My handful of readers might be wondering where I have been. We have been travelling out of the country for almost a month. We were able to watch most of the Rams game online, but could not find a video feed of either the Patriots or Dolphins game. I was able to listen to the Patriots game on the Packers Radio Network in the middle of the night, but for some reason could not get through on the Dolphins game and had to rely on the written play-by-play online. These are not ideal ways to follow games, to say the least, and don't allow me to comment meaningfully on either game. We just got back in the country yesterday, and I haven't been able to watch the prior games yet, but the good news is, I only have to wait until Thursday night for a real, live Packers game!
Seattle and Green Bay is not a natural rivalry. For most of their early history, the Seahawks weren't even in the NFC. But since around 2000, this has become the kind of rivalry where a single phrase is all it takes to bring back vivid memories. The "Al Harris pick 6 game," also known as the Matt Hasselbeck "We want the ball, and we're going to score" game (January 4, 2004). The "Seattle Snow Globe" game, also known as the "Ryan Grant redemption" game, also known as Favre's last win as a Packers player (January 12, 2008). The "Fail Mary" game, also known as the "Replacement Ref" game (September 24, 2012). And of course, the "Colossal Collapse" NFC Championship Game (January 18, 2015). Not to mention Mike Holmgren's return to Lambeau as the Seahawks coach, a game in which, as I recall, Holmgren had to go to the Packers' locker room to console Brett Favre after his 4-interception performance (November 1, 1999).
Thursday's game is actually a big game for both teams. The Seahawks aren't about to catch the Rams (9-1) with their 4-5 record. But they are certainly in the Wild Card hunt (the Wild Cards, "if the season ended today," would be the 6-3 Panthers and the 5-3-1 Vikings). But a loss to the Packers will be a serious blow to those hopes.
For the Packers, at 4-4-1, they are not only in contention for a Wild Card spot, but the division is not out of the question, if the Bears stumble and the Packers go on enough of a winning streak to pass the Vikings and catch the Bears. Those of you who saw the last two games are in a better position to judge than I am whether the Packers are actually capable of going on a winning streak. But I heard an intriguing statistic on Good Morning Football today: when Aaron Rodgers throws for less than 200 passing yards (as he did Sunday against the Dolphins), the Packers have a very high winning percentage. All of which suggests that a strong running game (think of some of the early Eddie Lacy years) are a large component of a winning game strategy for the Packers. I may not have seen the Dolphins game, but I know that Aaron Jones finally was the feature running back, and rushed for 145 yards, with an average gain per run of almost 10 yards. Some combination of the departure of Ty Montgomery, plus the idea finally getting through Mike McCarthy's stubborn skull, resulted in Aaron Jones playing the role the rest of us thought he should all year long. I don't think it is too strong to say, as some articles have this week, that Aaron Jones is the key to the Packers making the playoffs. I look forward to a win Thursday night and a run for the playoffs.
Showing posts with label Patriots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Patriots. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 14, 2018
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
The Ultimate Preventable Loss
 |
| Photo by PackersWire.USAToday.com |
Most of the focus post-game has been on Ty Montgomery's regrettable decision to try to return the Rams' kickoff after they went ahead, 29-27. His fumble handed the ball right back to the Rams, and sealed the win for them. There has been speculation that Montgomery returned the ball out of frustration or spite for having been benched in a prior series ("I'll show them!" - style). But Montgomery says that is not what happened, rather he thought the ball was going to land close to the goal line, where he can't let a live ball bounce, or take a chance on an official's ruling as to whether he was in or out of the end zone when he caught the ball. So he made a disastrous, split-second decision to return the ball.
Let me say that I don't really care that much which version is correct. If the Packers think Montgomery deliberately disobeyed the order to down the ball, they should have cut or traded him on Monday. If they believe his version, then it is appropriate that he is still on the team as of now (although today is the trade deadline, so we will see).
My bigger concern is that 5 of the Packers' first 7 games have either been decided in the closing seconds, or have been decided by dumb and inexplicable errors. The Packers pulled off a miraculous comeback against the Bears to win. They had numerous opportunities to either win or lose the Vikings game, so it was almost fitting that it ended in a tie. A Mason Crosby flame-out of epic proportions cost them the Lions game. Another miracle comeback against the 49ers. And now a boneheaded mistake by our number 3 running back costs Aaron Rodgers the opportunity to pull off a significant upset win. In these 5 games, the Packers are 2-2-1, so it obviously could be worse. But a championship team finds a way to win all, or at least most, of those winnable games. And they typically don't make them close; they put them away early on.
By that measure, the Packers don't look like a championship team right now. They may not even make the playoffs absent a significant improvement. An optimist would say that there were signs of improvement in the Rams' loss. The Packers finally seem to have realized that Aaron Jones is their feature back. And Jaire Alexander was making the kind of plays that justify the Packers' use of a high draft choice on him. But "signs of improvement" just won't cut it anymore. If the Packers are going to make anything out of this season, they are going to have to start winning the close ones, and putting away the easy ones. Beating the Patriots would not seem like such a "must-win" game if the Packers had pulled off the comeback against the Rams. But they didn't. And now they need a win to avoid falling below .500 at the halfway point of their season. In the immortal Super Bowl XLV words of Kevin Greene, "it is time" to go out and get it done.
Monday, December 8, 2014
Monday Morning Game Day Thoughts
 |
| Photo by USATSI |
So when the Packers' drive in the fourth quarter stalled, and Mason Crosby kicked his fourth field goal of the day to bring the score to 26-21 with 8:45 left in the game, Packer fans could be forgiven for contemplating the possibility of a long, clock-eating drive, ending in a go-ahead touchdown by the Patriots. While the Packers' defense had kept Brady under control all game, they had never sacked him, until it was 3rd and 9 from the Packers' 20, after the Patriots' drive had consumed over 5 minutes of the clock and 52 yards. It was at that moment that Mike Daniels and Mike Neal came up with the only Packers sack of the game, putting the Patriots too far out to try a fourth-down play, and forcing them to try to kick a field goal, which they missed. Two Lacy runs, one clutch pass to Cobb, and 3 kneel-downs later, the game was over. While this game was obviously not a Super Bowl, the Daniels-Neal sack immediately reminded me of Reggie White's two, back to back sacks of Drew Bledsoe in Super Bowl XXXI, to effectively finish out the game.
