The Morgan Burnett INT

[sschind]

The truly sad part is that Burnett and Mike McCarthy are not saying they learned anything from this experience. They both say that they would do the exact same thing again. They refuse to learn from their mistakes.

Perhaps because they don't view this as a mistake. If you haven't been paying attention there are a lot of people who do not think it was a mistake. Its a purely subjective matter. There is no right or wrong answer only peoples opinions.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

1) It works both ways. Offensive players aren't taught ball stripping techniques, either.
2) Did you watch the video? There WAS no traffic. He had offensive lineman to run around and then a QB to beat! If there were 5 or 6 guys bearing down on him at midfield when he did this ready to tackle him, we wouldn't be having this discussion.



Theres is no 1-7 of what cost us the game in the game in the last 5 minutes. There's about 1A - 1G, because any one of them, if played differently, would have changed the outcome. The reason I'm less forgiving about Burnett is that his mistake was a conscious, voluntary one. Whereas most of the others were physical football mistakes.



Then we'd be in the exact same position that we were in anyway by him just going down, wouldn't we? At least we wouldn't be wondering if it would have changed the result.

There's an awful lot of analysis going into a play that does not rank highly on the list of things that cost us the game. MM losing his courage during the first quarter is probably number 1. Rodgers not playing well is probably two (his throw to Adams in the endzone was picked by Sherman because he threw it inside instead of outside) and yes, he was hurt but results matter and this team is built around Rodgers playing extremely well. Third would probably be MM going into his customary conservative playbook with the lead in the second half. Fourth, we'll call it a tie between Williams losing his man in coverage, HaHa forgetting how to play football on the two-point conversion and Bostick muffing the kickoff. So that would put Burnett going to the ground at about seven.

It's a lot easier and more satisfying to blame a specific play for ******** the team but the play that should bothering most people is the play calling by McCarthy.

If we're going to have fun with probabilities, why dont' we look at the Packers performance at getting a first down with a yard to go? Packers faced 3rd-and-1 or 4th-and-one with one or two yards to go 49 times this year. They got a first down on 69.4% of those plays. Just look at fourth down, the Packers went for it on fourth and one or two six times and converted three of them. So, a FG is worth three points. We walked away with six points on two fourth-and-goal on the one chances. The Packers, had they gone for it, should have expected to get 7 points. Instead they ended up with 6. Seems like that extra point might have come in handy at the end of regulation, huh? Probably WAY more important than Burnett not picking up an extra twenty yards.

 

[sschind]

All due respect Captain, but I couldn't care less about such stats, and in the context of the discussion, they're meaningless. In watching the games, Rodgers is not the difference maker he's expected to be.

He made no difference a week ago against Dallas that's for sure.

 

[PackerDNA]

He made no difference a week ago against Dallas that's for sure.

Too bad we're not talking about the Dallas game then, isn't it?

 

[sschind]

There's an awful lot of analysis going into a play that does not rank highly on the list of things that cost us the game. MM losing his courage during the first quarter is probably number 1. Rodgers not playing well is probably two (his throw to Adams in the endzone was picked by Sherman because he threw it inside instead of outside) and yes, he was hurt but results matter and this team is built around Rodgers playing extremely well. Third would probably be MM going into his customary conservative playbook with the lead in the second half. Fourth, we'll call it a tie between Williams losing his man in coverage, HaHa forgetting how to play football on the two-point conversion and Bostick muffing the kickoff. So that would put Burnett going to the ground at about seven.

It's a lot easier and more satisfying to blame a specific play for ******** the team but the play that should bothering most people is the play calling by McCarthy.

If we're going to have fun with probabilities, why dont' we look at the Packers performance at getting a first down with a yard to go? Packers faced 3rd-and-1 or 4th-and-one with one or two yards to go 49 times this year. They got a first down on 69.4% of those plays. Just look at fourth down, the Packers went for it on fourth and one or two six times and converted three of them. So, a FG is worth three points. We walked away with six points on two fourth-and-goal on the one chances. The Packers, had they gone for it, should have expected to get 7 points. Instead they ended up with 6. Seems like that extra point might have come in handy at the end of regulation, huh? Probably WAY more important than Burnett not picking up an extra twenty yards.

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think the Packers went for 3/4th and 1/2 55 times against the Seattle Seahawks. In fact, in that first series alone, heck the previous 2 plays, the Packers had just gone 0/2 with only one yard to go. Could be the defense had something to do with it.

 

[PackerDNA]

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think the Packers went for 3/4th and 1/2 55 times against the Seattle Seahawks. In fact, in that first series alone, heck the previous 2 plays, the Packers had just gone 0/2 with only one yard to go. Could be the defense had something to do with it.

