Instant Classic

[Runscott]

A few minutes ago I finally got around to re-watching (as in, on t.v., not from my nosebleed seats) the game, and there were three things that had to go right, that involved a bit of .....hmmmmm....'luck' - Bostick not catching the onside kick, Clinton-Dix not covering Willson on the 2-point conversion and Burnett 'downing' an interception: poor execution, stupidity and ill-advised caution.

I realize this topic is stale to most, but I probably won't get tired of it until next year's game.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Runscott

and Burnett 'downing' an interception: poor execution, stupidity and ill-advised caution.

I think Burnett made a smart decision. Look at the play again. How much additional yardage would he have gained? Maybe 5 yards? I've seen too many players try and be a hero by turning a reception into a big play and then end up turning the ball right back over.

What I didn't like was the play calls after the interception. GB should have gone for the jugular at that point. Instead, they played it conservatively and were playing not to lose instead of playing to win - run, run, run, punt - meanwhile Seattle calling timeouts between each run. GB should have shoved the ball down their throat after that interception and they failed to do so.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I think Burnett made a smart decision. Look at the play again. How much additional yardage would he have gained? Maybe 5 yards? I've seen too many players try and be a hero by turning a reception into a big play and then end up turning the ball right back over.

What I didn't like was the play calls after the interception. GB should have gone for the jugular at that point. Instead, they played it conservatively and were playing not to lose instead of playing to win - run, run, run, punt - meanwhile Seattle calling timeouts between each run. GB should have shoved the ball down their throat after that interception and they failed to do so.

The t.v. pundits always have wonderful hind-sight on this sort of thing. When the Cowboys player recovered a fumble against Detroit and then fumbled while running it, they were quick to say that Dallas could have iced the game if he had simply gone to the ground. The Burnett decision is a little different, in that another 3 points really would have iced the game. I think he could have gotten a lot more than 5 yards, but I totally understand his (and Culpepper's) decision to down it - if McCarthy had handled the rest of the game, Burnett's decision would have been wise...in hindsight.

I sure loved re-watching the game, and I was grinning ear-to-ear watching each amazing play that had to occur in order for the miracle to occur. It's weird knowing I've seen the greatest sporting event I'll ever witness in my life, but I said the same thing after Ryan's 7th no-hitter, so maybe there's more.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I think Burnett made a smart decision. Look at the play again. How much additional yardage would he have gained? Maybe 5 yards? I've seen too many players try and be a hero by turning a reception into a big play and then end up turning the ball right back over.

Here's the field. Burnett could have returned the ball, maybe gotten into field goal range. He certainly would have improved the Packer field position. With the offense struggling, and an opposing quarterback handing out turnovers, why not try?



I agree that the Packers didn't put them away when they should have. They didn't go for the jugular. But I don't know how anybody can think the more talented of the two teams is going to the Super Bowl. The Packers have played two other games in Seattle recently. The first one, Seattle was gifted a win with a botched replacement ref call. Refs who were fired by the league after the game. The next game, Seattle won by a few scores. But considering three fifths of the offensive line was new, and our defensive line was patchwork (look at the yards allowed in the first half of the season when they were trying to find a replacement for Raji vs running yards allowed in the second half of the season. Night and day), the defending champs playing at home after winning the Super Bowl should have won.

The Packers gave New England a blueprint on how to beat them. Only Hoodie won't wuss out and just run the ball into the middle of the line six times. And he won't hand the ball to the fullback on first and goal at the 1 yard line, either.

The Packers beat themselves. Anybody who feels differently is a homer, or lying to themselves.

[Runscott]

.......

[arc2q]

I'm way late on joining this thread. Not sure how I missed it. I agree with Scott. Luck is a factor on every play - maybe multiple times a play. Success in sports can never be attributed simply to luck. Sure there were a couple of plays that were pivotal and could have changed the course of the outcome. But those kind of plays go both direction. By the same argument that the Packers "gave the game away" one could easy argue the Seahawks poor play in the first half gave the lead to the Packers in the first place.

The Seahawks won because they were the better team. When it mattered most they made the plays. The final score shows they were the better team that deserved to win.

I've rewatched the game now several times. Why did Buck and Aikman (not to mention most of the media afterwards) not even mention that Clay Matthews sat out the entire 4th quarter? Their best defensive player was on the sideline when it mattered most. If that had been a player like Jay Cutler he would have been eviscerated by the media. The cameramen were even trying to prompt the announcers to say something about Matthews watching as Marshawn Lynch ran all over the Packers defense.

Seahawks 24 - Patriots 12

[the 'stache]

The Seahawks won because their defense was healthy, and Aaron Rodgers was not. That's what it boils down to.

