Packers Preparing for Short Turnaround Week

Old Friends Getting Together for Some Football

Game 6 for the Packers turned out to be primarily another Davante Adams show.  When it was announced that Bakhtiari, Tyler Ervin and Aaron Jones would all be out on offense, along with Kevin King, Darnell Savage, and Tyler Lancaster on defense, I admit to being a little concerned.  I knew that the Texans' defense isn't that good, despite having playmakers like J.J. Watt and Whitney Mercilus.  But still, how many of the Packers' offensive stars can be out before the offense just doesn't work?  And on defense, I know that the Texans traded away DeAndre Hopkins in the offseason, but the Texans offense still scored 36 points last week and took the Titans to overtime before succumbing.  Could the Packers really keep the Texans' offense under control with a depleted secondary?

Turns out I need not have worried.  Billy Turner took over for David Bakhtiari and provided good protection.  Rodgers was not sacked, although he was pressured and hit from time to time.  Jamaal Williams, in replacing Aaron Jones, reminded us that he is a high quality running back, even if he doesn't have Jones' explosiveness.  Williams ended up with 114 yards from scrimmage and a touchdown.  Every time the Packers needed a third down catch to continue a drive, Davante Adams was there, ending up with 13 catches for 196 yards and 2 TDs.  

On defense, to my eye the career debut of inside inside LB Kamal Martin was a positive factor.  He was one of the team leaders in tackles.  The defense pretty consistently applied pressure to DeShaun Watson and sacked him three times.  The defensive backs as a group kept Will Fuller and Brandin Cooks under control, with Alexander primarily shadowing Fuller, and Josh Jackson covering Cooks.  Only our old friend Randall Cobb was able to do much damage, catching 8 passes for 95 yards.  I doubt this would happen, but with all the talk about how the Packers should acquire a veteran receiver, wouldn't it be fun if the Packers traded to bring Randall Cobb back?  This might have been a very different Texans team if they had not traded away DeAndre Hopkins.  The final score was GB 35, Houston 20.  Another 30+ points on offense and another double digit win.

Creative use of motion and misdirection is one of the hallmarks of the LaFleur offense.  Until the last two weeks, a player streaking down the line of scrimmage pre-snap was seen a lot.  But Tyler Ervin was the primary runner of the jet sweep motion, and for whatever reason, in his absence the Packers have made much less use of this motion.  But speaking of creative use of motion, LaFleur's former mentor, Sean McVay, pulled an interesting play out of his hat Monday night, when McVay's Rams played the Bears.  Inside the Bears' 5 yard line in the first quarter, the Rams huddled up, and then sprinted to the line of scrimmage, snapped the ball almost immediately, and the play went for a touchdown.  It is the opposite of Rodgers' normal M.O.  He likes to study the defense, noting among other things how the defense reacts to any motion by the Packers, and seeing what he can read about the defense's intentions based on their movements before the snap.  Here, the situation is reversed.  By the Rams sprinting to the line and snapping the ball immediately, the defense has no opportunity to see and react to the offensive formation.  The Bears were caught flat-footed and gave up a touchdown.  I don't remember ever having seen the Packers run a play like this, other than maybe in a two minute drill.  But just as a change of pace, once or twice a game, this would be an intriguing and winning innovation.

This Sunday, the Packers host the Minnesota Vikings, who now find themselves in last place in the North at 1-5 and going nowhere.  And then four days later, the Packers head to Santa Clara to face the injury-riddled but still formidable 49ers.  I am concerned that this makes the Vikings game a bit of a trap game.  There is no reason the Packers should lose to the Vikings.  But there are lots of reasons that the Packers might lose to the 49ers.  And if, in the course of preparing and practicing for two games in short order, the Packers look past the Vikings to worry about the 49ers game, they could easily lose both games.  It is not just blowing smoke to say that the Vikings usually play the Packers very tough, and few coaches have more experience preparing for the Packers than Mike Zimmer.  Let's not forget that the Vikings still have Dalvin Cook, Adam Thielen, and Justin ("Could Have Had Him") Jefferson, so even though they have not played well, they are still dangerous.  And of course the Vikings' Anthony Barr broke Rodgers' collarbone 3 years ago.  He is out for the season this year, but I still would think that the Packers want to get the ball out quickly and on rhythm.

I heard LaFleur, in his Thursday press conference, say that they are not thinking about the 49ers, that the 49ers are the farthest thing from his mind.  I don't believe that.  I have to assume that at least a skeletal (how is that for a Halloween week reference) game plan has been put together.  But anyway, I hope he is truthfully relaying that the Packers are not looking past the Vikings.

Rodgers Puts Together an Instant Classic

Cobb's Game-Winning TD, Photo by Wm Glasheen, USA Today

What a tale of two halves.  And what a tale of the irresistible force meeting the immovable object.  One of the best offensive players in the league (and the highest paid), in Aaron Rodgers, meeting one of the best defensive players in the league (and the highest paid), in Khalil Mack.  As bad as the offense and defense looked in the first half, they looked just that good in the second half.

We actually had to watch most of the game on DVR Sunday night, as we had to leave the house when the game was just starting for Rosh Hashanah services, and didn't get back until about 2 hours later.  In the meantime, we had turned off our cell phones and left them off, and turned off the answering machine so that we didn't have to listen to any messages coming in, and we turned off the car radio.  By the time we finished watching the game, it was almost midnight, Lambeau time.  So this is a bit of a stream of consciousness recap of how we learned what had happened.

We didn't know that Rodgers had been knocked out of the game, and taken off on a cart, until we got back home.   When we saw the injury, I thought one of the bones in his leg had broken based on the way the Bears player landed on the leg.  I was envisioning another lost season, or at a minimum wondering how many weeks Rodgers would have to miss.  I wasn't feeling too excited about traveling from the west coast this coming week to watch DeShone Kizer getting beat up by the Vikings.  And I was wondering how my fantasy team would survive.

But Rodgers miraculously appeared on the field, ready to play the second half.  It was obvious that he was hobbled by his knee injury, and therefore obvious that he was more vulnerable than usual to oncoming pass rushers, especially from Khalil Mack, who was like a human wrecking ball in the first half.  He was only expected to play limited snaps, but the Bears threw that plan out the window when they saw the instant impact he had on the game.  Oh, now I get why the Bears were willing to pay so much to bring him to Chicago.  But once Rodgers returned, the Packers started playing a lot of no huddle offense, and the TV announcers were exactly right in observing that the pass rush dropped off as soon as the Packers started running no huddle.  They just could not keep up with the pace of the offense and started to tire out. Meanwhile, defensive coordinator Mike Pettine also made adjustments, and after the two opening drives for the Bears, the defensive squad only gave up two more field goals for the rest of the game.

I only took one call while we were watching the game.  We got a call from our daughter, who was stuck in traffic on the way back from the game with her partner.  I answered and immediately yelled "we are only in the third quarter, can I call you back when we are done?"  She asked me how much time was left in the third quarter, and I said 5 minutes.  She said, "OK, I want to talk to you about the game when you finish."  On the surface, I learned nothing from this call.  And yet, I did not hear the slightest hint of dejection in her voice, and I would have expected to pick up on some.  The score was 20-0 at the time.  I didn't say this to my wife, but I began to wonder if somehow they had pulled off a miracle.

And then it was 20-3 after Rodgers' first drive of the third quarter.  Too bad they didn't get a touchdown, now they still needed three more scores (and a shutout or near shutout) to possibly win.  Soon, it was 20-10, thanks to a quick drive and a sensational pass from Rodgers (on one foot) and an excellent catch by Geronimo Allison in the corner of the end zone, on a 39 yard touchdown.  Hey, there were still 14 minutes left.  Who knows?  Around this time, my wife and I started to exchange looks, that, loosely translated, meant, "What do you think?  Could they possibly do this?"

