NFC Championship GB@Seattle (2 Viewers)

[CletiusMaximus]

The Packers were undone by what was eventually going to be their undoing and it was obvious all season long....they have no defense.

They looked good in the first half because the Seahawks made them look that way by playing so bad.

If they had scored a TD - TWICE - when at the 1 yard line then we're not talking about Bostick

If their defense could tackle, then Lynch doesn't do the hot knife through butter routine to score.

If Clinton-Dix had his head about him, he'd have "done his job" and played pass defense on the 2 point conversion.

Their safety play did them in in overtime too.

And that's before we get to the "playing it safe" play calling.

If your season comes down to whether or not Brandon Bostick does his job on an onside kick then you've likely failed in other aspects of the game.

ETA: Someone other than Hawk might have made a better play on that fake kick too. Why not cover the receiver? Do you really think the kicker is going to run for that score?

A defense that holds Seattle to zero points from scrimmage through three quarters is to blame? And it is "obvious" that was the case all season? The fact that fans are identifying so many different crucial breakdowns by the Packers players and coaches is evidence enough how silly it is to try to identify one single overriding moment or aspect of the game that caused this loss. Its the most improbable result I've ever seen. Most Packer fans still have a strong memory of the "4th and 26" play, which was over 10 years ago and likely cost the team a Lombardi. Yesterday, I think there were several 4th and 26 moments, any one of which would have changed the outcome.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

The Packers were undone by what was eventually going to be their undoing and it was obvious all season long....they have no defense.

They looked good in the first half because the Seahawks made them look that way by playing so bad.

If they had scored a TD - TWICE - when at the 1 yard line then we're not talking about Bostick

If their defense could tackle, then Lynch doesn't do the hot knife through butter routine to score.

If Clinton-Dix had his head about him, he'd have "done his job" and played pass defense on the 2 point conversion.

Their safety play did them in in overtime too.

And that's before we get to the "playing it safe" play calling.

If your season comes down to whether or not Brandon Bostick does his job on an onside kick then you've likely failed in other aspects of the game.

ETA: Someone other than Hawk might have made a better play on that fake kick too. Why not cover the receiver? Do you really think the kicker is going to run for that score?

A defense that holds Seattle to zero points from scrimmage through three quarters is to blame? And it is "obvious" that was the case all season? The fact that fans are identifying so many different crucial breakdowns by the Packers players and coaches is evidence enough how silly it is to try to identify one single overriding moment or aspect of the game that caused this loss. Its the most improbable result I've ever seen. Most Packer fans still have a strong memory of the "4th and 26" play, which was over 10 years ago and likely cost the team a Lombardi. Yesterday, I think there were several 4th and 26 moments, any one of which would have changed the outcome.

I would argue that Seattle held themselves to zero points through three quarters. And it was obvious that the Packers had linebacker and safety problems. It was a problem identified all the way back before the 2014 draft and while the drafting of Clinton-Dix helped a little, the problem still manifested itself and at the worst time.

I forgot to mention the sequence where Seattle had that 2nd and 31 that they converted.

Whatever nits you want to pick, their league average (+/- a bit depending on the metric) defense let them down the most yesterday. And against a just above mediocre offense.

And even if you can say they "did it for three quarters"...the games are four quarters long.

 

[Pipes]

The Packers were undone by what was eventually going to be their undoing and it was obvious all season long....they have no defense.

They looked good in the first half because the Seahawks made them look that way by playing so bad.

If they had scored a TD - TWICE - when at the 1 yard line then we're not talking about Bostick

If their defense could tackle, then Lynch doesn't do the hot knife through butter routine to score.

If Clinton-Dix had his head about him, he'd have "done his job" and played pass defense on the 2 point conversion.

Their safety play did them in in overtime too.

And that's before we get to the "playing it safe" play calling.

If your season comes down to whether or not Brandon Bostick does his job on an onside kick then you've likely failed in other aspects of the game.

ETA: Someone other than Hawk might have made a better play on that fake kick too. Why not cover the receiver? Do you really think the kicker is going to run for that score?

A defense that holds Seattle to zero points from scrimmage through three quarters is to blame? And it is "obvious" that was the case all season? The fact that fans are identifying so many different crucial breakdowns by the Packers players and coaches is evidence enough how silly it is to try to identify one single overriding moment or aspect of the game that caused this loss. Its the most improbable result I've ever seen. Most Packer fans still have a strong memory of the "4th and 26" play, which was over 10 years ago and likely cost the team a Lombardi. Yesterday, I think there were several 4th and 26 moments, any one of which would have changed the outcome.

