Quote Originally Posted by Patler View Post
All said above is true, but the key, I think, was when Rodgers tweaked his hamstring.

Tie game at half with the teams matching each other TD for TD and FG for FG.
NO takes possession with the 2nd half kickoff to a first down, but then the Packer "D" holds on 4th down for a huge change of possession without a score in a puntless game.
Packers drive down field quickly, have 1st and goal from the 6, but with Rodgers clearly a bit hobbled.
With Rodgers out of sync, the expected run on 1st goes no where, Rodgers quickly gets rid of the 2nd down pass on a play he would normally have extended, then tries another quick, no movement pass that is intercepted.

A chance to go up by 7, or at least 3 evaporates, and the Packers can no longer keep up without Rodgers at his best.

Not saying they would have won, but until Rodgers' injury, I think the game looked like a classic shoot-out with teams matching score for score, but with the Packers looking to be in the leadership role and NO playing catchup, at least for a while. Up to that point, there was no evidence that the NO defense could stop the Packers any more than there was evidence GB could stop NO.
I don't think any of us can say truthfully we thought our D was gonna stop Brees and company. I'm with you, NO couldn't stop us either. The main reason IMO of why we had to settle for FGs and not TDs before Aaron got hurt was we were screwing up more than anything NO did. Once AR hurt his hammy all bets were off. Most teams with elite QBs like Brees and Rodgers will suffer when their guy goes down or isn't playing well.