ImageImage

Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation

User avatar
chuckleslove
RealGM
Posts: 18,566
And1: 1,128
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
Location: In an RV down by the river
Contact:
     

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#81 » by chuckleslove » Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:11 am

RRyder823 wrote:
chuckleslove wrote:The Eagles had a bad defense in 2010 but the Steelers, Bears and Falcons all had top 5 scoring defenses in 2010

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/y ... 10/opp.htm

You make a lot of terrible posts but that might be the worst because it is easy to verify that you literally just made **** up out of thin air


My bad. I probably should've looked that up also but just was being lazy


I was talking about Godgers not you, you just snuck a post in while I was pulling up the data I agree with your post :P
I'm dealing with cancer, it sucks, can follow along for updates if that's your thing: Chuck's cancer Go Fund Me page
RRyder823
General Manager
Posts: 8,949
And1: 5,003
Joined: May 06, 2014
   

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#82 » by RRyder823 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:11 am

Bigger point im trying to make is this though.

Since our bye week the offence has played 4 bad quarters of football...The entire Buffalo game

Since our bye week our D has played 2 bad quarters of football..... 2nd half of the Falcons game

Ill just go ahead n ask with as many quarters of football played since the bye week how is it exactly that 6 bad combined quarters, between the O n the D, got people not liking our chances at all??? Seattle aint no joke but neither are we
HKPackFan
RealGM
Posts: 15,528
And1: 10,868
Joined: Jan 14, 2014
Location: Hong Kong
   

Re: Playoff Scenario Thread 

Post#83 » by HKPackFan » Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:55 am

Godgers wrote:
RRyder823 wrote:
Godgers wrote:Packers a have a slim chance of beating Seattle at home. Same goes for the whole NFL. I don't even think the Packers would beat the Cardinals with their 3rd string QB.

Only chance Packers have at a super bowl is if they can avoid a top 10 defense. Playoffs have to setup and fall perfectly for the Packers just like in 2010.

I am sure the Packers offense will light up the Bucs. And people will be like the Bills game was a fluke and there back on track. They will win a close one in Detroit because the Lions secondary is horrible. People will say see they beat a top defense and we should RELAX.

We'll play the Cardinals in our first game in the playoffs and lose to a 3rd string QB.


Please explain to me how thing fell perfectly for us in 2010?

We beat the 3 seed, 1 seed and then the 2 seed on the road to the SB and then im pretty confident the Steelers were at least the 2 seed in the AFC. Pittsburgh's D was ranked number one I believe and the Bears werent no joke on D either. So what matchup broke right for us to win???

The only one I can think of is Seattle knocking off New Orleans in the wildcard round but thats reaching more then a lil bit. They still wouldve had to beat Chicago in Chicago before we wouldve played them.

So once again. What matchup broke our way during that run????

Answer. None did...... We just played better then everyone else


No Giants thanks to Jackson's punt return. Avoided any top 10 defenses. 49ers and Seahawks were not good yet.



Complaining we didn't face anyone good onto the way to the Superbowl is like saying the 1996 Superbowl team was just lucky because we avoided the 90's dynasty Cowboys (who we hadn't beat in a zillion tries including that season) in the playoffs.


The 2010 team was anything but lucky. They had the worst luck. Always someone getting injured, always losing in OT. I never wanted to go to OT ever again after the AZ playoff loss prior and then 2 OT losses in in 2010, I was like, "please God no more OTs!!!" That was a team that constantly dealt with obstacles, bad luck, and injuries, but they persevered. That was what was so great about them, besides everything NOT going for them, they still fought on, believed in themselves, and came out on top, despite all the odds. I don't understand how anyone can imply the 2010 team had the superbowl fall into their lap.
#FreeChuckDiesel
User avatar
rilamann
RealGM
Posts: 27,700
And1: 15,232
Joined: Jun 20, 2003
Location: Damn that rilamann!!
     

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#84 » by rilamann » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:35 am

El Duderino wrote:
rilamann wrote:
Godgers wrote:Different expectations for every team. Making the playoffs is not a good season for the Packers.



Exactly,when you have the best QB in the league the standard should be higher than simply ''getting in''.

Like Paul Allen once said... ''this is not Detroit,man''.