I would argue that Seattle held themselves to zero points through three quarters. And it was obvious that the Packers had linebacker and safety problems. It was a problem identified all the way back before the 2014 draft and while the drafting of Clinton-Dix helped a little, the problem still manifested itself and at the worst time.

I forgot to mention the sequence where Seattle had that 2nd and 31 that they converted.

Whatever nits you want to pick, their league average (+/- a bit depending on the metric) defense let them down the most yesterday. And against a just above mediocre offense.

That's not a great argument as the Packers defense deserves some credit for the 4 interceptions. The defense/special teams generated 5 turnovers and the offense could only put up 22 points that's what lost them the game. Yes the defense fell apart in the last 5 minutes and overtime but they played great (for a mediocre Packers defense) for 3 plus quarters. Anyone who watches the Packers on a regular basis would say their defense play above their heads for most of yesterday's game.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

That's not a great argument as the Packers defense deserves some credit for the 4 interceptions. The defense/special teams generated 5 turnovers and the offense could only put up 22 points that's what lost them the game. Yes the defense fell apart in the last 5 minutes and overtime but they played great (for a mediocre Packers defense) for 3 plus quarters. Anyone who watches the Packers on a regular basis would say their defense play above their heads for most of yesterday's game.

At least two of those INTs were unforced erros (the one that Wilson threw down the middle of the field and the one that clanked off the receivers arm). Nice catch by HHCD on the first one, but the pass should never have been thrown.

Anyway, none of this is really my point. My point is you can't blame it on one guy (Bostick). There's plenty of blame to go around and it was a team loss.

And it's my opinion that with a better defense they would have won the game. Their defensive deficiencies have been talked about all season long (and then some)- linebacker and safety play.

 

[jon_mx]

It is still mind bottling that the personal foul somehow got declined.

Wasn't it explained to be a live ball foul so they had to take the play or the penalty? I thought they could do both too.

Does anyone have a definitive answer to this. Can a late hit be on a live ball? Can a personal foul be tacked on against the offense, or is that if it is only a dead ball foul? It seemed the explaination at the time was the Packers declined the penalty and took the result of the play, but I am not convinced that is right. Seems like a late hit is by definition a dead ball penalty whether the whistle blew or not.

 

[proninja]

That's not a great argument as the Packers defense deserves some credit for the 4 interceptions. The defense/special teams generated 5 turnovers and the offense could only put up 22 points that's what lost them the game. Yes the defense fell apart in the last 5 minutes and overtime but they played great (for a mediocre Packers defense) for 3 plus quarters. Anyone who watches the Packers on a regular basis would say their defense play above their heads for most of yesterday's game.

At least two of those INTs were unforced erros (the one that Wilson threw down the middle of the field and the one that clanked off the receivers arm). Nice catch by HHCD on the first one, but the pass should never have been thrown.

Anyway, none of this is really my point. My point is you can't blame it on one guy (Bostick). There's plenty of blame to go around and it was a team loss.

Yes, Bostick wasn't in on defense when the Seahawks scored 21 straight points in the last 3 minutes of regulation and the first drive of overtime. Blaming him for the loss because of one bad play is very poor form.

 

[fatboyj711]

McCarthy put the game in the hands of a mediocre defense instead of the NFL MVP.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

That's not a great argument as the Packers defense deserves some credit for the 4 interceptions. The defense/special teams generated 5 turnovers and the offense could only put up 22 points that's what lost them the game. Yes the defense fell apart in the last 5 minutes and overtime but they played great (for a mediocre Packers defense) for 3 plus quarters. Anyone who watches the Packers on a regular basis would say their defense play above their heads for most of yesterday's game.

At least two of those INTs were unforced erros (the one that Wilson threw down the middle of the field and the one that clanked off the receivers arm). Nice catch by HHCD on the first one, but the pass should never have been thrown.

Anyway, none of this is really my point. My point is you can't blame it on one guy (Bostick). There's plenty of blame to go around and it was a team loss.

And it's my opinion that with a better defense they would have won the game. Their defensive deficiencies have been talked about all season long (and then some)- linebacker and safety play.

If this is your point, it was poorly-stated ("they have no defense"). I agree the blame can be spread far and wide, but the defense put the team in position to have this one all but over at halftime, and completely out of reach after 3 quarters. Its easy to fantasize alternate scenarios in which this is an easy, comfortable win for the Packers. Ultimately a waste of time though. As is always the case in Green Bay, rightfully so, anything short of a Lombardi is failure.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

That's not a great argument as the Packers defense deserves some credit for the 4 interceptions. The defense/special teams generated 5 turnovers and the offense could only put up 22 points that's what lost them the game. Yes the defense fell apart in the last 5 minutes and overtime but they played great (for a mediocre Packers defense) for 3 plus quarters. Anyone who watches the Packers on a regular basis would say their defense play above their heads for most of yesterday's game.

