Bear Down Against the Chicago Bears

Mike Daniels makes the Lambeau Leap

Let's see - a magically beautiful snow game, the Packers falling into an 0-14 hole due in part to turnover(s), Ryan Grant on the field, the Packers come back to win the game.  Why does this all seem so familiar?  Ah, yes.  The famous Snow Globe Game.  The final score against the Lions last Sunday was not as convincing, just 27-20, but given that the Bears and 49ers both lost on Sunday, the significance of the victory over the Lions can't be underestimated.  Sunday's game against the Bears, of course, will be even more significant.

After getting back Sam Shields last week, it looks like the Packers will finally get Clay Matthews back on Sunday.  Unfortunately, Jordy Nelson, James Starks, C.J. Wilson, and Charles Woodson are still out.  My thought has been that the only upside to this year's raft of injuries was that the Packers would start to get back some of those players not on Injured Reserve at just the right time to close out the year strong and go into the playoffs.  There is still room for that to happen, but it is not happening as fast as I would have liked.  The return of Greg Jennings was offset almost immediately by the loss of Jordy Nelson, so the Packers continue to be slightly short-handed at receiver.  That said, the return of Matthews should be an enormous benefit to the Packers this week.  Maybe the brightest spot for the Bears' offense this season is the Jay Cutler - Brandon Marshall connection (32 catches in his last three games).  While the burden for defending against Marshall will fall primarily on the defensive backs, more pressure on Cutler will definitely contribute to holding Marshall in check.

Meanwhile, the Bears have given up 170 or more rushing yards in each of the last two games (against the Vikings and Seahawks).  If only the Packers had a rushing game.  Oh, wait!  The Packers, all of a sudden, have one, having gained 140 or more against the Lions and Vikings.  Ryan Grant, who I assume will get more than one carry on Sunday, has a history, both of performing well against the Bears, and of performing well when the weather turns sloppy.  So I look forward to seeing what he can do against the Bears.  Plus I like the three-headed monster of a running back group of Ryan Grant, DuJuan Harris, and Alex Green.  They each have different styles, they each have shown that they can be effective (assuming, in Ryan Grant's case, that there is gas left in the tank) and they all are healthy and should have fresh legs at this time of the season.  If the Packers can keep a semblance of a running game going, they will be hard to stop.

The Bears always seem to play a tough game against the Packers, but I don't see the Bears actually winning the game on Sunday, especially missing Brian Urlacher, Tim Jennings, and a couple of other defensive players.  Full disclosure: I always think the Packers will beat the Bears, so I am not necessarily a good judge of this game.  But there are lots of stats that tend to back me up on this one.  I see big days for the Packers' running backs, and big days for at least a couple of the receivers, most likely Jermichael Finley (believe it or not) and Greg Jennings.  The Packers have started off the last two games very slowly, and dug themselves considerable holes before turning things around.  If they can avoid that fate this time, the game may not be close.

Packers-Giants Post-Mortem

(Photo my Mark Hoffman, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

On Sunday, the Packers' season, which looked like it could turn out to be one of the great seasons in Packers history, came to a crashing and disappointing halt.  The visiting New York Giants ended the Packers' season, just as they did four years ago, this time by the score of 37-20.

I went in for a dental appointment on Monday afternoon.  I'm sure you can see this line coming from a mile away - I feel like I spent two afternoons in a row at the dentist.  In the waiting room I read, wistfully, Peter King's Postseason Predictions in Sports Illustrated from a couple of weeks ago: "I see New Orleans and Green Bay facing each other again [in the NFC Championship Game], with the survivor going on to win the Super Bowl."  Yeah, me too.

All year long, the Packers have set various records, week to week.  Well here is another one.  The Packers became the first ever 15-1 team to be "one and done" in the playoffs.  While it is painful to see the Packers squander their no. 1 seed position this way, it should be noted that 4 of the last 5 number 1 seeds in the NFC have been knocked out of the playoffs without reaching the Super Bowl (New Orleans in 2009 was the exception).  Not that this helps very much - I am still walking around in a daze two days later - but at least the Packers are not alone in wasting a great season.  (It was sad having to cancel my travel reservations for the NFC Championship game, so that didn't help matters, either.)

Before getting into what went wrong, it is appropriate to give some credit to the New York Giants.  They outplayed the Packers on offense, on defense, and on special teams, and in my opinion the Packers were outcoached, as well.  Or as Greg Jennings said on his Facebook page Sunday night: "Hats off to the NYG on their win today.  They played a very sound game and we didn't do enough on our end to get this one.  Thank u Packer fans for your commitment to excellence all season in bringing us closer together as a team as we fed off u all season.  We'll bounce back."

So what went wrong?  Aaron Nagler of Cheesehead TV said that the Packers picked a terrible day to play their worst game of the season, and that is certainly true.  Mike Vandermause of the Green Bay Press-Gazette says that this game will go down as the most disheartening playoff loss in team history.  I'm not at all sure I agree with him, but why quibble?  This was plenty bad enough.

