All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > PACKERS: Datone Jones is latest DL bust drafted
1/18/2012 1:20 AM
Posted by edsortails on 1/16/2012 8:30:00 AM (view original):
HEY RODGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



DISCOUNT DOUBLE CHOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 If his receivers didnt drop f#ckin  passes all day long it may have been a different story.. Rodgers didnt play that bad
1/18/2012 6:39 PM
Posted by randle44 on 1/18/2012 1:20:00 AM (view original):
Posted by edsortails on 1/16/2012 8:30:00 AM (view original):
HEY RODGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



DISCOUNT DOUBLE CHOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 If his receivers didnt drop f#ckin  passes all day long it may have been a different story.. Rodgers didnt play that bad
He really didn't play that bad, but he also played worse than he has any game this season (other than perhaps the Chiefs game). He missed open receivers that he typically doesn't..and two of the misses were extremely critical (missing a wide open Jennings for a TD, and missing Finley on the 3rd down before they went for it and Rodgers was sacked). He typically makes those plays...and if he did, it would've been a whole different ballgame.
1/19/2012 11:20 AM
He really didn't play that bad, but he also played worse than he has any game this season (other than perhaps the Chiefs game). He missed open receivers that he typically doesn't..and two of the misses were extremely critical (missing a wide open Jennings for a TD, and missing Finley on the 3rd down before they went for it and Rodgers was sacked). He typically makes those plays...and if he did, it would've been a whole different ballgame.   

Dan, you stated the above, and I agree completely.  The miss to Jennings was HUGE as it would have put the Packers up 7-3 and showed the Giants why you were 15-1.  Come right back after a score, and take the lead.  The miss to Finley was again HUGE. 

The play that you are missing was when Rodgers didn't feel the pressure from Umenyiora and allowed the ball to be swatted from his hand and the Packers turned the ball over when Jennings slant and go totally fooled the Giants safeties and with a minimal throw was a TD.  Usually Rodgers steps up in the pocket, and delivers the ball.  There, he just pump faked on the slant (fooling the Giants safeties) and just stood there for about a full second waiting for the right time to release the ball.  Had he stepped up in the pocket like he normally had been doing throughout the season, that's a Packers TD, and not a fumble that lead to points for the Giants. 

The Packers sat Rodgers and Woodson and 3 others in the final game against Detroit.  Rodgers had his worst game of the season, and Woodson was burned on a pathetic hail mary at the end of the first half (which in my estimation was the back breaker).  I was not in favor of sitting ANYONE.  Bad idea.  You then go 3 weeks without any contact or competition.  If you get a bye week, you have a week off built in.  The Packers were assured of that already.  Is another week really necessary?  And is the risk of injury that great in this one game that you sit players? Here is what many coaches forget......   When you host a Divisional Playoff game as a #1 or #2 seed.....   any team that you play is coming off a very big emotional high from a playoff win.  Add in any wins that the team needed to win in the regular season in order to even make postseason, and you could be facing a team on a 3 or 4 game win streak (like the Giants were this season and GB was last season).  And if your main players have not faced any competition in 3 weeks, while the opposition has been playing well in big game after big game....  sometimes it doesn't help you.  The bye week should have been enough.....

1/19/2012 12:12 PM
Teams that throw the ball are more prone to up/down weeks regardless of rest/competition.    That's why Manning and Brees have but one ring each.  Why Marino has zero. Why NE hasn't won a Super Bowl since 2004.   And why teams like Pitt and NYG are always sticking around.   You have to be able to run the ball if your QB/WR are "off".  If you can't, you're screwed.   And it only takes one "off" day in the playoffs.  

I don't think Baltimore stands much of a chance this weekend.  But, if Brady misses a couple of receivers or Welker drops a couple, it's a whole new ballgame.
1/19/2012 3:42 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 1/19/2012 12:12:00 PM (view original):
Teams that throw the ball are more prone to up/down weeks regardless of rest/competition.    That's why Manning and Brees have but one ring each.  Why Marino has zero. Why NE hasn't won a Super Bowl since 2004.   And why teams like Pitt and NYG are always sticking around.   You have to be able to run the ball if your QB/WR are "off".  If you can't, you're screwed.   And it only takes one "off" day in the playoffs.  

I don't think Baltimore stands much of a chance this weekend.  But, if Brady misses a couple of receivers or Welker drops a couple, it's a whole new ballgame.
Agreed 100%.


