Jones wasn't the guy who let a receiver slip behind him for the TD
Printable View
So you are blaming Hawk?
I think as the play unfolded, Hawk made the right decision, since House was out to lunch on the play and stood there watching Ryan run past him. If Hawk goes with the receiver, Ryan picks up the 1st down easily and probably a lot more. Hawk prevented that and put pressure on Ryan in making the throw. He prevented the run for a first and made the throw more difficult. Therefore he impacted both options Ryan had. At that point, you hope for a bad throw from a punter, a drop by the tackle-elligible receiver, or enough recovery by one of the little, quick guys to get back on the receiver.
House could have done what Hawk did, allowing Hawk to go with the receiver. When he didn't, Hawk tried to make the best out of a quickly deteriorating situation.
If that is the design, its another in a long line of bad Slocum plans.
That's just it. House was on the end, took a few steps at the snap, then stopped standing up as Ryan started to get up. House did nothing until Ryan was well outside of him when he finally turned to follow. Since House clearly was not firing off in an attempt to disrupt the kick, I can only assume he had some responsibility in the event of a fake or botch. Otherwise, he was serving no earthly purpose on the play at all.
MM said he loves Slocum's "creativity". This may be an example of it.
By coming up, Hawk at least forced Ryan to throw. With a punter throwing to a tackle, anything can happen. If Hawk went with the receiver, he was conceding the first down to Ryan by running, because there was no one else close.
Not to pick at the scab too much, but for those who didn't really seen the open green in front of Burnett I offer you the full-22 image just after the pick.
http://s5.postimg.org/6rlznqbsn/pick.png
I've watched replay several times, what you are saying is not true. Ryan had long way to go for first and two Packers between him and marker. McGinn watched replay closely too
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...289108751.htmlQuote:
Hawk was stationed behind the FG block front for his experience, not his athleticism. His mistake — running up on fourth and 10 when the punter couldn't hurt the Packers instead of staying back on the man who could — probably was as egregious as Bostick's.
This is the big thing to me. I have a feeling when that happened, it woke up a defeated team. They saw this shit and got pissed off! They were on their sideline seething "these fuckers think the game is over"! They left everything on the field the last 5 minutes. You can't play football that way or anything else for that matter....It obviously carried over to the defense as well....totally different team after that!
I'm with HH. I think House might have tracked down Ryan before he reached the marker. It would have been close. And I understand Hawk was just reacting, but it's a hell of a lot better to give up a first down then leave a guy wide open in the end zone.
He coulda scored! fucking dumb.....
That was a devastating loss. I am heartbroken. It's much like the damn 4th-and-26 loss, except this time it was for a trip to the SB, not to the next round.
But Nutz is right: everyone sucked. Enough blame to go around - the offense had the ball with four minutes left and couldn't get a first down, much less run out the clock. Then they could get downfield later, but couldn't score a winning TD. ST sucked hard, twice: the fake field goal, which every Packer fan was screaming to watch out for BEFORE the snap, and the Bostick Epic Fail. And the defense, of course, letting Seattle score two touchdowns in four minutes and another in OT after playing a great, great game for the 56 minutes before that. And let's not forget the coaching: MM's nut sack shriveling up in the last four minutes of that game.
Sheesh. You have a twelve point lead AND the ball with four minutes left, and you can't close the deal.
I can't even read about the SB or the Packers or anything else right now. I'm sick about this loss. I'm going to be off the board for a while.
I disagree. The defense of the fake was botched, but it was an act of desperation. The Packers scored again, making it a two TD game. The critical moment was the final INT. Everything changed after that, because the Packers shut it down, beginning with the slide.
House didn't have a chance. He only got even remotely close because Ryan slowed up to collect himself to throw. Had Ryan seen Hawk retreating, he would have kept his head down and run. No way does House catch him if he does that.
I just watched it a couple more times. On the other side, Hayward (I think) was lined up the same as House. Each took only about two steps up field and stopped. The difference was that Hayward kept his feet and shoulders square, House turned his shoulders inward. Hayward was able to turn and run back must faster than House reacted to Ryan right in front of him.
Patler's new avatar. :)
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...3va14U96T79Rtg
Either House screwed up, or Slocum designed the FG block thinking that teams would only ever roll out right on a fake.
The outside guy on the right (Bush) does a wide rush that would have contained the punter rolling out his way. Richardson (second in line) immediately backs off the LOS at the snap. Compare that to how the other side of the line plays it.
