Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages12>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Zero2Cool  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, February 22, 2011 3:23:54 PM(UTC)
http://sportsillustrated...index.html#ixzz1EhJqSGwN


" said: Go to Quoted Post
Ran into Lions PR man Bill Keenist leaving Dallas Monday, and he made this point: If not for the late-game ridiculousness in games of Dec. 19 in New Jersey and Tampa, the Packers would not be hoisting the Lombardi Trophy today.

Keenist is right. Green Bay finished 10-6, the last Wild Card team and sixth seed in the NFC, by virtue of winning tiebreakers with the 10-6 Giants and 10-6 Bucs. We all know the Giants story: Up 31-10 over Philly at home with eight minutes left in the game, the Giants gave up 28 points in the last half of the fourth quarter and lost 38-31. The killer was punter Matt Dodge blowing the game and keeping a punt to DeSean Jackson inbounds with 14 seconds left in a 31-all game. Jackson returned it 65 yards for a touchdown. Who knows what would have happened if that game went to overtime, but that'll stay a mystery.

The Detroit game, in many ways, was more painful because of who the Lions are. They hadn't won a road game in three years. They were in Tampa, trailing by a field goal with two minutes left, playing third-string quarterback Drew Stanton. He led a field-goal drive to tie it. The Lions won the toss in overtime. Stanton led another long drive to win it in overtime.

Dave Rayner kicked the tying and winning field goals that afternoon in Tampa Bay. He was Green Bay's kicker in 2006, the one fired to make way for new Super Bowl champion Mason Crosby.

Without the ex-Packer to help the current Packers, Green Bay's players would be in the fifth week of their offseason today, not getting confetti and love and cheers showed on them in Lambeau Field. Football is a funny game sometimes.
Dulak  
#2 Posted : Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:58:53 AM(UTC)
ya its freaking unbelievable ... alls I know is that before the giants game the bookies gave great odds for a GB SB win ... ya I didnt take em (missed it last year so errr) ... but after the week 17 win and the WC win over the eagles I jumped on some digits ...
djcubez  
#3 Posted : Thursday, February 24, 2011 6:49:07 PM(UTC)
If Mason Crosby doesn't miss that kick against the Redskins we win that game.

If Rodgers doesn't get concussed in the Lions game we (probably) would win that game.

If Rodgers plays in the Patriots game we'd have a better chance at winning that game.

If Rodgers doesn't fumble the ball in the end zone against the Falcons we probably win that game.

If we don't let a lineman romp 71 yards against us in the Patriots game we have a better chance at winning that game.

If Devin Hester doesn't run back that punt for a touchdown we probably win that game.

See? I can play that game too.
Zero2Cool  
#4 Posted : Thursday, February 24, 2011 9:31:18 PM(UTC)
I think this article is wrong. if giants win then eagles don't get in.
Yerko  
#5 Posted : Thursday, February 24, 2011 9:43:37 PM(UTC)
...and Bill Kennist....

Thats the way the cookie crumbles.
djcubez  
#6 Posted : Thursday, February 24, 2011 10:13:39 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
I think this article is wrong. if giants win then eagles don't get in.


We owned head-to-head's against both the Eagles and Giants. However, the Eagles did lose two games after beating the Giants so there could have been a chance of both of them making it.

I just think it's a bit stupid to argue hypotheticals in hindsight.
Zero2Cool  
#7 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 4:08:35 AM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
" said: Go to Quoted Post
I think this article is wrong. if giants win then eagles don't get in.


We owned head-to-head's against both the Eagles and Giants. However, the Eagles did lose two games after beating the Giants so there could have been a chance of both of them making it.

I just think it's a bit stupid to argue hypotheticals in hindsight.


It is stupid, but I still think the article is wrong, lol.

" said: Go to Quoted Post
1. Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. The original seeding within a division upon application of the division tie breaker remains the same for all subsequent applications of the procedure that are necessary to identify the two Wild-Card participants.


I think that means if both Giants and Eagles made it, only one of them would have gotten in?


If Tampa Bay beat the Lions, then the game against the @Saints would have meant a lot to the Saints because they'd have to win to get in. I don't remember if they kept starters in or not, but I believe they had their spot locked in the playoffs.



Hell if I know ... the only team I'm thanking is the Green Bay Packers and I think this is just a way for Peter King to slight the Packers accomplishment. Yes, I'm being petty about it. I don't get any other angle other than he was told to pump out a story an he lacks creativity, which I know he doesn't.
Greg C.  
#8 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 10:50:46 AM(UTC)
King's a good writer for the most part, but he often lapses into this kind of garbage. I view it less as slighting the Packers' accomplishment than as a statement about how various teams' fates are intertwined in the NFL. Pretty mundane stuff, really. I was only mildly irritated by it.
Pack93z  
#9 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 11:54:33 AM(UTC)
Personally... it proves just how close the margin is in this league to winning it all and sitting an watching another team win it.

