What confuses me the most about last night.....

Yes, I know the end result.  Yes, I know Seatte "won" the game...

I am not referring to the betting angle of the game.  I am strictly referring to the Win or Loss.

I keep seeing people on this site saying that "Seatte deserved to win, Seattle was the right side"....

Please tell me why this is???

Because they got 8 sacks in the 1st half???

I live in Chicago, WHO HATES GB.  I am surrounded every minute by people who hate the Packers, and EVERYONE in this town is talking about how robbed they got last night. 

Yet, people on here actually claim Seatte "deserved" this win.

Lets actually breakdown the game.

Sure, Seattle got 8 sacks in the 1st half.  Amazing, impressive and pathetic offense by GB...100% CORRECT....

But, if you look past the sacks, GB defense was actually better.

Seattle had 5 3-and outs.  Seattle had 2 drives over 6 plays, and 5 drives over 5 plays. 

Of their 5 drives that were more than 3-and out, 3, YES ONLY 3 drives all game had more than 3 plays because of a flag on GB.  And, 1 of those 3 drives was the end of the half on their own 10. 

Their 2nd and final drive of the game, were the only drives of the night that had more than 3 plays not because of a flag.

Their 1st scoring drive resulted of a missed PF call, that instead of 3rd and 8, allowed a 1st and 10, allowing them to call a play-action pass that wouldnt have been called without the flag. 

Their 12-play drive that ended on a loss of downs, continued because of not 1, but 2 AWFUL calls.  First the roughing the passer for tackling the feet on a PICK, then the PI on 1st and 30 when Rice jumped over Shields.  So, instead of 1st and 40 on their own 30, it was 1st and 30 on GB 30.  Only a change of 40 yds.  That call resulted in them driving the ball down to the 5 yd. 

I just dont understand how people think Seatte "deserved the win".

Despite the 8 sacks in the 1st half, GB only had 1 3-and out.  They had 6 drives of 5 plays or more, and 5 drives of 7 or more plays.

I have no problem admitting the awful call on Finley on the PI, that resulted in a td.  I have no problem admitting the missed PI on Woodson on the last drive at about the 25 or 30 yd line.  Take away those 2 calls, how can anyone claim the bad calls were equal???

OBVIOUS Calls that went GB way:   1---Finley PI.....2---Woodson missed PI

OBVIOUS Calls that went Sea way:   1---Missed PF on Sea when lineman lays out lineback after the play resulting in 1st down...2---Jennings getting laid out 50 yds away from the play....3---Roughing the passer for tackling feet...4---PI on 1st and 30 on Shields not Rice...5---PI on Tate....6---I wont even bring up the sim possession they said happened....

That right there is 6-2 on OBVIOUS missed calls.  I wont even bring up calls that can go either way. 

I have seen people say, GB only took the lead because of that PI call and the game woud have ended 7-6.  Really???  It was 4th and 2 on the 45 yd line.  They might have went for it.  But, then again, there was still 11 MIN left!!!  Seattle at that point didnt have 1 drive in the 2nd half that wasnt 3 and out. 

I have seen people say the roughing the passer was correct cause he went after the knees.  Wilson laughed live on air at the call, after they "tackled my feet" he said.

I have seen people say Shields PI was correct.  I wont even comment on that.

The only reason there was a chance for play at the end was because the awful calls prior.  Without the roughing the passer, odds are GB goes up atleast 8, maybe 12 or 14.  Without the PI on 1st and 30, Seattle cant drive down to the 5 yd line, resulting them to getting the ball back at the 50 for the last drive.

I have seen people say Tate didnt push off.  Wont comment either.

Finally, I wont even discuss the final sim possession call.

How can it be sim possession when the one guy is laying on top of the other??  How can you have possession of the ball when it is in the lap of another guy???

Living in the city who HATES GB, yet I havent heard one person in the town say GB didnt get jobbed. 

Congrats on your gambling win.  But, the Loss in the standings is what bothers me the most.

The fact that people claim Seattle "deserved" to win because of 8 sacks in the 1st half is baffling. 

I have read the comment that refs "cant call PI on last second hail mary bombs"....If that is the case, why dont teams send 2 guys down the field and completely take out all the defenders in the end zone, and throw it 2 yds short of the endzone when everybody is on the ground???

I have read the comments "just knock it down".....did you see the Tenn game the day before???  It always doesnt work.

Why knock it down when you can jump 6 inches higher than everybody on the field and catch it prior to everybody???

People say only people who lost their bets, or Packer fans are complaining.  Is it possible that EVERY person on ESPN...every person on the radio...people on the TODAY Show...people on Good Morning America...ALL BET ON GB????   I havent seen or heard on show or broadcast saying it was a correct call or the calls were fair. 

This has nothing to do with overturning the call. 

I have read people say "well they had a chance to overturn it and they didnt" ......YOU HAVE NO CLUE.  Once the call was TD on the field, ALL THE REPLAY COULD DO was confirm the ball didnt hit the ground.  You CANT OVERTURN SIM POSSESSION.

