We see the exact same thing...I understand 100% your point on CJ
I think you are wrong about the GB game though. Thats fine.
Obviously, I was in about every GB/SF.....I didnt not see 1 person who thought GB had any chance on the ground. I saw many people say they would have under 40-30 yds.
I still think you are ruining your case by taking away the best THREE runs they had.
But, like I said, even without their best THREE runs...even if they only went for 5 yds instead....thats still 16 runs for 67 yards.
That is more than enough for Gb on the ground to have been considered a good game for GB on the ground.
If you disagree with that, which is fine, then you dont know the GB offense.
Im not saying they dominated on the ground, but they did MUCH better than expected 
Holy christ man.
You might actually be worse than me 
yes, I was wrong about the winning and the D
Its still funny you keep claiming just take away a teams best 3 run plays and they didnt do anything....they arent a running team, yet you want to take away their 3 most successful plays
Do you do that for every game???? Just take away the 3 best plays, and that team really didnt do that good
I mean if you take away Baltimores 2 bombs and game winning fg, they really didnt win that game
Im admitting GB got beat, and SF did whatever they wanted to score, and youre still fighting with me
We see the exact same thing...I understand 100% your point on CJ
I think you are wrong about the GB game though. Thats fine.
Obviously, I was in about every GB/SF.....I didnt not see 1 person who thought GB had any chance on the ground. I saw many people say they would have under 40-30 yds.
I still think you are ruining your case by taking away the best THREE runs they had.
But, like I said, even without their best THREE runs...even if they only went for 5 yds instead....thats still 16 runs for 67 yards.
That is more than enough for Gb on the ground to have been considered a good game for GB on the ground.
If you disagree with that, which is fine, then you dont know the GB offense.
Im not saying they dominated on the ground, but they did MUCH better than expected
Man, you people on here have serious, serious mental issues.....
Yeah, instead of going back and forth with arguments, I tried to walk away from the issue.....
Still that wasnt good enough for you...
Instead you want to say the SAME THING over and over again.....
We disagree, get over it. Not everybody will see eye-to-eye.
I think its funny though, how you just want to dismiss every good play GB had.
For example....you say....
"Gb only scored that one TD cause a long bomb to Jones"
Does that not count??? Thats what Gb does. They take deep shots. So it doesnt count??? It actually should have been a TD if Rodgers doesnt under throw him, as he was behind both defenders.....
Then, going back to the running....you keep saying they didnt run the ball well....
You take away the BEST 3 runs.....how is that possible???/
On GB 1st offensive scoring drive....GB after the bomb to Jones that doesnt count, is in the red-zone on SF 18....Harris goes up the middle not touched by anybody. So that play doesnt count??? You cant factor a 18 yard run up the middle for a touchdown???
Sounds good
Here you are saying GB got lucky on a deep bomb which they do pretty much every game during the last 2 years....then a run, right up the heart of SF defense for 18 yds not touched by anybody doesnt count.....Or a run with Cobb, who is their most dangerous weapon...Or a Qb scramble for a 3rd and long conversion in which Kaep did like 8 times doesnt count towards...
All those plays dont count
Yet, I am the one who is delusional and doesnt watch the game....
Exactly
Capers has done well, but he has no adjusted with the new times of the NFL.
Two years ago, his type of D worked, but not anymore.
Would love to see Lovie come here, but he will probably head-coach somewhere.
Williams played awful is crucial games this year, including last night. I would like them to bring in some new linebackers and another rush end as well
Atlanta has some of the best talent in the NFL with if not the best, the 2nd best WRs in football....
But, until Ryan can actually win a playoff game, they will not get any respect nor do they deserve it...
But, if they win today, they can be dangerous
I agree, I just find it funny the guy is making his argument by dismissing the best 3 offensive plays they had!!! Im not making a point that Gb was awesome, but they ran the ball better than anybody thought.....except LGPWESTCOAST
As for your other comments. I actually like McCarthy. He makes some bad choices once in awhile, but I still think he is a good coach. He is terrible at taking the foot off the gas when he has a lead, no doubt about that. I am still happy with what he has done since he has come here. Capers needs to go. The NFL has passed him by.
As for rooting for SF. Like I said in a different thread, if GB loses, I want to lose to the champs. I will not root for Sea as they robbed us, ha!! I dont think Atl has any chance. I cant stand NE and I think they will represent the AFC. If Balt or Hous make it I will root for them, but I dont think they will.
I dont dislike people or teams like it seems so many do on this site. Well, actually I dislike the Bears, ha!!! Yeah, i would have rooted for Minn.
I only root "against" teams when they play GB. Im a fan of the game, and want the good teams to do well. SF is a great team and they proved it last night, and I hope they continue to do well. It would suck as a Gb fan, if SF went out and got blasted next week, thus I hope they continue to win
Funny....people said all I do is make excuses.
Defense is part of the game.
Fact is....with 7 min left in the 3rd qtr...it was 24-24. SF didnt shut-down GB.
People said GB WONT run the ball....GB CANT PROTECT Rodgers....