I get that, but having an elite QB shouldn't mean fans just expect multiple Super Bowl wins. Look at history

Marino zero rings

Steve Young only one and IMO he just might be the most underrated QB ever

Peyton Manning one ring, less than his far inferior brother Eli

Favre only one

Elway didn't win a title until he was more of a game manager for a great running team

While Brady has three, the last came in 2005 even though they've won roughly 11-15 games a year since that last title.

It's really hard for any team to win the Super Bowl in a given season. So many things can factor into why one team wins it, while another loses in the playoffs. Everything from lots of injuries, simply having a bad game, some bad luck in a playoff game via a flukey play or two, a bad matchup, being really good on only one side of the ball, etc.

Hell, over the last say 10 years, quite a few Super Bowl winners ended up missing the playoffs entirely the next year. A number of people picked the Saints as the team to reach the Super Bowl out of the NFC this year and they might finish 6-10 with Brees and Sean Peyton.

I sure hope Rodgers wins at least one more title before he eventually retires, but he would be far from the exception of being an elite QB who only won one ring or even zero rings, while Trent Dilfer/Flacco each have one and Eli Manning has two.



I was talking more in terms of being one and done and maybe winning a playoff game against a team that is not quarterbacked by Joe Webb.

If we are one and done again,or get humiliated in the playoffs again this season,McCarthy has to be held accountable and not given the ''well he got us in the playoffs'' pass.The Packers are too good of a team for that.

I understand that we're not going to win the Super Bowl every season and I obviously don't expect that,but I don't want the prime of Rodgers career to be defined by the Packers being a one and done team that never comes through in the playoffs every season either.

I think the Packers as a team lack some mental toughness but I don't really buy into the ''soft'' thing that always comes up after we get smashed in the playoffs every season.I think the Packers failures in the playoffs have a lot to do with the fact McCarthy is just not that great of a head coach.

In the playoffs you're facing good to great defenses and you can no longer simply rely on the greatness of Aaron Rodgers to carry you though a game like you can in say week 7 against a mediocre team.In the playoffs when McCarthy is forced to actually COACH and make adjustments and win mind games with the guy across the field he comes up short and that's a big reason (not the only reason) why the Packers have come up short in the playoffs.

Now I'll give Mike McCarthy credit when it's due and he did out-coach the great Bill Belichick about a month ago in a win over the Patriots so you can say McCarthy is capable but if the Packers are one and done in the playoffs for 4th time in 6 seasons it's going to start getting comical.
Giannis Antetokounmpo wrote:You're out here reffing like Marc Davis and ****
User avatar
chuckleslove
RealGM
Posts: 18,566
And1: 1,128
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
Location: In an RV down by the river
Contact:
     

Re: Playoff Scenario Thread 

Post#85 » by chuckleslove » Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:09 pm

HKPackFan wrote:Complaining we didn't face anyone good onto the way to the Superbowl is like saying the 1996 Superbowl team was just lucky because we avoided the 90's dynasty Cowboys (who we hadn't beat in a zillion tries including that season) in the playoffs.



It's worse than that, it is factually false as I posted the defensive ratings. In the playoffs we faced the Eagles(22nd in scoring defense), Falcons(5th in scoring defense), Bears(4th in scoring defense), and Steelers(1st in scoring defense).

They were also the top 3 seeds in the NFC and the #2 seed in the AFC. We didn't run in to any cupcakes in the playoffs and to say we did is BS.

Did we have some things go our way to even get in the playoffs as the #6 seed? Sure but that is hardly relevant considering how many things went against us that season particularly from an injury standpoint. I believe we finished the season with 15 people on IR.
I'm dealing with cancer, it sucks, can follow along for updates if that's your thing: Chuck's cancer Go Fund Me page
Greatness
RealGM
Posts: 12,636
And1: 4,556
Joined: Aug 23, 2009
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#86 » by Greatness » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:33 pm

If we take care of business on Sunday, we have a very favourable scenario. Either home for the Cards or Falcons/Panthers in round 2 while Seattle faces in my opinion one of the two teams that can present them the biggest problems (Lions or Cowboys).
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 35,595
And1: 4,452
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#87 » by Kerb Hohl » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:35 pm

Greatness wrote:If we take care of business on Sunday, we have a very favourable scenario. Either home for the Cards or Falcons/Panthers in round 2 while Seattle faces in my opinion one of the two teams that can present them the biggest problems (Lions or Cowboys).


