game, the announcers said that they had asked Brett Favre to compare this year's team to the 1996 team. Favre said that the 1996 team was much stronger than this year's team. The announcers seemed surprised to hear this, but anyone who has watched all of the games would have to agree with Favre.

Home field advantage itself is going to be difficult or impossible to achieve this year. The Packers are tied with the Eagles and the Buccaneers for best record in the league at 10-3, but both of those teams have tie-breaker advantages over the Packers, so even winning their remaining games will not guarantee home field advantage. Just today, the Buccaneers played the Falcons. You might think the Falcons, with the sensational Michael Vick, would have a shot to beat the Buccaneers, but the game was not close. The Eagles, with their third-string quarterback, went to Seattle to play the Seahawks. But again the game was not competitive. The 49ers, who trail the Packers by a game, had a game they easily could have lost at Dallas, but they rallied to win it at the end of the game. So, today at least, the Packers got no help whatsoever from other teams. And they are going to need help to get the home field advantage.

Next week, the Packers travel to the birthplace of the West Coast Offense, San Francisco. The 49ers seem vulnerable, based on their last couple of games, and yet despite their vulnerability they have managed to pull out wins in most of their games. The Packers don't have to look very far to get a game plan as to how to beat the 49ers. All they have to do is pull out the tapes of the Monday night victory by the Eagles (another West Coast Offense team) against the 49ers a couple of weeks ago. The Eagles, with their second and third-string quarterbacks, clearly displayed the weakness of the 49ers defensive backs. If the offensive line can give Favre some time, he should be able to carve the 49ers up. I will be there, of course. I have never missed a Packer game in San Francisco or Oakland in the 22 years I have lived here.

Thud!

"The Packers' season came to an end on Sunday with a crashing thud. They were destroyed by a far superior St. Louis Rams team, blown out by the score of 45-17. Just like those early playoff years of the Favre/Holmgren era, they met up with a team (the Cowboys then, the Rams now) that they seemed to have no chance to beat."

At least that is what you would think if you missed the game, woke up on Monday morning and just read the final score. But on closer inspection, this game had a different feel to it. Oh, the Rams' victory was no fluke, and the Rams are certainly the better team. But unlike the feelings of despair in those years against the Cowboys, when it was clear that the Cowboys were so much better than the Packers that the Packers would never beat them until the Cowboys were well past their prime, this time the Packers seemed pretty close to the victors. Take away the ridiculous number of turnovers (PLEASE take them away!), and the Packers played right with the Rams. In fact, it could be argued that they outplayed them. The Packers had more rushing yards, more passing yards, more time of possession, more of most everything except points, where there was a huge deficit.

So what happened? Well, obviously, enough turnovers for 4 games (6 interceptions, tying a playoff record, and 2 fumbles lost). But the interesting question is, why? Antonio Freeman's fumble was mostly just a great play by Aeneas Williams in stripping the ball. Ahman Green's fumble was the result of poor ball-carrying technique, something he will work on in the off-season.

And then there were the interceptions. The first one (returned for a touchdown) was the obvious result of either Favre or Schroeder making a mistake, but without knowing the details of what the Packers' offensive system is for adjusting routes on the fly, it is difficult to know whose fault it was. Certainly, Schroeder's adjustment (to head up field) was a good idea in the abstract (i.e. apart from whatever the system calls for), because he would have been wide open for a long gain or a touchdown. But Favre and Schroeder have frequently seemed not to be on the same page this year, and as much as it is nice to see the local Sheboygan boy make good, I am not sure he will be back.

Four of the interceptions came on tipped balls, so there was a certain fluky aspect to those interceptions, although there is plenty of room to question both Favre's judgment on some of the throws, and the inability of the Packer receivers to pull the balls down.