At least two of those INTs were unforced erros (the one that Wilson threw down the middle of the field and the one that clanked off the receivers arm). Nice catch by HHCD on the first one, but the pass should never have been thrown.

Anyway, none of this is really my point. My point is you can't blame it on one guy (Bostick). There's plenty of blame to go around and it was a team loss.

And it's my opinion that with a better defense they would have won the game. Their defensive deficiencies have been talked about all season long (and then some)- linebacker and safety play.

If this is your point, it was poorly-stated ("they have no defense"). I agree the blame can be spread far and wide, but the defense put the team in position to have this one all but over at halftime, and completely out of reach after 3 quarters. Its easy to fantasize alternate scenarios in which this is an easy, comfortable win for the Packers. Ultimately a waste of time though. As is always the case in Green Bay, rightfully so, anything short of a Lombardi is failure.

Okay, fine. If you want to go by the letter of the argument and not the spirit just so that you can argue I'll put it this way. They didn't have ENOUGH defense.

Packers fans...

 

[Pipes]

That's not a great argument as the Packers defense deserves some credit for the 4 interceptions. The defense/special teams generated 5 turnovers and the offense could only put up 22 points that's what lost them the game. Yes the defense fell apart in the last 5 minutes and overtime but they played great (for a mediocre Packers defense) for 3 plus quarters. Anyone who watches the Packers on a regular basis would say their defense play above their heads for most of yesterday's game.

At least two of those INTs were unforced erros (the one that Wilson threw down the middle of the field and the one that clanked off the receivers arm). Nice catch by HHCD on the first one, but the pass should never have been thrown.

Anyway, none of this is really my point. My point is you can't blame it on one guy (Bostick). There's plenty of blame to go around and it was a team loss.

Yes, Bostick wasn't in on defense when the Seahawks scored 21 straight points in the last 3 minutes of regulation and the first drive of overtime. Blaming him for the loss because of one bad play is very poor form.

Yeah I haven't seen too many people blaming Bostick...there is a lot more anger directed at McCarthy it seems.

 

[Pipes]

It is still mind bottling that the personal foul somehow got declined.

Wasn't it explained to be a live ball foul so they had to take the play or the penalty? I thought they could do both too.

Does anyone have a definitive answer to this. Can a late hit be on a live ball? Can a personal foul be tacked on against the offense, or is that if it is only a dead ball foul? It seemed the explaination at the time was the Packers declined the penalty and took the result of the play, but I am not convinced that is right. Seems like a late hit is by definition a dead ball penalty whether the whistle blew or not.

I was confused by this as well but it was explained to be a live ball penalty so it was an either or deal not both. McCarthy isn't that stupid to decline a free 15 yards.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers were undone by what was eventually going to be their undoing and it was obvious all season long....they have no defense.

They looked good in the first half because the Seahawks made them look that way by playing so bad.

If they had scored a TD - TWICE - when at the 1 yard line then we're not talking about Bostick

If their defense could tackle, then Lynch doesn't do the hot knife through butter routine to score.

If Clinton-Dix had his head about him, he'd have "done his job" and played pass defense on the 2 point conversion.

Their safety play did them in in overtime too.

And that's before we get to the "playing it safe" play calling.

If your season comes down to whether or not Brandon Bostick does his job on an onside kick then you've likely failed in other aspects of the game.

ETA: Someone other than Hawk might have made a better play on that fake kick too. Why not cover the receiver? Do you really think the kicker is going to run for that score?

A defense that holds Seattle to zero points from scrimmage through three quarters is to blame? And it is "obvious" that was the case all season? The fact that fans are identifying so many different crucial breakdowns by the Packers players and coaches is evidence enough how silly it is to try to identify one single overriding moment or aspect of the game that caused this loss. Its the most improbable result I've ever seen. Most Packer fans still have a strong memory of the "4th and 26" play, which was over 10 years ago and likely cost the team a Lombardi. Yesterday, I think there were several 4th and 26 moments, any one of which would have changed the outcome.

Yeah...this was a huge blunder all around.

We can blame McCarthy for being conservative and not putting it in Rodgers hand...but they did throw and throw pretty often on 1st down in the 2nd half even.

And don't take this as me just blaming Rodgers either...but we talk a lot about how he has control at the line and can change plays. Why just blame McCarthy for play calling as some are?

It was an all around collapse...offense, defense, special teams, players and coaches.

 

[Tau837]

The play of the Seahawks defense has been overshadowed by how the game ended.