Outside guy on the left (House) makes a hard rush off the edge and then slows up. Jones (second in line) also makes a hard rush off the edge.
I still think House might have caught Ryan. Ryan slows up to gather himself at about the 25, he would have had to run all the way to the 9 to convert.
This link has GIF's from both sides of the field.
http://thebiglead.com/2015/01/18/sea...ensive-tackle/
House has him dead to rights, even if he runs, at the moment Hawk commits.
He has a good shot at picking up some important yards. With a couple of decent blocks on either side of the field he has gained significant yardage. Does he take it all the way? Probably not...but man..try for the short field at least. If he is approaching a wall of defenders fine...slide then.
Ryan had to slow up to twist and get ready to throw. He gets caught by House with that motion before the first down.
If Hawk smothers the receiver and Ryan keeps his head of steam, its going to be close. Ryan runs well and has made tough first downs before.
Vince, first of all, no need for an apology. I don't take comments on this board personally. You rant. I rant. We all rant. But I did read your entire lengthy post and I hope you give the same consideration to mine. And please note that nothing I'm about to say is meant as disparaging or derogatory toward you. :-)
That said, I disagree with most of what you said in your rant. Moreover, I disagree completely with your philosophy of football strategy which you explained earlier. ...Now to the specifics of what you said:
"The offense was struggling passing the ball all game long." Maybe in the 1st half, but not in the 3rd and 4th QTR's. From the start of the 3rd quarter until Burnett's interception, Arod was 3 for 7 for 32 yards and 2 first downs. Lacy rushed 4 times for 15 yards and 1 first down. Starks rushed 4 times for 41 yards and 1 first down (one rush alone accounted for 32 yards and his first down).
Now, regarding the series of downs in question, the one immediately after Burnett's interception, there was 5:04 left in the game. I'm thinking it's way to early to run out the clock UNLESS we make a first down or two. I'm also thinking, if we go three and out, the situation gets worse because Seattle has plenty of time to score, recover an onside kick and score again. And my gut tells me Seattle is going to score if they get the ball again.
Why do I think Seattle is going to score? Because, contrary to what you say in your rant, our defense in the 3rd and 4th quarter WAS "problematic." With 10:53 to go in the 3rd quarter, Seattle had a 6 minute drive, moving the ball from their own 22 yard line to the Packers' 19. Moreover, Wilson and Lynch were beginning to come to life (Wilson had a 29 yard completion to Baldwin, and Lynch had solid runs of 11 and 12 yards.
In the 4th quarter, in the Seattle series just before Burnett's interception, Seattle moved the ball from their own 13 yard line to the 50 yard line, with Lynch having two more solid runs of 13 and 11 yards.
So what does McCarthy do after Burnett's interception, giving what was happening above? He runs Lacy on 1st down into the teeth of the stacked defense for a loss of 4 yards. Does that sound like a man trying to make a game winning 1st down? Well, maybe. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt.
But surely now that it's 2nd and 14, McCarthy will turn his offense loose.
But no, he doesn't even show pass and runs the same play on 2nd down. Lacy loses 2 more yards. Then, on 3rd and 16 McCarthy does it again. Clearly, he was playing Vince football, playing it "safe," hoping Lacy busts one for a first down, but in any event running down the clock and running Seattle out of two time outs.
Well, he did the latter, but only ran a minute and 12 seconds off the clock. And in the process he put the game on the back of his "problematic" defense and took control out of his and his QB's hands.
Surely one can honestly disagree with this "safe" strategy without being a victim of "postpartum" rationalization!
Yes, there are "inherent punitive consequences" of throwing the ball (incompletions, interceptions), but there are also inherent rewards (1st down yardage, touchdowns). I happen to believe that, given this situation, based on what transpired in the second half up to Burnett's interception, that the rewards were more likely than the punitive consequences.
Fair enough?
As far as the rest of your rant, I consider it a "windstorm of emotion" of your own. It certainly has nothing to do with me or my state of mind either during the game or after.
You nailed it in my view 'Maxi the Taxi' because you went with the evidence.
The Play By Play.
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201501...yze=playbyplay
It's much easier to see studying the Play By Play of that game.
The thing is Brandon Bostic's over exuberant flub and blown assignment is just another play of so many in the game. That flub didn't determine a loss as the Packers were up five (5) points after that flub.
