Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 1089992" data-attributes="member: 10086">When your LT is getting beat. Don’t be calling 20-30 yard pass plays to Musgrave in the first place. If Dennis is sending Blitz packages?  Why are we trying to look 20+ down the field? Does that make a lick of sense. Respond with on your player getting beat and try adapting. Leak a TE and RB out for a 7 yard pass. Why a huge play needed? Isn’t that a low probability clock stopper? Is that smart on that scenario or should we maybe move the chains and keep the clock rolling instead?  I know that’s a strange philosophy!Also correct me but Kinnard was not the reason we lost on that drive on s check down. If we recall that play was one of our better plays as far as net yards. They did bring the fumble back because you can’t advance it, but that play was probably one of our top 5 plays in thr 3rd/4th Qtr, not the reason we lost imo.While Brandon did miss. We set him up for failure kicking from 55 yards imo. We had several tries to gain 5-10 yards range and were sending guys downfield instead of a 5 yard sideline pass. Yiu don’t need 25 yards. We needed 6-8 yards and on a 1 read. The Bears Kicker BARELY made it from 51 and he’s been red hot this season. From 55 the Bears kick was an easy miss go look. Expecting to take a FG try from 55 at below freezing with wind is like a 61-62 yarder imo.Had Brandon made the other FG?  We STILL allowed the Bears to catch up. It’s not like The Bears couldn’t go for 2pt conversions if we added in 4 points. They BEARS win by +4, not +1 or 2. They also could’ve went on 2pt we conversions if the points are different. It’s not as straight line as saying we Win that easy. Ben would’ve went for 2pt conversions he’s not going to lay down like we did.We run the ball on a delayed handoff up the middle on 2nd n 10 to open the 3rd Qtr??  Is that being assertive?  No it’s not. It didn’t work it was the 1 thing Chicago was doing well was interior DL. Exploit their secondary should’ve been our blueprint. Not delay run the middle of our opponent strength. I bet I wasn’t the only one watching the Bears stymie us inside.So yes we could’ve made every Kick including a 62 yard equivalent, but that’s not how football works. You’ve got to take advantage of every second and not go limp and limp we went to get a reasonable try to close the half. I know the score. But I don’t care!  I also know Chicago and that drive might as well been for the Win and yes, I said as much live feed. Should’ve been a high probability 5-6 yard pass leading a Receiver out of bounds. We had nobody doing a simple crosser or 6 yard down n out clock stopper.  We should’ve had 3 tries to get + yards if we get 10 yards in 2 tries. +6 out of bounds is a probability win.  We needed a couple 5 yard quick throws. We can’t get even 3,4,6 yards in 2 pass plays?</blockquote>

Verification

Members online

No members online now.

Total: 878 (members: 1, guests: 877)

Latest posts

Valuation of NFL Teams
- Latest: Pokerbrat2000
- 5 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
- Latest: Heyjoe4
- Today at 7:18 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
- Latest: Heyjoe4
- Today at 6:36 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
- Latest: Heyjoe4
- Today at 6:20 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
- Latest: OldSchool101
- Yesterday at 10:10 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum