Official Packer vs Seattle Studs n Duds

[Dantés]

Watching Perry and Clark out there, I was thinking 'Man, I wish TT would stop drafting these soft PAC12 players.'

 

[swhitset]

Im shocked that Rodger's would say he's in favor of anything that would dissuade anyone from laying finger on him. Shocked I say. (You'd have an argument if it in any way was a dirty hit but it wasn't)

Unless you think it's OK for one of our guys to get in the defenders face every time someone lays a finger on Rodgers then it's still a huge no to people arguing he just had his back. It was just plain stupid. Trying to defend it is just having blinders on

I didn't hit your posts with the red X.... but in this case... I think most including Aaron himself see it differently.

 

[RRyder]

I didn't hit your posts with the red X.... but in this case... I think most including Aaron himself see it differently.

Two questions

1: Did you think it was a dirty play by the defender?

2: Do you think one of our guys should get up in the defenders faces and shove him to the ground every time Rodgers is tackled?

If you answered no to those questions then it was a stupid play. Oh course Rodoers will say he likes it though. I wouldn't expect him to say differently. I also expect MM to have a talk with him.

I get why people are glossin over it. We still won. But that one decision took a game that was wrapped up and in the bag with us in FG range and put it back in doubt by then forcing us to pick up another 1st to close it out. Had we failed to pick up that 1st and given the ball back to Seattle with 2 minutes left in a one score game many would change there tune. And I'm just saying be consistent

 

[swhitset]

Two questions

1: Did you think it was a dirty play by the defender?

2: Do you think one of our guys should get up in the defenders faces and shove him to the ground every time Rodgers is tackled?

If you answered no to those questions then it was a stupid play. Oh course Rodoers will say he likes it though. I wouldn't expect him to say differently. I also expect MM to have a talk with him.

I get why people are glossin over it. We still won. But that one decision took a game that was wrapped up and in the bag with us in FG range and put it back in doubt by then forcing us to pick up another 1st to close it out. Had we failed to pick up that 1st and given the ball back to Seattle with 2 minutes left in a one score game many would change there tune. And I'm just saying be consistent

Answer to question 1.... You don't get to set the parameters by asking limiting questions that then determine another person's right and reasons for their opinion. However, was it dirty? I would say not dirty per se, but it was unnessessary. It was intended to send a message. Bennett's response was also. You may not like the double standard regarding top players like Rodgers, but it exists. Can you get away with hitting a running back or wideout like that? Usually. But very few players are going to stand by and watch their future HOF QB take a hit like that and not respond.

Your second question is predicated on getting the answer you wanted in question 1 so it is moot.

The bottom line is that We don't agree as I said before. This does not change that.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

studs:
playcalling / clock management

McCarthy's terrible clock management at the end of the first half allowed the Seahawks to score three points. I'm not sure how any Packers fan would consider it a stud on Sunday.

Duds: Bennett for his personal foul that extended the game a bit longer than it should have.

I get why people are glossin over it. We still won. But that one decision took a game that was wrapped up and in the bag with us in FG range and put it back in doubt by then forcing us to pick up another 1st to close it out. Had we failed to pick up that 1st and given the ball back to Seattle with 2 minutes left in a one score game many would change there tune. And I'm just saying be consistent

The Packers were on the Seahawks 39 after Rodgers run for a first down. I'm absolutely convinced McCarthy wouldn't have tried a 57-yard field goal in that situation, therefore the offense needed another first down anyways. While some might consider it to be a stupid action by Bennett I liked him stepping up for the quarterback and it didn't change the way the coaching staff had to approach the next set of downs.

 

[King of Jeans]

McCarthy's terrible clock management at the end of the first half allowed the Seahawks to score three points. I'm not sure how any Packers fan would consider it a stud on Sunday..

The clock management was MUCH better in the 2nd half, and I hardly think the blame for letting Seattle's offense cover the length of the field in just a couple plays lies with McCarthy.

 

[yooperpackfan]

The clock management was MUCH better in the 2nd half, and I hardly think the blame for letting Seattle's offense cover the length of the field in just a couple plays lies with McCarthy.