I have not even re-watched the whole game yet, but to me it was a large collection of little things, all of which worked against the Packers.  (And since the Packers benefited from a couple of bad calls by referees in their favor, it is horrifying to note that things could have been even worse.)  Aaron Rodgers was off the mark on some of his passes, including what should have been a touchdown to Jennings in the first quarter.  Was rust from an unnecessary week off a factor?  I don't know.  I was not in favor of resting healthy starters for competitive reasons, but there is no question that Rodgers did not look sharp.  Rodgers also had Jennings open for an easy touchdown in the third quarter, but Umenyiora stripped him on the play for a fumble.  In Rodgers' somber post-game press conference, he was asked about the play.

Q: "On the play where you fumbled, did you see how open Greg was?"
A: "Yes."

This terse answer, together with the look on his face, says a lot about the missed opportunities in this game.

If Rodgers was off on offense, the receivers and running backs were even worse.  There were either 6 or 8 dropped passes in the game, depending on how you count them.  Since the Packers averaged about 2 dropped passes per game during the regular season, this hurt, killing promising drives in the process.  Both Ryan Grant and John Kuhn are dependable ball carriers; but they both fumbled away the ball in this game (in Kuhn's case, it was his first career fumble).

On defense, it is probably not fair to single out one player, but nobody had a worse game than Charlie Peprah.  Peprah was the one who hit Hakeem Nicks, but did not wrap him up, on what turned out to be Nicks' long touchdown catch.  At the end of the first half, he took a bad angle and failed to get Ahmad Bradshaw on the ground when the Giants ran the ball with 15 seconds left, allowing him to get out of bounds and set up the Hail Mary pass.  Peprah and Woodson were the players with the best shot to break up the Hail Mary pass, but didn't.  This game, more than any other game this year, shows how much it hurt to lose Nick Collins early in the season.  Peprah is a decent player, but he was a big downgrade from Collins.  The latest word on Collins is that he will be reexamined in March, and will decide based on medical advice (and before the draft) whether he can come back and play again.

But most fundamentally, the problem on defense is what it has been all year: the inability to get pressure on the quarterback without blitzing.  So, if the Packers rush 3 or 4 on a given play, there is no pressure, and the quarterback has plenty of time for someone to get open.  If the Packers blitz, they get pressure, but if the quarterback gets the ball out quickly enough, somebody is going to have an opening to make a big play.  It is no fluke that the Packers gave up as many yards as they did on defense this year, but two factors allowed them to mask the problem and go 15-1: (1) the MVP quality of play by Aaron Rodgers; and (2) the turnovers generated by the defense.  On a day when Rodgers did not play like an MVP, and when the Packers lost the turnover battle, we now see what can happen.

This problem will have to be addressed in the draft and/or free agency, with the top priority being the defensive line.  I will have more comments on the Packers' needs later, after we see which coaches (if any) are hired away or simply replaced by the Packers.

Putting the pieces together, how do we explain (1) a sub-par performance by our MVP quarterback; (2) an extra dose of dropped passes; (3) fumbles by our normally reliable running backs; (4) sloppy tackling on defense; (5) worse than usual pass rush; and (6) poor play in the secondary?  I had predicted that the team would use Coach Philbin's son's death as a rallying point.  But Andy Hayes (of Packergeeks) was at the game and points to some things not visible on TV that really do suggest that there was something lacking, emotionally, from the team's effort.  So I have come to the conclusion that this was a far bigger, and more negative, factor than I would have anticipated.

It has been a good run for the Packers in the first few years with Aaron Rodgers as the starting quarterback.  Despite the disappointing end to this season, the core of this team is young and good enough that there should be more opportunities in the coming years.  The caveat is that I thought the same thing when the Packers lost Super Bowl XXXII.  I was convinced that the Favre era Packers would rack up a couple more Super Bowl wins, but we found out that nothing comes easily, and nothing is guaranteed.

*  *  *  *

I had occasion over the weekend to reflect on the way that technology has changed the lives of sports fans.  When my wife and I spent a week in England in October 1983, we literally had to wait until Monday and buy the International Herald Tribune to find out who won the football games on Sunday.  (We were happy to learn that the Packers beat the Buccaneers, 55-14, October 2, 1983).  But on Sunday, we watched the game at home with friends, while our son watched the game while flying on Jet Blue, and our daughter watched it with Wisconsin expats in Amsterdam.  The expats were Erik and Mary Jo Tunison, who own Eat at Jo's restaurant in the Melkweg entertainment complex, near the Leidseplein.  They showed themselves to be classic Wisconsin people, by being nice enough to invite a total stranger to watch the game with them, just because she is a Packers fan!  As Erik said afterwards, "We had a good time, except for that one little thing..."  Eat at Jo's is on my list of places to go, if I ever get back to Amsterdam.

