This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
well whatever, pretty sure I won't convince you of anything. Packers played great and probably deserved to go to the SuperBowl but if they had dominated for 55 minutes it would have been more than 19-7 with 5 minutes left after starting 16-0 in the 1st quarter. The Seahawks didn't just magically appear at the 20 yard line for the fake field goal and the GB offense didn't just punt the ball to be nice.
They did kick their ### up and down the field for 90% of the game...just didn't close it out when it mattered.
Not really. First quarter, yes. GB struggled to move the ball, especially in the 2nd half when they needed it most.
16-0 at half...what was Wilson's rating?
And now you guys are whining about me whining about others whining, but now I'm whining about you whining about me whining about others whining.
They had the lead, yes. Yes, Seattle also struggled to move the ball. Outside of the first quarter GB gained 169 yards total, with drives ending in FG, INT, punt, punt, punt, FG, punt, punt, FG. Lacy's and Rodgers average yards per play plummeted. In that same time period, Seattle gained 374 yards, and scored three TDs. Take away overtime, and the Seahawks still outscored and outgained GB, despite turning the ball over 2 more times than GB.
Hawks have the money to lock up Wilson long term, as well as the other big FA this coming offseason (Wagner). Everyone else is already under contract for the most part. We will most likely lose Maxwell this offseason, but I trust Seattle to find a suitable replacement for him.
This.
Cheese plates?
Exactly it wasn't like it was a miracle the Packers were winning. I think the majority of players with 5 mins left figured they were playing in the Super Bowl in 2 weeks. They didn't finish so tough, but what are they going to say RIGHT AFTER THE F-ING GAME?!?!? Its not like the game was even remotely close the Seahawks looked like utter trash for 55 minutes.
Not sure where he is going with this? Trying to make the Packers fans feel bad? Like I told someone today as long as I can point to those 13 championships (most in the NFL), no Bears Super Bowl win, and no team 3-peating as a Champion (Packers only team to do it and they did it twice) then I really can care less.
A quick look at Wikipedia shows 11 championships before we landed on the moon. Four of those before the end of WWII. Nice job.
Anything we can do to get you to where you couldn't care less?
I was the big one that didn't give a crap about games played in the 30's. Titletown probably needs an infrastructure makeover.
I probably don't know the salary cap situation as well as you, and I know trading Harvin away helps, but I'm not sure it's possible to positively spin Wilson's $20+ million pay raise
Mind bottling?
He's just about finished covering the entire shark pool with his misinformation/opinion presented as fact, don't trip him up now!!
Nothing wrong with celebrating the history and tradition of a storied franchise. Fans of teams that haven't existed lomg don't really get it I guess. Not knocking you personally, I just don't get why anyone would try to lessen the meaning of championships from before their time. They still matter to the franchises and their fans, and sometimes that fandom goes back generations in families, which is pretty cool, IMO.
The Seattle offense was trash for 55 minutes. The Seattle defense kept them close enough to give them a chance. Lacy had about 70 yards? Rogers had about 170 yards? Was the Seahawk defense trash? I don't think so.
And the Packer offense was trash for 45 minutes. I don't get the dominated for 55 minutes narrative. Seattle outgained GB in 3 quarters and outscored them in 2. Yes, they were BEHIND the whole game, thanks to a disastrous start by the offense, but if the Hawks were dominated on offense for 3 quarters, so were the Packers - just the last 3.
The positive way to spin it is that we have a qb deserving of an enormous contract. It's really the best case scenario. The way people talk about his contract it's like he'll be a millstone around the neck of the franchise. He's Russell ####### Wilson. And he's ours. That's the positive way to spin it.I probably don't know the salary cap situation as well as you, and I know trading Harvin away helps, but I'm not sure it's possible to positively spin Wilson's $20+ million pay raise
What did happen there? Wouldn't a personal foul just be additional lost yardage... and not make them replay the down?
No, Seattle isn't clearly better. The game went to OT and Rodger's calf injury was a factor as he was much less mobile. Game game down to some big plays and maybe a little luck (2 point conversion?) down the stretch - Give Seattle credit for that. And maybe GB stopped playing to soon... but these teams were well matched.
He was getting playing time before he got hurt and headed to IR. I'm hopeful that he and Jordan Hill will be the next men up next season. Hill really started to shine before he got hurt. Marsh didn't really get the opportunity to shine yet. Pretty sure he was out by week 4 or 5.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/traffic/no-new-sagging-on-leo-frigo-bridge-on-i-43-in-green-bay-dot-says-b99112046z1-226307681.html
Seattle was 2-0 against GB this year. Crushed them the first time. They had 5 turnovers and still pulled out the win the second time. Clearly Seattle's defense has Green Bay's number. Does anybody really think that the GB defense has a chance to do that again to the Seattle offense?