Back when the Packers were 1-2, none of us really contemplated the Packers being in a position to win 7 out of 8 games, or to knock off two division-leading teams like the Eagles and the Patriots within a three week span. But they have done exactly that. Keeping more of their players healthy has been a big factor, obviously, but so has the continuing development of young players like Eddie Lacy and David Bakhtiari and Corey Linsley and Davante Adams (other than his big drop of what would have been a touchdown pass) on offense, and like Datone Jones, and Micah Hyde, and Ha Ha Clinton-Dix on defense. And finally, the coaching staff deserves a lot of credit. Over the years, many of us have been critical of Mike McCarthy and his staff, for poor clock and game management, unimaginative play calling, being slow to adjust within games, etc. But I have to admit that the Packers, for most of this year, have been doing a better job of changing things up to keep the opposing teams off balance. On defense, the creative use of Clay Matthews in the last four weeks has made a huge difference in the overall performance of the defense, and on offense, last Sunday's game showed how the creative use of Randall Cobb in many different alignments can create massive problems for the opposing team's defense. Where was all this creativity hiding for the last few years? Hard to tell, but let's enjoy it while it lasts.
Much has been made this week of Bill Belichick seeking out both McCarthy and Rodgers after the game to have a few words with them. Neither McCarthy nor Rodgers would disclose what was said, but it is fair to assume that Belichick was acknowledging the excellent play-calling and performance of the Packers in the game.
The Packers have four winnable games left in the regular season. Atlanta at home, Buffalo and Tampa Bay on the road, and then the huge rematch with the Lions. The Falcons, despite their 5-7 record, should not be taken lightly. They still have Julio Jones and Roddy White on offense, and if Matt Ryan gets hot, they can score a lot of points. They have also won 3 of their last 4 games, including a win over Arizona, so they are getting their season back on track after a really poor start. Plus, at 5-7 they are like the old joke about the two men being chased by a bear. Since they currently actually lead the NFC South, they don't need to win enough games to have a good record; they just need to finish in front of the Saints and Panthers. If they do, they will win the division and host a home playoff game.
We all remember that it was just four short years ago that the Falcons had the best record in the NFC, and the Packers knocked them off on the way to Super Bowl XLV. They have lost a lot of players since then, but they still have plenty of talent. And this is, for the reasons noted, a big game for the Falcons. But I don't see them pulling off a massive upset of the Packers at Lambeau Field. I think the Packers will win this one by at least 10 points. Go Pack!
Back when the Packers were 1-2, none of us really contemplated the Packers being in a position to win 7 out of 8 games, or to knock off two division-leading teams like the Eagles and the Patriots within a three week span. But they have done exactly that. Keeping more of their players healthy has been a big factor, obviously, but so has the continuing development of young players like Eddie Lacy and David Bakhtiari and Corey Linsley and Davante Adams (other than his big drop of what would have been a touchdown pass) on offense, and like Datone Jones, and Micah Hyde, and Ha Ha Clinton-Dix on defense. And finally, the coaching staff deserves a lot of credit. Over the years, many of us have been critical of Mike McCarthy and his staff, for poor clock and game management, unimaginative play calling, being slow to adjust within games, etc. But I have to admit that the Packers, for most of this year, have been doing a better job of changing things up to keep the opposing teams off balance. On defense, the creative use of Clay Matthews in the last four weeks has made a huge difference in the overall performance of the defense, and on offense, last Sunday's game showed how the creative use of Randall Cobb in many different alignments can create massive problems for the opposing team's defense. Where was all this creativity hiding for the last few years? Hard to tell, but let's enjoy it while it lasts.
Much has been made this week of Bill Belichick seeking out both McCarthy and Rodgers after the game to have a few words with them. Neither McCarthy nor Rodgers would disclose what was said, but it is fair to assume that Belichick was acknowledging the excellent play-calling and performance of the Packers in the game.
The Packers have four winnable games left in the regular season. Atlanta at home, Buffalo and Tampa Bay on the road, and then the huge rematch with the Lions. The Falcons, despite their 5-7 record, should not be taken lightly. They still have Julio Jones and Roddy White on offense, and if Matt Ryan gets hot, they can score a lot of points. They have also won 3 of their last 4 games, including a win over Arizona, so they are getting their season back on track after a really poor start. Plus, at 5-7 they are like the old joke about the two men being chased by a bear. Since they currently actually lead the NFC South, they don't need to win enough games to have a good record; they just need to finish in front of the Saints and Panthers. If they do, they will win the division and host a home playoff game.
We all remember that it was just four short years ago that the Falcons had the best record in the NFC, and the Packers knocked them off on the way to Super Bowl XLV. They have lost a lot of players since then, but they still have plenty of talent. And this is, for the reasons noted, a big game for the Falcons. But I don't see them pulling off a massive upset of the Packers at Lambeau Field. I think the Packers will win this one by at least 10 points. Go Pack!
Thursday, November 27, 2014
Statement Game, Part Deux?
Two weeks ago, the Packers made their statement by beating one of the top teams in the NFC, the Eagles. Then they avoided, just barely, falling in their trap game against the Vikings in TCF Stadium. On Sunday, they get their chance to make another statement by beating the Patriots, probably the top team in the AFC, in what some people are calling a possible Super Bowl preview.
About the Vikings game - sure, we all expected the Packers to dominate the game, and they really did not do that. They never trailed in the game, but they never really took control of the game, either. It was the classic sort of game where the better team plays down to the level of the competition, and lets the other team hang around and hang around, all game long. There were a number of contributing factors. First, the Packers just seemed flat. Rodgers missed some passes, and should have been intercepted at least once, and receivers dropped some passes that they normally would catch. The Vikings played a lot of cover-2 defense, which seems like it always frustrates Rodgers, and it does tend to decrease the efficiency of the Packers' offense. Teddy Bridgewater looks like he might be the real deal for the Vikings, but he was wild on Sunday, especially early in the game. If he had completed some easy passes, instead of overthrowing them, and if his receivers had not dropped a handful of catchable passes, the Vikings might well have won the game.