That isn't anything new.. just a very solid illustration of that point, IMO.
Dulak  
#10 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 1:04:08 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Personally... it proves just how close the margin is in this league to winning it all and sitting an watching another team win it.

That isn't anything new.. just a very solid illustration of that point, IMO.


that about sums it up - we were that close to having our offseason chatter 1 month earlier. IMO we all knew we were a much better team then most of the other NFL teams.

Simple as this - we had our opportunity and our players/coaches did not let us down. They rose to the challenge and IMO like I talked about all during the preseason. Its the heart of this team - its that that won us the championship.
wpr  
#11 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 2:41:31 PM(UTC)
Yeah this is just more BS. I posted most of the things cubez said awhile back after someone said GB backed into the playoffs.

I added the Miami game. If the official would have gotten the call right and not thrown the flag on Johnson for being lined up over center when he was clearly more than a yard back they would not have lost that game either.

I really don't mind it when the games that went in favor of GB are pointed out as long as they point out the ones what went against GB too.
TheKanataThrilla  
#12 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 3:11:03 PM(UTC)
The problem with this article is it lacks all the gifts which were given to Chicago to win the division starting with the joke win against Detroit. I still don't know why somebody with possession of the ball over the goal line has to not lose control of it going down. It is dfferent rules for WRs than RBs in my opinion.

Nobody had a horseshoe like the Bears this year.
Zero2Cool  
#13 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 3:41:05 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Personally... it proves just how close the margin is in this league to winning it all and sitting an watching another team win it.

That isn't anything new.. just a very solid illustration of that point, IMO.


How is it solid? It's not even accurate. You can't change one outcome without having a domino effect. Surely you remember playing and how winning and losing effected you, your team and how your coaches coached.

The article is 'un' solid and comes off whimsical in my view. ;)

A thorough article would have outlined the what if's for the Packers as well. This just points out that basically the Packers were 'lucky'. I strongly disagree, the game is of inches, everyone knows this and the Packers have lost by inches and won by inches.

He's only looking at one side of the coin, and only glancing at it.
Dulak  
#14 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 3:46:54 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
The problem with this article is it lacks all the gifts which were given to Chicago to win the division starting with the joke win against Detroit. I still don't know why somebody with possession of the ball over the goal line has to not lose control of it going down. It is dfferent rules for WRs than RBs in my opinion.

Nobody had a horseshoe like the Bears this year.


That always stumps me too ... so a guy can run in like rodgers or a rb and alls he has to do is be 1 cm over the line and its a TD; but a dude catching the ball has to hold onto it even when he is drilled and he cant let go of it even if he is hit by a mack truck.
Zero2Cool  
#15 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 4:07:53 PM(UTC)
Exactly, the Bears had how many injuries, home field advantage (-Falcons) and how'd that work for them? Not to mention the Lions game as just mentioned above.
wpr  
#16 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 4:15:28 PM(UTC)
King has a deadline and needed a story. Any story. He didn't care how accurate he was. Wasn't he a Favre-ite anyway? Like Madden, he probably is sore that GB won without ol #4.
Pack93z  
#17 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 4:52:58 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Personally... it proves just how close the margin is in this league to winning it all and sitting an watching another team win it.

That isn't anything new.. just a very solid illustration of that point, IMO.


How is it solid? It's not even accurate. You can't change one outcome without having a domino effect. Surely you remember playing and how winning and losing effected you, your team and how your coaches coached.

The article is 'un' solid and comes off whimsical in my view. ;)

A thorough article would have outlined the what if's for the Packers as well. This just points out that basically the Packers were 'lucky'. I strongly disagree, the game is of inches, everyone knows this and the Packers have lost by inches and won by inches.

He's only looking at one side of the coin, and only glancing at it.


How does it not illustrate that the margin between qualifying for the playoffs and not is oh so small?

A play here or a play there.. of course there is the totality of effects from that point out.. but I stand by my comment, the margin between winning and losing in this league is tiny.. and the Packers getting in based on a number of factors over two other teams with the same record and a accumulation of events that separates them.

And of course it doesn't outline all other factors.. King was trying to point out, IMO, that tiny margin between sitting home and getting into the playoffs and earning it from there.
Greg C.  
#18 Posted : Friday, February 25, 2011 6:06:53 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
The article is 'un' solid and comes off whimsical in my view.


"Whimsical" is a good word for it, and that's why it doesn't bother me much. It's not a stand-alone article anyway; it's just a little prelude to his weekly mailbag column. I haven't yet heard anybody discrediting the Packers for their championship, and that's not what this is.