Raiders Blown Out by the Packers

(Photo by Corey Wilson, Green Bay Press-Gazette)

During the first few offensive plays for the Raiders, I wondered if we Packer fans would be in for "another one of those days."  The Packers gave up a couple of passes for first downs, and it looked like the Raiders would just march down the field.  But just like that, Clay Matthews got after Carson Palmer, causing Palmer to hurry his throw, which resulted in an interception by D.J. Smith.  After a Raiders penalty on the Packers' first snap (the first of many Raiders penalties to follow), Ryan Grant broke off a 47 yard touchdown run, and after that, the only question was how bad it was going to get for the Raiders.

At some point during a commercial in the middle of the second quarter, Judy (my wife) said, "what is the score now, 31-0?"  And indeed it was.  The Packers eventually gave up some points, and the final score was Packers 46, Raiders 16.  It is a bit of a cliche to say that the game was not as close as the score, but it really wasn't.  The Raiders, their fans, and the local media here in the Oakland area are well aware that the Raiders were blown out for the second week in a row.  The online version of the game story in the Oakland Tribune has a different headline, but my local print paper's article on the game is titled: "Another 34-0 Deficit, Another Debacle."

The Packers' defense looked much more like its normal 2011 self this week, meaning they give up way too many yards, they don't get enough sacks, but they really do "bend" mostly without "breaking," and they continue to be among the best ball-hawking defenses in the league.  (Against the Raiders, they intercepted Palmer four times, and recovered a fumble.)  Truth be told, the Raiders dropped a lot of catchable balls in the game, and the Raiders committed lots of penalties, and both factors made things easier on the Packers' defense, but still, the point is that the defense looked like the kind of defense the Packers can continue to win with.

Against the Raiders, it was the offense that had an off day, if you can consider it an off day when you score 39 points on offense, and give your backup quarterback lots of playing time in the third and fourth quarters.  There were balls that should have been caught, balls that were just a little off target, and one ball that was wrestled away from our sometimes unstoppable tight end, Jermichael Finley, for an interception.  However, in the absence of James Starks, Ryan Grant looked like the Ryan Grant of a couple of years ago, breathing some new life into the running game just when it is needed, as the weather gets cold.

Rodgers, in the course of having his "off" day, managed to tie the Packers' team record for TD passes in a season, at 39.  The record was held by Brett Favre, for 39 TD passes in 1996, which was of course the year that the Packers won Super Bowl XXXI.  The Packers also set the team record for points scored in a season, by reaching 466 points.  Rodgers and the Packers have three more games in the regular season to add to those record totals.

The injury to Greg Jennings is obviously a major concern.  I consider him to be one of the top 4 playmakers on the team, along with Rodgers, Matthews and Woodson.  As of this writing, it looks like he will miss the last 3 weeks of the regular season, but that he should be back in time for the playoffs.  Normally, one would expect a problem when a player of Jennings' caliber misses three games, but the 2011 Packers have what can only be described as an embarrassment of riches at WR, most prominently Jordy Nelson, Jermichael Finley, James Jones, Donald Driver, and Randall Cobb.  I think they will be just fine.

I heard an interesting fact on the local (San Francisco) CBS post-game show: the Raiders have not beaten the Packers since Ronald Reagan was in office.  That would have been September 13, 1987, when the Raiders came to Lambeau Field and beat the Packers, 20-0.  That was so long ago that I have no recollection of the game, but the starting quarterback for the Packers was Randy Wright, and this was during the period that Randy Wright and his successor, Don Majkowski, were sharing the starting quarterback duties.  (Special Randy Wright memories: the gnarly older woman with the gravelly, smoker's voice who sat behind us in our old seats at Lambeau Field, and/or her partner, could be counted on at least once each game to yell out the following lines: "Randy Wrong, Randy Wrong." . . . "Come ON, youse guys, DO something!" . . . "Yah, I seen him piss away the Rose Bowl.")

Dredging up these Randy Wright memories brings to mind another thought.  While the Wright / Majkowski sharing of the starting quarterback job was a weird experiment, it is probably closer to the typical team's quarterback situation than what the Packers have had over the last 20 years.  Most teams struggle to find the right long-term quarterback, and may go through a couple of starting quarterbacks a year for a number of years before settling on their guy.  Think of the Chicago Bears, for instance.  But since the third week of the 1992 season, the Packers have had exactly two starting quarterbacks (not counting the concussion-induced start by Matt Flynn last year), both of whom are probably headed for the Pro Football Hall of Fame.  The only other back-to-back quarterback combination I can think of that is even comparable is Joe Montana - Steve Young in San Francisco.   We are lucky enough to be living through another golden age of Packers football, and we should, from time to time, take a moment to reflect on that.

And, of course, we are also living through what might end up being the most magical single season for a team in history.  Earlier in the season, I always thought that the Packers would lose a game here or there, and they still might, given the fact that the defense is not playing at the same level as it did last year.  But there are only three games left in the regular season.  The 5-8 Kansas City Chiefs, who fired their head coach this week, don't seem like they will be the ones to knock off the Packers.  The 7-6 Bears, probably without Jay Cutler and possibly without Matt Forte?  It could happen, as they do usually play the Packers very well, but I doubt it.  The self-destructing 8-5 Lions, playing in the cold?  Very little chance.  We will talk about the playoffs later, but at this point, having gotten by the Lions, Giants and Raiders, I think the Packers will end up 16-0.