Seattle cannot face the Cowboys (assuming they get the 3 seed and assuming that the Packers are the 2/Seattle 1).
El Duderino
RealGM
Posts: 20,545
And1: 1,328
Joined: May 30, 2005
Location: Working on pad level

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#88 » by El Duderino » Wed Dec 24, 2014 3:03 am

rilamann wrote:
I was talking more in terms of being one and done and maybe winning a playoff game against a team that is not quarterbacked by Joe Webb.

If we are one and done again,or get humiliated in the playoffs again this season,McCarthy has to be held accountable and not given the ''well he got us in the playoffs'' pass.The Packers are too good of a team for that.

I understand that we're not going to win the Super Bowl every season and I obviously don't expect that,but I don't want the prime of Rodgers career to be defined by the Packers being a one and done team that never comes through in the playoffs every season either.

I think the Packers as a team lack some mental toughness but I don't really buy into the ''soft'' thing that always comes up after we get smashed in the playoffs every season.I think the Packers failures in the playoffs have a lot to do with the fact McCarthy is just not that great of a head coach.

In the playoffs you're facing good to great defenses and you can no longer simply rely on the greatness of Aaron Rodgers to carry you though a game like you can in say week 7 against a mediocre team.In the playoffs when McCarthy is forced to actually COACH and make adjustments and win mind games with the guy across the field he comes up short and that's a big reason (not the only reason) why the Packers have come up short in the playoffs.

Now I'll give Mike McCarthy credit when it's due and he did out-coach the great Bill Belichick about a month ago in a win over the Patriots so you can say McCarthy is capable but if the Packers are one and done in the playoffs for 4th time in 6 seasons it's going to start getting comical.


I just don't buy the Packers "lacking some mental toughness" angle when it comes to their playoff losses. Sounds to much like a typical sports talk radio caller cliche with zero substance to it. There were far more tangible reasons for each playoff loss and victory than what you said.

You just blame or credit head coaches in football much more than i do. For example, after the Saint won the title, Sean Peyton was labeled the next great head coach. I don't think Peyton suddenly got stupid since and that's why the Saints finished 6-10. Their defense lacks talent and Brees threw some bad picks at the worst time. Peyton didn''t. McCarthy didn't make Grant, Kuhn, and Rodgers fumble in the playoff loss the Giants after finishing the season with the least amount of turnovers. Those three guys did. Pete Carroll is probably a good head coach, but that Seattle defense has high quality talent at nearly every position and a very solid offense.

When you get in playoff games, coaches matter, but only to a degree. It's the players who mainly win or lose games. They are the ones who make or miss tackles. Who fumble or don't. Who beat the lineman in front of them or who get stuck on blocks. McCarthy or any other coach doesn't control who fumbles or whiffs on a block allowing a free pass rusher. They put together game plans and it's up to players to execute it.

Sure, sometimes a coach can put together an obviously terrible game plan as happened in the first 49ers playoff loss where Capers defense looked terribly unprepared for the read option and he kept playing man coverage in the secondary, giving Kaepernick huge areas to run for first downs. Overall though, San Fran had better well rounded rosters in both wins over the Packers. The offense scored 45 points in the playoff loss to Arizona. Jennings dropped a game winning TD right before the killer strip sack in that game. Was that the coach's or Jennings fault for dropping it?

Look around the NFL and who are the head coaches that are clearly a cut above everyone else besides Bill Belichick? Bruce Arians is getting lots of pub, but it's the Todd Bowles run defense who kept Arizona in most games. Pete Carroll seems a fun guy to play for, but they are most penalized team in the NFL. When the Packers actually had a good defense to go with the offense, they won it all. If you can give me some tangible things besides maybe thinking it was a mistake to keep Capers so long as evidence to blame McCarthy and not super vague stuff like "lacking some mental toughness", i'll gladly listen to what you say. Or if you can explain how exactly any coach prevents players from fumbling three times on game day even though the team rarely ever fumbled during the season?
Greatness
RealGM
Posts: 12,636
And1: 4,556
Joined: Aug 23, 2009
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#89 » by Greatness » Wed Dec 24, 2014 6:14 am

Kerb Hohl wrote:
Greatness wrote:If we take care of business on Sunday, we have a very favourable scenario. Either home for the Cards or Falcons/Panthers in round 2 while Seattle faces in my opinion one of the two teams that can present them the biggest problems (Lions or Cowboys).