I lost $260 on the game last night, when I shoud have won $680.  Its not about the money.  A week from now I will forget about that $900 swing.  But, that loss can keep GB from getting home-field in the playoffs.  That loss can keep GB from even making the playoffs.  Its more than the money.

Like I said, I have NO probem admitting the 2 AWFUl calls that went GBs way.  I just dont understand how anyone can argue the 6 AWFUL calls that went Seattle way and "Seatte deserved" to win.

Best of luck on your future wagers

Time to move on to MLB and College ball and watch the Sox blow it

https://mobile.twitter.com/mcarter0399/status/250458173822087169

By the way, that is a picture of Jennings hugging the ball, and Tate with his arm around his neck.  How is that dual possession??

Why is it more likely that GB kicks a field goal and then Seatte scores???

Seatte DIDNT HAVE A FIRST DOWN PRIOR TO THE ROUGHING THE PASSES CALL!!!!

Even if GB punts, which maybe they do.  But, with 11 min left I like the chances of GB scoring more than Seattle. 

GB dominated the 2nd half.  Seattle had NEGATIVE YDS until the roughing the passer call. 

That picture is after the fact.  That has nothing to do with the play.  He ripped it out of Tate's grip once the play was over. 

I just saw the replay and that picture is after the refs came in and looked at the positioning.

Stats don't usually tell the whole story.  Neither does penalties.  Many games end with the better stat team losing the ball game.

Maybe GB had 0 TDS, but they HAD MORE SCORING DRIVES

You make it seem like Seattle was dominating...they had 7 points....ONE PLAY!!  One play that wouldnt have happened if it was 3rd and 8 and not 1st and 10.

As for the roughing...please point out a roughing call like that which was called??  You refer to Brady???  They hit Brady in the legs atleast.  Wilson was tackled by HIS LEFT FOOT!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nWffdZo7Zg

What is the defender suppose to do???  He jumped at his waist, the QB was moving away from him, is he suppose to stop in mid-air???   Give me a break....

When Brady was hit, he was STANDING STILL....Wilson was scrambling AWAY from the defender....

Its funny that "you think it was a standard call" but the QB who actually got hit was LAUGHING AT THE CALL...

GB figured out how to take advantage of Seattle's D in the 2nd half. With the no huddle/hurry up offense. GB's D also shut out Seatlle's offense the whole 2nd half. Until the ref's gave them scoring oppurtunities in the last half of the 4th Qt. This isn't even an argument. GB adjusted better at halftime than Seattle.GB had a helluva a fight in the first half & instead of laying over, they punched Seattle in the mouth. GB was on the ropes the first half, Seattle was punched & knocked out in the 2nd half. Games are won in the 2nd half, not the 1st.

If it wasn't for the ref's, GB had an interception to go further ahead. Most likely with a touchdown the way they were running the ball. Any argument to the contrary of GB adjusting & beating Seattle in the  2nd half is absurd.

Maybe the Sea-Chickens backers were living off the 1st half. GB counter punched & knocked those bitches out!

End of story.  

You guys are idiots to make a decision on a picture that was taken after the play was basically blown dead. 

I'm not saying it wasn't an INT, but that picture doesn't prove anything.

WOW!!!!

Prior to the roughing the passer call, or heck even prior to the PI call on Finley, here are the stats of the 2nd half:

GB drive 1: 13 plays 70 yds

GB drive 2: 11 plays 66 yds

GB drive 3: 16 plays 81 yds

Sea drive 1:3 plays -16 yds

Sea drive 2: 3 plays 5 yds

Hmmmm

I guess youre right....

If GB takes the lead 9-7 like you "claim" with 5 min left....what makes you assume Seattle would get down the field starting from their 20, instead of the 50, like they did with the final possession, when besides the TD pass, their last FIVE POSSESSIONS netted 20 TOTAL YARDS

It works both ways....Yes, GB scored on a giant amount of 2 FGs, but after 23 plays on both of those drives...

Seatte SCORED ONCE, after a drive kept alive because of a PF flag which should have been offsetting...

It doesnt bother you that after 4 straight possessions, Seattles only 1st down came because of a flag???

Best of luck on your future wagers...done responding to you...

I back up my responses with FACTS, you respond with "what-ifs"

Enough said, you dont even know the rules....

governs “protection” of all players, including a passer.

is a specific clause that prohibits “contacting an opponent above the shoulders in an unnecessarily rough manner” that applies to all players, including a passer.

specifically governs protection of the passer.

, is a specific clause that prohibits “any blow above the passer’s shoulder”, i.e. the neck, head or face.

rule changes for 2007 prohibit players from:

1. Forcibly hitting a passer when he is in the pocket at or below the knees whether the defender has an unrestricted path or is coming off a blocker [reworded clause 7-2-4 (c)].

2. Leading with the headand using it as the initial or primary point of contact with a passer, and specifically defenders may not duck the head and launch at a passer [new clause 7-2-4 (f)]. This applies regardless whether the passer is in or out of the pocket.