Still, the positive parts of the Vikings game were the effect that the Packers suffered through a subpar performance and still managed to win the game - somewhat like the Jets and Dolphins games, both of which they could easily have lost. And there is nothing more satisfying than to see the Packers get the ball back, with over 3 minutes to go, and watch them grind it out on 5 straight Eddie Lacy runs, for two first downs, to get the game into kneel-down time.
What about the Patriots? They have the best record in the AFC at 9-2, and they are on a 7 game winning streak, after a maddeningly slow start of 2-2. People were beginning to question whether Brady was over the hill, but just like that, they turned it around. In their seven game winning streak, only one win has been by less than 15 points (they beat the Jets by 2 points). One of the things that I have always admired about the Patriots is the way that they keep their foot on the gas until the game is way out of control. So if the Patriots get ahead of the Packers on Sunday, there is no hope that the Patriots will slow down the game and give the Packers a chance to catch up. The Packers will have to seize the opportunity themselves, with no help from the Patriots.
I can make the case for the Patriots winning the game. They have two top cornerbacks, so they should have a better chance to keep Nelson and Cobb in check than most teams. Both teams have high-level passing offenses and middle of the pack rushing offenses, They both have middle of the road passing defenses, but the Patriots have a much better rushing defense, and the Patriots have shown that they are willing and able to emphasize the run offense when that is the easier way to score points. If the Patriots win the game, it will be likely be because of the Packers' Achilles' heel: rushing defense.
But I am predicting a Packers' win. True, the Patriots have won 7 in a row, but the Packers have won 7 out of their last 8 games, and are 5-0 at home (thanks to the furious comeback against the Jets). The Packers do have, on a year-to-date basis, one of the worst rushing defenses in the league, but I would suggest that the statistic is out of date. Since the Packers started to use Matthews inside, the Packers have given up 55, 109 and 112 rushing yards in those three games. If they did that all season long, the Packers would have a top 10 rushing defense.
It is interesting that Brady and Rodgers have never started against each other - a fact made possible by Rodgers' concussion in 2010. Matt Flynn played instead, and came close to upsetting the heavily-favored Patriots. But this time, we get two of the best quarterbacks in the league, both (I would argue) sure future Hall of Famers. This will be an interesting battle, between the classic pocket passer in Tom Brady, and the newer model, more mobile quarterback in Rodgers. According to the NFL Network, there has never been a game in which the starting quarterbacks have more career touchdown passes. Brady and Rodgers have 603 combined passing TDs. In second place is a Roethlisberger-Favre matchup late in Favre's career - those two had 589 passing TDs. This should be a great matchup.
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
Monday, December 20, 2010
New England Heartbreaker
What a disheartening loss last night to the Patriots, 31-27. I admit that I did not give the Packers any chance in this game, which reflects poorly on me, I suppose. But for them to lead the Patriots for much of the game, and have a shot at winning in the final minute, but not to be able to pull it off, was painful to watch.
"Heartbreaking" was the word used independently by both my wife and my daughter to describe the game. We had to start watching this game after it was already going on for about 2 hours, so it was over by the time we were still watching the second quarter. That is a terrible way to watch a game, especially one like this. I was getting text messages from Dick Karth, from my daughter, and from my cousin during the game. Then my daughter and my in-laws called within minutes after the end of the game. All of these messages and calls were ignored, but it was pretty clear to me that something remarkable was going on - either a disaster or a miracle. I was holding out hope for the miracle until the final play.
This morning I got some interesting comments on the game from my old college buddy Dick Karth, before I got around to even starting a game review of my own. I agree with most of Dick's comments, and disagree with others. So I am making Dick the honorary guest columnist of the week. His comments (with very slight editing) are in italics, with my own comments interspersed in regular font. Sort of a point-counterpoint.
In keeping with some of my comments [sent to me by Dick during the game], I was liking what I saw as the game progressed. The opening kickoff surprised New England and their coach. It allowed the GBP to take first blood. Brilliant!
Or, as a family member put it, "I didn't know the Packers were that ballsy." Packer blogger Jersey Al used the same colorful term.
The team played solid ball (pretty much on both offense and defense) through much of the game. There were some dropped balls on both the Packer offense and defense that should have been caught, which would have turn the game into a rout. But nonetheless, in spite of those lapses, the Packers were always in the game.
The drops were just killing me. Nobody is a bigger Charles Woodson fan than I am. 95 times out of a hundred he doesn't drop that interception. I could not believe that he dropped it last night. There were other dropped balls, including by Sam Shields and Jordy Nelson. Sorry, guys, this was a big game. You just have to make those plays.
I think that Flynn did an excellent job in his first real game and against an outstanding team. He was poised. Sure the INT for a TD is a pass he wishes he had back, and might not throw that again in his career. Chris Collinsworth made an interesting comment about a pass Flynn threw to the goal line at the left sideline. Chris said that you can throw that kind of a pass in college ball, even a National Championship game, but you CANNOT throw that kind of a pass in the National Football League! If Flynn learns from those mistakes and is effectively coached while watching the tape, he has a bright future in the NFL.
Collinsworth was right. That particular pass was a mistake, and so were the two interceptions [correction - only one official interception - the other one was called back on a penalty]. But we learned something about Matt Flynn last night - if it comes to it, he can play and give us a chance to win. I don't know why I should be so surprised. Going back to the beginning of the Favre - Holmgren era, we have pretty much always had coaches with great skills developing quarterbacks on the staff, and as a result we have pretty much always had capable backup quarterbacks (even, though, ironically, the last time a backup quarterback started for the Packers before last night was more than 18 years ago).
