GT: Pack at Bears

[bcl20]

Yeah, Capers needs to go regardless, and Coach Pad Level unless we at least make a big run in the playoffs. Hopefully the downside to these outcomes which are still by themselves unimpressive is it doesn't lull ourselves into a false sense of security as far as the problems of the f.o.

We could win the Super Bowl and I'd still be cool if McCarthy and Capers got fired. That's probably dumb but oh well.

[Bernman]

I'll gladly eat crow but we have a really bad record in close games since 2008 and haven't won an overtime game since 2007.Not saying it's all on Rodgers obviously but the negative feelings are warranted.

Lions gotta be like **** though,haha.

Yeah, and I'm saying that the negative feelings were unfounded because we don't actually have a bad record when it comes to trying to engineer a game winning drive at the end of regulation and only needing a fg especially, or even a td. The problem is what happens when it reaches OT. But there's been a ton of games where Rodgers has led the team down the field quickly for a fg attempt (sometimes td) we should make and usually do.

[bizarro]

John Fox McCarthy's his way to that loss at the end. You're 3-10 with nothing real to play for, just go for the TD and the win.

He was worried they didn't have an appropriate package for that 4th down scenario...they all involved 2 qb's and with cutler and all. I know. Ridiculous.

That's not fair. We wouldn't have even had Janis for that 2pt try. Or idk, maybe it's fair. Whatever.

It was obviously a poke. I begrudge the fact we had ALL the momentum and we didn't have a play to choose to run or not. I get Janis was injured. It just stings like all the other epic collapses. Thankful they dodged a bullet today, but, I'm also fully aware we typically come out the other end.

Fox has no excuse. You have to go for the win there. At least show your fans you are trying to take victory not eeek it out in OT.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

John Fox McCarthy's his way to that loss at the end. You're 3-10 with nothing real to play for, just go for the TD and the win.

I think he was thinking about his job and got conservative, but they surely would have won the game had they gone for it there.

Surely? I would say 50/50 at best. It's a condensed field. The packers were mostly struggling with the 5-10 yard passes but those go away at towards the goal line. I don't think it was as easy of a score as this board would say. I do agree he had nothing to lose so might as well do it.

[trwi7]

They should've gone for it because there was a decent chance they get the ball back in pretty good field position if they don't get it. Packers would go ultra conservative in play calling and with 2 timeouts, if they made a stop, they could've gotten the ball back with around 30 seconds and the Packers punting deep in their own territory. Possibly from deep in the end zone.

We then go back into our same awful defensive coverage and a couple of 10 yard sideline passes later and they're likely back in FG range, albeit a further and much more difficult FG attempt.

[thomchatt3rton]

He was worried they didn't have an appropriate package for that 4th down scenario...they all involved 2 qb's and with cutler and all. I know. Ridiculous.

That's not fair. We wouldn't have even had Janis for that 2pt try. Or idk, maybe it's fair. Whatever.

It was obviously a poke. I begrudge the fact we had ALL the momentum and we didn't have a play to choose to run or not. I get Janis was injured. It just stings like all the other near collapses. Thankful they dodged a billet today, but, I'm also fully aware we typically come out the other end.

Fox has no excuse. You have to go for the win there. At least show your fans you are trying to take victory not eeek it out in OT.

Idk. I feel like this something that fans think, but coaches probably don't. Maybe it's wrong coaches don't think this way, idk.

I think at home, you play for OT where you supposedly have an advantage. Plus, we weren't moving the ball well, had no time-outs, Rodgers is hurt etc. I'm sure that's what Fox was thinking was thinking about.

[bizarro]

That's not fair. We wouldn't have even had Janis for that 2pt try. Or idk, maybe it's fair. Whatever.

It was obviously a poke. I begrudge the fact we had ALL the momentum and we didn't have a play to choose to run or not. I get Janis was injured. It just stings like all the other near collapses. Thankful they dodged a billet today, but, I'm also fully aware we typically come out the other end.

Fox has no excuse. You have to go for the win there. At least show your fans you are trying to take victory not eeek it out in OT.

Idk. I feel like this something that fans think, but coaches probably don't. Maybe it's wrong coaches don't think this way, idk.