Maybe SF dominated time of poss and on offense, but it doesnt change the fact that it was 24-24 in the middle of the 3rd qtr
yeah 24-24 mid 3rd quarter and 7 pts was pick 6, and gb barely had 200 yards of offense to that point... they did shut gb down, the total points doesn't tell the whole story on how the game was going. Rodgers was under pressure mostly all game with only 4 pass rushers. yeah they had 104 yards with 53 from harris most on the 1st scoring drive, 28 from rogers 23 from cobb.... thats not exactly being successful on the ground! tell me when the packers ran the ball in a critical situation and were successful! numbers don't tell the whole story so yeah 100 yards is ok, but watching the game, there is no way you can say GB had success running... you try and be classy, but make ridiculous statements like San Fran didn't shut GB down! What game were u watching?? Whole 2nd half rodgers and co were going 3 and out, 26-39 257 yards is not a good game by rodgers standards... They just got exposed in the playoffs for 2nd year in a row. no run game, and allowing Kaep to run for most yards in history for a qb... Your team is built to be a juggernaut in regular season, but that style of play fails miserably in playoff football
yeah 24-24 mid 3rd quarter and 7 pts was pick 6, and gb barely had 200 yards of offense to that point... they did shut gb down, the total points doesn't tell the whole story on how the game was going. Rodgers was under pressure mostly all game with only 4 pass rushers. yeah they had 104 yards with 53 from harris most on the 1st scoring drive, 28 from rogers 23 from cobb.... thats not exactly being successful on the ground! tell me when the packers ran the ball in a critical situation and were successful! numbers don't tell the whole story so yeah 100 yards is ok, but watching the game, there is no way you can say GB had success running... you try and be classy, but make ridiculous statements like San Fran didn't shut GB down! What game were u watching?? Whole 2nd half rodgers and co were going 3 and out, 26-39 257 yards is not a good game by rodgers standards... They just got exposed in the playoffs for 2nd year in a row. no run game, and allowing Kaep to run for most yards in history for a qb... Your team is built to be a juggernaut in regular season, but that style of play fails miserably in playoff football
Yeah....we get it man....
Like I said....Not many people thought Gb would run the ball at all....I am willing to bet MAJORITY of people would say GB WOULD NOT get 100 yds for the game on the ground....
If more people thought they would, then I am wrong....but I am willing to bet people didnt think they would get that
Im not saying the dominated on the ground, but they did MUCH better than most people thought
Yeah....we get it man....
Like I said....Not many people thought Gb would run the ball at all....I am willing to bet MAJORITY of people would say GB WOULD NOT get 100 yds for the game on the ground....
If more people thought they would, then I am wrong....but I am willing to bet people didnt think they would get that
Im not saying the dominated on the ground, but they did MUCH better than most people thought
Who cares about 100 yards and if anyone thought they would?? My question is were they meaningful yards? Did they convert any short yardage 3rd downs, did they have any big runs to set up scores? Did they run consistently to keep the Defense honest? My answers to all those are NO! Youre way off base with your statement that the packers had success on the ground!
It looks like they are doing good now, but they are CRASHING EVERYTHING....
I cant believe Wilson is not running to the outside....its WIDE OPEN....
If they do this same D next week, Kaep will run for almost 200 again
Who cares about 100 yards and if anyone thought they would?? My question is were they meaningful yards? Did they convert any short yardage 3rd downs, did they have any big runs to set up scores? Did they run consistently to keep the Defense honest? My answers to all those are NO! Youre way off base with your statement that the packers had success on the ground!
I think Harris had a 18 yard run up the middle not getting touched for a TD
Rodgers had a run that led to points
Do those not count???
Yes, I think they ran enough to keep the D honest.....how many sacks did SF get???? ALOT LESS than you thought going into the game correct???
I think Harris had a 18 yard run up the middle not getting touched for a TD
Rodgers had a run that led to points
Do those not count???
Yes, I think they ran enough to keep the D honest.....how many sacks did SF get???? ALOT LESS than you thought going into the game correct???
Yeah i already stated in my last post on their 1st scoring drive they ran ok, after that drive they had no success... If Aaron Rodgers scrambling on a pass is the best run the pack had all night then thats not having success running the ball!! I think they only had 1 sack, but the pressure was there all night... i would say 25% of his dropbacks he was scrambling out of the pocket or taking a hit... 1 sack, but they did get plenty of pressure
Yeah i already stated in my last post on their 1st scoring drive they ran ok, after that drive they had no success... If Aaron Rodgers scrambling on a pass is the best run the pack had all night then thats not having success running the ball!! I think they only had 1 sack, but the pressure was there all night... i would say 25% of his dropbacks he was scrambling out of the pocket or taking a hit... 1 sack, but they did get plenty of pressure
Man....im done responding to the same subject.
You people are funny. You keep saying take away a couple plays or a couple drives and they didnt do anything.....
I mean come on????
You cant take away anything....
Its unfair to say take away a few plays or drives to talk about what a team did during THE GAME.....
Gb isnt a running team....
They arent going to pound the ball 25+ for 150 yds....
Rodgers gets big runs often....Cobb gets big runs often....you cant not count those
And, if you think that if Rodgers scrambling on 25% of his passes means pressure from the D...you dont watch GB enough
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