Seattle cannot face the Cowboys (assuming they get the 3 seed and assuming that the Packers are the 2/Seattle 1).

Doesn't the winner of the 3/6 matchup face the 1 seed?
HKPackFan
RealGM
Posts: 15,528
And1: 10,868
Joined: Jan 14, 2014
Location: Hong Kong
   

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#90 » by HKPackFan » Wed Dec 24, 2014 6:50 am

Greatness wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:
Greatness wrote:If we take care of business on Sunday, we have a very favourable scenario. Either home for the Cards or Falcons/Panthers in round 2 while Seattle faces in my opinion one of the two teams that can present them the biggest problems (Lions or Cowboys).


Seattle cannot face the Cowboys (assuming they get the 3 seed and assuming that the Packers are the 2/Seattle 1).

Doesn't the winner of the 3/6 matchup face the 1 seed?




They reshuffle the bracket so that the #1 seed ALWAYS get the lowest seed left after the wildcard round. If Dallas #3 survives then they automatically go to the #2 GB. And Seattle gets the leftovers of the NFC South/AZ mess.
#FreeChuckDiesel
HKPackFan
RealGM
Posts: 15,528
And1: 10,868
Joined: Jan 14, 2014
Location: Hong Kong
   

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#91 » by HKPackFan » Wed Dec 24, 2014 7:22 am

El Duderino wrote:
rilamann wrote:
I was talking more in terms of being one and done and maybe winning a playoff game against a team that is not quarterbacked by Joe Webb.

If we are one and done again,or get humiliated in the playoffs again this season,McCarthy has to be held accountable and not given the ''well he got us in the playoffs'' pass.The Packers are too good of a team for that.

I understand that we're not going to win the Super Bowl every season and I obviously don't expect that,but I don't want the prime of Rodgers career to be defined by the Packers being a one and done team that never comes through in the playoffs every season either.

I think the Packers as a team lack some mental toughness but I don't really buy into the ''soft'' thing that always comes up after we get smashed in the playoffs every season.I think the Packers failures in the playoffs have a lot to do with the fact McCarthy is just not that great of a head coach.

In the playoffs you're facing good to great defenses and you can no longer simply rely on the greatness of Aaron Rodgers to carry you though a game like you can in say week 7 against a mediocre team.In the playoffs when McCarthy is forced to actually COACH and make adjustments and win mind games with the guy across the field he comes up short and that's a big reason (not the only reason) why the Packers have come up short in the playoffs.

Now I'll give Mike McCarthy credit when it's due and he did out-coach the great Bill Belichick about a month ago in a win over the Patriots so you can say McCarthy is capable but if the Packers are one and done in the playoffs for 4th time in 6 seasons it's going to start getting comical.


I just don't buy the Packers "lacking some mental toughness" angle when it comes to their playoff losses. Sounds to much like a typical sports talk radio caller cliche with zero substance to it. There were far more tangible reasons for each playoff loss and victory than what you said.

You just blame or credit head coaches in football much more than i do. For example, after the Saint won the title, Sean Peyton was labeled the next great head coach. I don't think Peyton suddenly got stupid since and that's why the Saints finished 6-10. Their defense lacks talent and Brees threw some bad picks at the worst time. Peyton didn''t. McCarthy didn't make Grant, Kuhn, and Rodgers fumble in the playoff loss the Giants after finishing the season with the least amount of turnovers. Those three guys did. Pete Carroll is probably a good head coach, but that Seattle defense has high quality talent at nearly every position and a very solid offense.

When you get in playoff games, coaches matter, but only to a degree. It's the players who mainly win or lose games. They are the ones who make or miss tackles. Who fumble or don't. Who beat the lineman in front of them or who get stuck on blocks. McCarthy or any other coach doesn't control who fumbles or whiffs on a block allowing a free pass rusher. They put together game plans and it's up to players to execute it.

