Observations from a neutral fan

NHPatsFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
59
Reaction score
16
Just some observations from a fan who was just curious who May team could meet in the SB:

1. Settling for 3 twice in the first quarter was a killer. IMO have to go for a TD at least one of those two times and trust your D.

2. IMO got to conservative with the lead, you guys have the 2nd best QB in the NFL ! They pack needed to trust him a bit more in the second half.

3. Russell Wilson absolutely STUNK! You guys had his number all game! The D game plan was amazing and executed perfectly for 55 minutes.

All and all the Pack played well and the mishandle on the on side kick shouldn't have mattered if IMO YOUR O coordinator had played less scared.. Ie he was afraid to risk losing it this losing it.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,582
Reaction score
2,343
All and all the Pack played well and the mishandle on the on side kick shouldn't have mattered if IMO YOUR O coordinator had played less scared.. Ie he was afraid to risk losing it this losing it.

McCarthy is calling the plays for the Packers offense. And yes, he got way too conservative at the end.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
14,091
Reaction score
2,238
He did get conservative, but it was a 2 score game and all Quarless had to do was catch that 3rd and 4? pass and it was over. He didn't.

So lets say we pass and Rodgers gets sacked and we punt from deeper in our own territory. There's a sack fumble? a tipped ball for an INT? the D was selling out and jumping gaps and they were in the backfield at the snap of the ball by then, do you feel good about Rodgers running around making time to throw? I bet he just would have eat it and taken a sack giving more momentum to Seattle.

The play was there to be made and we didn't
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,582
Reaction score
2,343
He did get conservative, but it was a 2 score game and all Quarless had to do was catch that 3rd and 4? pass and it was over. He didn't.

So lets say we pass and Rodgers gets sacked and we punt from deeper in our own territory. There's a sack fumble? a tipped ball for an INT? the D was selling out and jumping gaps and they were in the backfield at the snap of the ball by then, do you feel good about Rodgers running around making time to throw? I bet he just would have eat it and taken a sack giving more momentum to Seattle.

The play was there to be made and we didn't

I´m talking about calling three straight running plays after the interception by Burnett when Seattle put extra guys in the box. I´m fine with doing it on first down but after losing four yards on it McCarthy should have put the ball in Rodgers´ hands.
 

Ceodore

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
815
Reaction score
135
Location
Dixon, IL
Pretty hard to get 5 turnovers and not win the game. I too blame McCarthy at the end for the conservative play, especially on defense. We were doing a good job of getting to the QB most of the game and then start rushing 3 at the end. We played to not lose instead of to win.
 
OP
OP
N

NHPatsFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
59
Reaction score
16
All I am saying is in my fan experience when coaches play not to lose like this, they most always end up losing.

It's one thing if you have a young QB but come on he has Aaron freakin Rogers trust one of the elites to know enough to throw it away if needed!

In the end the Pack left to many points out there, 6 points instead of 10 or 14 was huge in the first quarter alone!
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
14,091
Reaction score
2,238
I´m talking about calling three straight running plays after the interception by Burnett when Seattle put extra guys in the box. I´m fine with doing it on first down but after losing four yards on it McCarthy should have put the ball in Rodgers´ hands.
That whole series was bad, starting with having Burnett go to the ground after the INT. sure you don't want him weaving thru traffic in case the ball gets knocked out, but at least run till there is resistance before going down.
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
New England was throwing the ball down field late in the 4 quarter up by more then 30 points. Some might say well that was because it was the Colts. IMO Belichick would of gone after the Seahawks the same way. I don't think we needed to go as far as Pat's did but we had these guys on there heels. Two of there starters in there secondary were playing hurt. Some of there fans were leaving the stadium.

There was blood to smell everywhere.
 

HaHa'sRightGlove

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
46
Reaction score
1
Location
London, UK
Two scores and five minutes is not garbage time. Burnett could have made at least another 15 yards on that INT return...hell he could have houses it. I haven't seen it from the All-22 but from the replay im pretty sure I remember seeing two lineman and one of our guys in between them. I'm pretty sure the athletic Morgan Burnett can juke a lineman and still be a couple of yards clear of being touched. I don't know whether he was under instruction to go down or what, but that is inexcusable.

Whether we need to keep the clock running or not, they absolutely packed the box for those plays and we showed absolutely no desire to get a first down, we just tried to take another 2 and a half minutes off the clock and give it back to them and say "have another go".