Green Bay's starting field position for its first 5 drives:

Drive 1 - GB 20

Drive 2 - SEA 19

Drive 3 - SEA 23

Drive 4 - GB 44

Drive 5 - SEA 33

The fact that the Seattle defense came out of that stretch allowing just 16 points, when three of those drives began in field goal range, was huge. Then they allowed just 3 points in Green Bay's next 7 possessions to keep Seattle in the game.

Ultimately, they held Green Bay well below their season averages for points and yards. And that was with Thomas missing some time and Sherman playing hurt. Very impressive.

 

[sho nuff]

It is still mind bottling that the personal foul somehow got declined.

Wasn't it explained to be a live ball foul so they had to take the play or the penalty? I thought they could do both too.

Does anyone have a definitive answer to this. Can a late hit be on a live ball? Can a personal foul be tacked on against the offense, or is that if it is only a dead ball foul? It seemed the explaination at the time was the Packers declined the penalty and took the result of the play, but I am not convinced that is right. Seems like a late hit is by definition a dead ball penalty whether the whistle blew or not.

I was confused by this as well but it was explained to be a live ball penalty so it was an either or deal not both. McCarthy isn't that stupid to decline a free 15 yards.

Going to say how terrible that rule is then...basically gives free reign to players to take shots at guys if their team is in the midst of a negative or big play.

Say its during a huge play by the offense and the ball is being caught 20 yards downfield...what is to stop an Olineman from taking a cheap shot on a LB or other defensive player while the play is happening?

I would think unsportsmanlike penalties should be tacked on always to prevent this.

 

[Tau837]

It was an all around collapse...offense, defense, special teams, players and coaches.

I agree with this. But I don't think it was just a collapse on the Green Bay side. Seattle also had to make a lot of plays to win, and they made them.

 

[Tau837]

Going to say how terrible that rule is then...basically gives free reign to players to take shots at guys if their team is in the midst of a negative or big play.

Say its during a huge play by the offense and the ball is being caught 20 yards downfield...what is to stop an Olineman from taking a cheap shot on a LB or other defensive player while the play is happening?

I would think unsportsmanlike penalties should be tacked on always to prevent this.

I think the NFL needs to explain this. Feels like the refs made an error.

 

[sho nuff]

It was an all around collapse...offense, defense, special teams, players and coaches.

I agree with this. But I don't think it was just a collapse on the Green Bay side. Seattle also had to make a lot of plays to win, and they made them.

True...they deserve the credit for making the plays and every one of them they needed. Showed a ton of heart and resolve there.

 

[Balco]

It still stings. Going to take me a while to get over.

 

[snogger]

Going to say how terrible that rule is then...basically gives free reign to players to take shots at guys if their team is in the midst of a negative or big play.

Say its during a huge play by the offense and the ball is being caught 20 yards downfield...what is to stop an Olineman from taking a cheap shot on a LB or other defensive player while the play is happening?

I would think unsportsmanlike penalties should be tacked on always to prevent this.

I think the NFL needs to explain this. Feels like the refs made an error.

on a "error"..

Per a league source, it’s a judgment call by the official as to whether the penalty occurred during or after the play. By concluding that it happened during the play, however, the officials gave Sweezy what FOX’s Joe Buck properly described as a “free shot” at Matthews.

and Good quote below:

Meanwhile, the NFL should consider a rule change that makes all personal fouls dead-ball fouls, with the yardage marked off no matter the outcome of the play.

 

[Tau837]

Going to say how terrible that rule is then...basically gives free reign to players to take shots at guys if their team is in the midst of a negative or big play.

Say its during a huge play by the offense and the ball is being caught 20 yards downfield...what is to stop an Olineman from taking a cheap shot on a LB or other defensive player while the play is happening?

I would think unsportsmanlike penalties should be tacked on always to prevent this.

I think the NFL needs to explain this. Feels like the refs made an error.

on a "error"..

Per a league source, it’s a judgment call by the official as to whether the penalty occurred during or after the play. By concluding that it happened during the play, however, the officials gave Sweezy what FOX’s Joe Buck properly described as a “free shot” at Matthews.

and Good quote below:

Meanwhile, the NFL should consider a rule change that makes all personal fouls dead-ball fouls, with the yardage marked off no matter the outcome of the play.

OK, if that is the rule, so be it. I just don't remember ever seeing that before. And I agree with the logic that it gives the offense a free shot in certain situations, which is counterintuitive and counter to the league's public stance on player safety.

 

[sho nuff]

Going to say how terrible that rule is then...basically gives free reign to players to take shots at guys if their team is in the midst of a negative or big play.

Say its during a huge play by the offense and the ball is being caught 20 yards downfield...what is to stop an Olineman from taking a cheap shot on a LB or other defensive player while the play is happening?