Sure, sometimes a coach can put together an obviously terrible game plan as happened in the first 49ers playoff loss where Capers defense looked terribly unprepared for the read option and he kept playing man coverage in the secondary, giving Kaepernick huge areas to run for first downs. Overall though, San Fran had better well rounded rosters in both wins over the Packers. The offense scored 45 points in the playoff loss to Arizona. Jennings dropped a game winning TD right before the killer strip sack in that game. Was that the coach's or Jennings fault for dropping it?

Look around the NFL and who are the head coaches that are clearly a cut above everyone else besides Bill Belichick? Bruce Arians is getting lots of pub, but it's the Todd Bowles run defense who kept Arizona in most games. Pete Carroll seems a fun guy to play for, but they are most penalized team in the NFL. When the Packers actually had a good defense to go with the offense, they won it all. If you can give me some tangible things besides maybe thinking it was a mistake to keep Capers so long as evidence to blame McCarthy and not super vague stuff like "lacking some mental toughness", i'll gladly listen to what you say. Or if you can explain how exactly any coach prevents players from fumbling three times on game day even though the team rarely ever fumbled during the season?



I agree with this and I'd like to point out, with all the talk of the 49ers beating us in the playoffs, just remember 1 year ago the Packers had 15 players on IR, including Bulaga, and Finley. The 49ers had a clean bill of health heading into that game yet, Rodgers was 1 week removed from resting a broken collarbone, similar with Cobb and a broken leg. NOT TO MENTION, our BEST defender Clay Mathews did not play that game. On top of it Shields and Neal went down in opening series. The team had NO OLBs left, and relied on Andy Mulumba! Andy Friggin Mulumba! Dude didn't even know what a football was a few years ago, and now he's the only thing left to stop Keaperdick?! AND, then EVEN HE gets INJURED!!!!!! And there's no one to back him up, so they trot him out there with 1 good knee. They literally ran out of bodies, starting using 4/3 without ever practicing it because they ran out of LBs. Despite ALL of that, the game came down a FG as time expired.

For all the talk of 49ers being tougher, they were very healthy and the Packers ran out of bodies, yet it came down to a last second FG. Now look at the 49ers this year being injured like us in previous years, and they are sitting at home. Mental toughness doesn't amount to much when you don't have a healthy squad. I'd take having a healthy squad over any other vague variable heading into the playoffs.

Talent and health are pretty important for the post-season, it's not the only thing, but it's extremely important. I see the Packers as being in the top 4 teams this year and they are finally healthy. I think they have a legitimate shot, of course they would be an underdog if they ended up in Seattle, but they do have a shot.
#FreeChuckDiesel
El Duderino
RealGM
Posts: 20,545
And1: 1,328
Joined: May 30, 2005
Location: Working on pad level

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#92 » by El Duderino » Thu Dec 25, 2014 7:44 am

HKPackFan wrote:
I agree with this and I'd like to point out, with all the talk of the 49ers beating us in the playoffs, just remember 1 year ago the Packers had 15 players on IR, including Bulaga, and Finley. The 49ers had a clean bill of health heading into that game yet, Rodgers was 1 week removed from resting a broken collarbone, similar with Cobb and a broken leg. NOT TO MENTION, our BEST defender Clay Mathews did not play that game. On top of it Shields and Neal went down in opening series. The team had NO OLBs left, and relied on Andy Mulumba! Andy Friggin Mulumba! Dude didn't even know what a football was a few years ago, and now he's the only thing left to stop Keaperdick?! AND, then EVEN HE gets INJURED!!!!!! And there's no one to back him up, so they trot him out there with 1 good knee. They literally ran out of bodies, starting using 4/3 without ever practicing it because they ran out of LBs. Despite ALL of that, the game came down a FG as time expired.

For all the talk of 49ers being tougher, they were very healthy and the Packers ran out of bodies, yet it came down to a last second FG. Now look at the 49ers this year being injured like us in previous years, and they are sitting at home. Mental toughness doesn't amount to much when you don't have a healthy squad. I'd take having a healthy squad over any other vague variable heading into the playoffs.

Talent and health are pretty important for the post-season, it's not the only thing, but it's extremely important. I see the Packers as being in the top 4 teams this year and they are finally healthy. I think they have a legitimate shot, of course they would be an underdog if they ended up in Seattle, but they do have a shot.


