Game Day Thread Official Post Game Thread- Packers beat the Pats

[signbabybrady]

3rd and 5, defense was primed for a pass. 2nd and 5 after a run play, defense had to defend the run (which they did), making a pass more viable. I think we played conservatively there, played not to lose, and lost. I mean, how many times were we going to keep Rogers out of field goal range?

They didn't play to lose they put the ball in their best offensive players hand they had that day instead of a third stringer on his first action of his rookie year. It didn't work so it gets second guessed.

 

[captain stone]

They didn't play to lose they put the ball in their best offensive players hand they had that day instead of a third stringer on his first action of his rookie year. It didn't work so it gets second guessed.

Then why didn't they do the same thing on 3rd down?

 

[ALP]

Then why didn't they do the same thing on 3rd down?

yeah that logic really doesn't fly...there's little logic to what we did unless that logic is be conservative and do the the conservative sequence: run, run, pass...

there was no thinking about the bigger picture of the 4th down there, just in the moment play calling...either pass sooner or only run, nothing else really makes sense

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Do something Patricia, god damn it, your supposed to be a rocket scientist.

I think he will. The offense gets more diverse every week. Of course it has to simply for a few weeks with Zappe. It is an opportunity for the OLine to perfect both zone and power running trying to run against 8 and 9 in the box.

It is too bad Mac is injured, I think he would have been fabulous in the 2nd half of this year. Next year Mac will be special.

 

[signbabybrady]

Then why didn't they do the same thing on 3rd down?

I think they do had they gained even a yard on 2nd down.

 

[signbabybrady]

yeah that logic really doesn't fly...there's little logic to what we did unless that logic is be conservative and do the the conservative sequence: run, run, pass...

there was no thinking about the bigger picture of the 4th down there, just in the moment play calling...either pass sooner or only run, nothing else really makes sense

Really? Yes the logic was conservative. I don't see the fault in the conservative play when you have a 3rd stringer in there.

 

[venecol]

Really? Yes the logic was conservative. I don't see the fault in the conservative play when you have a 3rd stringer in there.

The fault with being conservative lies in the football situation at the time:

1. You stop GB on their 1st OT drive, so the next score wins.
2. You start your drive at your own 49 thanks to Marcus Jones great 20-yd return (wasted).
3. You only need 16 yards to kick a GW FG & the biggest Week 4 upset.
4. You pick up 5 yards on a 1st down run, so you need 10 more to win.
5. Everyone in the stadium knows you're running the ball. So we run the ball. Stuffed.
6. Now you're at 3rd & 5, you call a TO to think about it. Everyone in the stadium knows you're going to pass the ball. So we pass the ball. Incomplete.
7. 4th down facing: go for it & if you make it you may win the game. If you don't you give GB good field position and probably lose. Or you punt it back to Rodgers, giving him a 2nd bite at the apple. He found his groove in the 2nd half, so your tricks in the 1st half no longer work. Decision: Punt.

The entire drive was approached too conservatively. Given the "situation" it was the wrong approach. Total lack of cojones.

Good game though.

 

[ashley]

The fault with being conservative lies in the football situation at the time:

1. You stop GB on their 1st OT drive, so the next score wins.
2. You start your drive at your own 49 thanks to Marcus Jones great 20-yd return (wasted).
3. You only need 16 yards to kick a GW FG & the biggest Week 4 upset.
4. You pick up 5 yards on a 1st down run, so you need 10 more to win.
5. Everyone in the stadium knows you're running the ball. So we run the ball. Stuffed.
6. Now you're at 3rd & 5, you call a TO to think about it. Everyone in the stadium knows you're going to pass the ball. So we pass the ball. Incomplete.
7. 4th down facing: go for it & if you make it you may win the game. If you don't you give GB good field position and probably lose. Or you punt it back to Rodgers, giving him a 2nd bite at the apple. He found his groove in the 2nd half, so your tricks in the 1st half no longer work. Decision: Punt.

The entire drive was approached too conservatively. Given the "situation" it was the wrong approach. Total lack of cojones.

Good game though.