Just a few minutes later, it was 20-17, thanks to another extremely efficient, 6 play, 75 yard drive.  And there were still 9 minutes left.  Unfortunately, the Bears, who had been quiet for most of the second half, put together a pretty good drive, converting third downs when necessary, and eating up 6 of the 9 minutes left on the clock.  But the Packers defense finally stiffened and forced a 32 yard field goal to make it 23-17.

Well, what do you know?  If they could somehow pull it off, this wouldn't be the first game-winning drive Rodgers engineered in the last 3 minutes.  Not even the first one against the Bears, and not the first one involving Randall Cobb.  When Rodgers hit Cobb for a short pass that Cobb turned into a 75 yard TD (who knew he still had that much speed and shiftiness?), the only problem was that they scored too fast, and left over two minutes on the clock for the Bears. The Packers would have to stop the Bears on downs to preserve the win.  And they did!  In fact they had to do it twice, when Clay Matthews (who didn't have a very good game overall) committed an inexcusable roughing the passer penalty on what should have been the game-clinching, fourth-down incompletion.  If the Bears had gone on to score and win, Matthews would have been the goat, and not the Greatest Of All Time kind, just the plain old goat.  But five plays later, Nick Perry bailed out his fellow linebacker with a fourth-down strip sack, preserving the miraculous 24-23 win.

It was my wife's observation, but one with which I agreed, that this game was sort of reminiscent of the famous "Irvin Favre" game in Oakland, the night after Favre's father died.  Yes, Favre and Rodgers played unbelievably well; but it was also the case that their teammates stepped up and played over their heads, in order to support their team leader.  If they can preserve and maintain just a little of that extra something in coming games, it will be a big plus.

I think there are some significant take-aways from this game.  The first is that maybe it isn't such a great idea to have your starting offense only play 5 plays together during the entire preseason.  I understand why they do it, in view of the season-ending injury to Jordy Nelson a couple years ago, but you cannot convince me that the lack of playing time together had nothing to do with the sluggishness of the offense in the first half.  To a lesser extent, I felt the same way about the defense.  They seemed lost and outcoached during the first half, and I wonder if more playing time as a unit might have helped them out as well.  I know the coach will have none of this, but I hope deep down inside somewhere, he takes the point.

The second thing is that the Packers should turn to the fast paced, or even no huddle offense, whenever they are having trouble getting things started.  Heck, start the game with it and see what happens.  It is so obvious that Rodgers is the master of the fast-paced offense, and it is equally obvious that it puts the defense at a serious disadvantage.  If you have Rodgers behind center, you have a natural advantage going in.  But if you really want to put the defense back on its heels, have Rodgers run the fast-paced offense.

Finally, they are going to have to play better than this to win the game on Sunday against the Vikings.  No holes to be dug out of; no sluggishness on offense or defense; more pass protection and quick-release passes from the very beginning of the game, not just after your quarterback almost gets knocked out for an extended period.  With an injured Rodgers, and with the Vikings looking very good against the 49ers this past week, you would think that the advantage goes to the Vikings.  But it was the Vikings who took Rodgers out last year.  That ought to be a little motivation for the team to play with emotion and intensity again.  I just hope they start that way from the very start.

Something Has to Give

All Downhill After the Onside Kick, Photo by Evan Siegle, Packers.com

A disappointing season came to a fittingly disappointing end on Sunday, when the Packers lost to the Lions, 35-11, at Ford Field.  If it was unclear before the game (and it wasn't) that there is a problem with the Packers' defense, the problems could not be ignored after the game.  The Packers gave up passing TDs of 54 and 71 yards, to Kenny Golladay and Golden Tate.  Then, sort of as the cherry on top of the sundae, they gave up a 2-point conversion pass from Golden Tate to Matthew Stafford to close out the scoring.

The offense was again sub-par, although that perhaps was something to be expected given the absence of Jordy Nelson and Davante Adams.  If it wasn't for Randall Cobb and Trevor Davis, we might not have had any passing offense at all.  And Jamaal Williams again looked good, gaining 82 yards with a 3.7 yard average.  But when your starting QB throws for less than 200 yards and throws twice as many interceptions as touchdowns, you know you are in trouble.

In my house, we were calling for Joe Callahan no later than the third quarter.  Not because we thought Callahan was going to win the game for the Packers, but because we thought it was worth seeing what he looks like in live action, since Brett Hundley has so clearly failed as the Packers' backup quarterback.

I have nothing more to say about the game, other than to mention that some players were clearly not just mailing it in, players like Jamaal Williams and Randall Cobb on offense, and players like Clay Matthews and Mike Daniels on defense.  Good for them.

So what now?  Something has to give.  I have heard friends and family members calling for the firing of Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, and Dom Capers.  We will know what happens not long after I finish this blog post, but my vote is to fire Dom Capers (or let him retire) and to retain McCarthy and Thompson.  There are, admittedly, problems with both Thompson and McCarthy.  Ted Thompson is ultimately responsible for the lack of a quality backup quarterback, and many other problems on the roster.  But he has a strong record of finding quality players in the late rounds and among unsigned players, and I think it would be a mistake to turn away from those talents.  He needs better marching orders (self-imposed or imposed from above), but with those marching orders he should be retained until he chooses to retire, which will probably be in another year or two.

I have many issues with Mike McCarthy.  In-game adjustments (the lack thereof), poor clock management, and an incredibly stubborn streak.  His reputation as a trainer of young quarterbacks is in serious question in light of his constant advocacy for Brett Hundley.  Could Hundley have been so much better in practice than in games, that McCarthy was just fooled about his talent level?  Or was McCarthy's judgment just way off in thinking that he had an adequate backup for Aaron Rodgers?  I think it has to be the latter.  But despite all that, McCarthy has had an extremely good record with the Packers, and I don't know where we would find a replacement who could step in and better manage the remaining years of the Aaron Rodgers era.  So I don't support firing McCarthy, and I doubt it will happen.

Finally, we come to Dom Capers.  I like Capers.  I don't wish him any ill will.  But I think it is time for him to go.  Obviously, there is more to judging a defense than looking at the number of points given up, but points given up in the regular season tell a devastating story in this case.  In Capers' first year, the Packers gave up 297 points.  In his second year, the Packers gave up 240 points, were second in the league in scoring defense, and went on to win the Super Bowl with a very healthy dose of a ball-hawking defense in the playoffs and the Super Bowl.

But since then, it has gone downhill.  The Packers have given up 323 points or more (20 points per game) in every year starting with 2011.  2013 was the low point, with 428 points given up, but in 2016 they gave up 388 points, and this year they gave up 384.  That is 24 points per game.  Even with Aaron Rodgers behind center, you are going to lose some winnable games if you are giving up 24 points per game.  And if you don't have Aaron Rodgers, well, we all know how that story ends.

So what happened?  Has the game "passed him by?"  I never know quite what is meant by that term, but I suppose one example would be where opposing offenses learn to adjust to the defensive coordinator's tendencies, and then the defensive coordinator doesn't make good counter-adjustments.  Is he too old, at age 67, to relate well to players in their 20's?  Has Ted Thompson failed to get him good players to work with?  Who knows what the problem is.  I don't think it is all explainable by lack of quality players, as the Packers have drafted some high quality defensive players in the last few years, but they don't seem to be getting the most out of them.  It is painful to see players (like Casey Hayward) leave the Packers and perform better elsewhere, but that has certainly happened in a number of cases.  At least some of that has to be put at the doorstep of the defensive coaching staff.  It is for this reason that I have become convinced that the Packers will do better with a new defensive coordinator.  My favorite candidate is Vic Fangio of the Bears, who I believe is available (especially now that John Fox has been fired).

2017 was a tough year both on the football field, and in real life for my family.  I am hoping for a much improved 2018.  Happy New Year!