The lasting image i have from that 49ers game was Mulumba on one good leg desperately trying to chase down Kaepernick before he got that basically game ending scramble first down on like 3rd and 7. If my memory is correct, we were so out of bodies at OLB that Capers had to play Datone Jones there.

FWIW, i don't completely absolve McCarthy in each of the playoff losses. In the first playoff loss to San Fran, while it was Capers who ran the defense and called alignments during the game, a head coach has to be in tune with the plan on each side of the ball, even if it's an offensive head coach knowing what the defensive coordinator is planning to do. For example, Belichick is a defensive coach and likely will spend more time game planning on that side of the ball before a playoff game, but i'm pretty certain that he'd also have input to some degree on the offensive game plan. So while i blame Capers more for that debacle in San Fran, McCarthy wouldn't escape from any blame to me given just how badly the defense was unprepared for what the 49ers were doing that day.

Not only that, the lack of adjusting was just as bad as the initial game plan. I still remember even the announcers, especially Aikman i think being totally baffled as Capers continued using heavy doses of man coverage and Kaepernick just pulling the ball down and running for big gains as our secondary guys along with some linebackers chasing receivers way downfield with their backs to Kaepernick running wild. There clearly have been some talent deficiencies and key injuries on defense over the Thompson/McCarthy tenure which helped contribute to playoff losses, but that disaster in San Fran was one of the more glaring examples you'll see of a head coach calling plays or a coordinator being totally unprepared for what the other team was going to run, and then on top of that, failing badly to adjust. Capers was bent over the sink and prison raped that afternoon on a level you often don't see in a playoff game involving two good teams. In fact, i thought he might gets fired for it.
User avatar
rilamann
RealGM
Posts: 27,700
And1: 15,232
Joined: Jun 20, 2003
Location: Damn that rilamann!!
     

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#93 » by rilamann » Thu Dec 25, 2014 10:33 am

I fully understand that you obviously have to have talent to win and have success,but when you have the talent,which McCarthy does,it's the coach's job to put that talent and the team in the best position to succeed and win games.

And I don't feel that McCarthy does that on a consistent basis with the offense,the greatness of Rodgers covers a lot of that up....in the big games vs the good teams not so much.

Take the Buffalo game as the most recent example.Rodgers was having a bad game and when he did make some nice passes the receivers were dropping everything,the passing game took a collective ****.Meanwhile you have an elite back in Eddie Lacy and a solid back in James Starks who were both getting some nice runs on the ground.So what does McCarthy do? He goes away from the run and forces the issue passing the ball with Rodgers having his worst day as a pro.

That's not putting your talent in the best position to succeed given the situation.Keeping things simple and adjusting your game plan to the situation is not one of McCarthy's strongest suits.And I don't think McCarthy isn't a smart coach,IMO he's just too stubborn and arrogant.

If McCarthy sticks with the run vs Buffalo (or if we have an elite coach) we probably win that game and we probably get the #1 seed and we probably ride the HFA to the Super Bowl.Instead now we're probably going to have to go to Seattle and more than likely get destroyed.

And what makes it worse is the fact Lacy is a tough physical runner who can wear a defense a down,you could have had Buffalo's defense gassed on and their heels late in that game.Then maybe you have some easier big play opportunity in the passing game.

But I guess that would have made too much sense for McCarthy.

Like I've been saying,when Rodgers is just off or if he's not having a great game because we're playing a good defense and McCarthy can't just ride him and he actually has to COACH it shows up that he's far from elite.Not terrible but not elite.
Giannis Antetokounmpo wrote:You're out here reffing like Marc Davis and ****
El Duderino
RealGM
Posts: 20,545
And1: 1,328
Joined: May 30, 2005
Location: Working on pad level

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#94 » by El Duderino » Sat Dec 27, 2014 6:42 am

rilamann wrote:I fully understand that you obviously have to have talent to win and have success,but when you have the talent,which McCarthy does,it's the coach's job to put that talent and the team in the best position to succeed and win games.

And I don't feel that McCarthy does that on a consistent basis with the offense,the greatness of Rodgers covers a lot of that up....in the big games vs the good teams not so much.