By the way, Peter King predicted the Packers to go to the Super Bowl, and he was highly skeptical of year two of the Vikings' Favre experiment, so I don't see any evidence to support wpr's theory that King didn't want the Packers to win it without Favre.
Dulak  
#19 Posted : Tuesday, March 1, 2011 10:44:01 AM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
" said: Go to Quoted Post
The article is 'un' solid and comes off whimsical in my view.


"Whimsical" is a good word for it, and that's why it doesn't bother me much. It's not a stand-alone article anyway; it's just a little prelude to his weekly mailbag column. I haven't yet heard anybody discrediting the Packers for their championship, and that's not what this is.

By the way, Peter King predicted the Packers to go to the Super Bowl, and he was highly skeptical of year two of the Vikings' Favre experiment, so I don't see any evidence to support wpr's theory that King didn't want the Packers to win it without Favre.


I dont give too much credence to kings article - many many people picked the pack winning it all or going to the big game preseason. I didnt hear too much talk after we started suffering injuries thou.
pacmaniac  
#20 Posted : Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:29:11 AM(UTC)
The Pack also should thank the refs in the first Vikings game - they blew a couple TD calls that should have been in favor of the Vikings (and I'm not talking about the late Harvin TD that was correctly reversed).
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
beast (3h) : I believe the Packers seriously want to trade up (if they can find a price they like), I'm guessing for Fitzpatrick or James (though one guy said Ward). But could also be one of the ILBers (Smith or E
Smokey (4h) : Rumors are not money in the bank deals.
gbguy20 (6h) : pft reporting packers trying to trade up
Porforis (7h) : You're just a little chicken. Cheep Cheep Cheep Cheep Cheep Cheep Cheep Cheep Cheep
Nonstopdrivel (7h) : I don't want to talk about it.
Porforis (7h) : You're tearing me apart, Rourke!
Nonstopdrivel (7h) : (See "Moar Randomness" thread.)
Nonstopdrivel (7h) : It's a reference to The Room. I'm sorry, I forgot that not everyone knows about that movie. That's just my favorite line from that movie.
Porforis (9h) : I... Can't tell if serious or The Room reference.
Barfarn (13h) : Perhaps no or inadequte coverage in general
Barfarn (13h) : I’d guess “no help” refers to men not being covered for breast cancer
wpr (15h) : O no. Sorry to hear this NSD.
Zero2Cool (16h) : Rourke, sorry to hear that, but who doesn't want to help you?
Cheesey (25-Apr) : Oh geez, nonstop. Like was said, we have your back.
TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : NSD sorry your post is a bit of a mind fuck, but obviously brother those here have your back.
Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : I got the test results back! I definitely have breast cancer.
Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Everything goes wrong at once. Nobody wants to help me, and I'm dying!
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Zone defenses always must answer this question: is it better to invest in top CBs, or better to invest in pass rushers who can make a CB’s job easier?
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Packers giving away $500 Pro Shop gift card and 11 2018 Official Draft Caps
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : can't restrict
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : you did it now
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : 123456
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : too bad you gonna cry
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : don't break it
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : something here
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : You can do it too!
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Who the hell gives a shit about Sat/Sun now? 3rd to 7th round? F U
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : I thought Sat/Sun was great. You make a weekend of it. Have buddies over, cookout, etc.
TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : During the afternoons I tend to get caught up in family routines. I don't mind that for the later rounds.
TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : I now take Friday off work. It is a bit annoying, but I do find it fun at night as I can crack a few beers and enjoy. Sucks if they trade out of the first round though.
wpr (24-Apr) : I liked the Sat Sun version.
beast (23-Apr) : HELL YEAH! ... the draft was SOOOO MUCH BETTER in the ol Saturday/Sunday format... only people that I've heard disagree are those that don't really follow the draft and just random get updates on thei
beast (23-Apr) : Key word there is "proven"... not if they're true, but if you can prove it. Jerry Jones said the same thing for Greg Hardy, it wasn't "proven".
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : Flat out honesty from 49ers GM
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : John Lynch: “if these charges are proven true, if Reuben did hit this young lady, he won’t be part of our organization moving forward.”
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2018 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 9 @ 7:20 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Sep 16 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Sep 23 @ 12:00 PM
Redskins
Sunday, Sep 30 @ 12:00 PM
BILLS
Sunday, Oct 7 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Monday, Oct 15 @ 7:15 PM
49ERS
Sunday, Oct 28 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Nov 4 @ 7:20 PM
Patriots
Sunday, Nov 11 @ 12:00 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Nov 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Sunday, Nov 25 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Dec 2 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Dec 9 @ 12:00 PM
FALCONS
Sunday, Dec 16 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Dec 23 @ 12:00 PM
Jets
Sunday, Dec 30 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
2h / Random Babble / wpr

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

24-Apr / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

24-Apr / Random Babble / Cheesey

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk

20-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

20-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

Headlines