Packers Off to a Good Start!

GB Press-Gazette, 9-11-17

Our long offseason is finally over.  For someone like me, who doesn't much follow other sports, including college football, and for whom the NFL preseason has become more boring and less insight-provoking every year, it is a seven-month wait from the Super Bowl to another football game that actually matters.

How do the 2017 Packers look to me so far, after their 17-9 victory over the Seahawks on opening day?  The answer is, pretty good, and I am encouraged that they will only get better as the season goes on.

We all know that the Packers' main problem last year was on defense, never more evident than in the NFC Championship Game at Atlanta.  While the Packers' defense started off the year last year with some promise, by the end of the year, due in large part to injuries, the defense was a mess.

So the Packers went out and drafted with an emphasis on defense, and made some pickups in free agency on defense.  The first four picks on defense were defensive players, with the ones looking most promising to me being defensive backs Kevin King and Josh Jones.  Re-signing former Packers defensive back Davon House added depth, while signing former 49er linebacker Ahmad Brooks added some pass-rushing pop.

So going into Sunday's game, I figured the offense would  be just fine, especially with the addition of tight end Martellus Bennett.  Of course it wasn't at all, at first. More on that in  a minute.

But it was the defense I really wanted to see, to judge whether any progress has been made.  

On Sunday, from the very first series, when Nick Perry disrupted Russell Wilson's pass, and then got a third and long sack, this looked like a new and invigorated defense.  Probably the best part was that they got lots of pressure against the Seahawks, while hardly ever blitzing.  Nick Perry, right now, looks like the Packers' best linebacker, and Mike Daniels had maybe the best game of his career on Sunday afternoon, before going home and starting to prepare for the Falcons Sunday night!  The return of Davon House adds some veteran savvy in the defensive backfield, and Dom Capers' heavy reliance on the "nitro" defense, where a safety lines up as an inside linebacker, adds speed in the middle of the field.

Now, it is undoubtedly true that the Seahawks have problems of their own on the offensive line, and it will be interesting to see if the defense can play as well against better O-lines in the upcoming games.  Still, when the last game that meant anything was the awful NFC Championship game, seeing the defense play as well as it did on Sunday against a quality opponent was very welcome.

On offense, the Packers' start of the season was painfully slow, with no points and an interception (that easily could have been a pick six) in the first half.  Even if the Packers' offense looked better than the offense of the Seahawks in the first half, some bad throws, bad penalties and other mistakes meant no success in the first half.  Bryan Bulaga missed the game with an injury, and while the O-line did a credible job without him, getting him back will clearly help to give Rodgers more time and take fewer hits and sacks.

The running game was not too successful, but as the game moved into the second half, the passing game picked up the pace.  The Seahawks paid too much attention to Nelson and Adams, with the result that Cobb had a great game underneath.  Rodgers personally picked up the pace on a snap late in the third quarter, catching the Seahawks in a 12 men on the field penalty and firing a TD pass to Jordy Nelson.  Martellus Bennett did not make a huge splash in his first game, but he made some important catches to keep drives going.  While I hate unnecessary penalties, it is hard to fault Bennett too much for going after the guy who took an arguable cheap shot at Rodgers.  Even Rodgers appreciated the support.  Ty Montgomery also contributed in the passing game; he looked good on his three receptions, and his play served to remind that even if he is a running back now, he still remembers how to play wide receiver.

The Packers move on to open the new dome in Atlanta against the Falcons on Sunday night.  I watched the first Falcons game, in which they beat the Bears 23-17 in Chicago, and really should have lost if the Bears could gain 4 yards in 4 plays at the end of the game.  I came away feeling that the Falcons do not look like the Falcons of last year's Super Bowl (or, at any rate, not like the Falcons of the first half of the Super Bowl).  I think a good team can beat them, even though they will play a lot faster on their artificial turf.

Still, the Packers learned about the emotional boost a team gets when it is opening a new stadium last year in Minnesota.  I think the Falcons will be tough to beat in this particular game, and I expect a Packers' loss.  But how great would it be if they could pull off another win and start off the season 2-0?

Four More Quarters for a Shot at the Super Bowl

Mason Crosby, photo by Evan Siegle, Packers.com

I have been so far under the weather this week that I didn't know if I would come up for air before the weekend, and I guess I barely did.  But here are a few brief comments on the Cowboys game (which the Packers won 34-31 on the final play of the game), and then the upcoming Falcons game in the NFC Championship Game.

Well, I predicted (with trepidation) that the Packers would beat the Cowboys, and when they were ahead 21-3 and then 28-13, I was feeling pretty good about my pick, and more importantly, about the game.  There were so many "wow" moments in the game, and so much has already been written about them.  The TD to Rodgers on a free play.  Dallas area native Ty Montgomery living a dream and scoring two TDs in the Cowboys' stadium.  The Cobb toe tap sideline catch (announced by the crew as Rodgers "throws it away").  The even more spectacular Cook sideline catch.  The decision to go for a 56 yard Mason Crosby field goal, when a miss would have given the Cowboys great field position to win the game.  The 51 yard Mason Crosby field goal to win the game, as time expired, with the obligatory time out to ice the kicker.  Remember when Mason Crosby was a problem a few years ago?  Not any more.

The one I want to highlight, though, is a couple of plays before the Cook miraculous sideline catch.  Rodgers sustained a blindside sack at the Packers' 31 yard line.  If he had fumbled, as you would expect he would on a sack like that, the Cowboys would probably have recovered the ball right there, in perfect position to kick the game winning field goal themselves.  I really don't know how Rodgers avoided the fumble, but by doing so he saved the game.

Now obviously it was a little disheartening to let the Cowboys close the score to an 8 point margin before halftime, and it was a lot disheartening, if not heartbreaking, to let the Cowboys tie the game at 28 and then again at 31 in the fourth quarter.  We Packers fans have some history with blown leads in the playoffs, and it seems (without adding up each instance over the years) that it doesn't usually end well.  Just two comments: at least the blown leads this time did not result from a "prevent defense" or "kill the clock offense."  That would drive me crazy.  Instead, if you rewatch the game, the blown leads really happened "organically" in the course of the game, meaning the Cowboys adjusted their offense to rely more on the passing game, and the Packers made some errors here and there (like the Christine Michael error on the kickoff he bobbled, or Rodgers' interception) that contributed to the blown lead by changing around the field position game.  But here, for a change, the Packers were the ones to pull off the last second victory after blowing the lead, rather than the other way around.

There are two obvious Packers-Falcons games to think about in evaluating the Packers' chances on Sunday.  In the 2010 playoffs, when the Falcons were the number one seed, the Packers blew the doors off the dome, winning 48-21.  I can't put much stock in that game.  It was 6 years ago, and there has been much turnover on both teams since then.  Besides, that was at a time when the Packers not only had a healthy offense, but also a healthy defense, sporting such defensive backs as Charles Woodson, Tramon Williams, Nick Collins, and Charlie Peprah.  If Aaron Rodgers was the no. 1 star of that game, then Tramon Williams was no. 2, with his two interceptions, including the 70 yard interception for a touchdown on the final play of the half.

So what, then, about the game against the Falcons, at the dome, earlier this year, which the Falcons won, 33-32?  This was the first of four losses in a row for the Packers, ending up with the "run the table" moment when the Packers had fallen to 4-6.  There were 7 lead changes in the game, and the Packers had the lead at some point during each of the 4 quarters.  At the end, the Falcons scored the final points on a touchdown pass to Sanu, and in this case 31 seconds left was not enough time for Rodgers to get the offense downfield for a possible winning field goal.  So the Packers of 2016 can certainly play with the Falcons, and don't have any reason to fear going into the Georgia Dome.