For me, it's not about what happened in the preceding plays of those two situations. It's about the decision to go for it or not on 4th. Again, for me, I don't find fault with MM's decisions as much as a difference of opinion; that being, the 1st time, I'm fine with taking the points. The 2nd time, I'm going for 6. All conjecture/opinion, so all debatable.

 

[sschind]

Too bad we're not talking about the Dallas game then, isn't it?

Since the Dallas game was a playoff game and a pretty big game I thought it was pertinent to the discussion. When you said he is not the difference maker he is expected to be what games specifically were you talking about.

You said Rodgers is not the difference maker he is expected to be in the playoffs I pointed out 1 of the last 2 in which he was. I can think of a few others where he had a pretty big impact as well and I gathered that from watching the games. I guess it was just my way of saying I don't agree with you forgive me for trying to give you a reason why. From now on I'll just click the disagree button.

 

[sschind]

For me, it's not about what happened in the preceding plays of those two situations. It's about the decision to go for it or not on 4th. Again, for me, I don't find fault with MM's decisions as much as a difference of opinion; that being, the 1st time, I'm fine with taking the points. The 2nd time, I'm going for 6. All conjecture/opinion, so all debatable.

Now see that I can understand and its a good explanation of your reasoning. You think he should have gone for the points the second time. I don't but had he tried I would not have been totally upset.

 

[PackerDNA]

Since the Dallas game was a playoff game and a pretty big game I thought it was pertinent to the discussion. When you said he is not the difference maker he is expected to be what games specifically were you talking about.

You said Rodgers is not the difference maker he is expected to be in the playoffs I pointed out 1 of the last 2 in which he was. I can think of a few others where he had a pretty big impact as well and I gathered that from watching the games. I guess it was just my way of saying I don't agree with you forgive me for trying to give you a reason why. From now on I'll just click the disagree button.

Fair question. To answer while trying not to be long winded, how about every big game in recent years vs the top competition needed to be beaten to get to the Super Bowl in recent years. Namely, the 49ers and now Seahawks. Rodgers can usually be counted on for under 200 yards passing and not having any impact; fatal to the hopes of a team that relies on him so much, and disconcerting for a guy who's often touted as the greatest QB of all time.

 

[PackerDNA]

sschind, please do not just strictly hit agree or disagree on my account. I would like to hear your opinions as well as others; then we can discuss, then agree or disagree.
BTW, hitting the agree/disagree buttons doesn't work for me. Nothing happens. Either there's a problem on my end or I'm doing something wrong.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Rodgers not playing well is probably two (his throw to Adams in the endzone was picked by Sherman because he threw it inside instead of outside) and yes, he was hurt but results matter and this team is built around Rodgers playing extremely well.

On the first interception Rodgers thought he had a free play as Bennett was offsides but the refs missed it.

If we're going to have fun with probabilities, why dont' we look at the Packers performance at getting a first down with a yard to go? Packers faced 3rd-and-1 or 4th-and-one with one or two yards to go 49 times this year. They got a first down on 69.4% of those plays. Just look at fourth down, the Packers went for it on fourth and one or two six times and converted three of them.

As you pointed out there's a difference between a play on the opponents 1 or 2 yard line compared to anywhere else on the field. The Packers have run 26 plays inside the opponents 2 yard line and scored on 12 of them (46.2%) this season.

 

[pacmaniac]

Big games, big time opposition, Rodgers comes up small. Seeing and hearing a lot of questioning just how great of a QB he really is, and while I don't want to make a knee jerk reaction on the subject, it gives me pause. Does Rodgers end up being in a debate about all time great QB's , or end up in the debate with Peyton Manning as 'greatest regular season QB of all time' ?
I'll say this; if I just saw the stat line with no name attached, I'd think those numbers belonged to Matt Flynn. But in recent years, against top competition such as the 49ers and Seahawks, that's what they generally look like.

2 NFC-C games, only 1 TD and 4 INTs. Be glad we played the Bears and Cutler/Hanie in 2010, we probably lose that game against any other playoff team.

He also didn't play well against the Giants in 2011, and like you said against the 9ers in the playoffs.

He actually completed only 40% of his passes against the Bills. That's just horrible. He's a very good QB, but not quite as great as everyone thinks.

 

[GoPGo]

Whe he got it and dropped I am sure EVERY Packer fan was excitied as hell...Please dont tell me you were mad he just dropped..

Since when do you speak for EVERY Packer fan? I was excited about the INT but perplexed and literally said, "What the hell?" when he slid. So did at least a dozen or so other Packer fans around me at BWW. You just don't do what he did with 5 minutes to go against a top 3 defense. Burnett's a pretty savvy runner with the ball in his hands. He had a great chance at scoring on that play.

To be mad at him is wrong anger placement

I wasn't mad at him. More disappointed than anything.