Finley: Unstoppable!

(Photo from the Green Bay Press-Gazette)

Just as I thought, when the Packers meet the Bears with Jermichael Finley in uniform, and in the absence of a flurry of penalties, the Packers win the game, pretty convincingly.  Finley was just about unstoppable, scoring all three Packer touchdowns, apparently the first Packer tight end 3 TD game since Keith Jackson (Whoa Nellie!  I am referring to the player, not the announcer) scored three touchdowns in the season opener in 1996.  Sunday's game was not as close as the 27-17 final score would suggest.

The Packers' passing offense was aided significantly by a 92 yard rushing day for Ryan Grant.  After missing all three Bears games last year, I am sure it felt great for Grant to be such a contributor.  The defense managed to hold Matt Forte to 2 yards rushing, and while Cutler got a lot of yards, the Packers sacked him 3 times and intercepted him twice.  Woodson played a lot at safety in this game, returning to his cornerback position when the Packers were in nickel pass coverage.  Neither Woodson nor Matthews had gaudy stats in this game, but both were steady contributors, and Matthews in particular was very disruptive, as the TV announcers mentioned.

Meanwhile, I cannot imagine the disappointment of the Bears' coaching staff and players over the result of their masterful trick punt return play.  With a minute left in the game, and trailing by 10 points, the Bears uncorked a beauty of a play.  The Packers had been punting away from Devin Hester all afternoon, and did so again, punting to the Packers' left sideline.  But Hester, on the Packers' right side, sprinted  further to the Packers' right side, acting as if he was waiting for the ball to come to him.  Every Packer player, except punter Tim Masthay, bit on the fake, assumed that Masthay had mistakenly punted to the Packers' right side, and they all swarmed to Hester's side.  Meanwhile, Johnny Knox fielded the ball on the Packers' left sideline, and headed up field, with one lead blocker taking out Masthay, the only guy who realized the ball was over on the left side.  It would have been a touchdown, but for an absolutely meaningless holding infraction by Corey Graham, blocking one of the gunners early on in the play.  He didn't need to hold anybody; whoever he held probably was 20 yards or more away from the play at the time.  Now even if the Bears got the touchdown, they would have had to recover an onside kick and score a field goal to tie up the game.  But it was a beautifully-designed play, one of the sweetest special-teams plays I have ever seen, and it was screwed up by a needless penalty.  Even Aaron Rodgers and Greg Jennings were raving about this play.

So the Packers are 3-0, which, as we were told, means that there is a 76% chance they will make the playoffs.  In the case of the 2011 Packers, I think the chances are a little higher than that.

A LONG Time Coming

I had in mind the fact that the Packers have had trouble winning at Philadelphia. They have lost every recent game I can remember that was played in Philly. But I had forgotten that this streak goes back to 1962, until I heard that statistic in some of the post-game coverage. When you consider how long it has been, I would gladly take any win in Philadelphia, no matter how ugly.

And parts of this game were ugly. If you told me that Rodgers would throw for less than 200 yards, take three sacks and have two interceptions, I would have been pretty pessimistic about the Packers' chances. Add in a a handful of players knocked out of the game (especially Ryan Grant), and the fact that the Packers old nemesis Michael Vick was running the defense ragged for more than half the game, and I would have been positively depressed.

And yet, despite causing a lot of heartburn in the 4th quarter, the Packers won the game, 27-20. They did it, not with the smoking hot precision offense I had expected, but with good to excellent special teams (Mason Crosby hit 49 and 56 yard field goals, the latter being an all-time Packer record, and Jordy Nelson averaged 31 yards per kickoff return), and with an impressive defense. With Atari Bigby and Al Harris scheduled to miss at least the first six weeks of the season, each Eagles receiver was held to less than 50 yards receiving. With the way DeSean Jackson was tearing up the league last year, that is a significant accomplishment. Justin Harrell was knocked out of the game with what looked like a serious injury, and Cullen Jenkins played with a broken hand and a club cast. Charles Woodson and Clay Matthews did most of the damage. Woodson was always around the ball, made a handful of tackles, forced a fumble, and almost had an interception. Matthews, after missing most of the preseason, had seven tackles, two sacks, a forced fumble, and was instrumental on the critical fourth down stop of Vick to preserve the victory. With Vick at quarterback, I would have given long odds that they would get a yard on fourth down to keep their drive alive.

So yes, I will gladly accept a mixed performance for a win in the opening game. This leaves the Packers tied for the lead in the division (with Chicago!), and with the Vikings and the Lions at the bottom of the division. The Packers did not show me what I wanted to see: that they are a dominating team that has a great chance to win every game. As a result, we will have to wait to see if they can start to pull things together over the next couple of weeks.

Most Points Since . . . When?

The Packers, in beating the Colts last night 59-24, scored the most points they have scored in a single game since they beat the Cedar Rapids Crush, 75-0, in the 1938 pre-season. (The guys on TV said it was the most points "in a league game" since the victory over the Crush, but I think that was a mistake since the Crush never made it to the NFL.)