But in re-watching that October 30 game, the most amazing thing to me is the Packers' inactive list: Randall Cobb, Damarious Randall, Quinten Rollins, James Starks, Clay Matthews, Ty Montgomery, and Jared Cook.  Could the presence of some of those players on the active roster make a difference on Sunday?  You bet it could.  I assume Jordy Nelson will be out, but I assume Davante Adams and Geronimo Allison will be able to play, as will Randall Cobb and Jared Cook and Ty Montgomery.  That should take care of the offensive side of the ball.  On defense, the defensive backfield is a bit of a mess, but Damarious Randall will play, and Morgan Burnett may be able to play.  I assume Quinten Rollins won't be able to play, because as far as I know, he is still in concussion protocol.

I think the Packers will win this game, by a fairly close score, and advance to Super Bowl LI.

"We're Better with 18 on the Field, and he Showed it Tonight"

Hail Mary Photo by Evan Siegle, www.Packers.com

Just after the Packers finished their 38-13 victory over the Giants, in the post-game sideline interview with Erin Andrews, Aaron Rodgers finished with this comment: "And Randall Cobb, who this offense has been missing for a long time.  We're better with 18 on the field, and he showed it tonight."  That was never more clear than Sunday against the Giants.  He has had a 3 touchdown game once before (in a September game against the Chiefs in 2015, with nothing much on the line) but nothing with the significance of this playoff game.  He also tied an NFL record held by many players, including Sterling Sharpe, for catching 3 touchdowns in a playoff game.  I think this was probably Cobb's finest game as a Packer.

Armchair GMs have been wondering if the Packers should part ways with Randall Cobb, what with the emergence of younger receivers like Davante Adams and Geronimo Allison (although Geronimo's breaking marijuana charge this week does not assist his cause, certainly, as he probably is facing a suspension, most likely next season).  At any rate, I hope this game does away with such talk.  I would hate to see Cobb leave.

If  Cobb and Rodgers were the players of the game on offense, is there any doubt that Clay Matthews and Jake Ryan were the players of the game on defense?  Clay Matthews had only one tackle, but it was one for the ages.  He knocked the ball out of Eli Manning's hand, in a classic "empty hand" play (meaning that Manning's arm moved forward, but the ball was already loose as a fumble).  Matthews knew it, the referee knew it, but nobody else on the field seemed to have any idea, despite the fact that there was no whistle.  So Matthews was yelling at closer teammates to grab the ball, but they must not have heard him, so just as Giants RB Paul Perkins was casually bending down to pick up the ball and hand it to the official, Matthews took matters into his own hands, clocked Perkins, and recovered the ball himself.  It is probably easier to realize what is going on while watching the game on TV.  But Matthews was smart to realize that there had been no whistle, go after the ball!  That's the way players are taught.  Why was Matthews the only one paying attention on either team?

Sam and Chelsea at the Game

I have to admit that I missed how important Jake Ryan's play was to the defense, until my daughter Sam Freeman, who usually goes to playoff games with me, pointed it out after the game.  Since I could not go to this game, I am thankful that her good friend Chelsea Bundy (and potential budding Packers fan despite her Yinzer upbringing!) was able to use the ticket on short notice and go with Sam!  Anyway, I then looked at the stats (12 total tackles and assists to lead the team) and re-watched the game to realize how right she was.  Even when he didn't make the tackle or assist, he was still frequently in the mix.  I have liked him all along, but this was quite a game in a spot where the linebackers had to play well to help relieve the pressure on the defensive backs.  Dom Capers' creative use of his depleted defensive backs made them much more effective against the Giants than I expected them to be.  But plays by the linebackers, especially Ryan, contributed significantly to the effective defensive results.

The Packers, once they started playing some offense toward the end of the second quarter, completely over-matched the Giants.  But it has to be noted that the Giants contributed rather mightily to their own demise.  If it had not been for missed passes by Manning, dropped passes by their vaunted receivers, and little production from their running game, the Packers might have been behind by 14-0, instead of 6-0, and who knows how that might have affected the momentum of the game?

Just as an aside, I was intrigued by Troy Aikman's reference to Paul Perkins' uncle playing in the Ice Bowl.  So I looked it up.  Perkins' uncle was Don Perkins, the leading rusher for the Cowboys in the Ice Bowl with 51 yards on 17 carries.  In an ironic coincidence, nephew Paul had exactly the same yards per carry on Sunday, and was the leading Giants's rusher with 30 yards on 10 carries.  When your leading rusher only averages 3 yards per carry, and doesn't have that many carries, this is not a recipe for success.  Obviously, both the Cowboys in the Ice Bowl, and the Giants on Sunday, came up losers against the Packers.

And speaking of losers, what a head case Odell Beckham, Jr. is, to have punched a hole in the wall outside the locker room, especially after all the on and off field controversies involving him this year.  To coin a phrase, the Packers should fix the wall, and make the Giants pay for it.  He is obviously very immature, or very hot-headed, or both.  And then I see that the Giants players trashed the plane on the way back to New York, so that the next flight was delayed for several hours because of the cleanup.  The Giants deny it.  I call BS on the Giants.  The Giants have a serious discipline problem on their hands, and they need to clean it up by next year.

Beckham Hole, Photos by Carl Deffenbaugh, Fox 6 News, Milwaukee

Well, on to the Cowboys this coming Sunday.  With their record of 13-3, having lost (ironically) only to the Giants all year before essentially conceding the final game to the Eagles by playing mostly backups, the Cowboys look like a much more formidable opponent.  Aaron Nagler puts very well the three things the Packers have to do if they are to beat the Cowboys: (1) they have to overcome the likely loss of Jordy Nelson for the game; (2) they have to find a way to slow down Ezekiel Elliott; and (3) the Packers have to get off to a fast start.  The way Cobb and Adams played on Sunday, they will go a long way toward dealing with the probable loss of Nelson.  Add in Jared Cook and Ty Montgomery, and I think even if Nelson does not play, the Packers are in good shape.  Stopping or slowing down Elliott will not be easy, but it will be essential, and has to be done without opening the floodgates to Prescott and his quality receivers Dez Bryant, Cole Beasley, and Jason Witten.  I would not count on Prescott to throw as many bad passes, or on Bryant, Beasley and Witten to drop as many passes, as the Giants did on Sunday.

And once again, they need to get off a fast start.  Fooling around for the first 26 minutes of the game will just not cut it.  McCarthy needs to force Rodgers, or Rodgers needs to force himself, to start off with a quick, in-rhythm, short passing game, instead of dancing around in the pocket, taking sacks, and not being willing to pull the trigger, as he did for much of the first half against the Giants.  If the Giants had played better, Rodgers might never have been able to start the rout that started late in the second quarter.  The Packers will never be able to survive wasting the first 26 minutes of the game against the Cowboys.

The Packers that lost to the Cowboys 30-16 in October, dropping to a 3-2 record, were not playing at the level they are playing now.  They had not found their rhythm, as they have over the last 7 weeks, they were already without three defensive backs in the game (Shields, Rollins and Banjo) and Jared Cook was injured and inactive.  The Packers also, very uncharacteristically, gave the Cowboys 4 turnovers (an interception, and fumbles lost by Rodgers, Nelson and Montgomery).  Again, since the seven game winning streak started, the Packers just don't do that anymore.  Rodgers has thrown no interceptions in those games, and the Packers have far more takeaways than turnovers lost.

The Cowboys are the number one seed in the NFC for a good reason.  They played well, consistently, all year long, while the Packers and the rest of the NFC did not.  But right now, there is no hotter team in the NFC than the Packers.  The Cowboys are much worse against the run than were the Giants, so the Packers ought to be able to gain some yards on the ground, taking some pressure off the passing game.  Those things give the Packers an excellent shot, even against the number one seed, and even on the road.  With some trepidation, I am predicting a Packers victory, nothing like the blowout against the Giants, but maybe by a touchdown, with a late TD pass by Rodgers sealing it, or perhaps a late interception by the Packers' defense preventing the TD by the Cowboys to tie the game.