The biggest question is on 2nd on 5 did you have a problem with that call after gaining 5 yards on 1st down and running the ball well the whole game or did you have a problem throwing the ball on 3rd and 5?

 

[ashley]

Not even sure why you would ask BB this question, you know he's not giving you anything:

 

[mike_usagisan]

The fault with being conservative lies in the football situation at the time:

1. You stop GB on their 1st OT drive, so the next score wins.
2. You start your drive at your own 49 thanks to Marcus Jones great 20-yd return (wasted).
3. You only need 16 yards to kick a GW FG & the biggest Week 4 upset.
4. You pick up 5 yards on a 1st down run, so you need 10 more to win.
5. Everyone in the stadium knows you're running the ball. So we run the ball. Stuffed.
6. Now you're at 3rd & 5, you call a TO to think about it. Everyone in the stadium knows you're going to pass the ball. So we pass the ball. Incomplete.
7. 4th down facing: go for it & if you make it you may win the game. If you don't you give GB good field position and probably lose. Or you punt it back to Rodgers, giving him a 2nd bite at the apple. He found his groove in the 2nd half, so your tricks in the 1st half no longer work. Decision: Punt.

The entire drive was approached too conservatively. Given the "situation" it was the wrong approach. Total lack of cojones.

Good game though.

I disagree on a couple points, but I can see your line of thinking.

4. Everyone knew we were running on first down and we still made 5 yards. I think that set up the decision on the second down run. That was the strength of our offense and we had just seen Zappe take a sack on his last play-action attempt. I like the argument that we should have run on third down better.
7. You're giving GB too much credit that if we punt it, we lose. We had just stopped GB and our defense had been playing well. By that line of thinking, how did GB not score their first series in overtime?

Again, when the game mattered, they put it in the hands of the strength of the team: the running game and the defense.

But if they had played it your way, I'd probably be defending that play calling to a bunch of people saying, "Why didn't they run it!?!"

 

[PatsFan2]

Not even sure why you would ask BB this question, you know he's not giving you anything:

I'm not so sure I like this smiley BB in recent press conferences he seems so disingenuous.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

The conservative game plan was straight out of Mac's rookie year. Playing not to lose does not win enough when playing good teams. The Pats lost a number of games that they could have won if they were more aggressive. The introduction of throwing it down field is the evolutionary step for his development which has had its own downside. Zappe will have training wheels on.

 

[venecol]

I disagree on a couple points, but I can see your line of thinking.

4. Everyone knew we were running on first down and we still made 5 yards. I think that set up the decision on the second down run. That was the strength of our offense and we had just seen Zappe take a sack on his last play-action attempt. I like the argument that we should have run on third down better.
7. You're giving GB too much credit that if we punt it, we lose. We had just stopped GB and our defense had been playing well. By that line of thinking, how did GB not score their first series in overtime?

Again, when the game mattered, they put it in the hands of the strength of the team: the running game and the defense.

But if they had played it your way, I'd probably be defending that play calling to a bunch of people saying, "Why didn't they run it!?!"

My point was the approach of the entirety of the drive: it was conservative with RRP & punt. They should've gone into that drive committed to getting 10 yards in 4 downs. Clearly, they didn't. This isn't surprising coming from Bill. There was a chart last season of teams going for it on 4th downs. The four lowest rates were the 4 oldest guys: Zimmer, Carrol, Arians & Bill.

 

[captain stone]

Not even sure why you would ask BB this question, you know he's not giving you anything:

Or ask Bill any question, really...

 

[Marko]

That’s a little ridiculous on a few levels.

The pats moved the ball great last week. Most yards per play in the NFL. The turnovers killed them, but not the ability to move the ball.

Zappe was asked to do extremely little. Hand it off, take advantage of wide open receivers on PA. We tried a few traditional passes and I think he was actually extremely uncomposed. Frantic internal clock. Look at how many successful plays we had on passes that weren’t under center PA.
And by the way, one completion in OT on third wins the game there. Haven’t seen the film, so maybe that was on the receivers.

If Zappe were even REMOTELY close to nipping at Mac’s heels, they would have let him run a real offense with the game on the line. They didn’t.

Agreed, can we at least not imagine things when evaluating players?