this game reminded me of BOTH bears games

slowsinistermo

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Messages
125
Reaction score
0
the way this game started didn't look well..brutal weather, our offense starting slow, and the opponent driving down for 2 fgs handling it better than us...much like the second game in chicago when we trailed 6-0, we came up with a big play to make it 7-6 (Driver's 90 yder here and grant's 50 some odd yder there) and we thinnk were totally in business and are ready to take control...Then locked in a 20-20 tie after leading at half, there are about 10 mins or so left, in which the teams exchange punts, battle for field position and it seemed the first team to score would be the victor, and our offense can get absolutely nothing going.....ring a bell? it seemed EXACTLY like the bears game in week 5? when finally griese got us on that td making it 27-20.....This correlations are really insignificant, but it was at these points when i really starting feeling uncomfortable about this game
 

Danreb

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 11, 2006
Messages
574
Reaction score
0
Location
San Jose, CA
Not even close.

The first game was winnable.

The second one wasn't.

This one was just stolen. Flat out. But the Packers' youth deserved this loss. It's okay. It'll be our reason to win it all next year.
 

DoddPower

Nick Perry is watching you, NFL QB's!
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
817
Reaction score
21
Location
Raleigh, N.C
I started feeling really bad after the two field goals, lack of stops by the D, and then the one big play to driver. It really reminded me of the beginning of the last bears game. I even mentioned it to the folks I was watching the game with. I was like, "I'm glad we scored, but something just doesn't feel right!"

heh. oh well. On to next year.
 

Fuzznuts

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
561
Reaction score
1
This pretty much sums it up...

[from another forum..]
This was a TEAM LOSS, not one I can put on any one player.

I think its safe to say we did not play well. The Giants came in and made it a priority to stop the run and make us a one trick pony. It worked. Our offensive line was not able to open holes early and their linebackers were very disapplined and gave Grant no cutback lanes. Early on, we burnt them a few times on passing plays incorporating play action run fakes as their safeties came up to defend it. But as the game went on and they saw they didn't need to help out their front seven stop the run, their safeties stopped biting on the play action and stayed back. Unfortunately, the label "finesse" might well apply to our run blocking. We are not a smash mouth run blocking football team and until we can fix that we will have trouble running the ball in games like this.

Their defensive backs also played much closer to the line of scrimmage than they did against Dallas, bumping our receivers alot and taking away alot of the short stuff on the passing game.

Our offensive line did pass block well. Farve had more time than I thought he would have but the Giants did a very good job of filling their rush lanes so that Favre couldn't step through and pass the oncoming lineman to gain a good line of sight to our receivers which is one of Brett's true strengths. On top of that Brett became impatient in the second half when I think he sensed he had to make a play because the offense was sputtering and the defense was tiring.

This was simply, a great defensive gameplan by the Giants defensive coordinator and we did not do well against it. I trust McCarthy (gameplan) and Thompson (obtaining players) will note our this big area of need (improved run blocking) and do something about it.

I won't go into the defense here, but they too contributed mightily to this loss.

The Giants were the better team on this day...period...and yet we STILL almost won this game. That in itself is very surprising. They dominated us and yet we still had our chances at the end

...and another...

The pass protection was very good. All things considering, Brett did about as much as a man could. In the 4th qtr and OT, the giants didnt and werent going to blitz much because they didnt have to. The pack werent moving the ball well at all. They couldnt run, and Favre was a little inconsistent with his passing. Some were perfect, and some defintiley were not. But that is to be expected in that kind of weather, and throwing what they were trying to throw. The g-men sat back in coverage, and let favre try to beat them. Favre looked old, and he looked cold at that point. Then in ot, he just made an errant pass. In this cold of conditions, favre isnt the same. I would love for him to come back because there arent many games that cold. But, that about sums it up.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
I agree with it looking like the second Bears game, not the first.
The Giants played better in the awful weather then we did, just as the Bears did in Chicago.
I don't think we are a "bad weather" team anymore.
 

Heatherthepackgirl

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
2,274
Reaction score
0
Location
Fontana, CA
I dont know if the weather had anything to do with it IMO, we just didnt play well simple as that. But it was similar to the second Bears game. Do you guys think we went away from the play calling that we do to win games? Thats what it seemed to me to be.
 

packerfan4ever

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
39
Location
wisconsin
this game was bad but i do have to say they make it look like the giants were all that and to a point they were but we did come back and tie the game,if the giants were as good as everyone says they should have done what the bears done not win by 3,they just got lucky in the in when thir kicker new this one he better get,i think our team needs to get college out in is not a help and i think he has had time to improve he is what hes going to be i do hope giants beat the pats
 

Brady

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
The screen was not working at all, they should have abandoned that earlier.
 

TheKanataThrilla

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 24, 2007
Messages
320
Reaction score
0
Location
Kanata, Ontario
I have to admit when all the talk about the bad weather was going on, I was not happy as the second Chicago game was fresh in my memory. I am just wondering what the organization can do to make us a better cold weather team? I guess improve run blocking is a given, but should we also start looking at kids who play in the Northern Colleges and are used to the bad weather?
 

retiredgrampa

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
804
Reaction score
0
Location
phoenix AZ
I'm sure that this will sound too simplistic but our big weakness is in the guards and at center. Especially the inability of the guards to move and contain people. Colledge just doesn't have the strength to overpower anybody. Now, perhaps he is a LT in waiting but he is a liability at G. Wells is an intelligent fighter in there but his size will always limit him. We have no idea if Barbre is the future but so far I'm not too hopeful. Look for more of the same next year unless TT gets Faneca here to plug the hole.
 

TheKanataThrilla

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 24, 2007
Messages
320
Reaction score
0
Location
Kanata, Ontario
I'm sure that this will sound too simplistic but our big weakness is in the guards and at center. Especially the inability of the guards to move and contain people. Colledge just doesn't have the strength to overpower anybody. Now, perhaps he is a LT in waiting but he is a liability at G. Wells is an intelligent fighter in there but his size will always limit him. We have no idea if Barbre is the future but so far I'm not too hopeful. Look for more of the same next year unless TT gets Faneca here to plug the hole.

There are many of us who are pushing for the Faneca signing, but it seems with Green Bay's track record it will not be in management's to-do list unfortunately.
 
OP
OP
S

slowsinistermo

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Messages
125
Reaction score
0
i dont know how you can say going back and forth at 20-20 didn't make you think of the Bears game at home
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
I'm sure that this will sound too simplistic but our big weakness is in the guards and at center. Especially the inability of the guards to move and contain people. Colledge just doesn't have the strength to overpower anybody. Now, perhaps he is a LT in waiting but he is a liability at G. Wells is an intelligent fighter in there but his size will always limit him. We have no idea if Barbre is the future but so far I'm not too hopeful. Look for more of the same next year unless TT gets Faneca here to plug the hole.

In the offseason, OG BETTER be a priority. It's the position that's holding us back. We lost the game on the lines.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top