I think at home, you play for OT where you supposedly have an advantage. Plus, we weren't moving the ball well, had no time-outs, Rodgers is hurt etc. I'm sure that's what Fox was thinking was thinking about.

True. And, I can't get over they are 3-10. They just had the refs steal a game from them in Detroit. Regardless, the Packers snuck one today and they now control their destiny w two division games remaining. Kind of a perfect script, no?

[Bernman]

They should've gone for it because there was a decent chance they get the ball back in pretty good field position if they don't get it. Packers would go ultra conservative in play calling and with 2 timeouts, if they made a stop, they could've gotten the ball back with around 30 seconds and the Packers punting deep in their own territory. Possibly from deep in the end zone.

We then go back into our same awful defensive coverage and a couple of 10 yard sideline passes later and they're likely back in FG range, albeit a further and much more difficult FG attempt.

We would have had the ball with 1:12 to go and the Bears would have "only" had 2 TO's. With 3 runs the clock would have practically expired by the time they received the punt. 47 seconds for one play (typical 40 runoff after + an estimated 7 for the play) + 7 + 7 + 7 for 4 total downs = 68 seconds run off. 72 - 68 = 4. They'd have to already be in fg range in super cold weather, which is HIGHLY unlikely, or just resort to a hail mary. The Bears would have been pretty much done if they didn't score on 4th down, which they were underdogs for. They had a better shot tying the game and hoping our offense sputtered, which it almost did, before getting the ball back with enough time in regulation for a fg against our leaky d or facing us in OT where we had lost like 7 straight and were playing on the road. They made the right call in reality. You can make the right call and get the wrong result. That will happen when you get a 60 yard pass ripped off on you unexpectedly. Packers executed at the very end and the Bears didn't. That's why the Packers won.

[MickeyDavis]

I love that we control our density. No more counting on other teams.

[Allanon23]

It's cool that we also control our own destiny

We're not going to do anything in the playoffs anyway though.

[RiotPunch]

John Fox McCarthy's his way to that loss at the end. You're 3-10 with nothing real to play for, just go for the TD and the win.

I think he was thinking about his job and got conservative, but they surely would have won the game had they gone for it there.

Surely? I would say 50/50 at best. It's a condensed field. The packers were mostly struggling with the 5-10 yard passes but those go away at towards the goal line. I don't think it was as easy of a score as this board would say. I do agree he had nothing to lose so might as well do it.

You really felt like we had a 50% shot at stopping whatever they would have run there? I don't know. Felt like a complete implosion to me. Whatever though, we'll never know, thankfully.

[chuckleslove]

I think he was thinking about his job and got conservative, but they surely would have won the game had they gone for it there.

Surely? I would say 50/50 at best. It's a condensed field. The packers were mostly struggling with the 5-10 yard passes but those go away at towards the goal line. I don't think it was as easy of a score as this board would say. I do agree he had nothing to lose so might as well do it.

You really felt like we had a 50% shot at stopping whatever they would have run there? I don't know. Felt like a complete implosion to me. Whatever though, we'll never know, thankfully.

I mean considering they started with first and goal at the 3(yes they got backed up by a 10 yard penalty) and they didn't make it in then yes I would say the odds are better than 50/50 we stop them. They were already stopped 3 times from that point in the field, on first down before the penalty and then on 2nd and 3rd down post penalty.

[RiotPunch]

Surely? I would say 50/50 at best. It's a condensed field. The packers were mostly struggling with the 5-10 yard passes but those go away at towards the goal line. I don't think it was as easy of a score as this board would say. I do agree he had nothing to lose so might as well do it.

You really felt like we had a 50% shot at stopping whatever they would have run there? I don't know. Felt like a complete implosion to me. Whatever though, we'll never know, thankfully.

I mean considering they started with first and goal at the 3(yes they got backed up by a 10 yard penalty) and they didn't make it in then yes I would say the odds are better than 50/50 we stop them. They were already stopped 3 times from that point in the field, on first down before the penalty and then on 2nd and 3rd down post penalty.

Fair enough, just a gut feeling that they would have punched it in considering how we had been playing as a whole in the 4th.