McCarthy's clock management has been a weak part of his game since day 1.

 

[Zartan]

As I have cell signal here's my studs n duds

Studs. Rodgers Cobb Nelson Daniels Defense

Duds OL Davis

With Davis getting The Shemp of the game for his horrible returns and bad decisions

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Duds OL Davis

With Davis getting The Shemp of the game for his horrible returns and bad decisions

I'm with you and some other posters on Davis. So far the guy hasn't done much of anything, besides the one preseason punt return. We already have one special teamer (Janis) taking up a WR spot, if Davis can't contribute as a WR and his punt return abilities is marginal, I don't see how you can keep the guy around long. Hell, if he is eligible, which I think he is, he probably would clear waivers and make the PS.

I said it before the cut, I would have preferred to keep McCaffrey over both Davis and Janis.

All that talk by some as to how deep we are at WR......We have 3 legit WR's, Allison and 2 special teamers.

 

[swhitset]

And now Mcaffrey is on the Jags 53

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

And now Mcaffrey is on the Jags 53

Didn't see that transaction and that they had signed him off the Saints PS. Goes to show you some team saw Max as good enough to be on their 53. I hope he does great for the Jags, just wish the Packers would have opted to keep him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The clock management was MUCH better in the 2nd half, and I hardly think the blame for letting Seattle's offense cover the length of the field in just a couple plays lies with McCarthy.

It was a stupid mistake by McCarthy to use timeouts at the end of the first half as there was no chance of the Packers getting the ball back before halftime.

 

[Deleted member 11740]

Not wanting to repeat everyone else I'll just point some not so obvious things that stood out to me.

1) Aikman is still anti Packers. The play on Graham in the end zone should have been offensive PI on Graham for dragging Brice's head down by the back of the helmet. Don't care what any ex NFL official says, as there is a reason he is no longer employed by the league and that's most likely cos he doesn't know ****!
2) A block in the back is a block in the back. Stupid play by Seattle. Why go anywhere near someone's back when your guy is 5 yards free.
3) Matthews actually had a good game, however, he is now our third best defender behind Daniels and Perry. He is now a split second behind the other two on the splash plays or his pressure causes the space for Daniels to slice through. Also Wilson got out of two sacks that he would have made against 31 other QBs. he needs to track hips better and wrap up instead of trying to kill the QB sometimes.

 

[Mondio]

I think Matthews and Clark had a big impact on the reason were talking about other guys more than them. I saw some comments about Matthews being blocked by one, and i'm sure he was at times. I also saw a few others where there were 2 guys dedicated to him. And Daniels was beating 1 man often times, there was a reason for that. There were some names that stood out, but this was solid TEAM defense that allowed for others to "dominate"

 

[GleefulGary]

FYI, Matthews was double teamed on 30% of his snaps.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Aikman is still anti Packers. The play on Graham in the end zone should have been offensive PI on Graham for dragging Brice's head down by the back of the helmet. Don't care what any ex NFL official says, as there is a reason he is no longer employed by the league and that's most likely cos he doesn't know ****!

You have to take your green and gold glasses off and look at that play in an objective way. It's pretty obvious the Packers got away with a blatant pass interference on it.

 

[easyk83]

You have to take your green and gold glasses off and look at that play in an objective way. It's pretty obvious the Packers got away with a blatant pass interference on it.

There was a lot of shoving before then with Graham doing plenty of the pushing before he was jumped. If anything it should have been offsetting penalties and a replay of the down.

 

[easyk83]

FYI, Matthews was double teamed on 30% of his snaps.

And what percentage of those came in obvious passing situations?

 

[easyk83]

McCarthy's terrible clock management at the end of the first half allowed the Seahawks to score three points. I'm not sure how any Packers fan would consider it a stud on Sunday.





The Packers were on the Seahawks 39 after Rodgers run for a first down. I'm absolutely convinced McCarthy wouldn't have tried a 57-yard field goal in that situation, therefore the offense needed another first down anyways. While some might consider it to be a stupid action by Bennett I liked him stepping up for the quarterback and it didn't change the way the coaching staff had to approach the next set of downs.