All About Rhythm

Photo by Jim Biever, Packers.com

In the first 17 minutes of Sunday's game, the Redskins scored in almost every way possible - a safety, a field goal, and a touchdown with a missed extra point.  While they were building their 11-0 lead, the Packers had one completed pass in 8 attempts, one first down, and they ran the ball 4 times for a total of 5 yards.  (The wind was against the Packers in the first quarter, but still . . .)  Who would blame Packers fans for saying "here we go again."

But when things changed in the second quarter, they changed for good.  All of a sudden, there was more variety in the passing game, which suddenly seemed in sync and, most importantly, in rhythm, for most of the rest of the game.  And of course, as soon as that happened, the run game improved, too.  Funny how that works.  When the defense can't just sit back there and dare Aaron Rodgers to throw the ball, opportunities pop up all over the place, leading to the convincing 35-18 win.

Once again, Randall Cobb was one of the key players.  By lining him up in the backfield occasionally, starting in the second quarter, the Packers in effect forced the Redskins out of their base defense and into a nickel defense (because they were worried about where Cobb might go, and felt the need for an extra defensive back).  Another key was the fast tempo, either the no-huddle, or a sort of mushy, semi-huddle near the line of scrimmage.  Put the uncertainty about who is lining up where together with the fast tempo, and you have a recipe for problems for the defense.  The Redskins were caught with 12 men a couple of times as they tried to make substitutions, leading directly to one of the touchdowns, and generally putting the Redskins in a position where they sometimes felt that they just could not take the risk of substituting.  This combination left the Redskins at times with the wrong personnel on the field, which then opened up the running game, in which Eddie Lacy had his longest carry of the season.  It also seemed to make the game fun again for Aaron Rodgers, who seemed to relish the challenge of keeping the Redskins off balance and taking advantage.

A final key on offense was J.C. Tretter.  When Bakhtiari was again inactive at left tackle, everybody knew that the Packers would not put Josh Sitton over there again.  So backup center Tretter was the man, and although the game started inauspiciously for him (he gave up the sack for the safety to start the scoring), he quickly adjusted his footwork and was solid for the rest of the game.  I don't think it is much of a stretch to say that regardless which offensive lineman goes out with an injury, Tretter should be the first option to replace him.

You can argue, as does Rob Demovsky of ESPN, that there are three reasons the Packers can win in Arizona, Aaron Rodgers as the best player on the field, a resurgent if not outstanding defense this year, and much-improved special teams.  There is merit in all three of those reasons.  The Packers' prior game at Arizona, as bad as it was, was not really an accurate representation of the difference between these two teams.  The Packers' offensive line was a mess that day, they got behind early, Rodgers was getting mauled as a result of the Cardinals' strong defense and the Packers' porous offensive line, and then things just snowballed.  If you replay that game 100 times, the Packers might lose by 30 or more points only a couple of times.  The Cardinals' were a much better team that day, but the difference was not as great as it looked.

The question is, if the Packers are a better team than showed up three weeks ago, can things swing the other way so far that the Packers can actually win the game?  Well, let's count the factors.  The Packers' offensive line is in much better shape, even if Tretter has to play left tackle again, but if Bakhtiari plays, they may have their starting line intact for the first time in a long time.  The convincing win over the Redskins puts a little confidence back in the heads of the Packers, adding a little weight to McCarthy's "we're nobody's underdogs" bluster.  B.J. Raji looks like he will be back, whereas he missed most of the prior Cardinals game.  Jayrone Elliott and Sam Shields may be back, and Shields in particular has been sorely missed.  And the Cardinals put two players (including starting DT Alex Okafor) on injured reserve this week, despite not having played a game in the last two weeks.  On the negative side, it looks doubtful that Davante Adams will be able to play, which is a shame since he has finally started to look like the Davante Adams we expected all year long.  And of course, the Cardinals are a much better defensive team than the Redskins.

Let's just leave it at this: if the Packers plan to win the game, they can't just waste the entire first quarter, like they did last week.  The offensive line has to play better from the start, Rodgers needs to get rid of the ball quickly, and with some rhythm in the passing game, the running game has to be strong enough to keep the Cardinals pass rushers from pinning their ears back, and receivers have to catch the contested passes.  On defense, the Packers need to put some hits on Carson Palmer, early and often, and see how he performs when it is not just pitch and catch back there.

I still have to predict that the Packers lose this game, and go into off-season mode next week.  But funnier things have happened than an upset in this round of the playoffs, and they certainly have a chance.

Playoff-Bound Packers Looking for More

Photo by Jim Biever, Packers.com

To the left is a shot of James Jones racing down the field against the Raiders, presumably on his touchdown catch.  It might be just my imagination, but I think he plays better when he is wearing his hoody.  I hope he wears it Sunday against the Cardinals, as the Packers will need any edge they can get.

The Packers got off to a shockingly good start on Sunday, in the rain, at Oakland.  Two interceptions of Derek Carr led to a 14 point lead in the first quarter.  After that, while the Packers continued to lead for the entire first half, they effectively blew the entire lead, ending the half at 14-13.  Along the way, they were completely ineffective on offense, and trailed the Raiders in yards gained by 225 to 97 at the half.  The weird thing about that stat is that almost two-thirds of those yards were gained on the Packers' last full possession of the half, which ended when Charles Woodson knocked the ball out of Starks' hands, and the Raiders recovered.

From the Fox game broadcast

Fortunately for the Packers, they got their act together in the second half, and ended up winning the game by the score of 30-20, after trailing the Raiders only once, and very briefly (for about one minute of game clock time in the third quarter).  The best part of this game, from my perspective, was that I got to witness what seems like a rare occurrence: the Packers actually made halftime adjustments that worked!  It was obvious to everyone that the Packers' offense wasn't working in the first half.  The run game was almost non-existent, with the Raiders stuffing the box with defenders to prevent the run.  Normally, you would turn to the passing game, but that wasn't working either, with the recurring problem of the Packers' receivers not getting open, but this time compounded by a wet ball and a wet field.

From the Fox game broadcast

McCarthy changed things up by lining up Cobb in the backfield, which seemed to loosen everything up in the Raiders' defense.  The Packers' running backs are pretty good pass-catchers, but Cobb coming out of the backfield is an exponentially greater pass-receiving threat.  Putting Cobb back there seemed to open up both the running game and the passing game, and the defense performed well in the second half, giving up one touchdown drive, but shutting out the Raiders for the last 22 minutes of the game!

I made a last minute decision to go to the Raiders game.  I had an enjoyable, if wet, afternoon.  There were plenty of Packers fans I saw on the way to the stadium, in the stands, and after the game on the way to my hotel.  The funny thing about my time in the stands was that I found myself sitting next to some old time Raiders fans.  They started peppering me with questions as soon as I sat down.  "Who is your nose tackle?"  "What is the story with your rookie defensive backs?"  "Do you realize what happened the last time the Packers played here in Oakland?"  I apparently passed their little test, which I assume was designed to figure out if I was a real fan with some knowledge, or just some johnny-come-lately without much knowledge of football or the team.  We had some very pleasant conversations after that throughout the game.

My photo, after the game

If we had any doubt about whether Charles Woodson is coming back after this season, he made it clear early this week that he will not.  He has had a shoulder injury all year long, which was clearly evident on one play where he upended Randall Cobb but came up wincing and holding his shoulder awkwardly.  Because the Christmas eve Raiders game against the Chargers was the last Raiders home game of the year, Woodson announced that he will retire, in order to give the fans a chance to say goodbye (something that the fans did not have a chance to do in Green Bay after his last year there).  This turned a meaningless Christmas eve game into something of a Charles Woodson tribute.  He was one of my favorite Packers' players, and a significant contributor to the 2010 Super Bowl season.  He has been described as one of the most instinctive players in the history of the game.  I have interspersed some photos of Woodson, from the Packers game and from the Christmas eve game, into this post.