1/20/2012 11:01 AM
And why teams like Pitt and NYG are always sticking around    - NYG Dead last in rushing yards in 2011.  Made NFC Championship Game.


The Packers did not lose because their passing game was "off".  They lost because their defense was atrocious and that was combined with 3 fumbles and all 3 were turnovers leading to points.  The Hail Mary combined with the 3 fumbles leading to points doomed the Packers.  Had nothing to do with their passing game being off.  Was it off?  No Doubt.  But thats not what lost the game.  And before you say that the Packers were 15-1 because their passing game covered for their defense all season....   I know that.  But the turnovers were NOT there during the season.  They were a +24.  Thats why they lost.  The Hail Mary just made it more difficult...  the turnovers made it impossible.  

1/20/2012 11:08 AM

I think you and I both know that NYG has started running the ball more effectively down the stretch.  You know, when they went from "no chance at playoffs" to "NFC East winner".   Why do you make the worst arguments to "prove" your point?   I know you're smarter than that.   Do you just think everyone else is stupid?

Their defense was atrocious all season but you know that too.  32nd in YPG(that would be last).   Whether or not you want to say they were "off", you can't agree that Rodgers had his worst game(or 2nd worst) all season in the same breath.  Last time I checked, QB is pretty important to the pass game.

 

1/20/2012 11:43 AM
Here, I know you love statwork:

First 12 games plus loss in W14 loss to Wash(91 rushing yards), the Giants averaged 84 yards per game.
Last 6 games(5 wins) excluding loss to Wash, the Giants averaged 130 ypg.
2 playoff games-319 rush yards

IOW, they were 6-6 with 4 games left.  They ran the ball well in three of those last 4 and won those 3 to make the playoffs.   They have ran the hell out of the ball against ATL/GB and are in the NFC Championship.  
1/20/2012 1:39 PM
Mike...  Seriously....  Taking statistics that were compiled over the course of an entire season are less valid than ones compiled over the last 4 games of the regular season and the playoffs?  Is that your contention?  Because the Giants earned the 32nd overall rushing team over all 16 games (which include those games you cited).


In addition, I said that the Packer defense was bad all season.  I even said "BEFORE YOU SAY THAT THE PASSING GAME COVERED FOR THE DEFENSE ALL SEASON....".   I said the TURNOVERS were the reason the Packers lost.  All 3 fumbles turned into points.  All of them.  They were the daggers.  The Packers overcame bad defense all season.  They did not overcome a -3 in the turnover battle.


They have ran the hell out of the ball against ATL/GB and are in the NFC Championship.  
REALLY????   95 yards against the Packers on 27 carries (3.5 a carry and only 6 yards more than their 32nd overall ranking of 89 yards a game stood in the regular season), and without the Bradshaw run of 24 yards before the half, you have 71 yards on 26 carries (2.7 a carry).  The did run the hell out of the ball against Atlanta.

1/20/2012 2:03 PM
Seriously.  They were 6-6, on a 4 game losing streak and there was talk of Coughlin's dismissal.   They won 3 of the next 4 after rediscovering their running game.   There is nothing false about "And why teams like Pitt and NYG are always sticking around" which is what you seemed to dispute.   They are "sticking around" in the NFL playoffs(now that they actually made them) because of their renewed running game.

I could quote what you said, what I said and explain it to you but it's rather pointless.  In short, you agreed Rodgers had one of his worst games but then denied that the passing game was "off" while blaming the loss on the atrocious defense that has been horrible all season.  I honestly don't know what your ******* point is but it's obviously moronic and wrong.   If the QB has one of his worst games and the ****** defense remains ******, you can't blame the defense for remaining the same and give the QB/pass offense(turnovers like a QB fumble or interception are part of this) a pass for playing worse than they have. 

But I have to admit you got me on that last one.  I looked at the Pack's 147 yds and gave NYG credit for that instead of their 95.
1/20/2012 2:34 PM
I did agree Rodgers had one of his worst games of the season.  Stat wise.  He missed like 2 passes.  Receivers dropped 6 passes, and his interception came after the outcome was decided. 

I did not blame the loss on the defense.  I blamed it on the FUMBLES & TURNOVERS.  THREE FUMBLES.  THREE TURNOVERS LEADING TO POINTS.  You said you could quote what I said, but it's pointless.....   I dont think it is pointless.  You keep saying I blamed the defense.  I didn't.  They certainly contributed to the loss, but they were God awful all season, and the Packers were 15-1.  So, something was different....  OH!   TURNOVERS!   They were a +24 in the regular season, and were -3 in the Divisional Playoff game.  And all of their turnovers led to Giants points.  So...  Here's what I said again.