Take the Buffalo game as the most recent example.Rodgers was having a bad game and when he did make some nice passes the receivers were dropping everything,the passing game took a collective ****.Meanwhile you have an elite back in Eddie Lacy and a solid back in James Starks who were both getting some nice runs on the ground.So what does McCarthy do? He goes away from the run and forces the issue passing the ball with Rodgers having his worst day as a pro.


I thought we should have run the ball more in the second half also after running it so well in the first half. That said, keep in mind a few issues.

1. Twice we had good runs in the second half that were wiped out by holding calls, one of which was an awful call on Sitton. So instead of first and 10 situations, we were in 2nd and 20 yards to go, pretty much forcing passes and the end result was both drives stalling out on those series. There were other other offensive penalties in the first half half like false starts or alignment ones which again change the down/distance towards throwing vs running.

Here is the drive story in that half

1st drive-- After a 20 yard pass to Cobb, Lacy gains 10 yards, but called back via holding. Drive stalls out from being 1st and 20.

2nd drive-- Lacy runs for three yards, next play Rodgers picked off.

3rd drive-- We start at the Buffalo 2 yard line. Lacy runs for 4 yards and on 3rd down Rodgers throws for a first. Lacy runs for 2 yards and on 3rd down, 16 yard pass to Jordy. Two straight runs gain 15 yards. Pass to Cobb gains 14. Pass to Adams gains 6. Rodgers throws a pick.

4th drive-- Lacy runs for 6 on 1st down, but called back for holding. Now 1st and 20 again. After a 16 yard pass gain, run play no gain, but penalty on Buffalo. Rodgers throws to Jordy for 20 and 16 to Cobb on back to back plays. Two passes and a run fail to get a first down. FG by Crosby.

Last drive-- Rodgers stripped by Williams inside our five yard line with under 2 minutes left needing a TD..

It's not as if they barely ran the ball. The Packers ran for 158 yards, not 58.

2. The biggest issue i have with any fans who blame the play calling is that they simply have absolutely zero clue from play to play as to whether Rodgers ran the play sent into him or not. Zero clue. I've listened to Rodgers podcast many times and he once laughed when getting a fan question about some play call the fan thought McCarthy was stupid to use. Aaron said that on most play calls, he has the option to run it as called. To switch from a run to pass or pass to run. To switch from an inside run to an outside run or vice versa. Two switch from say a quick slant to a deep route. Sometimes when it looks like he's calling an audible, it's just a fake and other times an audible is so subtle nobody notices besides only a few players. Even the lineman won't know, but you claim to know somehow?

3. I don't often read the game threads anymore, way to much drama most of the time. That said, when i do read them, if McCarthy and/or Rodgers run the ball on say 1st and 2nd down without gaining many yards, followed by an incomplete pass on 3rd down, almost without fail will come screaming about what an idiot McCarthy is for being so conservative and taking the ball out of the hands of Rodgers. If he dares to run again on 1st down the next drive for only a short gain, multiple posters will practically want McCarthy lynched right that instant. Only if the runs are getting good yards, which no play caller controls, do posters not bitch and moan. If so many fans weren't such hypocrites and results only orientated on most run calls, i'd take complaints more seriously. Most aren't though. Pretty much only good runs don't bring out the pitchforks. Had we run a bunch more in the second half, but not gained good yardage, McCarthy would be shredded as an overly conservative buffoon. I've seen it countless times.
mnstinks
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,654
And1: 43
Joined: Jun 28, 2006

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#95 » by mnstinks » Sun Dec 28, 2014 6:54 pm

Holy **** you guys have a lot of free time
User avatar
WRau1
RealGM
Posts: 11,943
And1: 5,154
Joined: Apr 30, 2005
Location: Milwaukee
     

Re: Playoff Scenario & Seeding Thread 

Post#96 » by WRau1 » Sun Dec 28, 2014 7:32 pm

chuckleslove wrote:The Eagles had a bad defense in 2010 but the Steelers, Bears and Falcons all had top 5 scoring defenses in 2010

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/y ... 10/opp.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You make a lot of terrible posts but that might be the worst because it is easy to verify that you literally just made **** up out of thin air


:clap:
#FreeChuckDiesel
#FreeNowak008
#FreeNewz

Return to Green Bay Packers