From the NFL Network game broadcast

While the Raiders are improving, and look like they are definitely on the upswing in the AFC West and in the league in general, the Packers' next opponents, the Cardinals, have already arrived, and are trying to secure a bye week in the playoffs by winning one more game out of their remaining two.  Win or lose, the Packers will still be playing for the division title next week against Minnesota, unless the Packers win on Sunday and the Vikings lose Sunday night to the Beckham-less Giants.  So at the moment, both Packers and Cardinals have something to play for, and it should be a good test.

It is stating the obvious to say that the Packers are going to have to play better than they did on Sunday, if they want to beat the Cardinals.  The Cardinals have a better overall offense, better overall defense, and have scored way more points than the Packers have this year.  The Cardinals did lose the "Honey Badger" for the year, and that gives the Packers' passing game a little break, but it is no accident that the Cardinals are sitting at 12-2 so far this year,  But if the Rams and Steelers can beat the Cardinals, as they did earlier this year, surely the Packers have some chance.

It might feel a little like Lambeau West in Arizona on Sunday, as prices for the game are the highest in five years for a Cardinals regular season home game.  I will give you one guess as to who is buying those tickets.  I have been waiting for weeks to see if the Packers end up being one of those "hot teams" going into the playoffs that "nobody wants to play."  Cliches aside, the Packers may have a three game winning streak going right now, but they just don't look like one of those teams.  If I have to predict, I would predict a Packers' loss, but if they are going to get hot, Sunday afternoon would be an excellent time to do it.

Slingin' in the Rain, Seattle Style

Photo by Tom Freeman

My daughter and I went to the Cowboys-Packers game on Sunday. Between traffic delays and a huge crowd waiting to get in the gates of the stadium, we barely made it in time for the game. In fact, we arrived as the National Anthem was being sung, and managed to peek up from the tunnel to see the fly-over before the game. We made it to our seats before kickoff, in time to witness lots of frustrating moments in the first half.  We had real doubts that the Packers would win, starting in the second quarter, but it turned out to be a great game after all, with the Packers prevailing, 26-21.

The first half was, at times, excruciating. While the crowd started out the game creating lots of noise, there were times in the first half when we all started to have enough doubts about the outcome that the crowd was, to some extent, taken out of the game. Rodgers was obviously immobile, but to make matters worse, he was missing passes that one normally assumes he will make. And Eddie Lacy missed lots of snaps after the first drive, causing us to wonder if he was hurt, too (we learned later that he was having an asthma attack).

The turn-around in the second half was pretty spectacular.  Rodgers started to look much better, even if he was still quite immobile.  Better passes led to fewer missed connections.  Eddie Lacy returned, and ended up being one of three Packer players having over 100 yards from scrimmage in the same playoff game, something that had never happened before (the others were Davante Adams, and, thanks to that last amazing catch to help run out the clock, Randall Cobb).

The picture above depicts the team lined up, about to snap the ball on the game-winning touchdown, as I saw it from section 114. Well, technically it depicts the team lined up right before Rodgers had to burn a time out as the play clock expired. The time out allowed me to post the picture on Facebook before the play was run, in time to look like I knew the game winning score was coming all along.

If I had to name MVPs of the game, I suppose that the obvious choice on offense has to be Aaron Rodgers, given his gutty performance under the circumstances. But you can't ignore the trio mentioned above, Davante Adams, Randall Cobb and Eddie Lacy. While it is fair to expect high level performances from Cobb and Lacy, Adams' performance was totally unexpected - this was the best performance of his rookie season. After an early drop, with the fans in our section grumbling about how McCarthy should take him out and play somebody else, he went on to have a great performance. The juke he made on his touchdown catch was one for the ages. And on the final, game-clinching drive, the third down catch he muscled away from the defender, who seemed to have the better chance to catch the ball, and then proceeded to gain 26 yards, was really a fabulous play. On defense, even though I did not really appreciate it while sitting in the stands (one misses too much sometimes without seeing all the angles on TV replays), the MVP had to be Julius Peppers. His strip of DeMarco Murray, in the third quarter, in all likelihood saved a touchdown. And since the Packers won by 5 points, the importance of this play can't be underestimated.

But my personal non-player MVP is the Diamond Vision operator in Lambeau Field, Kregg Shilbauer. Normally, the way replays work in Lambeau Field is that, after a couple of seconds, a logo appears on the boards, followed by the play shown from the beginning, and then sometimes from different angles. But on the Dez Bryant non-catch with 4:36 left in the game, the procedure was different. Almost immediately, with no logo, and without bothering with the beginning of the play, Shilbauer started shuttling the action backwards from the end of the play, showing Bryant rising off the field, getting the ball, leaping over Sam Shields to get it, then forward, then back and forth several times in slow motion. In other words, he wanted to make sure that Mike McCarthy had an opportunity to watch the important part of the replay, over and over again, in time to make his own decision on a challenge without having to rely on the judgment of others calling down to him from the coaches booth. Now look, given the magnitude and circumstances of the play, I think that McCarthy more or less had to throw the challenge flag, regardless of what he was being told, but Mr. Shilbauer made sure that he had a personal and detailed view of the play.

I have read that both Rodgers, and I think Tramon Williams, instantly knew, based on the "Calvin Johnson play" from 2010, that this should be ruled incomplete, based on the "process rule." Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1 reads: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete." I have to assume that at least some of the coaching staff knew the rule as well. So after looking at the replay, the decision to challenge was an easy one. The ball very clearly touched the ground, and it very clearly popped loose for a split second, with both of Bryant's hands off of the ball.  It is hard to see how the call could not be reversed.

Almost immediately, the whining and complaining about this call started. A Patriots fan friend, despite saying that he was rooting for the Packers, said that the win was tainted as a result of the call.  To me, that is dead wrong, and I pointed out to my friend that it is like saying that the Brady "tuck rule" play in the AFC Championship game years ago made the Patriots' trip to the Super Bowl tainted. In both cases, the calls after review were clearly correct under the letter of the rules. You want to say that it is a bad rule? Or that the rule should be changed?  Fine. But these were 100% correct applications of the rules as written. End of story.  (And if you are still not convinced, I can only point out that the Packers drove down into easy field goal range by the end of the game, with the Cowboys having at least as much incentive to stop them as they would have if they had retaken the lead.  In other words, the Packers would have won the game, in all likelihood, either way.)

Anyway, the Packers now head to Seattle for the NFC Championship game, the second NFC Championship game in Rodgers' tenure, and the third in McCarthy's. The forecast is for an 80% chance of rain on Sunday.  Could the weather be an equalizer?  You never know what will happen when players and footballs start sliding around.  It does remind me of the last NFC Championship Game the Packers played on the West Coast, in a downpour.  The Packers easily beat the 49ers, 23-10, and the game wasn't as close as the score.  Sunday, by the way, is also Julius Peppers' 35th birthday. I wish him the very best birthday ever.

Do the Packers have a chance in this game?  Heck, the Broncos were bigger underdogs to the Packers in Super Bowl XXXII. "On any given Sunday," and all that. But the Packers are and should be underdogs in this game. Even if Rodgers were 100% healthy, they would not be favored, given the home field advantage and how well the Seahawks are playing. The Seahawks put a lot more pressure on the quarterback, as compared to the Lions and the Cowboys, and that is not good with a hampered quarterback.  Rodgers is the best quarterback in football, especially when he is out of the pocket. Unfortunately, he can't get out of the pocket right now.