When Russell Wilson tossed his 4th pick of the game did the Seattle side collapse? Flipping it over. How many in Packer Nation thought that pick by Morgan Burnett was the 'death nell' for the Seahawks? It looked like Morgan Burnett thought so. I've shot deer in the head that didn't drop as fast as he did.
I did the same thing today (studied the Play By Play and worked up a mighty post) but instead of spelling it out. I left the LINK on a post for Vince to see for himself ( Post#104 of An Attempt At Discussing McCarthy's Future ) . vince's a bright man. It's not my place (to teach or argu with) him or any other member; what he can learn for himself 'with an open mind'. The problem here is long term or escalating animosities. That sort of thing among fans supporting a mutual cause is silly.
That play by Bostic bugged me. So did the drop by Andrew Quarless on the right sideline on a perfect pass by Aaron Rodgers to secure a first down.
4th QTR:
3-4-GB 19 (5:26 remains) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to 81-A.Quarless (50-K.Wright).
Why? Because that was followed up by another weak Tim Masthay punt of 37 yards that ended with Seattle getting excellent field position at their own 48.
Not to worry!
Russell Wilson promptly toss's his 4th pick ( Morgan Burnett ).
The thing with me is I'm not blinded by homerism. I'm fortunate to not be plagued with obsession before discovered reason. I predict a result then use analysis to determine why this/that happened.
Somehow I hope that makes me grow as a fan of football, of the NFL and of my beloved Green Bay Packers.
Ryan said his instructions were to look at the LB, and if the LB dropped, just run without even considering the pass. With that approach, he gets the 1st down easily, I think.
No one has mentioned it, but Ryan really did a good job on that play. To be running as hard as he was, pull up and loft a 20 yard throw as accurately as he did is not easy for a guy not used to that type of thing. If he was short on the throw, Hayward probably makes a play on it. That, and a lot of things to keep in mind, including being aware of the line of scrimmage.
If Green Bay would have been up only one score, not two, at the 5 minute mark, I'd agree with the need to open it up to get a first down there. Had they been up by only one score at that same point, I have no doubt McCarthy would have thrown the ball in trying to move it rather than running it, because they would more desperately need a first down to win at that point. Running in that situation showed confidence in his team, not a lack of it.
The only reason to lack confidence at that point, and therefore take more risks, was if you feared your team would fall apart by allowing Seattle to get a quick score, successfully execute an onside kick and then score a second quick TD - all without the benefit of possessing the ball again.
Well, we know what happened. The Bostick Botch single-handedly undermined the faith McCarthy had in his guys, and changed the complexion of all the other plays and calls before it that until that point had contributed to their success. Now they became instrumental in their failure.
The field goals in the first quarter that should have added enough to the final tally for victory (as they did vs. New England) all of a sudden should have been 4th down touchdowns. Burnett's interception to seal the game became a premature celebration. HaHa's inexplicable failure to break up the two point conversion wouldn't even have happened. McCarthy's confidence in his team to finish Seattle off and play as they had for the entire game up to that point (3 for 7 for 32 yards passing isn't exactly lighting it up passing) - and as they had done in numerous wins prior - became "playing not to lose," "tightening up" and more.
Everything that happened before the botch changed, and suddenly, before we could get our heads around it, everything after it actually happened. It wasn't a dream, but at the same time none of it was real either - until one moment - a moment brought on entirely by a mental lapse of reason - changed it all into the opposite of what it was before.
You were right Maxie to fear what to me was an unbelievable series of events. Obviously all that happened was possible and could possibly have been avoided had they passed rather than ran. There is no guarantee that passing the ball would have secured a first down but we know running didn't.
If you want to say he should have had less confidence in his guys and protected the team against themselves, then there's nothing and noone who can deny that's right because they screwed the pooch at every turn from that point on.
I can't blame McCarthy for having confidence in his guys.
The shock of the crowds sudden grrroooaaann !
Forced Morgan Burnett down before he looked to see how open it was for him to gain a chunk.
When he responded to the media after that game he hadn't seen any recording of the play.
That was one of the weirdest things I've ever seen in football. A definite :whaa: moment !
So I agree there were many fuckups. Does this mean most of the players are taking a paycut to help us sign the freakish TE and ILBers? I mean, now is the time to hit them up since their fuckup is fresh in their mind...
http://s5.postimg.org/6rlznqbsn/pick.png
as hard to look at as:
https://packergeeks.files.wordpress....avres-pick.jpg
Fuck you guys.