I wasn't happy to see 3 fumbles in the game (by Ryan Grant, Brandon Jackson, and Will Blackmon), and I wasn't happy to see Peyton Manning carve up the Packers' defense in the first few possessions. But this game answered a lot of questions for me.

Yes, the Packers are capable of putting some pressure on a quality NFL quarterback. Even though they were still not playing this as a regular season game, Dom Capers at least gave us some indication that he is willing to bring some pressure against a quality QB. The result was an interception and a strip of Peyton Manning.

Yes, the Packers offensive line looks like it is still capable of giving Rodgers the kind of protection he got toward the end of last year. Rodgers was never sacked, and this was without rookie Bryan Bulaga even dressing for the game.

Yes, the Packers continue to look very sharp on offense, even though Greg Jennings did not play last night. But Finley, Driver and James Jones picked up the slack and gained 195 yards in passing offense in the first half.

Yes, it looks like the Packers got some good players in the draft or as free agents. Although, again, Bryan Bulaga did not play, safety Morgan Burnett had a good showing. After struggling early on in the pre-season, he made some plays, most impressively including one interception he made and another that got away. Free agent linebacker Frank Zombo (why do I keep thinking of Frank Zappa?) made a bunch of tackles and stripped the ball out of Manning's hand. I would not want to be the person charged with cutting down the roster, as there are going to be some tough decisions here.

And yes, the special teams are capable of making some positive plays. While they gave up one kick return that was way too long, they also scored two touchdowns, one on a muffed punt recovered in the end zone, and another on a punt return. That is not a bad night's work, and it helps to relieve the sick feeling I have been getting whenever the special teams are on the field.

Week 2 Comments & Week 3 Preview

Time to write a quick few words about last week's game against Seattle, since the next game comes tomorrow night (Thursday) on ESPN against the Colts.

• The Packers' first-string offense continues to look great. Rodgers is in fine form, and in the first two games, the Packers have marched up and down the field with their first team, interrupted only by Ryan Grant's fumble in the first game.
• Jermichael Finley is going to be a monster for the Packers this year. His skill became more and more apparent as the year went on last year, but he seems unstoppable in the pre-season this year. A worthy pickup in any fantasy league that has separate roster spots for tight ends.
• The first-string defense continues to look spotty, but since the Packers were missing at least 6 starters on defense, I would not want to hit the panic button just yet.
• Special teams were again disappointing, but maybe not quite so disappointing as a week ago.

Traditionally, the first-string teams have their longest pre-season outings in the third game, so normally I would look forward to the Colts game with great anticipation. But it is not clear to me that the first-string offense has anything left to prove this pre-season, so I would not be surprised to see them take their seats early, maybe early in the second quarter.

I do hope to see more of the starters return on defense, and it would be nice to see a little more aggressive play-calling on defense. I don't fault Dom Capers for calling the first two games conservatively - it makes sense for him to do that early in the pre-season. (Besides, there will be plenty of time to criticize him for conservative play-calling during the regular season!)

But since there are going to be some changes on defense from last year when the season opens (Al Harris looks like he won't be ready, and of course Johnny Jolly and Aaron Kampman are gone), I am sure that Capers wants to see how some of his replacement starters perform in different pressure packages. I have no idea how long the Colts' starters on offense will play (heck, they don't always play even when the games count). But for however long they play, they will provide exactly the kind of test for the Packers' defense that I would think the coaches would want to see.

Review of 1st Preseason Game

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

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

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

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

Playoff Rematch Coming Up!

The Packers beat the Cardinals Sunday in Arizona, by the score of 33-7. This, combined with the Vikings victory over the Giants, means that the Packers return to Arizona to play the Cardinals in the playoffs next Sunday. As if that isn't weird enough, there are two other rematches next week from today's games. The Eagles again will play at Dallas, and the Bengals and Jets will play again, but this time in Cincinnati. It would be way too tedious to look it up, but I would bet that there have never been 3 rematches from the final week of the season to the first week of the playoffs before.

The Packers and Cardinals approached the game so differently that it is hard to know what to make of it. By game time, the Cardinals knew that they could not get a bye week (because the Vikings had won), and so they evidently decided to treat this as an exhibition game. They started pulling starters in the second set of series of the game. The Packers, on the other hand, played almost all of their starters until well into the 3rd quarter. So I guess both teams have their own talking points about the results. The Packers know that they dominated the Cardinals, from the first possession of the game. When they add this to the fact that the Packers' starters dominated the Cardinals' starters in the preseason, and the fact that the Packers are one of the hottest teams in the league, having gone 7-1 in the second half of the season, the Packers have ample reason for confidence that they can beat the Cardinals again next week.

The Cardinals, on the other hand, can say "well, we weren't trying to win the game, we were just trying to get our people rested up and ready for next week." Fine. It is not a crazy strategy. But I have a hard time believing that the Cardinals are not doubting themselves a bit today. If we recognize that there is a strong mental element to the game of football, then these things matter, and I think the Packers had the far better strategy in Week 17.