I would think unsportsmanlike penalties should be tacked on always to prevent this.

I think the NFL needs to explain this. Feels like the refs made an error.

on a "error"..

Per a league source, it’s a judgment call by the official as to whether the penalty occurred during or after the play. By concluding that it happened during the play, however, the officials gave Sweezy what FOX’s Joe Buck properly described as a “free shot” at Matthews.

and Good quote below:

Meanwhile, the NFL should consider a rule change that makes all personal fouls dead-ball fouls, with the yardage marked off no matter the outcome of the play.

OK, if that is the rule, so be it. I just don't remember ever seeing that before. And I agree with the logic that it gives the offense a free shot in certain situations, which is counterintuitive and counter to the league's public stance on player safety.

Agreed...something that should get changed this year.

 

[ryno1980]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

 

[thatguythere]

http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/27884109/today-is-saddest-day-of-the-year-and-theres-a-blue-monday-equation-that-explains-why

Oof, double whammy for the sconcies....

 

[Deamon]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

So much hindsight in this thread its insane. If the TE let Jordy catch the ball, McCarthy would be praised for "taking the points" and going for FGs and winning the game for them. He only made "the wrong" call because of a completely awful decision by one of his players. Yes, if they got TDs they would have won. THey also could have been stuffed and let Seattle back into the game much earlier. Overall he called a game that was GOOD ENOUGH to win as 6 point road dogs.

 

[thatguythere]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

So much hindsight in this thread its insane. If the TE let Jordy catch the ball, McCarthy would be praised for "taking the points" and going for FGs and winning the game for them. He only made "the wrong" call because of a completely awful decision by one of his players. Yes, if they got TDs they would have won. THey also could have been stuffed and let Seattle back into the game much earlier. Overall he called a game that was GOOD ENOUGH to win as 6 point road dogs.

Yeah because Jordy has been Mr. Automatic catching the ball the last few weeks. Way to follow up the insane hindsight with even more.

 

[Deamon]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

So much hindsight in this thread its insane. If the TE let Jordy catch the ball, McCarthy would be praised for "taking the points" and going for FGs and winning the game for them. He only made "the wrong" call because of a completely awful decision by one of his players. Yes, if they got TDs they would have won. THey also could have been stuffed and let Seattle back into the game much earlier. Overall he called a game that was GOOD ENOUGH to win as 6 point road dogs.

Yeah because Jordy has been Mr. Automatic catching the ball the last few weeks. Way to follow up the insane hindsight with even more.

Pretty confident he would have caught the onside kick. The hindsight is in terms of coaching decisions.

It happens all the time in football and it baffles me. Everyone says 'the coach was so stupid for doing that, why would he do that' if it doesn't work. Let's say the Packers go for it on 4th down those 3 times and come up short. There would be even MORE people in here saying "you take the points on the road vs seattle... you don't mess around and try for the tds" if they lost the game by 3.

The surprise onside kicks, the trick plays, the going for it on 4th downs, the running play, or passing play.... there will always be an uproar of "why would you do that? You don't make that call in that situation" if it doesn't work. If it works, the coach has balls, is a genius, etc. Can you imagine the hate Payton would have gotten if his surprise onside in the Super Bowl didn't work and they lost? Would have gone down as one of the worst coaching decisions ever, but now it goes down as a great one.

 

[seahawk 17]

Hell of a game.

 

[ryno1980]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

So much hindsight in this thread its insane. If the TE let Jordy catch the ball, McCarthy would be praised for "taking the points" and going for FGs and winning the game for them. He only made "the wrong" call because of a completely awful decision by one of his players. Yes, if they got TDs they would have won. THey also could have been stuffed and let Seattle back into the game much earlier. Overall he called a game that was GOOD ENOUGH to win as 6 point road dogs.

I didn't say a word about going for it and not taking the points. I'm just saying they had 3 downs to get it in the end zone and failed. smdh

 

[Wingnut]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

So much hindsight in this thread its insane. If the TE let Jordy catch the ball, McCarthy would be praised for "taking the points" and going for FGs and winning the game for them. He only made "the wrong" call because of a completely awful decision by one of his players. Yes, if they got TDs they would have won. THey also could have been stuffed and let Seattle back into the game much earlier. Overall he called a game that was GOOD ENOUGH to win as 6 point road dogs.

Yeah because Jordy has been Mr. Automatic catching the ball the last few weeks. Way to follow up the insane hindsight with even more.

Pretty confident he would have caught the onside kick. The hindsight is in terms of coaching decisions.It happens all the time in football and it baffles me. Everyone says 'the coach was so stupid for doing that, why would he do that' if it doesn't work. Let's say the Packers go for it on 4th down those 3 times and come up short. There would be even MORE people in here saying "you take the points on the road vs seattle... you don't mess around and try for the tds" if they lost the game by 3.