More and more, and after re-watching most of the game, I am coming around to the view that the problem was a combination of several factors: (1) a slightly over-aggressive (and thus risky) approach to the game plan; (2) the fact that this risky approach came home to roost in the form of several early interceptions, one for a touchdown and one for a near touchdown, so that early in the second quarter the Packers were down 21-7; (3) the fact that one of the breaks that could have kept the Packers in the game (Rossum's kickoff return for a touchdown) was called back on a penalty; and (4) the fact that the early 14 point lead allowed the Rams to start playing almost a prevent type defense, which, combined with the continuing aggressive approach by the Packers' offense, led to an obscene number of interceptions.

What I mean by the slightly over-aggressive approach is this. The Packers seemed to come into the game with the attitude that they needed to score a lot of points to win the game, so they went right after it, somewhat aggressively, from the start. No jockeying for field position, not a lot of runs or short passes, but a lot of medium range or longer passes. Now that is not a bad thing; in fact I think it was a good strategy. But unfortunately it is a higher-risk strategy, and it backfired on the Packers when the early turnovers started putting extra points on the scoreboard for the Rams. And as the Rams got ahead, and as the minutes for a possible comeback ticked off the clock, it led to an ever-increasing sense of desperation for the Packers, so they started putting the ball up even more, trying to squeeze it into small spaces, etc. And this just allowed the Rams' defensive backs to have a field day.

Mike Sherman, in his dual role as head coach and general manager, will have a busy off-season. It will have been a successful off-season, in my view, if he is able to upgrade the wide receiver corps. Right now, the Packers' wide receivers are not keeping defensive coordinators from sleeping at night. The Packers need a substantial improvement of at least one of their starting wide receivers, whether through maturation of players on the existing roster, through free agency, or through the draft. A relatively modest improvement at wide receiver will really open up the running game, and help to take some pressure off of Favre.

And then, if he has some free time left over, it would be good if he could figure out a way to keep the team better motivated against bad teams. The Packers lost three games to non-playoff teams this year, Atlanta, Minnesota, and Tennessee. Turn one of those losses into a win, and the Packers would have won the division and had a bye week in the playoffs. Turn two of them into victories, and the Packers would have had home field advantage throughout the playoffs. Games against bad teams are always important, every year. But looking back at the 2001 season, the importance of those games could not have been clearer for the Packers.

Nothing to Lose

I was just a kid when Lambeau Field opened in 1957. Yesterday, I was fortunate enough to be in attendance at the last game to be played in Lambeau Field before the extensive renovations, which are already underway. Looking up at the Club Seats and Luxury Boxes after the game, I could almost imagine the demolition crews in there, probably starting today, smashing things in preparation for the unveiling of an even-better Lambeau Field in the future. For those of you close enough to go take a look, you should take a trip to Lambeau Field this year to see how the renovations are progressing. The new brick facade is coming along, and it really is starting to look nice.

Although the timing was off, the military jets doing their flyover during the national anthem was an impressive spectacle. So was the flag ceremony in the middle of the field. I did wonder why the 49ers didn't join the Packers in coming out to grab the edges of the flag, but maybe they were told not to do so.

Gilbert Brown opened the game with a bang, sacking Garcia on the first play. I heard a nice story on the radio show after the game. Gilbert is evidently opening a car dealership in Fond du Lac. Some kid who, according to the person who called into the show, has had "a lot of adversity in his life," came in to see Gilbert during the past few days, when he was present at the new dealership. According to the caller, Gilbert was as nice as could be to this kid, and promised him that his first "grave digger" celebration would be for him. The caller said "you should have seen this kid's eyes when Gilbert told him that." I can only imagine what his eyes looked like after the first play of the game.

The much-maligned receiving corps redeemed itself somewhat yesterday. It was nice to see Antonio Freeman score the first touchdown of the game, which means that he extended his team record of catching a touchdown in four straight playoff games. He was also the leading Packer receiver in the game, and he has been the leading Packer receiver in 6 straight playoff games. Dorsey Levens, meanwhile, has had a catch in 12 straight playoff games, another Packer record. Bubba Franks got into the act, too, and his catch for the second touchdown had a very different "degree of difficulty" from his usual, 1 yard touchdown catch.