Still in utter shock that we blew that the way we did. The amount of mistakes we made is absolutely inexcusable at this level.
 

PackManDan

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 20, 2014
Messages
78
Reaction score
7
Just some observations from a fan who was just curious who May team could meet in the SB:

1. Settling for 3 twice in the first quarter was a killer. IMO have to go for a TD at least one of those two times and trust your D.

2. IMO got to conservative with the lead, you guys have the 2nd best QB in the NFL ! They pack needed to trust him a bit more in the second half.

3. Russell Wilson absolutely STUNK! You guys had his number all game! The D game plan was amazing and executed perfectly for 55 minutes.

All and all the Pack played well and the mishandle on the on side kick shouldn't have mattered if IMO YOUR O coordinator had played less scared.. Ie he was afraid to risk losing it this losing it.

It is so easy to say when you are at the 1 or 2 yard line you should go for the TD. But it is all "hindsight is 20/20". If the Packers went for it and didn't get any points and let's say lost the game by 2 points everyone would be crying about how in that situation you just "take the points" and we should have kicked a FG. It's a lose lose. The outcome of the game will always make people question certain calls. Those same calls will never be questioned if the game is a Win. I have no problem with McCarthy just trying to get points on the board in a road playoff game. Let's be real here, if it comes down to 3 points or 0 points, everyone here would take 3. It isn't guaranteed that you will make the TD even from the 1 yard line, considering how bad our red zone has been. And yes even though a FG from the 1 yard line isn't a guarantee, it's a hell of a lot more "fool proof" than a TD. I don't blame McCarthy at all for kicking a FG there.
 
OP
OP
N

NHPatsFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
59
Reaction score
16
It is so easy to say when you are at the 1 or 2 yard line you should go for the TD. But it is all "hindsight is 20/20". If the Packers went for it and didn't get any points and let's say lost the game by 2 points everyone would be crying about how in that situation you just "take the points" and we should have kicked a FG. It's a lose lose. The outcome of the game will always make people question certain calls. Those same calls will never be questioned if the game is a Win. I have no problem with McCarthy just trying to get points on the board in a road playoff game. Let's be real here, if it comes down to 3 points or 0 points, everyone here would take 3. It isn't guaranteed that you will make the TD even from the 1 yard line, considering how bad our red zone has been. And yes even though a FG from the 1 yard line isn't a guarantee, it's a hell of a lot more "fool proof" than a TD. I don't blame McCarthy at all for kicking a FG there.

I am use to a very different style of coaching is all. BB would have went for it at least one of those times it's the type of coach he is.

Also considering how your D was playing there was a good chance of a safety or TO deep in their territory if you don't score.

Now your right it's 20/20 now, but I thought at the time settling would come back to bite the pack in the butt. .
 

mongoosev

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
175
Just some observations from a fan who was just curious who May team could meet in the SB:

1. Settling for 3 twice in the first quarter was a killer. IMO have to go for a TD at least one of those two times and trust your D.

2. IMO got to conservative with the lead, you guys have the 2nd best QB in the NFL ! They pack needed to trust him a bit more in the second half.

3. Russell Wilson absolutely STUNK! You guys had his number all game! The D game plan was amazing and executed perfectly for 55 minutes.

All and all the Pack played well and the mishandle on the on side kick shouldn't have mattered if IMO YOUR O coordinator had played less scared.. Ie he was afraid to risk losing it this losing it.

which is why this lose will forever be brandished into our minds! to be underdogs(which I did not think we were) to take on a very good defensive team and to play like we did against them and seattle's offense poor execution and not take advantage of it early in the game, and not to mention the last 5 minutes, is what makes the results of this game all that harder to accept.
 

mongoosev

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
175
It is so easy to say when you are at the 1 or 2 yard line you should go for the TD. But it is all "hindsight is 20/20". If the Packers went for it and didn't get any points and let's say lost the game by 2 points everyone would be crying about how in that situation you just "take the points" and we should have kicked a FG. It's a lose lose. The outcome of the game will always make people question certain calls. Those same calls will never be questioned if the game is a Win. I have no problem with McCarthy just trying to get points on the board in a road playoff game. Let's be real here, if it comes down to 3 points or 0 points, everyone here would take 3. It isn't guaranteed that you will make the TD even from the 1 yard line, considering how bad our red zone has been. And yes even though a FG from the 1 yard line isn't a guarantee, it's a hell of a lot more "fool proof" than a TD. I don't blame McCarthy at all for kicking a FG there.