The Packers' big super-secret surprise defense, unveiled at Seattle in week 1, fizzled out rather spectacularly in that game, and they don't really even use that defense much anymore. Fortunately, the Packers' defense is much improved since that time, particularly after the bye week changes principally involving moving Clay Matthews around. But being honest, it is more likely that the Seahawks will win than that the Packers will win. Betting odds say that the Packers have around a 30% chance of winning. I think the true odds are a little higher than that.  I still expect to be disappointed on Sunday.  But yes, paraphrasing Jim Carrey, I am telling you that there is a chance.

Playoff Bound Packers Hoping for Redemption

Contra Costa Times Sports Section, Dec. 30, 2013

San Francisco Chronicle Sports Section, Dec. 30, 2013

What a great victory for the Packers on Sunday.  There were so many individual moments that could have gone the other way and spoiled the chance for the 33-28 win over the Bears in the final regular season game, clinching the NFC North Championship and getting a home game in the playoffs.

What if the Bears' defensive back had picked up that Aaron Rodgers fumble in the second quarter that looked like an incomplete pass, or even batted it out of bounds?  Presumably the Bears, too, are coached to pick up loose balls just in case.  What if Boykin, having scooped it up, tossed it in the direction of the ref before Rodgers came up and told him to run?  The ref would presumably have jumped out of the way of the ball, and at that point everyone would realize it was a live ball.

What if the Packers players did not succeed in talking Mike McCarthy into going for it on 4th and 1 in the final drive, and the Packers never got the ball back?  What if the snap that Rodgers was so clearly not expecting did not basically lodge between Rodgers' hand and body, but bounced off in another direction?

What if, on the final touchdown to Cobb on fourth down, John Kuhn had gotten less of a piece of Julius Peppers, or Peppers' outstretched hand had tripped Rodgers up, or Rodgers didn't see Cobb flying free, or Cobb got his feet tangled with the defender or, heaven forbid, Cobb dropped that ball (it happens)?  This drive represented, as Coach McCarthy aptly said, Aaron Rodgers' finest hour as a Packer.  It may also have represented John Kuhn's finest and most significant single play as a Packer.

Rodgers showed the effects of all those weeks off.  Both of his interceptions, in the first 16 minutes of the game, looked like his fault.  The red zone interception, only the fourth red zone interception of his career, looked particularly bad.  Where and to whom was he throwing the ball?  The ball tipped by Jordy Nelson and then intercepted was poorly placed, too high and behind Nelson.  But Rodgers got better and better as the game went on, and the Packers, both in blocking (Kuhn was in to block, to my eye, much more frequently than usual) and in play selection (greater emphasis on short drops and running plays) did a good job of keeping Rodgers from getting hit as much as he usually is hit.

Jordy Nelson was obviously glad to have Aaron Rodgers back.  He had his best day by far, in catches and yards, since Rodgers went out, getting 10 catches for 161 yards.  We learned, on the Aaron Rodgers radio show on New Year's Eve, that Nelson did this despite having the flu and throwing up on the team bus after the game.  The Packers, without Rodgers, were scoring about 9 fewer points per game than they score with him in the game, and they obviously needed those points on Sunday.  And Randall Cobb, you could say, was eased back into action.  He was thrown to only twice, but caught both balls for touchdowns, including the game winner.

Here in the SF Bay Area, the 49ers fans are already looking past the Packers.  We watched the KTVU 10:00 news Sunday night, and one of the fans was looking forward to the NFC Championship game, 49ers at Seattle, in a couple of weeks.  Yep, the Green Bay Packers are essentially just a speed bump on the way to the NFC Championship game.  Coach Jim Harbaugh is already thinking about keeping his team in the midwest between the Packers game on Sunday and the Panthers game the following week.

The photos at the top of the page are the Monday morning front sports pages from a couple of the local newspapers.  At least some in the local media are being a little more level-headed about this, with one writer pointing out that the 49ers have blown sizable leads two weeks in a row, and that doing so in the playoffs is not going to work.  Another writer noted that the 49ers secondary is a bit shaky heading into the playoffs.

But let's face it, the Packers are also going to have to play better against the 49ers than they did against the Bears.  If Rodgers throws another couple interceptions, that will be trouble.  If the Packers give up more long kick returns, they may never recover.  The Packers did a decent job on defense, especially considering the absence of Clay Matthews.  They gave up 121 yards rushing, and 226 yards passing.  But the Bears probably should have rushed more, as they were getting 5 yards per carry.  And the Bears would have had a lot more passing yards if their elite receivers hadn't dropped a number of catchable balls.  I am not counting on the 49ers to make the same mistakes.  And I would not count on the Packers converting three fourth downs in a single drive to score the game-winning points, either.

The Packers have some obvious advantages at home.  It turns out that the 49ers have not played a single game with temperatures below freezing in the three years Harbaugh has been the coach.  Assuming the Packers manage to sell out the game (shockingly, in doubt as of Wednesday morning), the home crowd should help the Packers and hurt the 49ers.  But the Packers are slight underdogs in this game, and it makes sense that they are - if for no other reason than that the 49ers have a much better defense.

As it happens, we have attended the last three Packers-49ers games, opening day 2012, the playoff game last year, and the opening day game this year.  The Packers lost all three of those games.  The superstitious among us will be glad to know that we are not going to the game this week.  Happy New Year!

One Last Chance to Win the Division

Cover Photo from Monday's Green Bay Press-Gazette

Last Sunday was another weird Sunday for Packers football.  Aaron Rodgers missed his 7th consecutive start as the Packers played the Steelers with a shot at the playoffs on the line for both teams.  While the Packers played well in spots, ultimately you cannot give up 38 points and expect to win a lot of games.  

In the case of this game, exceedingly untimely penalties and turnovers essentially undid the Packers, and unlike the 1995 game between these teams, there was no "Yancey Clause" to bail them out.  Sure, the screwed up ref timing on the final 10 seconds did not help, but absent the penalties and turnovers, the Packers would not have found themselves in the position of needing a TD to tie the game.  The Lions, who should have won the NFC North a month ago, had knocked themselves out of the playoff chase earlier in the day.  And this loss to the Steelers (38-31) left the Packers planning for next year's draft.  

Unless, of course, the Bears managed to lose the Sunday night game to the Philadelphia Eagles.  Oh, boy, did they ever!  The Eagles went up by 21 points in the first quarter, and never took their feet off the gas, beating the Bears by the score of 54-11.  My old friend Dick Karth said, during the Sunday night Bears-Eagles game: "As a GBP fan who went to the game today at Lambeau Field in all the snow and everything ... I'm not happy.  But I'm glad I'm not a Bears fan tonight!   What an embarrassment it must be for Bears fans!"

As a result of the Bears' game, Matt Flynn need not have been so forlorn, as he looked in the picture above.  It turns out, the game against the Steelers did not matter one whit.  Win or lose against the Steelers, the Packers would still need to win the finale against the Bears to win the division and make the playoffs.  Dramatic developments in the last couple of days have Aaron Rodgers returning for this game, Clay Matthews out with a re-broken thumb (I can't imagine him playing again this year), Eddie Lacy will apparently play through the pain of his injured ankle, and as an added bonus, as of this writing, it is quite possible that Randall Cobb will be activated and play.

I am, to be honest, surprised that Rodgers will play.  After all of the talk last week, repeated endlessly on every football website, that Rodgers was not that close to playing against the Steelers, and that he was at "extraordinary risk" if he returned to the field, I really thought that he would again not be activated.  And particularly after Clay Matthews re-broke his thumb, I thought the lesson the Packers would take away was to err even further on the side of caution with Aaron Rodgers.  Despite all that, he will play, which not only changes the complexion of this game, but if the Packers win, it will change the complexion of the playoffs in the NFC.  Rodgers, if he is close to his normal self, is simply not prone to make the same kinds of mistakes that his merry band of backups have made in the almost 8 games since he broke his collarbone.