The surprise onside kicks, the trick plays, the going for it on 4th downs, the running play, or passing play.... there will always be an uproar of "why would you do that? You don't make that call in that situation" if it doesn't work. If it works, the coach has balls, is a genius, etc. Can you imagine the hate Payton would have gotten if his surprise onside in the Super Bowl didn't work and they lost? Would have gone down as one of the worst coaching decisions ever, but now it goes down as a great one.

This is a good post. The difference between a genius and bonehead decision early in a game usually comes down to whether you end with a W or L.

 

[Longtucky Lemmings]

Hell of a game.

This. I'm a Packers fan and was crushed by the result. But the truth is we got to see one of the most epic games of our lifetime. This one will likely be talked about for a long time....especially if Seattle wins the Super Bowl

 

[sho nuff]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

So much hindsight in this thread its insane. If the TE let Jordy catch the ball, McCarthy would be praised for "taking the points" and going for FGs and winning the game for them. He only made "the wrong" call because of a completely awful decision by one of his players. Yes, if they got TDs they would have won. THey also could have been stuffed and let Seattle back into the game much earlier. Overall he called a game that was GOOD ENOUGH to win as 6 point road dogs.

Yeah because Jordy has been Mr. Automatic catching the ball the last few weeks. Way to follow up the insane hindsight with even more.

Pretty confident he would have caught the onside kick. The hindsight is in terms of coaching decisions.

It happens all the time in football and it baffles me. Everyone says 'the coach was so stupid for doing that, why would he do that' if it doesn't work. Let's say the Packers go for it on 4th down those 3 times and come up short. There would be even MORE people in here saying "you take the points on the road vs seattle... you don't mess around and try for the tds" if they lost the game by 3.

The surprise onside kicks, the trick plays, the going for it on 4th downs, the running play, or passing play.... there will always be an uproar of "why would you do that? You don't make that call in that situation" if it doesn't work. If it works, the coach has balls, is a genius, etc. Can you imagine the hate Payton would have gotten if his surprise onside in the Super Bowl didn't work and they lost? Would have gone down as one of the worst coaching decisions ever, but now it goes down as a great one.

The bolded is dead on...like complaining in the game they should run the ball more...now complaining they got too conservative.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

Hell of a game.

This. I'm a Packers fan and was crushed by the result. But the truth is we got to see one of the most epic games of our lifetime. This one will likely be talked about for a long time....especially if Seattle wins the Super Bowl

I feel bad for Packer fans, that was as tuff a loss as you will ever see; I still can't believe the Packers lost that game after dominating it for 55 minutes.

 

[ryno1980]

It's sad...just sad. The better team lost. Just great...now we'll be "treated" to an amazing Super Bowl. Yay....

The inferior team played like the inferior team and blew it. They lost this game in the first quarter as much as the 4th. Had a chance to score TDs and came away with FGs off those Seattle turnovers.

So much hindsight in this thread its insane. If the TE let Jordy catch the ball, McCarthy would be praised for "taking the points" and going for FGs and winning the game for them. He only made "the wrong" call because of a completely awful decision by one of his players. Yes, if they got TDs they would have won. THey also could have been stuffed and let Seattle back into the game much earlier. Overall he called a game that was GOOD ENOUGH to win as 6 point road dogs.

Yeah because Jordy has been Mr. Automatic catching the ball the last few weeks. Way to follow up the insane hindsight with even more.

Pretty confident he would have caught the onside kick. The hindsight is in terms of coaching decisions.

It happens all the time in football and it baffles me. Everyone says 'the coach was so stupid for doing that, why would he do that' if it doesn't work. Let's say the Packers go for it on 4th down those 3 times and come up short. There would be even MORE people in here saying "you take the points on the road vs seattle... you don't mess around and try for the tds" if they lost the game by 3.

The surprise onside kicks, the trick plays, the going for it on 4th downs, the running play, or passing play.... there will always be an uproar of "why would you do that? You don't make that call in that situation" if it doesn't work. If it works, the coach has balls, is a genius, etc. Can you imagine the hate Payton would have gotten if his surprise onside in the Super Bowl didn't work and they lost? Would have gone down as one of the worst coaching decisions ever, but now it goes down as a great one.

The bolded is dead on...like complaining in the game they should run the ball more...now complaining they got too conservative.

I didn't suggest they should have went for it on 4th down (that would have been dumb). But they failed to execute. You guys can save your hostility for those criticizing the coaching. It's the QB's job to convert in the red zone and they didn't get it done and it ultimately bit them in the a**

 

[Sabertooth]

Bostick. Oh man, just showed that guy after the game on ESPN. Feel for that dude.

