Must read..TD's vs. Int's.

[4thand26]

That bears game was bull and you know it. It was such a block in the back.

Not a block in the back. Favre turned his back to the oncoming 54 train and then went to the fetal position.

From jsonweb log

http://www2.jsonline.com/packer/insider ... &year=2003


Mike Sherman thought Brian Urlacher should have been penalized for pushing Favre in the back on Mike Brown’s 95-yard fumble return and sent tape of the play to the league office, but Favre was running backwards and admitted that he wasn’t attempting to make a tackle. It would seem that just like in basketball, sometimes a no-call is the best call


~~~~~



To Leroy Butler...

http://www.packers.com/news/stories/2004/09/21/2/

Leroy, Am I the only person who saw Urlacher's illegal block in the back on Favre during the fumble return? I know it means nothing today, but I'm just curious! Was I seeing things, or did Urlacher really throw an illegal block that could have changed the result of the play? - Kimberli (South Elgin, IL)

Thank you for mentioning that. I didn't want to sound like a crybaby and bring it up myself.

He definitely clipped Brett, hitting him right in the #4 on the back of his jersey. There was another case where Robert Ferguson was facemasked late in the game, and the officials missed that call too. Those are two calls that you would think the Packers would get at Lambeau Field.

The block in the back was blatant, though, and it would have changed the game completely. Chicago would have had the ball at their own 10 with the score 7-3, instead of a TD to make it 14-3, and I don't think they could have moved down the field and scored before halftime.

~~~ Homer articles??

Here is a Chi town link ( sun times )

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... _n12561473

KEYY PLAY: The Packers had a first-and-goal at the Bears 2 when Brian Urlacher stripped Ahman Green and Brown recovered at the 5. Sprung by Urlacher's block-in-the-back on Favre and escorted by Bobby Gray, Joe Odom, Michael Haynes and Israel Odonije, Brown returned the ball for a touchdown.

I remember listening to 101.1 WIXX the next day, with Larry McCaren. The first call was someone saying that it was a block in the back. Larry just laughed and said that it was not a penalty, and that fans should not think that it was. Of course, I could picture him talking with his narly finger in the air.

 

[4packgirl]

It amazes me that anyone would look at this enlightning read (Regardless of it is Right or Wrong.) as a novel and not even digest it, becuase it is longer than a simple statement.

However these same people will read 500 simple posts which takes a great deal longer than Net's forwarded article.

Is your attention span that of a retarded field mouse?

I agree with the author with some points and disagree with other points. It is still a a good read, and something this forum needs during a dry off season.

Go ahead... Read the first two pharagrahs, then jump on Net who is not only NOT the author but has been a member of our family for many years and is a Packer Fan.

Oh Baby! That makes a great deal of sense. Some of you dismissed it in the third paragraph becuase this scribe (Not Net) used Brett as an example for his example. If you were running numbers (And I know that stats can be altered.) what other QB would you use as an example of INT vs. TD's other than the Gunslinger?

Lighten up.

Remember there is nothing wrong with reading... and more importantly... The enemy of learning is knowing.

Some of you just kill me.

But that is OK... It is your life. Live it. All the more power to you.

Thanks NET. It was a good read, even though I do not agree with all of it.

RP

it amazes me that everyone is so pissy lately. seems like we can't even make a good natured joke without someone getting mad. i didn't slam net once & don't intend to. the article simply isn't worth it IMHO.

now - where the heck did i put my wine coolers?? oh wait - it's almost 6AM - not PM. :wink:

signed,
retarded field mouse #1. :lol:

 

[Timmons]

Yeah, I too long on to a packer board so I can avoid reading about football.

If you didn't read the article, that's your deal. If you think the point of the article was that turnovers (INTS) are bad, then YOU didn't read the article. The point is as follows:
TDs are not worth as much as NOT turning the ball over. It is an interesting claim and well substantiated with data. Sure you can turn stats however you want. However, these are laid out quite clearly and I thank the author for the insight and time taken to post this. It CERTAINLY is a lot more interesting than the silly drivel posted following it.

As for the quarterback. If you guys think risk taking QBs are good, that's your deal. Risk taking QB's are fun to watch. However, they are not as successful as ball control QBs, when it matters, the playoffs, because they can't string wins together. We should know, we've been watching it since 97.

Brett Favre is exciting and brings a lot to the game. I respect him, and how he handles himself. He, however, has fewer SB rings than Tom Brady, and I hate Tom Brady. Watching Tom Brady play football is like watching grass grow. Tom understands that ball control wins games. I think he learned it from his head coach.

 

[cheesey]

If you watch the replay of the fumble return in the Bears game, Favre WAS blocked in the back, period. The replay doesn't lie. It happened, and was not called. But thats the fault of the zebras. THEY blew it.