Then things started to unwind. If I were an NFL GM, I would have a rule ... that if a team or player sets an NFL record against me that is derogatory towards my team, then I'm going to fire the responsible coach. No questions asked. To have the longest return play in NFL history by an offensive lineman be executed against your SPECIAL TEAMS is inexcusable. It would have been bad enough for an offensive lineman to have picked up his own team's fumble on a bumbled running play on a 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 and to have lumbered (and I stress LUMBERED) 71 yards ... but on a kick-off?
Well, agreed, sort of. We do have recurring problems on special teams, and any neutral observer would have to think seriously about replacing the special teams coach, Shawn Slocum. Having said that, I don't agree with the idea of an automatic rule that says the coach is fired, immediately, if A, B, or C.
The final drive. A fraternity intra-mural team would have looked better out there. When you're playing one of the best team's in the league and you're expected to lose by almost two touchdowns, you know the only way you're likely to win the game is on a drive in the closing two minutes with one or no time outs left.
First, 13 to 15 seconds (two plays?) were squandered after plays ended before the timeout was called. Inexcusable. As the plays ended, the QB and the offensive leaders not directly involved in the play should be looking to the sidelines for time out calling direction. Were they? Or was there indecision on the sidelines? (Would not have surprised me!)
Second. Either the team goes on 60 second drill autopilot with audibles ... or two or three or four plays should be called during the T/O's. Neither apparently happened.
Look. They moved down the field in the final minutes and had a chance to win the game. My biggest criticism of the final drive is clock management. I have often been critical of McCarthy on matters of clock management. From his press conference, ironically, it appears that McCarthy had the right thinking in mind on this drive. That is, he wanted to use up time during the drive so that, if the Packers scored, there would be little time for Brady to work with. That is the right thing to do, so it seems harsh to be too critical. They overdid it, as it turned out, and they certainly wasted time they wish they would have had to play with at the end. But in this instance they were actually trying to do the right thing.
So ... in the end ... while I got excited at times during the game ... I again didn't like what I saw last night.
I guess I was happier with what I saw than Dick was. I did not give the Packers a chance in this game, and they proved me wrong and almost won the game.
The GBP were picked by smart football people at the beginning of the year to be in the Super Bowl. I can see why the smart people picked them for that. They have talent, depth, and they can play well.
More depth than I could possibly have imagined back in September.
But ... they not only almost upset New England (and could have turned it into a rout), they handed the best 2 and 10 or 3 and 10 team in the history of the NFL a four point victory that should have been a Packer victory.
On a brighter note ... this is a team that could back its way into the play-offs, into the Super Bowl, and bring the next Lombardi trophy to Green Bay as one of the few teams with NO home field play-off games during the play-offs ... if they don't beat themselves.
Apparently they don't want to win the Super Bowl the smart and easy way through the front door ... they appear to me to want to win it the dumb and hard way, through the back door.
Well, stranger things have probably happened. And I will obviously be rooting for it. But I don't see the Packers making it to the Super Bowl this year. Might they have done so without the avalanche of injuries? Hard to say, but it sure would help to have Ryan Grant, Jermichael Finley, Nick Barnett, Morgan Burnett, Mark Tauscher and 9 other players around to help out. I have been amazed by the Packers' ability to stay in contention with all these injuries. I argued before the season started that the 2010 Packers were not at the level of the 1996 Packers. If that was right, then it stands to reason that the end of season 2010 Packers are not even close.
Monday, December 13, 2010
A Perfect Opportunity. Squandered.
I started writing this while watching the Patriots administering a real beat-down to the Bears. Right. The same beat-down that, when paired with a Packer victory, would pull the Packers back into a tie with the Bears. Whoops!
How many times have we seen something like this? Last year it was the loss to the previously-winless Buccaneers. I wrote about it here. I am aware that almost every team, some time during the year, loses a game that they should win. The Packers are not unique in their vulnerability to bad teams. Heck, the Patriots lost to the Browns this year. But in fairness, the Browns are an up and coming team, now struggling at 5-8. The 3-10 Lions, with more players on Injured Reserve than the Packers, and playing their third-string quarterback yesterday, are not in the same category. Nor were the 0-7 Buccaneers last year when the Packers lost to them.
So, even if the Packers are not uniquely vulnerable, it seems more predictable than with other good teams that they will screw up a game like this at least once every year. I just can't let Mike McCarthy off the hook anymore. Periodically, I feel that he is finally starting to get it in his play calling. Yesterday was not one of those days. From too much emphasis on the non-existent running game, to too much emphasis on long passes when underneath passes were available, to the idiotic play calls on the final drive (running plays on a final, must-score-a-TD drive; long pass on 4th and 1), this was not an impressive effort. I am losing confidence in McCarthy's ability to learn from past mistakes.
Another way to look at this is that, this year at least, the Packers have lost three games to teams with worse records when either Rodgers or Matthews did not play or did not finish the game. Baranczyk and Christl make this point in the Press-Gazette today. This is, perhaps, the flip side of the positive notion that the Packers have done a great job of winning a lot of games despite the devastating impact of all the injuries. That is true in general, but they seem to have a hard time dealing with the absence of their biggest stars. You could point to any number of teams who have not fallen victim to this problem - from the Vikings winning last week behind Tarvaris Jackson, to the Lions beating the Packers yesterday with their third-string quarterback.
Amazingly, the Packers could still win the NFC North, but now it will take some help from our old friends, the Chicago Bears. They looked pretty bad yesterday, but I think that was more about the New England Patriots than it was about the Chicago Bears. As Packer Blogger Jersey Al put it, the Patriots are "executing teams like cold-blooded killers." Oh, great, the Packers face New England next week.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Happy Bye Week!
SAN FRANCISCO — It is indeed a happy bye week for the Packers. After their disappointing Sunday night loss to the Bears, they had one more game before the bye, against the Washington Redskins. The Redskins, according to some analysts in the days before the game, actually had the best defense of all the teams the Packers had played this season. Thus, it would be important to win that game, to avoid going into the week off with a two-game losing streak.