Yeah, me too. Not only did he screw up, but he screwed up while not doing his assignment. And now he'll be known as the guy who kept the Packers out of the Super Bowl for the rest of his life. Wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Well, maybe he shouldn't have screwed the pooch then, huh? I don't feel bad for him one bit. He's a bum.

 

[ROCKET]

This will sting for a long time for Packer fans. I've had my share of triumphs and heartbreaks as a sports fan. There is no sense rehashing woulda, coulda, shoulda's. It just wasn't meant to be.

 

[Sabertooth]

And guess what, Brandon Bostick now gets to be featured on every NFL Films "Greatest comebacks of all time" videos. So he's famous. He went for the glory and immortalized himself.

 

[Sabertooth]

This will sting for a long time for Packer fans. I've had my share of triumphs and heartbreaks as a sports fan. There is no sense rehashing woulda, coulda, shoulda's. It just wasn't meant to be.

Yep, if they were truly championship material they'd have won this game. They aren't. Too mentally weak from the top down.

 

[TDorBust]

This will sting for a long time for Packer fans. I've had my share of triumphs and heartbreaks as a sports fan. There is no sense rehashing woulda, coulda, shoulda's. It just wasn't meant to be.

I dont know about other Packers fans but personally I am actually not upset or anything about the game yesterday. I look at it as no one gave them a chance to win, they proved they had the ability with the NFL MVP somewhat hobbled to win that game, they blew their chance by having multiple issues to allow Seattle to comeback.

In the end I think if anything yesterday proves that Green Bay can deal with a "physical" team they just need to work on the red zone plays more in the off-season and hopefully Rodgers keeps improving at TE to give them another threat inside the 10 and for those crucial 3rd and shorts. Would have been nice to get to the Super Bowl which is what I expected but biggest issue we had was not doing enough to have a home game yesterday.

On to 2015 and another chance to add to our championship trophy case. Now if we get back to this point next year and Seattle won the Super Bowl back to back then there will be a little more pressure as GB is the only franchise to 3-peat as champions and we have done it twice. #titletown

PS - Still don't believe in Seattle and think New England comes out ahead which is unfortunate as the last thing I want is another Tom Brady championship.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

This will sting for a long time for Packer fans. I've had my share of triumphs and heartbreaks as a sports fan. There is no sense rehashing woulda, coulda, shoulda's. It just wasn't meant to be.

I dont know about other Packers fans but personally I am actually not upset or anything about the game yesterday. I look at it as no one gave them a chance to win, they proved they had the ability with the NFL MVP somewhat hobbled to win that game, they blew their chance by having multiple issues to allow Seattle to comeback.

In the end I think if anything yesterday proves that Green Bay can deal with a "physical" team they just need to work on the red zone plays more in the off-season and hopefully Rodgers keeps improving at TE to give them another threat inside the 10 and for those crucial 3rd and shorts. Would have been nice to get to the Super Bowl which is what I expected but biggest issue we had was not doing enough to have a home game yesterday.

On to 2015 and another chance to add to our championship trophy case. Now if we get back to this point next year and Seattle won the Super Bowl back to back then there will be a little more pressure as GB is the only franchise to 3-peat as champions and we have done it twice. #titletown

PS - Still don't believe in Seattle and think New England comes out ahead which is unfortunate as the last thing I want is another Tom Brady championship.

Perhaps instead of pointing fingers, we should all take a long hard look in the mirror and ask ourselves the hard questions. What could we, as fans, have done differently? Did we have anything left in the gas tank yesterday when the clock struck 0:00, or did we leave it all out there? Personally, I now realize I was off my game. I was happy Burnett slid after the INT, because, like him, I thought the game was over. I let the Pack down, and am ashamed, but I'll learn from this and be a better fan because of it.

 

[Tau837]

Perhaps instead of pointing fingers, we should all take a long hard look in the mirror and ask ourselves the hard questions. What could we, as fans, have done differently? Did we have anything left in the gas tank yesterday when the clock struck 0:00, or did we leave it all out there? Personally, I now realize I was off my game. I was happy Burnett slid after the INT, because, like him, I thought the game was over. I let the Pack down, and am ashamed, but I'll learn from this and be a better fan because of it.

Glad to see you still have your sense of humor, GB.

 

[Pop Tart]

The Packers were undone by what was eventually going to be their undoing and it was obvious all season long....they have no defense.

They looked good in the first half because the Seahawks made them look that way by playing so bad.