I agree. i'm not upset about the FG attempts as I am with the blunders made in the last 5 minutes. those field goals practically won the game for pack's had not the devastating last 5 minutes had happened!
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
427
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Pretty hard to get 5 turnovers and not win the game. I too blame McCarthy at the end for the conservative play, especially on defense. We were doing a good job of getting to the QB most of the game and then start rushing 3 at the end. We played to not lose instead of to win.
I disagree. The conservative play calling that hurt was in the first half. The Packers had 4 and 1 three times and they settled for FG's each time. If they went for it all three times, made it twice and scored 14, that's still better than 9.
 

Ceodore

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
815
Reaction score
135
Location
Dixon, IL
I disagree. The conservative play calling that hurt was in the first half. The Packers had 4 and 1 three times and they settled for FG's each time. If they went for it all three times, made it twice and scored 14, that's still better than 9.

Yeah i'm not sure how i feel about not going for it. At the time i didn't hate taking the points. If they'd have gone for it and not made it, and lost by 2 or whatever, i think they'd be getting killed for not taking the field goals. Although SEA would have been starting at the 1, so in a sense it was win/win. In this case I think you're right and they should have gone for it in the do or die/ on the road scenario, but I have a hard time saying that was the reason for the loss.
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
427
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Yeah i'm not sure how i feel about not going for it. At the time i didn't hate taking the points. If they'd have gone for it and not made it, and lost by 2 or whatever, i think they'd be getting killed for not taking the field goals. Although SEA would have been starting at the 1, so in a sense it was win/win. In this case I think you're right and they should have gone for it in the do or die/ on the road scenario, but I have a hard time saying that was the reason for the loss.
But it's easy to sit here the next day and second guess the coach.
 

Sky King

158.3
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
329
Location
Out of the clear blue western skies...
Yeah i'm not sure how i feel about not going for it. At the time i didn't hate taking the points. If they'd have gone for it and not made it, and lost by 2 or whatever, i think they'd be getting killed for not taking the field goals. Although SEA would have been starting at the 1, so in a sense it was win/win. In this case I think you're right and they should have gone for it in the do or die/ on the road scenario, but I have a hard time saying that was the reason for the loss.
The wild card may have been a shift in momentum. Taking the points did not alter that. Failing to score at all may have. We'll never know.
 

Ceodore

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
815
Reaction score
135
Location
Dixon, IL
But it's easy to sit here the next day and second guess the coach.
Right, which is why i'm not killing him for taking the FGs. If there's anything i think he deserves a second guessing about, it's his general lack of a killer instinct.
 

pacmaniac

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
237
He did get conservative, but it was a 2 score game and all Quarless had to do was catch that 3rd and 4? pass and it was over. He didn't.

Quarless was coming back for the ball and I'm not sure the ball would have been spotted for a first down.
 

dbain21

Chicagoland Packer Fan
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
535
Reaction score
67
Quarless was coming back for the ball and I'm not sure the ball would have been spotted for a first down.

in addition it seemed as though the defender made a good play on the ball. Looked like he got his arm in there to hit the ball. Just what I remember seeing at the time.
 

Ceodore

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
815
Reaction score
135
Location
Dixon, IL
in addition it seemed as though the defender made a good play on the ball. Looked like he got his arm in there to hit the ball. Just what I remember seeing at the time.

That's what i saw too. IMO it would have been better for AR to just take a knee and use up some time instead of throwing to tight coverage that might not even get the 1st down.
 

dbain21

Chicagoland Packer Fan
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
535
Reaction score
67
That's what i saw too. IMO it would have been better for AR to just take a knee and use up some time instead of throwing to tight coverage that might not even get the 1st down.

Agree. On a day when a large majority of blame is going to MM...and rightfully so. I think Rodgers played quite poorly at times.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Settling for 3 twice in the first quarter was a killer. IMO have to go for a TD at least one of those two times and trust your D.
I'll never understand that logic. Going for 7 says, "we'll need every point we can get; if we happen to fail then the opponent must go 70 yards for a good chance at scoring 3."

Going for 3 expresses confidence in the defense, an expectation they'll play well enough to win a close game as McCarthy stated. Unfortunately, that confidence was misplaced.
 
Top