Before getting to the Redskins game, a word or two on the loss to the Bears. After an impressive first half, in which the Packers staked themselves to a halftime lead of 17-7, it seemed as if the Packers were in position to win again. But in the second half, the Packers scored only 3 points, while the Bears scored 20 and won the game. During the second half, John Madden made comments about the Packers playing very conservatively on offense, and watching the game, it certainly seemed that way to me, too. At the time, it seemed like the Packers were so convinced that they had the game in hand, that they thought they could, in effect, just run out the clock on the second half. It was painful to watch the game slip away that way. I always admire teams that keep on pounding with whatever is working until the game is out of reach. The Patriots, for example, seem to do this, continuing to play aggressively, without mercy, until the game is almost over. The best single example of what I am talking about was the NFC Championship Game after the 2000 season, during which the Giants attacked the Vikings with the long ball from the very beginning of the game. After building the lead, they did not let up, or start to use up time with the running game. They just kept hammering the Vikings until it was over, 41-0. So it was very disappointing to see the Packers seem to think that they could just play it safe and protect their 10 point lead for 30 minutes of football. It was also disappointing to hear Mike McCarthy deny that the Packers had played conservatively. How refreshing it would have been to hear him say that, in hindsight, maybe we did play too conservatively, and that is a mistake we will not make again. But I guess coaches just don't say things like that.
As for the Redskins game, it was a terrible day on offense for the Packers, during which Favre set the all-time interception record, and did not throw a touchdown pass. While there have been hints of an improving running game in a couple of the earlier games (ironically, especially in the loss to Chicago), the running game was totally ineffective against Washington. After three games in a row where Favre threw for more than 300 yards per game, these figures were almost cut in half, as Favre threw for only 169 net passing yards.
It seemed clear early on in the Redskins game that only the defense could put the Packers in position to win this game. And that is exactly what they did, scoring the go-ahead and winning points on a fumble return for a touchdown by Charles Woodson. Not the most impressive way to win a game, but at least it leaves the Packers at 5-1. Now, I would argue that they are the worst 5-1 (or 4-1, or 4-2) team in the league. But then, in the past, haven't Packer fans said pretty much the opposite? Last year, weren't the Packers the best 8-8 team in the league? Or the best non-playoff team in the league? At least as a mediocre 5-1 team, they have the chance to get their act together, get their running backs healthy and hopefully more effective, get all their receivers healthy and keep Favre in one piece, and win a bunch of games.
Before getting to the Redskins game, a word or two on the loss to the Bears. After an impressive first half, in which the Packers staked themselves to a halftime lead of 17-7, it seemed as if the Packers were in position to win again. But in the second half, the Packers scored only 3 points, while the Bears scored 20 and won the game. During the second half, John Madden made comments about the Packers playing very conservatively on offense, and watching the game, it certainly seemed that way to me, too. At the time, it seemed like the Packers were so convinced that they had the game in hand, that they thought they could, in effect, just run out the clock on the second half. It was painful to watch the game slip away that way. I always admire teams that keep on pounding with whatever is working until the game is out of reach. The Patriots, for example, seem to do this, continuing to play aggressively, without mercy, until the game is almost over. The best single example of what I am talking about was the NFC Championship Game after the 2000 season, during which the Giants attacked the Vikings with the long ball from the very beginning of the game. After building the lead, they did not let up, or start to use up time with the running game. They just kept hammering the Vikings until it was over, 41-0. So it was very disappointing to see the Packers seem to think that they could just play it safe and protect their 10 point lead for 30 minutes of football. It was also disappointing to hear Mike McCarthy deny that the Packers had played conservatively. How refreshing it would have been to hear him say that, in hindsight, maybe we did play too conservatively, and that is a mistake we will not make again. But I guess coaches just don't say things like that.
As for the Redskins game, it was a terrible day on offense for the Packers, during which Favre set the all-time interception record, and did not throw a touchdown pass. While there have been hints of an improving running game in a couple of the earlier games (ironically, especially in the loss to Chicago), the running game was totally ineffective against Washington. After three games in a row where Favre threw for more than 300 yards per game, these figures were almost cut in half, as Favre threw for only 169 net passing yards.
It seemed clear early on in the Redskins game that only the defense could put the Packers in position to win this game. And that is exactly what they did, scoring the go-ahead and winning points on a fumble return for a touchdown by Charles Woodson. Not the most impressive way to win a game, but at least it leaves the Packers at 5-1. Now, I would argue that they are the worst 5-1 (or 4-1, or 4-2) team in the league. But then, in the past, haven't Packer fans said pretty much the opposite? Last year, weren't the Packers the best 8-8 team in the league? Or the best non-playoff team in the league? At least as a mediocre 5-1 team, they have the chance to get their act together, get their running backs healthy and hopefully more effective, get all their receivers healthy and keep Favre in one piece, and win a bunch of games.
Thursday, October 17, 2002
The Brad Hoover Syndrome
Those who saw the game Sunday against the Patriots probably saw the sign in the stands saying "You've Just Been Favre'd." And that is certainly true of the Patriots game, the Bears game before it, and various other games so far this year. Of course it is not a one-man show, and there are plenty of supporting characters who deserve credit for the Packers' 5-1 record so far this year.
Ahman Green is frequently a big factor, and he certainly was on Sunday by bringing balance to the offense (something the Patriots did not have, seemingly by design), and by chewing up the clock and yards in the 4th quarter. The new receiving corps is frequently a factor, too, although not so much in the Patriots' game given the weather conditions and the game plan. But in the Bears' game, the receivers came through in a big way, starting with the 85-yard bomb to Driver. That play was a thing of beauty, in so many different ways. First, Favre had all day to survey the field after rolling left. Then he threw the ball about 60 yards in the air. Driver got separation from the defensive back by a couple of steps. Then Favre hit him perfectly in stride. And finally, Driver actually caught the ball and was never in danger of being caught from behind. At least five things happened on that play, all of them perfectly, and as a result it was a great play to open the scoring against the Bears. Not only did it put 7 points on the board, but it had to have an effect on the Bears' coverage schemes for the rest of the game, which had the effect of opening up the short passing game and running game.
Still, a lot of it comes back to Favre, who just turned 33 last week and is in some ways having the best year of his career.