If they had scored a TD - TWICE - when at the 1 yard line then we're not talking about Bostick

If their defense could tackle, then Lynch doesn't do the hot knife through butter routine to score.

If Clinton-Dix had his head about him, he'd have "done his job" and played pass defense on the 2 point conversion.

Their safety play did them in in overtime too.

And that's before we get to the "playing it safe" play calling.

If your season comes down to whether or not Brandon Bostick does his job on an onside kick then you've likely failed in other aspects of the game.

ETA: Someone other than Hawk might have made a better play on that fake kick too. Why not cover the receiver? Do you really think the kicker is going to run for that score?

A defense that holds Seattle to zero points from scrimmage through three quarters is to blame? And it is "obvious" that was the case all season? The fact that fans are identifying so many different crucial breakdowns by the Packers players and coaches is evidence enough how silly it is to try to identify one single overriding moment or aspect of the game that caused this loss. Its the most improbable result I've ever seen. Most Packer fans still have a strong memory of the "4th and 26" play, which was over 10 years ago and likely cost the team a Lombardi. Yesterday, I think there were several 4th and 26 moments, any one of which would have changed the outcome.

I would argue that Seattle held themselves to zero points through three quarters. And it was obvious that the Packers had linebacker and safety problems. It was a problem identified all the way back before the 2014 draft and while the drafting of Clinton-Dix helped a little, the problem still manifested itself and at the worst time.

I forgot to mention the sequence where Seattle had that 2nd and 31 that they converted.

Whatever nits you want to pick, their league average (+/- a bit depending on the metric) defense let them down the most yesterday. And against a just above mediocre offense.

And even if you can say they "did it for three quarters"...the games are four quarters long.

Disgruntled Viking fan not giving Green bay any credit.

Shocking

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Disgruntled Viking fan not giving Green bay any credit.

Shocking

Credit for losing?

 

[Pop Tart]

Disgruntled Viking fan not giving Green bay any credit.

Shocking

Credit for losing?

How did your Vikings do?

 

[Pop Tart]

Disgruntled Viking fan not giving Green bay any credit.

Shocking

Credit for losing?

How did your Vikings do?

Yea, sitting at home like my team yesterday, but I can give credit where credit is due. The Packer defense played well for 45 mins. I can't stand them, but I'm not taking a shot at them like a bitterass viking fan

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Disgruntled Viking fan not giving Green bay any credit.

Shocking

Credit for losing?

How did your Vikings do?

Wow, you really got me there.

Not sure what you want me to say. They played well and caught some breaks for three and a half quarters. In the end their weaknesses were their downfall.

 

[ImTheScientist]

The best team won the game. I think the Packers should feel lucky they were gifted those turnovers. I haven't seen the hawks play a game that poorly in over 3 years.

Arizona time.

 

[MarcO]

Hell of a game.

This. I'm a Packers fan and was crushed by the result. But the truth is we got to see one of the most epic games of our lifetime. This one will likely be talked about for a long time....especially if Seattle wins the Super Bowl

I feel bad for Packer fans, that was as tuff a loss as you will ever see; I still can't believe the Packers lost that game after dominating it for 55 minutes.

not sure I would say they dominated for 55 minutes. Packers did very little offensively after the first quarter - 120 or so yards in the 1st, 170 or so yards the remaining 3 quarters with 50 coming in the last minute drive for a FG.

Seahawks D really clamped down after the 1st quarter. The Packers pass D was dominant in the 1st half but even with that Seahawks out-gained the Packers in every quarter but the 1st.

 

[ImTheScientist]

http://vimeo.com/117127513

Great replay of the last minute of the game!

Moon with the "game over".

 

[sho nuff]

The best team won the game. I think the Packers should feel lucky they were gifted those turnovers. I haven't seen the hawks play a game that poorly in over 3 years.

Arizona time.

And the Seahawks were gifted 2 ints too...and an onsides kick, 2 point coversion....

 

[sho nuff]

Hell of a game.

This. I'm a Packers fan and was crushed by the result. But the truth is we got to see one of the most epic games of our lifetime. This one will likely be talked about for a long time....especially if Seattle wins the Super Bowl

I feel bad for Packer fans, that was as tuff a loss as you will ever see; I still can't believe the Packers lost that game after dominating it for 55 minutes.

not sure I would say they dominated for 55 minutes. Packers did very little offensively after the first quarter - 120 or so yards in the 1st, 170 or so yards the remaining 3 quarters with 50 coming in the last minute drive for a FG. Seahawks D really clamped down after the 1st quarter. The Packers pass D was dominant in the 1st half but even with that Seahawks out-gained the Packers in every quarter but the 1st.

16-0 at the half...no defensive points really given up til how much time left?

They dominated until the last 5 minutes.