Regardless of what happens in the playoffs, the turnaround the Packers had in the second half of the season was sensational. Lots of fans and writers (including me) were ready to ship out the whole coaching staff and some of the players after the Packers lost to the Buccaneers. But those same coaches and players deserve an enormous amount of credit for the improvements we have seen. It seems clear now that the Packers' defense was just not fully adjusted to the new 3-4 alignment, and that the more comfortable they have become, the better they are playing. And they are playing better despite the losses of Aaron Kampman and Al Harris for the season.

On offense, Ryan Grant has gotten stronger as the year progressed, and so has Jermichael Finley. Aaron Rodgers has been solid all year, except for his share of the blame for all of the sacks early in the year, and as the offensive line improved, and he started getting rid of the ball faster, he became one of the top quarterbacks in the league. Interestingly enough, though, as the Packergeeks note in their blog, as good as Rodgers is, it is not even clear that he is the team's MVP, given the play of Charles Woodson. The talking heads on the NFL Network after the game were agreed that Woodson probably secured the league's defensive MVP award with this game.

I have seen a few comments around the web today about how odd it is that the Cardinals had the roof closed on their stadium on such a beautiful day today. I even saw speculation somewhere (can't find it right now) that maybe the Cardinals are faking out the Packers by closing the dome today, thinking that they will leave it open next week. I can just about assure you that it will be closed next week, too.

My wife and I were in Phoenix a couple of weeks ago. Before arriving, somebody mentioned in passing that they slide the field out of the stadium on a tray between games. I had never heard of such a thing, and it sounded doubtful to me. So we looked it up online, and it is true. More on that in a minute.

We also learned that they have stadium tours, so we took the tour. Here are a couple of pictures showing the field resting outside the stadium (in the rain that day) and showing the inside of the stadium without the field in place (the field slides out in the gap under the words RED ZONE at the far end of the picture).

During the tour, the guide was asked when the stadium roof is open for games. We also had dinner with some cousins of mine, formerly from Milwaukee, who go to lots of Cardinals games. Both the tour guide and my cousins explained that the roof is always closed (or nearly always closed) during Cardinals games (as opposed to other events). Apparently Kurt Warner likes the roof closed, so that there is no wind. And so the Cardinals always have the roof closed. [Ed. Note: cousin Beth, while unfortunately outing herself as a Cardinals fan, reminds me that increasing the crowd noise is also a factor favoring the Cardinals keeping the dome closed next week and every week.]

Obviously, I would expect a much closer game next time. I assume that the Cardinals will be favored by a few points, unless the oddsmakers were so impressed with the Week 17 beat down that they make the Packers the favorites. (In fact, I would think that all four home teams will be favored.) But I think that the Packers are the more complete team of the two. The Packers have scored more points (461 vs. 375), have given up fewer points (297 vs. 325), they have a better overall record (11-5 vs. 10-6) and they had a better second half (7-1 vs. 5-3). I like the Packers' chances.

Quick Turnaround for Thanksgiving Game

When the Packers played the 49ers yesterday, they started off by playing probably the best half of football they have played all year, leading the 49ers 23-3 at halftime. Then, they almost let the game get away from them, and ended up winning by the score of 30-24, prevailing only by grinding out three first downs to run out the clock. That was the way it felt while watching the game, and as happy as I was to see some more aggressiveness, on offense and defense, in the first half, I was disappointed to see the "play it safe" attitude that almost lost the game in the second half.

In the first half, the Packers finally seemed to absorb some of the things that us armchair quarterbacks think we see so clearly while sitting in our dens watching the games. On offense, there was a good balance of running and passing plays, and maybe just as important, the play calls were unpredictable. There was a series made up entirely of passes, ending with the 64 yard touchdown pass to Jennings. There were other series with multiple running plays strung together. There was continuing, welcome emphasis on plays that take some of the heat off of Aaron Rodgers, through screen passes, quick-release passes, and play-action passes. And, let's face it, the offense just played a better, more consistent game than it has in the past. Rodgers seems more conscious of getting rid of the ball before the pass-rushers converge, the offensive line played better, the return of Jermichael Finley at tight end made a difference, and Ryan Grant and Brandon Jackson had productive days at running back. On the defensive side, Dom Capers continued to unleash more of those pressure tactics that kept Tony Romo off-balance last week, to similar effect.

And then the Packers almost blew it in the second half. But after watching the game a second time, I am far less critical of the offensive and defensive calls in the second half than I was during and immediately after the game. In the first place, the Packers actually continued to be aggressive on both sides of the ball throughout the third quarter and into the early fourth quarter. With 11 minutes left in the game, the Packers had just put the heat on Alex Smith, passing from his own end zone, resulting in an interception by Nick Collins, leading to a short touchdown drive that put the score at 30-10. It was really only at that point that the Packers seemed to back off, on both sides, and play it safe to protect the lead and finish the game. The truth is that it would have taken a perfect storm of events for the 49ers to come back and win the game. The fact that it came close enough to happening to make ever Packer fan cringe does not change the fact that it was an extremely long shot throughout those scary 11 minutes.