But the big surprise in week 6 was the defense. So many players were out of the game, including Holliday, Johnson, Sharper and McKenzie. The Packers started a defensive back they just signed a few days before the game (Westbrook). My attitude, going into the game, was that there was very little chance that the Packers would win this game. They were playing the world champions, on the road, with numerous injuries to starters on defense. Sure, the Patriots had not been playing well in the last couple of weeks, but still, they would surely eat the Packers' makeshift defense alive. Frankly, the first drive played right into my worst fears, as the Patriots marched relentlessly from their 20 yard line into Packer territory, until Brady launched a pass downfield, and that brand-new defensive back, Westbrook, intercepted it at the 8 yard line. Starting with that play, the Packers' defense really stepped up, playing far better than I would have hoped or expected.
One of the pivotal plays, of course, was the Tom Brady lateral in the last couple of minutes of the half, right after the Packers had scored to make the score 7-3. Brady looked right, spun around to the left, and lofted a too-high pass toward Kevin Faulk. The ball went off his hands and rolled around on the ground while Faulk, KGB, Hardy Nickerson and many others looked on. Watching the game on TV, I found myself yelling "PICK UP THE BALL!" Not that I was certain that the ball was a lateral pass (and therefore technically a fumble), but it sure was in the realm of possibility. Especially as the official just stood there, rather than picking up the ball, giving the alert observer a hint that maybe the ball was considered to be a LIVE BALL. Finally, as the seconds ticked by, rookie Marques Anderson showed that his head was in the game, as he came racing from many yards away to try to fall on the ball (it was eventually recovered by KGB). A heads-up play by another substitute starter.
The Packers, for once, found themselves on the positive end of what I think of as the Brad Hoover syndrome. Many times, over the years, the Packers have gone into a game knowing that the other team is missing a critical starter. Troy Aikman can't play, and so somebody noone ever heard of named Jason Garrett is the starting quarterback. Packer fans are licking their chops, but Jason Garrett (or Brad Hoover, or whoever) plays like a hall-of-famer and the Packers lose. It has almost gotten to the point where I wince if the other team has starters on the injury list. Finally, the Brad Hoover syndrome worked in the Packers' favor, with a bunch of backups playing way over their heads to bring home a victory for the Packers.
Ahman Green is frequently a big factor, and he certainly was on Sunday by bringing balance to the offense (something the Patriots did not have, seemingly by design), and by chewing up the clock and yards in the 4th quarter. The new receiving corps is frequently a factor, too, although not so much in the Patriots' game given the weather conditions and the game plan. But in the Bears' game, the receivers came through in a big way, starting with the 85-yard bomb to Driver. That play was a thing of beauty, in so many different ways. First, Favre had all day to survey the field after rolling left. Then he threw the ball about 60 yards in the air. Driver got separation from the defensive back by a couple of steps. Then Favre hit him perfectly in stride. And finally, Driver actually caught the ball and was never in danger of being caught from behind. At least five things happened on that play, all of them perfectly, and as a result it was a great play to open the scoring against the Bears. Not only did it put 7 points on the board, but it had to have an effect on the Bears' coverage schemes for the rest of the game, which had the effect of opening up the short passing game and running game.
Still, a lot of it comes back to Favre, who just turned 33 last week and is in some ways having the best year of his career.
But the big surprise in week 6 was the defense. So many players were out of the game, including Holliday, Johnson, Sharper and McKenzie. The Packers started a defensive back they just signed a few days before the game (Westbrook). My attitude, going into the game, was that there was very little chance that the Packers would win this game. They were playing the world champions, on the road, with numerous injuries to starters on defense. Sure, the Patriots had not been playing well in the last couple of weeks, but still, they would surely eat the Packers' makeshift defense alive. Frankly, the first drive played right into my worst fears, as the Patriots marched relentlessly from their 20 yard line into Packer territory, until Brady launched a pass downfield, and that brand-new defensive back, Westbrook, intercepted it at the 8 yard line. Starting with that play, the Packers' defense really stepped up, playing far better than I would have hoped or expected.
One of the pivotal plays, of course, was the Tom Brady lateral in the last couple of minutes of the half, right after the Packers had scored to make the score 7-3. Brady looked right, spun around to the left, and lofted a too-high pass toward Kevin Faulk. The ball went off his hands and rolled around on the ground while Faulk, KGB, Hardy Nickerson and many others looked on. Watching the game on TV, I found myself yelling "PICK UP THE BALL!" Not that I was certain that the ball was a lateral pass (and therefore technically a fumble), but it sure was in the realm of possibility. Especially as the official just stood there, rather than picking up the ball, giving the alert observer a hint that maybe the ball was considered to be a LIVE BALL. Finally, as the seconds ticked by, rookie Marques Anderson showed that his head was in the game, as he came racing from many yards away to try to fall on the ball (it was eventually recovered by KGB). A heads-up play by another substitute starter.
The Packers, for once, found themselves on the positive end of what I think of as the Brad Hoover syndrome. Many times, over the years, the Packers have gone into a game knowing that the other team is missing a critical starter. Troy Aikman can't play, and so somebody noone ever heard of named Jason Garrett is the starting quarterback. Packer fans are licking their chops, but Jason Garrett (or Brad Hoover, or whoever) plays like a hall-of-famer and the Packers lose. It has almost gotten to the point where I wince if the other team has starters on the injury list. Finally, the Brad Hoover syndrome worked in the Packers' favor, with a bunch of backups playing way over their heads to bring home a victory for the Packers.
Monday, November 3, 1997
Packers Back on Track / Mid-Season Review
Bye Week Blues
Well, it seems as if the Packers needed the bye week, even if their fans did not. What does a Packer fan living in the San Francisco area do during the bye week, when there is nothing doing locally but 49ers and Raiders? If you are like me, you find a week without Packer football to be a bit tough to take. And believe me, it is worse if you are not in Wisconsin, without all the Packer hubbub that goes on around there.
My family kept busy the weekend of the bye by going to Great America for the last time this year on Saturday, and by going to the Denver at Oakland game on Sunday. An interesting game, but ultimately who cares about a game involving a couple of AFC teams? It's just not the same.