And how about Corey Bradford just stealing the ball from the defensive back on the long catch in the 3rd quarter. Bradford, talking about the biggest play of his career, said he had cried during the pregame introductions after hearing Mike Sherman's speech about all of the great players who came out of that North End Zone tunnel over the years, reminding the players that when they left the field on Sunday, it would be the last time any players would ever go out that tunnel. The tunnel will be demolished now that the Lambeau Field season has ended.

Bradford's catch belongs in the season's highlight reel, but amazingly, it was not even the play of the day. That play had to be the McKenzie to Williams tip for the interception that helped preserve the Packers' lead, followed by the 93 yard drive to sew up the ballgame. From now on, when someone talks about Elway's "The Drive" against Cleveland, I will just tune it out and think of Favre, driving down the field, completing third down passes whenever it was necessary to keep the drive moving. I will also think of Freeman's ill-considered exuberance in holding the ball up after catching one of those third-down passes. (At least he had enough awareness to admit, in post-game interviews, that it was a bonehead thing to do.)

This game was really all about the kind of player Brett Favre is. He was frustrated during the first half by the relatively conservative offensive game plan. He said he had talked to the coaches during the halftime break, saying that they should open it up, and "leave nothing on the field." And he just came out and took control of the game in the second half. He also took sole possession of second place on the all-time record list, for having a touchdown pass in 11 straight playoff games. Only Dan Marino has more, at 13.

And for their great effort yesterday, what is the Packers' reward? A trip to see the Super Bowl favorite St. Louis Rams. I see that the Rams are favored by 9 points. It is easy to understand why. They have blown a lot of teams out this year, only losing a couple of games when they had enough turnovers to beat themselves. The Packers have been good this year, frankly beyond my expectations and the expectations of most Packer fans. But let's not forget that the Packers also lost 3 games this year to inferior opponents (Minnesota, Atlanta, and Tennessee). And some of their wins were nailbiters (Tampa Bay, at Chicago, at Detroit, at Jacksonville). This translates into a maddening inconsistency by the Packers, although I suppose you could argue that you can't be too inconsistent and still end up with a 12-4 record (now 13-4).

Being objective about it, the Packers will probably lose this week. But with Brett Favre at quarterback, who knows? I suppose I feel the same way about the Rams game that I felt about the Green Bay at San Francisco game after the 1995 season. I briefly considered not going to that game, because I did not want to suffer through watching the Packers lose the first playoff game I ever attended. Better to suffer in solitude, I thought. Then I said to myself "What the hell are you talking about? You have never been to a Packer playoff game in your life, and here the Packers are playing in the playoffs in your back yard, and you are thinking about not going?" So my family and I went to the game, a game I will never forget.

Football miracles can happen, and it helps if you have Brett Favre, Ahman Green, and Gilbert Brown on your side. Other teams have gotten good in a hurry and cruised through the playoffs (perhaps prematurely) despite doubts about how good they are. The 1981 49ers were one example. The Rams, in their Super Bowl year, were another. So were the Ravens, last year. So it doesn't have to be a gradual progression like it was for the Packers under Holmgren (1-1 in playoff games after 1993 season, 1-1 after the 1994 season, lost in the NFC Championship game after the 1995 season, and finally won the Super Bowl after the 1996 season).

The Packers truly have nothing to lose this week. Everyone expects that they will lose to the Rams. They may as well play loose, take their shots, or as Brett Favre would say, "leave nothing on the field," and see what happens.

2001 in Review

Last night, we brought to a close a year many of us would rather put behind us, and today we welcome what we hope will be a much better year. Outside the football world, 2001 was a terrible year. A controversial Presidential election split the country right down the middle as the year began, and the stock market and the whole economy were in the tank. Then came the unfathomable terrorist attacks by Bin Laden's foot soldiers. Thousands of our fellow citizens lost their lives because of a handful of religious fanatics. And on and on. It was a year we will never forget, and a year that helped us football fanatics to put our fanaticism into some perspective, for a change.