At that point of the game we weren't looking for field position so much as running the clock out, the negative of the action was virtually non existent.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There was a lot of shoving before then with Graham doing plenty of the pushing before he was jumped. If anything it should have been offsetting penalties and a replay of the down.

You won't be able to convince me that play should have resulted in anything other than pass interference against the Packers.

 

[AmishMafia]

The Packers were on the Seahawks 39 after Rodgers run for a first down. I'm absolutely convinced McCarthy wouldn't have tried a 57-yard field goal in that situation, therefore the offense needed another first down anyways. While some might consider it to be a stupid action by Bennett I liked him stepping up for the quarterback and it didn't change the way the coaching staff had to approach the next set of downs.

I doubt Bennet considered that when he responded. The next time it happens it may cost us.

But I agree with you, I am not against it.

What I would prefer is a more calculated set up. I saw Sapp roll up intentionally on Rothlesberger one time. The next play Sapp was allowed off the line and it was a quick pitch. As Sapp changed directions he was hit by 3 OL at once. High and low and multi directions. The play went for a loss, but what do you expect with 3 players blocking one guy.? Sapp got up and quickly went to Ben and shook his hand presumably in apology. Message sent.

 

[Sky King]

I watched that play over and over yesterday. It looked like PI to me, as well. But just maybe the ref saw the ball as uncatchable. Even if there had been no contact before the catch it would have been a tough catch to make. Graham's momentum (after leaping to reach the ball) may have carried him out of bounds anyway. Other than being uncatchable there seems to be no plausible reason for not calling PI.

Also after watching a few other plays in the game it looked to me as though the refs were consistently relaxed both ways when it came to calling PI. There were at least two plays of significance involving Adams alone, for example. Besides the previously mentioned play there was another later in the game that should have gone against Griffen. As Adams broke for the sideline Griffen grabbed a handful of 17's jersey because he knew he was beaten on the play. It slowed Adam's break just enough to ruin the timing of the throw. No call. It seemed the refs in this game were not generally as flag-happy as some other crews.

 

[PackerDNA]

I,too think the Graham play was PI but not called because it was uncatchable. Also, most refs seem to give both WR's and DB's a lot more leeway on endzone plays.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I watched that play over and over yesterday. It looked like PI to me, as well. But just maybe the ref saw the ball as uncatchable. Even if there had been no contact before the catch it would have been a tough catch to make. Graham's momentum (after leaping to reach the ball) may have carried him out of bounds anyway. Other than being uncatchable there seems to be no plausible reason for not calling PI.

Also after watching a few other plays in the game it looked to me as though the refs were consistently relaxed both ways when it came to calling PI. There were at least two plays of significance involving Adams alone, for example. Besides the previously mentioned play there was another later in the game that should have gone against Griffen. As Adams broke for the sideline Griffen grabbed a handful of 17's jersey because he knew he was beaten on the play. It slowed Adam's break just enough to ruin the timing of the throw. No call. It seemed the refs in this game were not generally as flag-happy as some other crews.

Cutting and pasting this into an email for Troy........

Anyone hear if Marty B got fined for that hit?

 

[Dantés]

I watched that play over and over yesterday. It looked like PI to me, as well. But just maybe the ref saw the ball as uncatchable. Even if there had been no contact before the catch it would have been a tough catch to make. Graham's momentum (after leaping to reach the ball) may have carried him out of bounds anyway. Other than being uncatchable there seems to be no plausible reason for not calling PI.

Also after watching a few other plays in the game it looked to me as though the refs were consistently relaxed both ways when it came to calling PI. There were at least two plays of significance involving Adams alone, for example. Besides the previously mentioned play there was another later in the game that should have gone against Griffen. As Adams broke for the sideline Griffen grabbed a handful of 17's jersey because he knew he was beaten on the play. It slowed Adam's break just enough to ruin the timing of the throw. No call. It seemed the refs in this game were not generally as flag-happy as some other crews.

I don't know about other people, but I would so much rather watch a "looser" game than one with too many flags, even if it means something penalties against the Packers are going uncalled. As long as it's the same strike zone both directions, let 'em play.