Last weekend, the weekend before the Monday night game, we had to go out of town to a business function, which helped to keep our minds off of the long wait for the Monday night game. And today (Sunday, November 2) we went to scout out the Cowboys and 49ers at 3Com Park, allowing enough time to get home to watch the Packer game. I was doing my scouting in my Super Bowl hat and shirt, but another guy right in front of me was doing the same thing in his Brett Favre jersey. One kid (10-12 years old) saw me driving my car with PACK FAN license plates in the 3Com parking lot, and was nice enough to tell me (very loudly) that "the Packers Suck!" This passes for intelligent football discourse in the 3Com parking lot, apparently, although I have a feeling that he may not have checked the box scores in the recent Packer-49er games.
The Monday night game against the Patriots was great. The Packers looked the best they have looked all year. The only thing that bothers me a little bit is the thought that maybe the Patriots aren't really good enough to be considered a difficult test for the Packers. The Patriots' game today against the Vikings tends to confirm the suspicion.
Tonight's game against the Lions was not very impressive on offense, but the defense was in complete control of the game, and played its second impressive game in a row. It is good to see Fritz Shurmur showing enough confidence in his defenders to take some chances and play aggressively. The defensive players looked like they were really having fun out there.
Contenders' Schedules
I meant to take a look at remaining schedules for the rest of the NFC contenders last week, but did not get around to writing it down until now. The good news is that the Packers have the easiest schedule in the second half of all meaningful contenders, and the 49ers have the hardest schedule. (My thanks to Ross Fleege for crunching the numbers.) Unfortunately, though, the 49ers show little sign that they are about to start losing some games. So the Packers have to just keep winning games, and hope for a little help from someone else somewhere along the way.
Here is a brief review of the contenders' schedules, along with a few comments.
GREEN BAY PACKERS. Currently 7-2, the same as last year at this time. The Packers have home games left against St. Louis, Dallas, and Buffalo, and away games at Indy, Minnesota, Tampa Bay and Carolina. Going 6-1 seems quite possible to me, with a loss likely somewhere (I'm going to "arbitrarily" guess at Minnesota). So I am predicting 13-3 for the final record. This may be a bit optimistic, since they could drop another game somewhere. But they should not end up worse than 12-4.
MINNESOTA VIKINGS. Currently 7-2. Home games left against Chicago, Green Bay, Detroit and Indy. Away games at Detroit, NY Jets, and San Francisco. I am predicting that the Vikings go 4-3, losing the games at Detroit, at the Jets, and at San Francisco. This would leave the Vikings at 11-5. It would be nice to see a late-season collapse here (except when they play the 49ers), but right now they seem to be playing pretty well.
TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS. Currently 6-3. Home games left against New England, Green Bay, and Chicago. Away games at Atlanta, Chicago, the NY Giants and the NY Jets. I see a 3-4 record for the Bucs, with losses to New England, the Giants, Green Bay and the Jets. The Bucs would then end up at 9-7. The Bucs were an interesting story early in the year, but my predictions reflect my belief that the story is now over.
DETROIT LIONS. Currently 4-5. Not really a contender anymore, but I am just including them because they are in the NFC Central with a record better than 1-8. Home games against Minnesota, Indy, Chicago and the NY Jets. Away games at Washington, Miami and Minnesota. I see the Lions going 4-3, losing to Washington, Miami and Minnesota. The Lions would end up at 8-8.
SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS. Currently 8-1. Home games against Carolina, San Diego, Minnesota and Denver. Away games at Philadelphia, Kansas City and Seattle. I see them going 4-3, to finish at 12-4. I predict losses to Philadelphia, Kansas City and Denver. (But I sure wish they had lost today to the Cowboys.) The interesting thing about the 49ers schedule is that they are now all out of "byes," with the possible exception of the San Diego game. Even though I think they will win 4 more games, certainly the Panthers, Vikings and Seahawks are each capable of beating the 49ers. Be that as it may, I hope I am not being overly optimistic in predicting 3 losses.
CAROLINA PANTHERS. Currently 5-4. Trying desperately to crawl back in the race after a miserable start. Home games against New Orleans, Green Bay and St. Louis. Away games at Denver, San Francisco, St. Louis and Dallas. I see a record of 3-4, for a total of 8-8. The losses would come against Denver, San Francisco, Dallas and Green Bay.
NEW YORK GIANTS. Currently 6-3. Quietly becoming a significant contender. Home games against Arizona, Tampa Bay and Washington. Away games at Tennessee, Washington, Philadelphia and Dallas. I predict losses against Washington and Dallas, for a 5-2 record and a total of 11-5.
WASHINGTON REDSKINS. Currently 5-4. Home games against Detroit, NY Giants, St. Louis and Philadelphia. Away games at Dallas, Arizona and NY Giants. I think they will go 5-2, losing to Dallas and the Giants on the road, for a total record of 10-6.
DALLAS COWBOYS. Currently 4-5. Not really a contender anymore, but I had to include them here for frame of reference. Home games against Arizona, Washington, Tennessee, Carolina and NY Giants. Away games at Green Bay and Cincinnati. In making my predictions, I initially came up with a 6-1 record, with a loss only to Green Bay, for a total record of 10-6. But that just can't be right. This team is not good enough to go 6-1. They will find a way to lose 1 or 2 games to teams like Arizona, Carolina, the Giants or Cincinnati. They will end up with a record something like 8-8.
If these predictions come true, the Packers will win the all-important home field advantage. But the 49ers are (to state the obvious) the team with the best shot to knock the Packers out of home field advantage. So root like crazy against the 49ers, every week. The only other serious challenger I see in the NFC is the Vikings. That game on December 1 at the Metrodome could not only have large implications for the home field advantage, it could end up deciding the division winner.
Well, it seems as if the Packers needed the bye week, even if their fans did not. What does a Packer fan living in the San Francisco area do during the bye week, when there is nothing doing locally but 49ers and Raiders? If you are like me, you find a week without Packer football to be a bit tough to take. And believe me, it is worse if you are not in Wisconsin, without all the Packer hubbub that goes on around there.