But back to the Packers. 2001 started off quietly, too quietly, as the Packers were out of the playoffs for the second year in a row. On the bright side, that string of four straight victories in December, 2000 against NFC Central opponents left us with a sense that 2001 could bring better things for the Packers.

And sure enough, the Packers started out the 2001 season with a bang, winning the first three games in a fashion that was impressive, except for nagging doubts about the quality of their opponents. They then dropped a close game in Tampa, and then quite unexpectedly beat the World Champion Ravens in Green Bay. That was, in some ways, the high point of the season. Since that time their record has been 7-3, which is pretty good, but the three losses were to teams they should have beaten, and a couple of the victories required either miracle finishes (in Jacksonville) or serious nail-biting (in Detroit, and in Chicago). Most frustrating of all was the Packers' tendency to lose an "easy" game immediately after an important victory. All of this leaves one thinking wistfully of what might have been if the Packers had not dropped one of those games.

Sunday's game looked like it might fit right into that mold. The Packers had made the playoffs the week before, and now the Packers had no running game, the passing game was mostly misfiring, and the defensive line was being gashed by the Vikings' running backs, despite the total absence of any passing game from the Vikings' third string quarterback. The Packers were letting the Vikings hang around through the entire game, and when the Vikings scored to go ahead in the 4th quarter, 13-10, it looked like an upset in the making. But then the Packers turned it on, Packers marched down the field on the next drive, and went ahead for good.

What was the story? Were they just toying with the Vikings? Not exactly. It turns out from the post-game interviews that there was method in the Packers' madness, at least on defense. They were determined not to let the Vikings' receivers (especially Randy Moss) get open, and if that meant less attention to defending the run, so be it. The Packers were pretty sure that the Vikings would not win the game on the ground, and it turns out they were right. On offense, the picture is more complicated. The running game was not working, but the passing game was also misfiring, with a combination of off-target passes and dropped passes. This is the kind of inconsistency we have seen on and off all year, except this time it did not cost the Packers the game.

My sense is that the Packers are a year away from doing any serious damage in the playoffs. Living here in 49er country, the 49er fans seem to have the same question about their team that I have about the Packers: how is this team going to beat the Rams? The answer is that neither the 49ers nor the Packers have much chance of doing that. Of course, on any given Sunday anything can happen, but speaking for myself, I am not making any reservations for New Orleans.

Still, the season for the Packers has at least two weeks to go, and that is a much better situation than the Packers found themselves in a year ago. There are no guarantees, but the Packers have a reasonable shot of beating any other NFC team in the playoffs, except the Rams in the dome. So if things go right, the Packers could even end up in the NFC Championship game, and I suppose if someone else knocks off the Rams (like the Buccaneers?) they could possibly end up in the Super Bowl. But that seems like too much to ask of this team. A much more likely scenario is a first-round victory, followed by a frustrating loss in the second round. That will have been a very good season for the Packers, and something to build on for next year.

In the meantime, Happy New Year to Packer fans everywhere, and to all Americans.

Turning Points

The turning point in the season last year was the Monday Night game at Carolina. The Packers lost, 31-14, and looked bad in doing so. Their record sank to 5-7, and although they didn't know it at the time, losing that game ended up knocking them out of the playoffs. It was a turning point, because the Packers ended up finishing up the season with four straight wins, all against division opponents, just barely missing the playoffs but raising hopes for a better season this year.