One of the interesting NFL story lines of the past week has been the post-mortem on Patriots Coach Bill Belichick's going for it on 4th down in his own territory to try to run out the clock. The attempt failed, and the Colts drove for the winning touchdown. Watching it at the time, I thought Belichick was nuts to go for it. Or more precisely, I thought that there was no way they would actually run the play, and that if they did, then he must be nuts. That is pretty much where things stood until the Sunday morning shows yesterday, when I heard for the first time the argument that Belichick had made the right decision, even if it was unsuccessful. (For an example of the analysis leading to that conclusion, see this article.) I am open to this kind of argument, and have even made the same sort of argument before, in connection with some of the 4th down calls in the Packers' playoff loss to the Eagles in January, 2004 (see here).

Returning to the 49ers game, I am prepared to believe that, leading by 20 with 11 minutes to go, the chances of winning the game (high in any event) are improved somewhat by playing it safe on both sides of the ball. I am not claiming this is true, just saying that I could easily see it being true. So I am withholding criticism on this point. Admittedly, it feels better as a fan to watch your team continue to bring the hammer down until the closing gun, rather than coasting along. But I am no longer convinced that it was a bad strategy to play it safer in the game yesterday.

Now the Packers have only three days to get ready for the Thanksgiving Day game at Detroit. And to make matters worse, the Packers have to figure out how to deal with the fact that both Aaron Kampman and Al Harris had season-ending injuries yesterday. This is really terrible news. I know that there has been discussion about whether Aaron Kampman was like a fish out of water in the new defense. But when used properly, he is still a force on the defensive side of the ball. And even if there is room for argument about how much the loss of Kampman will mean, there really is no argument about the loss of Al Harris. With Al Harris on one side and Charles Woodson on the other, the Packers had (I think) the best pair of cornerbacks currently playing in the league. With one of them missing, the defense will suffer. So it is up to the backups to step up their game, and up to Dom Capers to come up with schemes to try to maximize the strengths the Packers still have on defense.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Wanted: Accountability

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tune-Up for Next Week

When the opening kickoff by the Packers bounced off the end zone pylon, giving the Browns the ball at the 40 yard line, I was concerned that this might be a sign of bad things to come. When a flag on the second play at first looked like it might be a phantom pass interference call against Al Harris, I worried some more. But it turned out it was a very proper offensive pass interference call against Massaquoi, and from that moment on it seemed like there was very little to worry about in this game.

From the first time that the Packers had the ball, it was apparent that they were working on changing their approach to the running game. The Packers have had seasons where the running game was strong enough to carry the offensive load. Up until yesterday, there was no reason to think that this would be one of those seasons. It probably still is not destined to be one of those seasons, but the difference yesterday is that the Packers clearly had decided to make a strong commitment to the running game. When is the last time you can remember the Packers starting out the game with 10 of the first 11 plays being runs? The stats of the game tell the same story. The Packers had as many first downs by rushing as by passing. They had more net rushing yards (202) than they have had in any game this year. The closest they have had to this total was in the Rams game, where they had 152. In the other four games, they never had more than 107.

This is welcome, on a number of fronts. It is getting to the time of year when it is more important for an outdoor team like the Packers to have a running game. It is a great time for Ryan Grant to start looking like the Ryan Grant of a couple of years ago. It gives the receivers a better chance to make a play, when the defenders have to worry more about the running game. Most importantly, it gives Aaron Rodgers a better chance of avoiding getting killed back there. It is surely not just a coincidence that Rodgers was not sacked a single time in the game.

The game itself was fun to watch. The 71-yard touchdown pass to Donald Driver was my favorite play. The 34-year-old was in a footrace to the end zone, and it was clear that the defensive back was faster than Driver. But Driver used a combination of a stiff-arm, and a changed angle to the end zone, to stay just enough in front to score the touchdown. Driver found Packer fans in the first row to greet, and then Rodgers came over and tossed a ball into the stands.

But despite all the positive developments in this game, there are still reasons for concern. The cavalcade of penalties continued, with the Packers racking up 8 of them in this game. And the red zone difficulties have not gone away, either. It took the Packers 6 plays from inside the 5 yard line to score the touchdown toward the end of the second quarter.

Meanwhile, the Brett Favre magic peeled away, just a bit, in the Vikings game at Pittsburgh yesterday. I have been waiting all year for one of those games where the Vikings lose, and it is at least arguably attributable to a Brett Favre mistake. Yesterday doesn't quite fit that mold, but it comes close. Favre had the ball knocked out as he was back to pass, and the ball was returned for a touchdown. But hey, that could happen to anybody. And then the Vikings returned the ensuing kickoff for a touchdown, which effectively eliminated any benefit from the fumble return. Then, Favre had a ball intercepted and returned for a touchdown, to seal the victory for the Vikings. But the ball was tipped, so again, it is hard to really pin it on Favre. For now, this will have to do. But this past weekend's games can't help but improve the confidence of the Packers, and remove the aura of invincibility around Favre.

