One more trip down memory lane back to the NFCCG.....

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
1,371
Reaction score
255
The 4 scenarios that could have led to a win.

1. Kick field goal. Stop Tampa. Score Touchdown. Win.
2. Get TD on 4th down, convert 2 pt. attempt. Stop Tampa. Go to O.T.
3. Get TD on 4th down, miss 2pt. conversion. Stop Tampa. Kick FG for the win.
4. Get stopped on 4th down. Stop Tampa. Score a TD and convert 2 pt. to get into O.T.

In all 4 scenarios GB had to both score a Tuddy and stop Brady. To me the odds are higher of making the FG than making a 2 pt. conversion. Plus the FG gets you the W the 2 pt. conversion gets you O.T.
I am not saying it was definitively the correct call, but by no means was it a no brainer to go for it
Correct. No promising choices.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,164
Reaction score
2,201
The 4 scenarios that could have led to a win.

1. Kick field goal. Stop Tampa. Score Touchdown. Win.
2. Get TD on 4th down, convert 2 pt. attempt. Stop Tampa. Go to O.T.
3. Get TD on 4th down, miss 2pt. conversion. Stop Tampa. Kick FG for the win.
4. Get stopped on 4th down. Stop Tampa. Score a TD and convert 2 pt. to get into O.T.

In all 4 scenarios GB had to both score a Tuddy and stop Brady. To me the odds are higher of making the FG than making a 2 pt. conversion. Plus the FG gets you the W the 2 pt. conversion gets you O.T.
I am not saying it was definitively the correct call, but by no means was it a no brainer to go for it.

It's not about the odds being higher of kicking the field goal compared to making a two point conversion though.

Actually you need to take a look at the chances of the following scenarios:

1. Kick the field goal, stop the Bucs with them most likely getting the ball around their 25, drive approximately 75 yards for a touchdown with limited time and no timeouts left

2. Go for it on fourth down, score and convert the two point conversion and stop the Bucs afterwards

Even if the Packers don't score on fourth down they would have received the ball in better field position if they had stopped the Bucs.

I understand the first scenario results in a win while the second one only forces overtime but I would have definitely preferred them to go for it.

FWIW, according to ESPN's Win Probablity model the Packers had a 10% chance of winning the game by going for it on fourth down compared to 9.5% by kicking the field goal.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
1,371
Reaction score
255
It's not about the odds being higher of kicking the field goal compared to making a two point conversion though.

Actually you need to take a look at the chances of the following scenarios:

1. Kick the field goal, stop the Bucs with them most likely getting the ball around their 25, drive approximately 75 yards for a touchdown with limited time and no timeouts left

2. Go for it on fourth down, score and convert the two point conversion and stop the Bucs afterwards

Even if the Packers don't score on fourth down they would have received the ball in better field position if they had stopped the Bucs.

I understand the first scenario results in a win while the second one only forces overtime but I would have definitely preferred them to go for it.

FWIW, according to ESPN's Win Probablity model the Packers had a 10% chance of winning the game by going for it on fourth down compared to 9.5% by kicking the field goal.
Some argue that it would have been easier to stop Brady with it 31-31 instead of 31-26 which is nonsense. You may have to gamble more. And Brady is not just trying to run the clock out. But either way you have to get a stop. But if it is still 31-23 puts a lot less pressure on Tampa. We not only have to stop him but we have to get the ball back. And we have to get 6. And we have to get 2. And we have to do it with very little time left.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,164
Reaction score
2,201
Some argue that it would have been easier to stop Brady with it 31-31 instead of 31-26 which is nonsense. You may have to gamble more. And Brady is not just trying to run the clock out. But either way you have to get a stop. But if it is still 31-23 puts a lot less pressure on Tampa. We not only have to stop him but we have to get the ball back. And we have to get 6. And we have to get 2. And we have to do it with very little time left.

The only difference being that the Packers would have had to go for two after getting a stop and scoring a touchdown.

In that situation I would believe the chances would have been better by going for it on fourth down.

With that being said the chances of winning the game were pretty small at that point no matter what.
 

PhilaPackersFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 22, 2016
Messages
46
Reaction score
19
Location
Philadelphia
I think the Packers coaches need to watch that game, look how the Bucc's offense, and defense were lined up, and what was the most productive part of the play, and try to copy it in the Packers play scheme.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,164
Reaction score
2,201
I think the Packers coaches need to watch that game, look how the Bucc's offense, and defense were lined up, and what was the most productive part of the play, and try to copy it in the Packers play scheme.

That's not a recipe for success as the Packers' talent is different from the Bucs'.
 

AKCheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
285
Long post alert.

Before we get cranked up with the 2021 season, I finally had the stomach to re-watch the NFCCG vs Tampa.

I just cannot get over how many mistakes and uncharacteristic events went into it.

You've got:
- The King blunder
- Two Jones fumbles
- A dropped TD pass by Davante and on the same drive lost where he was in the end zone and didn't get his feet down for another TD
- Rodgers INT
- Redmond drops an INT
- St. Brown drops the 2 point conversion
- MLF choosing to kick the FG instead of going for it

Along with that, there were awful protection issues throughout most of the game. Big time issues in the secondary with Brady picking on Sullivan repeatedly on whomever he was covering, and the obvious King blunders that were game changing.

Then there's the question of why wasn't Dillon utilized more? He abused their front on the few carries he got.

I honestly think the biggest killers in this game were not being able to cash on the 3rd possession of the game where Davante screwed two plays up, then the Rodgers INT, then the King blunder, then the Jones blunder right out of the half where it gifted the Bucs another TD.

Think about it...that was 18 points on plays that were completely within our control. And 14 points on consecutive possessions with the King/Jones debacle.

And still only lost the game by 5 points.

Now...

Looking forward, I'm hoping a lot of these issues have been remedied.

The issues with the secondary:
Hopefully at least one of Stokes/SJC will be able to take over the #2 CB slot, thus sliding others down. And if nothing else, surely MLF has an understanding with Barry on how he wants to play situational defense. This is of course the first DC that he's been able to hire since he's been with the Packers. I can promise situational stuff like that was discussed. That should be a net positive by default that we won't get utter stupidity at the end of the half like we did in this game.

The issues with protection:
Hopefully Bakhtiari comes back at close to 100% of what he was before. Losing #69 was such a huge blow and made such a huge difference in multiple drives of that game that stalled out because Rodgers got blindsided. He got pressure from many angles, especially lots of issues on the right side with Wagner and Lucas friggin Patrick, but it's going to be such a luxury to have the island LT that doesn't need help protecting AR's blindside.

The slight issues with the running game:
I'm not sure the Packers will make the mistake again of not utilizing Dillon more in cold temperatures. He's a battering ram that no one wants to deal with in those situations. Then you've got the dynamic abilities of Jones and Hill. I think our running backs are even more lethal this year than last. Williams was a nice player, but the Packers are now better.

The issues with the over reliance on Davante:
I honestly think the receiver room has turned into, dare I say a strength for the Packers. IF Amari Rodgers can contribute in a reasonable way this season, and Cobb stays healthy, I think it could be special. Because you already know what you're going to get from Davante, and if what I'm hearing about MVS is true, he's really rounded the corner and could be ready to explode. And then Lazard of course just provides steadiness all throughout the playbook.

I think this team has the opportunity to be great this season. The pieces are in place for the Packers to get it done. We've got flaws, no doubt. Just like all teams. But many of the issues that plagued the Packers last year have been addressed. We'll see how it all comes to fruition.
So how’d that all work out for you? Never mind, we’ve all been there. Me? I’m hoping for solid D, a good running game and Rogers not e-ffing it up. Yeah - call me a crazy optimist
 

KiDcUdI

Cheesehead
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
378
Reaction score
171
Location
Texas
So how’d that all work out for you? Never mind, we’ve all been there. Me? I’m hoping for solid D, a good running game and Rogers not e-ffing it up. Yeah - call me a crazy optimist
You’ve gotta be a Bears fan in disguise who is still pissed Rodgers said he owns you.
 

Curly Calhoun

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 23, 2015
Messages
1,841
Reaction score
300
So how’d that all work out for you? Never mind, we’ve all been there. Me? I’m hoping for solid D, a good running game and Rogers not e-ffing it up. Yeah - call me a crazy optimist

Maybe learn how to spell the MVP quarterback's name at some point...
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top