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!

Review of the Lions Game

This was one of those weeks where I read about the game before actually seeing most of it.  I was out of town on Sunday, and was really only able to catch about a quarter's worth of the game live in a sports bar in Providence, RI, after it was pretty well in hand.  So when I saw the game last night, I already knew the outcome, as well as the fact that the conventional wisdom was that the Packers had played pretty unimpressively for a team that notched a 26-0 shutout.  I knew that Rodgers had been sacked 5 times (and the Packers lead the league in sacks given up), that penalties against the Packers were out of control, reminiscent of a Raiders game (the Packers are second in the league in penalties), that this shutout was achieved against the Lions, a pretty bad team, and one missing its two biggest name starters, QB Matthew Stafford and WR Calvin Johnson.

Long-time readers will know that the fact that Stafford and Johnson were out gave me no great pleasure in the lead-up to the game.  I have previously written about what I call the Brad Hoover Syndrome (the Packers' incredibly irritating tendency to make back-up players look like hall-of-famers), so if anything, the fact that the Lions would be starting backups at key positions made me nervous.

Having now seen the game, the conventional wisdom is right, in my view.  The penalties, in particular, are ridiculous, and it implicates the coaching staff.  Sure, penalties are part of the game.  You can't eliminate them entirely.  I get all that.  But the problem is, when the head coach says that they are part of the game (as McCarthy did in his Monday press conference), I am afraid that the message that comes through to the players is that it is not good, but hey, it is not that bad either.  Wouldn't it be better for the player to be afraid to come back to the sideline after committing a penalty, as Leroy Butler says he was when playing for Mike Holmgren?

I saw some improvement in some areas.  I noticed a few more roll-outs, screen passes and pump fakes, all of which would help deal with the pass rush, given the problems on the offensive line.  Speaking of screen passes, shouldn't the Packers be great at screen passes, since they seem to let the rushers through even when they are not trying to do so?  I still saw some instances where Rodgers held on to the ball too long, so that is clearly an area where he needs to continue to improve.  I did like his presence of mind to throw the long ball on an obvious offsides call in the first drive, resulting in the long TD to James Jones.  

There has also been a lot of talk about letting Aaron Kampman be a pass rusher again, with his hand in the dirt, as the announcers were so fond of saying on Sunday.  Well, he got a few more chances to rush the passer, with favorable results.  So maybe the coaches are paying at least some attention to the criticism out there.  

Where do we go from here?  The Packers get one more "exhibition" game against the Browns on Sunday, before the re-match with the Vikings.  In fairness, with the Packers there are no exhibition games, so they should not take the Browns lightly.  My wife pointed out that on local TV in the SF Bay Area last week, they showed a clip of Eagles' coach Andy Reid, talking about the upcoming game with the Raiders.  He said that they know what the Raiders' record is (1-4 at the time), but that they have seen the films and know how explosive they can be.  At this point they cut back to the sports guys, laughing at their desk, saying they don't know what films he is watching.  The Raiders, of course, went on to beat the Eagles, 13-9.  The Packers should take a lesson from this.