A big part of what makes Rodgers so dangerous is that he's a great pocket passer, AND he's the best quarterback in the NFL at creating when the play breaks down. He can go off script, and his receivers are outstanding at doing that with him. He couldn't do that at all on that Sunday. Almost half of his game as a quarterback was taken away, so all the secondary had to do was sit back in pass coverage. They weren't forced to chase the Packer receivers around like they would have been because Rodgers couldn't get outside the pocket . They never had to worry about Rodgers taking off. A healthy Rodgers forces those corner backs and safeties to make decisions--to I stay in coverage, and let Rodgers run for 20 yards, or do I come up on him, and hope he crosses the line of scrimmage, so he can't stop, and throw the ball over my head.

If Rodgers is healthy, he doesn't force a throw into the back of the endzone for a pick. That throw was made out of frustration, not because Seattle was doing anything exceptional, but because his body couldn't do what he wanted to do. Tell Russell Wilson "you can't run today", and how do you think he does? He had his legs for that game, and was playing against a defense that everybody else said was so vastly inferior to Seattle's defense. And he got smacked down.

And I love Russell Wilson to death, but all the fawning over him needs to stop. He showed in that game that he is very mortal, that he can be rattled. A healthy Rodgers hits Randall Cobb in stride on that pass play over the middle of the field, and Cobb would have been gone. Nobody in the Seahawk secondary was going to catch him at full speed. And that would have put Seattle away, because their offense was not only doing nothing, but they were dejected.

[Runscott]

Yeah, Rodgers is flawless when perfectly healthy :roll eyes:

I think most people realize that a defense adjusts to what they are up against. This game they were up against a throwing Rodgers and Rodgers still threw great - he had several receivers drop balls that hit them right in the hands. In addition, Rodgers was able to pick up good yardage on runs, especially a critical one that got them into position for the tying field goal, possibly because Seattle didn't show his legs enough respect.

Rodgers did fine. Seattle did better and beat him and the Packers. If Wilson had been playing at anything above the +10 passer rating he took into the last 5 minutes, Seattle would have slaughtered Green Bay.

But go ahead and continue your fantasy.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Runscott

and Burnett 'downing' an interception: poor execution, stupidity and ill-advised caution.

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I think Burnett made a smart decision. Look at the play again. How much additional yardage would he have gained? Maybe 5 yards? I've seen too many players try and be a hero by turning a reception into a big play and then end up turning the ball right back over.

What I didn't like was the play calls after the interception. GB should have gone for the jugular at that point. Instead, they played it conservatively and were playing not to lose instead of playing to win - run, run, run, punt - meanwhile Seattle calling timeouts between each run. GB should have shoved the ball down their throat after that interception and they failed to do so.

I'll repeat it again. Downing the ball is the smart thing to do. If you don't belive me, ask Jeremy Lane this morning.

[Runscott]

Is 'Jeremy Lane' a pseudonym for God?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Lane intercepted the ball in the end zone. He should have downed the ball right then and given his offense possession at the 20 yard line. Did he seriously think he was going to return the ball 100+ yards for a TD? Why be a hero? Instead he runs it out to about the 11 yard line and breaks his arm. Real smart play there.

You make the call - Possession at the 20 and remains in the game, or possession at the 11 with a broken arm? My previous point was it's better to down an interception (assuming you have no running room) than to try and be a hero.

Burnett made the right call. Lane did not. Spin it any way you want.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Lane intercepted the ball in the end zone. He should have downed the ball right then and given his offense possession at the 20 yard line. Did he seriously think he was going to return the ball 100+ yards for a TD? Why be a hero? Instead he runs it out to about the 11 yard line and breaks his arm. Real smart play there.

You make the call - Possession at the 20 and remains in the game, or possession at the 11 with a broken arm? My previous point was it's better to down an interception (assuming you have no running room) than to try and be a hero.

Burnett made the right call. Lane did not. Spin it any way you want.

David, what you just did is the definition of 'spin'. Two totally different situations, yet you have spun them to be the same. Downing a ball in the end-zone and getting it at the twenty is quite a bit different from returning an interception 10-15 yards so that your team can get a field goal and ice the game. I've seen footage of the Green Bay interception and the field, from above, as oppose to the typical view we've been getting that keys on the receiver and his immediate area. He had plenty of room to run.

[nolemmings]

David, what you just did is the definition of 'spin'. Two totally different situations, yet you have spun them to be the same. Downing a ball in the end-zone and getting it at the twenty is quite a bit different from returning an interception 10-15 yards so that your team can get a field goal and ice the game. I've seen footage of the Green Bay interception and the field, from above, as oppose to the typical view we've been getting that keys on the receiver and his immediate area. He had plenty of room to run.

Of course you're right. Moreover, there is nothing wrong with Lane's decision in any event. I am not convinced he was in the endzone for purposes of taking a touchback--it's where the ball and not the feet are and it looked like one foot landed on the goal line anyway--and it was certainly close enough that he is not going to take the chance that the ball will be spotted inside his own one when he knew he had at least five yards or so of space. Heads up play, not being a hero.