They lost because their defense was atrocious and was combined with 3 fumbles and all 3 were turnovers leading to points.  The Hail Mary combined with the 3 fumbles leading to points doomed the Packers.  Had nothing to do with their passing game being off.  Was it off?  No Doubt.  But thats not what lost the game.  And before you say that the Packers were 15-1 because their passing game covered for their defense all season....   I know that.  But the turnovers were NOT there during the season.  They were a +24.  Thats why they lost.
1/20/2012 2:44 PM
So why did the Packers lose?   Because they committed turnovers that they normally don't?   Would that not be considered "off" in the Land of E?  Hell, I'll make it easy.

1. Was the offense lesser than normal by whatever standard you'd like to apply?
2. Was the defense it's usually bad-self?

Assuming (1) yes and (2) yes, would it be unfair to say the Packers lost because the offense was not up to par?    If so, what the **** is your point again?
1/20/2012 2:50 PM
I dont mean to be argumentative.  We just differ in opinion on certain things.  I think running the ball means relatively little anymore.  Even the Steelers were not their normal selves this season (14th in rushing, 10th in passing).  The teams winning the Super Bowls recently have had QBs who were elite level for the most part.  Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, E. Manning, P. Manning, Brady, Warner, Elway, Favre, Aikman & Young have won every Super Bowl dating back to January 1993 except for the 2001 Super Bowl (Dilfer) & the 2003 Super Bowl (Brad Johnson).  It has quickly become a QB's league, and a lot of that is due to the new rules for defenders who seemingly can't play defense anymore.  You cant touch a receiver outside of 5 yards, you can't hit a defenseless receiver (even if it is without your helmet being led), you cant play with your back to the ball at all, or it is flagged, etc....    I just think that the days of the mentality of run well and stop the run and you will win championships is pretty much over.
1/20/2012 3:01 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 1/20/2012 2:44:00 PM (view original):
So why did the Packers lose?   Because they committed turnovers that they normally don't?   Would that not be considered "off" in the Land of E?  Hell, I'll make it easy.

1. Was the offense lesser than normal by whatever standard you'd like to apply?
2. Was the defense it's usually bad-self?

Assuming (1) yes and (2) yes, would it be unfair to say the Packers lost because the offense was not up to par?    If so, what the **** is your point again?
The defense was it's normal self.  Poor.  Yet the Packers were 15-1 and overcame it on a regular basis.  So...  what might have been different in the playoff game that allowed them to be so badly beaten?

Yes, Mike.  Turnovers.  I blame the turnovers far more than the passing game's deficiencies for the loss at Lambeau.  The receivers dropped 6 passes, which hurt, no doubt.  Rodgers missed 2 key passes, no doubt.  The Packers passing game certainly was not its usual #2 or 3 in the NFL self.  But they were good enough to win.  If the turnovers were not there. 

And yes.  Turning the ball over is considered off in the Land of E.  But the passing game wasn't off enough on it's own to lose the game.  Without Grant & Kuhn fumbling away the ball and handing the Giants points, and Rodgers getting sacked and fumbling (which Rodgers could have possibly avoided if he stepped up in the pocket, to be fair), the Packers were right in this game, if not outright leading the game.
1/20/2012 3:03 PM
And I'm not saying a team that can't pass effectively can win the Super Bowl(even though I think they can but they're going to have to do A LOT right).  Mostly for the reasons you stated.   However, it's widely accepted that leaving too much time on the clock in this day and age is a bad idea(because of the passing offenses).   It's also widely accepted that some teams, like NO, have addressed their shortcomings at RB(drafting Mark Ingram) because they know they need to control the last 5 minutes of games.  Teams that can't/couldn't, like Indy/NO have been surprisingly unsuccessful in the playoffs in recent years.  As has NE.  I'm not saying you have to rush for 170 yards.  I'm saying you have to be able to control the clock late in the game to put yourself in a favorable position.   Now, of course, this doesn't matter if you're up 42-10 with 7 minutes left but, as you know, a lot of these explosive offenses have sorry defenses(for whatever reason).   So the O needs to be able to put together a 11 play, 6 minute drive every now and then.   And even the best QB miss 30% of the time so you have to run the ball somewhat effectively for that to happen. 
of 65
All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > PACKERS: Datone Jones is latest DL bust drafted

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.