This game has all the looks of a shootout now.  As bad as the Packers' defense has been, the Bears' defense is worse.  And as well as the Bears' offense has played at times, the Packers' offense is capable of matching them score for score, and, I would argue, getting a couple of extra scores along the way.

The Bears, of course, have a new offense under Marc Trestman, and it has been impressive at times, with Brandon Marshall, Alshon Jeffery, and Matt Forte providing the weapons for Jay Cutler.  The Packers-Bears game earlier this season is not much of a predictor, since almost all of the game was played with Josh McCown and Seneca Wallace at quarterback.  But now that Jay Cutler is back, we just need to remember what Charles Woodson said last year: "It's the same old Jay.  We just need to be in position.  Jay will throw us the ball."  If there is one thing that is critical in this game, it is that the Packers must take advantage of every one of those opportunities.

Injury Carousel Continues

Photo by Evan Siegle, Press-Gazette Media

Linebacker Nick Perry, shown in the photo, was one of the Packer players who sustained significant injuries in Sunday's game against the Ravens, which the Packers hung on to win, 19-17.  The photo shows him forcing the fumble on the second-to-last play of the first half, which resulted in Mason Crosby getting another shot at a field goal, having missed one (his first miss of the season!) a couple of plays earlier.  This time, Crosby made the field goal, in essence providing the margin of victory in the game.  Perry's strip sack was a big-time play.

But apparently on the same play, Perry broke his foot and is expected to miss multiple weeks, meaning both starting outside linebackers, Perry and Matthews, will be out for now.  If Brad Jones is still out this week, then 3 of the 4 starting linebackers will be out.  Time for McCarthy's mantra: next man up!  Speaking of which, what got into A.J. Hawk?  The normally steady but unspectacular Hawk led the team in tackles and assists Sunday (10), in sacks (3) and in tackles for loss (5, including the 3 sacks).  Hawk was not the only defensive player to step up his game on Sunday.  Lots of players contributed, and when you hold Ray Rice to 34 yards rushing, and have a sensational goal-line stand from the 4 yard line, the defense is playing a great game.

If anything, though, the injuries to James Jones and Randall Cobb were more troubling, given that the Packers' passing offense has sputtered, on and off, all season long.  Both were knocked out of the game, with Cobb's injury looking particularly painful.  When you have to cart the player back to the sidelines to watch the rest of the game, it is not a good sign.  After Cobb left the game, the Packers were left with exactly two active and healthy wide receivers on the roster, Jordy Nelson and Jarrett Boykin.  And for awhile, it looked like Boykin had hands of stone, as he dropped several passes before finally holding onto one for an important gain of 43 yards.

Jones' injury turns out to be the less serious of the two, just as we all expected while watching the game, and he might even play this week against the Browns.  But Cobb broke his fibula, and while differing reports were swirling all day Monday, the current consensus estimate is that he might miss 6-8 weeks.

Was the tackle on Cobb a cheap shot?  After Ravens' safety Matt Elam tackled Randall Cobb at his knees, Rodgers let Elam know he wasn't happy about the tackle.  Another defensive player argued back about the limited areas defensive players are now allowed to tackle a ball carrier, which Rodgers admitted was a fair point.  Adam Czech, of Jersey Al's Packers web site, makes a pretty convincing case that there was nothing dirty about the hit.  For myself, I am glad that Rodgers made an issue about it, both during the game and in his press conference after the game, even if we assume that the hit was not illegal.  As I understand Rodgers' point, he isn't exactly arguing that the hit was illegal, or even that it was (necessarily) a dirty hit.  He is arguing that it was completely unnecessary to hit Cobb at the knees, in effect appealing to Elam's better instincts and, more broadly, to try to encourage the players and the league to take a closer look at unnecessarily dangerous hits.  In the same way that a legitimate tackle becomes an illegal hit when the defender picks up the offensive player and slams him into the ground, there ought to be some discretion to treat a tackle like this one as an illegal hit by needlessly exposing the player to injury.

This coming Sunday, the Cleveland Browns come to Green Bay.  With the rash of injuries afflicting the Packers, every game is a potential loss.  When the 3-3 Browns were on their three-game winning streak, they looked dangerous.  But in hindsight, they have only beaten one good team, the Bengals, and they did it at home.  Their other two wins were against the flailing Vikings and the under-performing Bills.  The Packers ought to have enough, with a week to plan around the injuries, to beat the Browns.

Remember the Titans?

Trivia question: when was the last time the Packers got off to a fast start in a game?  Because they certainly didn't do it against the Bears last Sunday.  The Packers misfired on their first offensive series, with Rodgers throwing the ball behind receivers several times, and took a couple of sacks on the first two series, before ending a scoreless first quarter.  To make matters worse, they came close to giving up an interception on one tipped ball, and they almost had their first punt blocked.  The Bears got on the board first, in the second quarter, with a TD pass to new public enemy no. 1, Brandon Marshall, before the Packers finally seemed to get started in the game.

At the end of the day, the Packers were able to win the game in what would have been a comfortable fashion, but for one of the worst coaching calls in recent memory - the 4th quarter Randall Cobb "throwback" trick play punt return - Cobb caught the punt, then threw the ball across the field.  It looked like it could have been a good play with lots of potential in the right situation.  The receiver could have done a better job of going to get the ball, but instead the ball was fumbled and recovered by the Bears.  Close to your own goal line?  Leading by 11 points and with 8 minutes left, when the Bears have had almost no offense all day long?  I just don't see the risk-reward balance on this play as making it even close to being a sensible decision.

Mason Crosby missed another pair of field goals, from 43 and 42 yards.  This has got to be a mental issue at this point - Crosby has talent, but is not executing the kicks.  I question whether there is a better kicker out there bagging groceries and waiting for a call, so I am reluctantly in McCarthy's camp on this - Crosby is our kicker, period, so get over it and hope he gets through this soon.  Meanwhile, for an amusing look at a kicker who apparently is available to replace Crosby on a moment's notice, take a look at this video, located by the Acme Packing Company website.

Trap Game Ahead?  And now the Tennessee Titans come to Lambeau, for the last regular season home game of the year.  The Titans are 5-9, and have given up 396 points this season.  Only the Raiders and the Bills have given up more (402).  But they also have Chris Johnson who, as the Jets found out Monday night, is capable of taking over a game.  And the Packers have been known, from time to time, to give up big games to running backs.  So this game could be one of those games that could jump up and bite the Packers.  But I doubt it.  As bad as the Jets are now, the Titans only beat them by 4 points, despite a 94 yard touchdown run by Chris Johnson.  The Packers are just a better team, and the Titans are a little out of their element playing in Wisconsin in January.  Still, there is no margin for error if the Packers hope to rise to the no. 2 seed, so it would be advisable for them to "remember the Titans."

Bye Week Possibilities.  I really figured the 49ers would lose to the Patriots on Sunday night.  And of course, if they had, the Packers would be sitting at the No. 2 NFC seed right now.  I sort of gave up hope when the 49ers were ahead 31-3.  But I kept watching, mostly for Fantasy Football reasons.  Lo and behold, the Patriots tied it up at 31, before losing the game 41-34.  So the question now becomes, assuming the Packers beat the Titans, can the Seahawks give the Packers a little help by beating the 49ers?  It would be a welcome "payback" by the Seahawks to the Packers, after the "Fail Mary" game.  It almost seems like completely different 49er and Seahawks teams will be playing Sunday night, as compared to their last meeting 10 weeks ago, when the 49ers won, 13-6.  Both teams are scoring a lot more points now.  The Seahawks scored 50 or more points the last two weeks, admittedly against bad teams.  But the way they are playing now, the Seahawks certainly have a shot, and it would not even be a huge upset if they won.