Bring on Favre and the Vikings. We have been waiting for this game all season. We know Favre has been waiting for it. And what a surprise to learn that Favre's family reserved rooms in Green Bay for this weekend, a couple of months before he un-retired and joined the Vikings (see here).

A Magical Day at the Old Ballpark

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — For the first time since the "Terrell Owens game" in San Francisco after the 1998 season, all four members of my family attended a playoff game together last Saturday, along with our friends Myles and Jordan Abbott. We met our friends Dick Karth and Cathie Sunday after the game and went to dinner together. We could have had an even bigger reunion, since my brother Bruce was also in the crowd, although we unfortunately were not able to figure that out until too late. I credit my daughter Sarah for pushing hard for us all to go to this game. We had originally planned to go as a family to the Minnesota game in November, but the trip fell through at the last minute. When that happened, she insisted that, since we had to cancel that trip, we simply must go to a home playoff game if the Packers got that far. I also credit my wife Judy and my son Ben for resolving some tricky schedule problems to make sure we could all go to what turned out to be a vividly memorable experience.

I have been to a home playoff game that was cold - I almost said too cold, but of course there is no such thing for a Packer fan (NFC Championship game vs. Carolina) and to a game that was too warm (SF @ GB, after the 2001 season) and to the only two home playoff games that ended in defeat for the Packers (Atlanta, after the 2002 season, and Minnesota, after the 2004 season). But every time I go to a home playoff game, I dream of a game like Saturday's game. Light snow, getting heavier and heavier during parts of the game, until the field is covered. Snow, accumulating on top of the hats of the fans and the coaches; snow causing players to slide 5 or 10 yards when tackled. Snow, just light enough to make it possible to see the action on the field, but just heavy enough to affect everything and everyone in the stadium.

It was magical out there. The beauty of the snow falling against the dark sky. It brought back memories of snow falling when we were kids. It is remarkable that watching some of the best athletes in the world playing for their playoff lives can evoke memories of childhood games in the snow, but that was the unique thing about this game.

There were great story lines, too. The fact that the Packers could come back from their 14 point deficit and win the game convincingly. The remarkable story of Ryan Grant's redemption, in that the coach didn't bench him after his fumbles, but instead believed in him enough to stick with him and to allow him to set Packer playoff records for rushing yards and touchdowns in a game. It just doesn't get any better, and this game will be unforgettable to anyone who was there (and to many who were not).

Of course, the forecast did not call for this much snow, so when it started to snow lightly hours before the game, we decided it was time to head for the stadium. By game time, the weather was foreboding enough to cancel the flyover by the Navy pilots, which was disappointing not only because the flyover is such a great event, but because we had met the parents of one of the pilots at our hotel, who had flown in for the game and for the chance to see their son fly.

Still, expectations were high as kickoff approached. And then - those two critical turnovers by Ryan Grant, leading to a quick 14 points for the Seahawks. Could anyone in the crowd be blamed for thinking that things would only go downhill from there? Think, in particular, of that St. Louis playoff game after the 2001 season. It is all too common for a team in a hole to keep digging deeper and deeper. And (as he admitted in his press conference) Brett Favre has a history of trying to get it all back at once. Thankfully, QB coach Tom Clements came over to remind Favre that there was plenty of time left, and not to try to do it all immediately. From that moment on, the Packers just dominated this game, and won the game without difficulty.

Flying home Sunday evening was also part of the Green Bay experience. I of course know that there are a lot of Packer fans in the San Francisco area, because we used to see them in sports bars, and they buy up lots of tickets whenever the Packers play either the 49ers or the Raiders. But I was still surprised by the number of Packer fans on our plane flying out of Chicago. The Giants-Cowboys game had just started when we took off, so I had made arrangements for people to leave us phone messages with the final result. To our pleasant surprise, the pilot gave us several updates on the game. There were only two problems. First, at least part of the crew was from Chicago. Could the pilot be a Bears fan, just toying with the Packer fans on board, or were we just paranoid? And second, at one point he reported that the Giants were ahead, 27-17, but then later he came on to announce that the Giants had won, 21-17. Obviously, something was wrong with at least one of those scores, but we didn't know what.

When the pilot announced that final score, a huge cheer went up from the passengers. The guy across from me immediately started making plans to come back for this week's NFC Championship game, which got me to thinking that maybe I should do the same. The NFC Championship game is a very special game, and it doesn't come around very often. When you stop to think of the fact that the Packers have only hosted one other NFC Championship game since the end of the Lombardi era 40 years ago, you realize how historic this game Sunday will be, win or lose.

The Giants are playing some great football right now, having beaten the Buccaneers and the Cowboys, and having given the Patriots a run for their money in the final game of the regular season. So they are not pushovers by any means. This is actually the 6th NFC or NFL Championship game between these two teams, and the Packers lead the series, 4-1. Included among these championship games is the 1961 matchup, the very first NFL Championship game held in Green Bay, in which the Packers clobbered the Giants, 37-0. Can they do it again, or will the upstart Giants pull off another upset on the frozen tundra? My money is on the Packers.