My family kept busy the weekend of the bye by going to Great America for the last time this year on Saturday, and by going to the Denver at Oakland game on Sunday. An interesting game, but ultimately who cares about a game involving a couple of AFC teams? It's just not the same.
Last weekend, the weekend before the Monday night game, we had to go out of town to a business function, which helped to keep our minds off of the long wait for the Monday night game. And today (Sunday, November 2) we went to scout out the Cowboys and 49ers at 3Com Park, allowing enough time to get home to watch the Packer game. I was doing my scouting in my Super Bowl hat and shirt, but another guy right in front of me was doing the same thing in his Brett Favre jersey. One kid (10-12 years old) saw me driving my car with PACK FAN license plates in the 3Com parking lot, and was nice enough to tell me (very loudly) that "the Packers Suck!" This passes for intelligent football discourse in the 3Com parking lot, apparently, although I have a feeling that he may not have checked the box scores in the recent Packer-49er games.
The Monday night game against the Patriots was great. The Packers looked the best they have looked all year. The only thing that bothers me a little bit is the thought that maybe the Patriots aren't really good enough to be considered a difficult test for the Packers. The Patriots' game today against the Vikings tends to confirm the suspicion.
Tonight's game against the Lions was not very impressive on offense, but the defense was in complete control of the game, and played its second impressive game in a row. It is good to see Fritz Shurmur showing enough confidence in his defenders to take some chances and play aggressively. The defensive players looked like they were really having fun out there.
Contenders' Schedules
I meant to take a look at remaining schedules for the rest of the NFC contenders last week, but did not get around to writing it down until now. The good news is that the Packers have the easiest schedule in the second half of all meaningful contenders, and the 49ers have the hardest schedule. (My thanks to Ross Fleege for crunching the numbers.) Unfortunately, though, the 49ers show little sign that they are about to start losing some games. So the Packers have to just keep winning games, and hope for a little help from someone else somewhere along the way.
Here is a brief review of the contenders' schedules, along with a few comments.
GREEN BAY PACKERS. Currently 7-2, the same as last year at this time. The Packers have home games left against St. Louis, Dallas, and Buffalo, and away games at Indy, Minnesota, Tampa Bay and Carolina. Going 6-1 seems quite possible to me, with a loss likely somewhere (I'm going to "arbitrarily" guess at Minnesota). So I am predicting 13-3 for the final record. This may be a bit optimistic, since they could drop another game somewhere. But they should not end up worse than 12-4.
MINNESOTA VIKINGS. Currently 7-2. Home games left against Chicago, Green Bay, Detroit and Indy. Away games at Detroit, NY Jets, and San Francisco. I am predicting that the Vikings go 4-3, losing the games at Detroit, at the Jets, and at San Francisco. This would leave the Vikings at 11-5. It would be nice to see a late-season collapse here (except when they play the 49ers), but right now they seem to be playing pretty well.
TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS. Currently 6-3. Home games left against New England, Green Bay, and Chicago. Away games at Atlanta, Chicago, the NY Giants and the NY Jets. I see a 3-4 record for the Bucs, with losses to New England, the Giants, Green Bay and the Jets. The Bucs would then end up at 9-7. The Bucs were an interesting story early in the year, but my predictions reflect my belief that the story is now over.
DETROIT LIONS. Currently 4-5. Not really a contender anymore, but I am just including them because they are in the NFC Central with a record better than 1-8. Home games against Minnesota, Indy, Chicago and the NY Jets. Away games at Washington, Miami and Minnesota. I see the Lions going 4-3, losing to Washington, Miami and Minnesota. The Lions would end up at 8-8.
SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS. Currently 8-1. Home games against Carolina, San Diego, Minnesota and Denver. Away games at Philadelphia, Kansas City and Seattle. I see them going 4-3, to finish at 12-4. I predict losses to Philadelphia, Kansas City and Denver. (But I sure wish they had lost today to the Cowboys.) The interesting thing about the 49ers schedule is that they are now all out of "byes," with the possible exception of the San Diego game. Even though I think they will win 4 more games, certainly the Panthers, Vikings and Seahawks are each capable of beating the 49ers. Be that as it may, I hope I am not being overly optimistic in predicting 3 losses.
CAROLINA PANTHERS. Currently 5-4. Trying desperately to crawl back in the race after a miserable start. Home games against New Orleans, Green Bay and St. Louis. Away games at Denver, San Francisco, St. Louis and Dallas. I see a record of 3-4, for a total of 8-8. The losses would come against Denver, San Francisco, Dallas and Green Bay.
NEW YORK GIANTS. Currently 6-3. Quietly becoming a significant contender. Home games against Arizona, Tampa Bay and Washington. Away games at Tennessee, Washington, Philadelphia and Dallas. I predict losses against Washington and Dallas, for a 5-2 record and a total of 11-5.
WASHINGTON REDSKINS. Currently 5-4. Home games against Detroit, NY Giants, St. Louis and Philadelphia. Away games at Dallas, Arizona and NY Giants. I think they will go 5-2, losing to Dallas and the Giants on the road, for a total record of 10-6.
DALLAS COWBOYS. Currently 4-5. Not really a contender anymore, but I had to include them here for frame of reference. Home games against Arizona, Washington, Tennessee, Carolina and NY Giants. Away games at Green Bay and Cincinnati. In making my predictions, I initially came up with a 6-1 record, with a loss only to Green Bay, for a total record of 10-6. But that just can't be right. This team is not good enough to go 6-1. They will find a way to lose 1 or 2 games to teams like Arizona, Carolina, the Giants or Cincinnati. They will end up with a record something like 8-8.
If these predictions come true, the Packers will win the all-important home field advantage. But the 49ers are (to state the obvious) the team with the best shot to knock the Packers out of home field advantage. So root like crazy against the 49ers, every week. The only other serious challenger I see in the NFC is the Vikings. That game on December 1 at the Metrodome could not only have large implications for the home field advantage, it could end up deciding the division winner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