Three weeks into this season, the Packers are now on a seven game winning streak in the regular season, the longest active winning streak in the league. The turning point in this week's game at Carolina is easy to identify. It was early in the second quarter, with the Panthers leading 7-0. Brett Favre's pass had been intercepted, and the Panthers had a chance to add to their lead. Weinke threw what looked like a touchdown pass to Muhsin Muhammad, which would have made the score 14-0. But there was a flag, on our old ex-central division foe, Todd Steussie, and the touchdown did not count. The Panthers did not score on the drive, or for the rest of the game. And the Packers scored 28 unanswered points to easily win their third game of the season.

Meanwhile, the Buccaneers and Vikings were still playing in Minnesota. What a dilemma for a Packer fan. Do we hope for the Buccaneers to win, thereby driving a stake through the heart of the Vampires (oops, I meant Vikings), even though this would leave the Buccaneers at 2-0? Or do we root for the Vikings to pull it out, giving the Buccaneers a loss, but keeping the Vikings closer to the Packers? Well, the Vikings of course did pull it out, which is probably the better result for the Packers and their fans, but I simply could not bring myself to root for the Vikings.

So, after three weeks, there are only three undefeated teams in the league, the Packers, the Rams, and the surprising San Diego Chargers. A great way for the Packers to start the season, and it gives the Packers a little bit of a cushion to play with as they head into the scariest three-week stretch of the season. The next three games are at Tampa, Baltimore (at Lambeau Field) and at Minnesota. Before the season, I frankly would have thought there was a good chance that the Packers would lose all three of these games. But now, all three of these teams look at least somewhat beatable,plus the Packers look much stronger than I expected them to look. So my expectations are higher. I think winning two out of these three games is a realistic goal, and if the Packers achieve that, they will be in great shape.

A Good Start

A well-timed family visit brought me to Wisconsin this past weekend. So (of course) a visit to a rainy Lambeau Field on opening day was on the agenda. The last time I went to an opening day game, the up-and-coming 1995 Green Bay Packers laid an egg. They lost to the St. Louis Rams, providing the Rams with their first-ever victory since moving to St. Louis. The weather was much worse this time around, but the football result was much better. [Ed. note - the Packers beat the Lions, 28-6.]

Opening day is a great time of year for football fans. Everyone has high expectations, or at least high hopes, on opening day. There is frequently ahint of fall in the air, and for those with kids, the new school year has either begun or is about to begin.

Here are a few things that struck me about the game and the stadium.

The parking situation is not as bad as was advertised. I over-reacted to the talk about parking problems and plunked down the money for a reserved spot in one of the Ticket Star lots. But this turned out to be quite unnecessary, as it seemed to be just about as easy to find a parking spot near the stadium as in past years. (In fact, I could have parked in the Ticket Star lot to which I was assigned for $5 less than I paid Ticket Star.)

On the other hand, foot congestion going into the stadium was pretty bad. I don't know if they are really enforcing the requirement that you enter only through the gate marked on your ticket, but there seemed to be a larger-than-usual backup going into the stadium. People should definitely allow some extra time to get in by opening kickoff.

The bunting in the stadium looked nice, but would have looked much better on a bright, sunny day. The smattering of boos for Antonio Freeman as he was introduced was perhaps to be expected, but still disappointing to me. Although he was not much of a factor in the game, I hope he is able to rehabilitate himself with the fans. In that connection, he did a nice job blocking on one of the running plays, which may help.

If there was any doubt last year about whether Ahman Green is the real deal, this game goes a long way toward dispelling that doubt. Green broke tackles on both of his long touchdown runs. If only I had him on my fantasy football team! Brett Favre (who is on my team) was also very sharp, with a high completion percentage despite 3 or 4 dropped passes, two TD passes and
no interceptions. Plus Favre did a great job blocking on a reverse and on another running play. The fact that the Lions were missing 3 of their defensive backs is probably good reason not to over-react to how good Favre looked on opening day, though.

But I don't think it is an over-reaction to say that the defense looked great. Ed Donatell, the defensive coordinator, called a great game and the players responded. KGB (Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila) was an exciting presence on the defensive side of the ball. He had 3 of the Packers' 7 sacks, and how can you not like a player whose name includes the word "beer", and whose initials are KGB, if you include his first name, or GB if you don't. Darren Sharper seems to have picked up exactly where he left off last year, with 2 interceptions including one for a TD, although the TD was called back.