 

[Raptorman]

Bottom line is this, Burnett going down more than likely did not cause the Packers to lose the game. It may not even be a contributing factor. Because we have know idea what would have happened had he run further down the field. Anything and everything is possible. He could have scored, he could have fumbled, he could have made it to the 35 yards line and on the next play Lacy could have fumbled. So to get worked up over it is just not worth the time.

 

[Spike Mullin]

This play was hardly the problem........I would say there were many many other plays during the game that GB made the wrong choice. The had multiple chances early from the shotty play that Seattle started out with to score a few TD's and came away with FG's. I saw them Pass too often when they could have easily run it and scored when close to the goal line. The facts are this play was one of the better plays during the game that gave them a chance to win.

The interception was great. The slide was a deplorable coaching decision--not the worst, and alone, not the game changer. It was but one of a multitude of bad decisions. And that's the problem. If this were just one of two or three faulty decisions, that could be forgiven. But we are facing a coaching staff that is mired in a collective MINDSET that is oriented toward losing big championship games. Playing not to lose is not fighting to win as a champion.

 

[PackerDNA]

At first, I was fine with the slide; called it the correct move on the chatboard. Once I started to get a better idea of what was ahead of him, and after seeing the all-22 pictures today, I wish he would have returned it.

 

[Packers Boston]

Please give me one example via article, video, etc. in NFL history, other than Burnett, where a player simply gave himself up with 5+ minutes to play in a game that was still in doubt (2 score or less game). There is an enormous difference between doing that before the result is decided and doing that when you're just going to head straight into victory formation. And that's not hindsight, it's just simply something that is not done.

So why did Raji not just head down right here?

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Almost identical situation, right? You'd trust Raji's hands over Burnett's? What if he fumbles near the goal line? Heck, we almost blew that game. PLAY THE GAME FOR 60 MINUTES. It's simple.

Always go for the glory that will take your team to the Super Bowl. I was there at Soldier's Field for the Raji interception --same vantage point as the YouTube clip and it finished the Bears off. They haven't been the same since.

 

[Packers Boston]

I've never seen it done with 5 minutes left to play in a 2 score game. Never... until Sunday.

The entire team was treating that final stretch like there was just 50 seconds left to play, not five friggin minutes.

 

[Spike Mullin]

Perhaps because they don't view this as a mistake. If you haven't been paying attention there are a lot of people who do not think it was a mistake. Its a purely subjective matter. There is no right or wrong answer only peoples opinions.

It's not subjective. What is the mathematical probability that Burnett would have fumbled on that run back? I'm sure that a statistician could calculate that for us and we would find the probability rate was very small. On the other hand, the probability that Seattle would score on it's next possession is very high, given the history of their offense. Regardless, I'm not referring to that singular play. Few would disagree that without question, there were MANY bad coaching decisions in that game.

 

[melvin dangerr]

Can any body show me all season long where some one on the "D" was firing up the team, never saw that not from McCaution or "D" coach, not from anyone, guess were too finesse for such lowly things..

 

[longtimefan]

Since when do you speak for EVERY Packer fan? I was excited about the INT but perplexed and literally said, "What the hell?" when he slid. So did at least a dozen or so other Packer fans around me at BWW. You just don't do what he did with 5 minutes to go against a top 3 defense. Burnett's a pretty savvy runner with the ball in his hands. He had a great chance at scoring on that play.



I wasn't mad at him. More disappointed than anything.

/
So after he had the interception you were not excited?? you werent happy??

thats my point, when he was done, people were upset he intercepted??

dont worry about him not running or running, td or peppers...the simple act of him catching it at the end of the play you were happy..I dont buy that anyone was upset, sad, worried, depressed, he got an int

 

[pacmaniac]

I just rewatched the Packers sideline right after the INT. No wonder the D collapsed after that. They were all laughing and celebrating. They were mentally done, the game was over to them, no point in playing defense anymore.

 

[adambr2]

/
So after he had the interception you were not excited?? you werent happy??

thats my point, when he was done, people were upset he intercepted??

dont worry about him not running or running, td or peppers...the simple act of him catching it at the end of the play you were happy..I dont buy that anyone was upset, sad, worried, depressed, he got an int

This is a straw man argument. No one said they were disappointed with the INT. It is possible to be happy about the defense intercepting a pass while at the same time being disappointed that he did not attempt a return.

 

[longtimefan]

This is a straw man argument. No one said they were disappointed with the INT. It is possible to be happy about the defense intercepting a pass while at the same time being disappointed that he did not attempt a return.

not trying to startg an argument at all...gopgo seemed to be confused, so I tried to explain it the best I could

 

[Vrill]

I just rewatched the Packers sideline right after the INT. No wonder the D collapsed after that. They were all laughing and celebrating. They were mentally done, the game was over to them, no point in playing defense anymore.

Winner. This is why we lost. Exactly the reason.