Anyway, a great way to start the season. The Packers have a tough schedule this year, so they can't afford to give away any games that they should win, and by the end of the first quarter yesterday, it was pretty clear that they were not going to give this game away.

Franchise Free Agency

There has been a fair amount of attention on the internet and in the popular press about the effects of free agency. Is it a plus or a minus for a small market team like the Packers? Now that the Packers are on top of the heap, does free agency help them (because they are relatively attractive to free agents looking for a shot at a ring) or does it hurt them, because the participants in a Super Bowl always get more attention from other teams than they deserve (see Neil O'Donnell, Larry Brown and, yes, even Desmond Howard).

These are all interesting questions, and I might even have something to say about them one of these days. But my topic today is FRANCHISE free agency, not player free agency.

As a Packer fan, I suppose it is obvious that I have my biases on the question of franchise free agency, but try as hard as I can, I can't see anything good about the present system. Yes, there are some teams with whom the fans have just fallen out of love. I suppose the Oilers are the best example. A year or so ago they had a rally in downtown Houston to try to keep the Oilers, and something like 36 people showed up. This is amazing to me, given how recent it was that the Astrodome was known as the "House of Pain" and was filled to the rafters with nut cases with their faces painted blue. But right now the team has no support in Houston, and I suppose that the owner had little choice but to try to find a new home somewhere else. The Rams are probably another more or less comparable example.

But then there are the Raiders, and the way that Al Davis screwed the City of Oakland, not once but twice. The first time was when he took the Raiders away from sellouts and a solid fan base in a dispute with the city over luxury boxes. And the second time was when he brought them back under the burden of the highest ticket and PSL prices in the league, which are not selling out and which will leave the taxpayers in the City of Oakland holding the bag under the financial guarantees they provided to the Raiders to lure them back.

And the saddest case, to me, is the Browns/Ravens. Browns fans were like Packer fans, in many ways. They had a devoted, working class fan base, they were one of the old time teams in the league, and they had a wonderful history and tradition. And, quite unlike the Raiders, the Browns had an old-time, NFL guy for an owner, not a lifelong renegade like Al Davis. But Art Modell took the Browns away just as ruthlessly as Al Davis took away the Raiders.

The people of Cleveland will be getting a new Browns team in a couple of years, but it won't be the same. Never again will the people feel as if this is really "their" team. They will always know that some rich guy can take it all away in an instant over some future dispute over stadiums, luxury boxes, or something we can't even imagine now.

Compare these situations to the Packers. The fans (or more precisely some of them) actually own the team. It is not feasible to imagine a set of circumstances, other than outright financial failure of the franchise, under which the team would no longer be in Green Bay. There is no reason for a kid, or even an adult, to hold back on giving his heart to this team.

Here is the part that I don't understand. Can't everyone see that this is a better situation for the team, for the fans, and for the league, than the situation in Cleveland, Oakland, Baltimore, Houston, Los Angeles, etc? Then why is it that the league currently prohibits Packer-style public ownership, with the Packers being the sole team that is "grandfathered?" This just seems nuts to me.

I would respectfully suggest that the Green Bay Packer ownership model is the ideal fix for the problem with the league and franchise free agency. The league ought to be encouraging community ownership, rather than prohibiting it. Nothing much can be done with the existing franchises, but as the league adds new teams in Cleveland, Los Angeles, and elsewhere, and as teams are sold, community ownership should be the preferred (if not exclusive) model. The NFL right now is the hottest thing in sports. But they are very close to having the league ruined because of problems like franchise free agency.

If you agree, why not take a minute and write a letter to the Commissioner about this. I have already done so. The address is:

Commissioner Paul Tagliabue
National Football League
410 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10022