The presence of the Falcons in that 4th Quarter lead list is hurting my brain.
The presence of the Falcons in that 4th Quarter lead list is hurting my brain.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
12 run to 10 pass is still more run than the first half.Originally Posted by vince
But one game result isn't going to make anyone's case. This was not even the best example of the tendency we are complaining about. Until the last drive, the run game was more effective than passing in the 2nd half.
I will admit that evidence of my complaint is hard to find in that 4th quarter lead chart. The percentage difference between NE and GB is as scant as vince predicted it would be.
I do wonder how it looks for top competition and playoffs.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
4th Quarter Leads
Code:Rk Tm From To W L T W-L%▼ Count 1 New England Patriots 2006 2016 109 16 0 0.872 125 2 Green Bay Packers 2006 2016 94 14 0 0.870 108 3 Denver Broncos 2006 2016 68 11 0 0.861 79 4 New Orleans Saints 2006 2016 81 14 0 0.853 95 5 Pittsburgh Steelers 2006 2016 82 16 0 0.837 98 6 Seattle Seahawks 2006 2016 72 14 0 0.837 86 7 Chicago Bears 2006 2016 60 12 0 0.833 72 8 Baltimore Ravens 2006 2016 82 17 0 0.828 99 9 Philadelphia Eagles 2006 2016 79 17 0 0.823 96 10 New York Giants 2006 2016 69 16 0 0.812 85 11 Indianapolis Colts 2006 2015 77 18 0 0.811 95 12 New York Jets 2006 2016 59 14 0 0.808 73 13 San Francisco 49ers 2006 2016 61 15 0 0.803 76 14 Arizona Cardinals 2006 2016 56 14 0 0.800 70 15 Atlanta Falcons 2006 2016 62 17 0 0.785 79 16 Houston Texans 2006 2016 58 18 0 0.763 76 17 Dallas Cowboys 2006 2016 58 19 0 0.753 77 18 Buffalo Bills 2006 2016 46 16 0 0.742 62 19 Kansas City Chiefs 2006 2016 55 20 0 0.733 75 20 San Diego Chargers 2006 2016 65 24 0 0.730 89 21 Jacksonville Jaguars 2006 2015 40 15 0 0.727 55 22 Carolina Panthers 2006 2016 63 24 0 0.724 87 23 Minnesota Vikings 2006 2016 53 20 1 0.723 74 24 Cincinnati Bengals 2006 2015 61 23 2 0.721 86 25 Tennessee Titans 2006 2016 45 22 0 0.672 67 26 Miami Dolphins 2006 2015 42 22 0 0.656 64 27 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 2006 2016 38 21 0 0.644 59 28 ?????? Rams 2006 2016 41 27 1 0.601 69 29 Detroit Lions 2006 2016 35 27 0 0.565 62 30 Oakland Raiders 2006 2016 31 24 0 0.564 55 31 Cleveland Browns 2006 2016 36 28 0 0.563 64 32 Washington Redskins 2006 2015 35 29 0 0.547 64 Total 2006 2016 1913 604 4 .760 2521
Last edited by pbmax; 09-29-2016 at 08:40 PM.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Team Comparison to McCarthy-led Packers - Win/Loss Results when Leading at the Half
Ranked by W-L%
Code:Rk Tm From To W L T W-L%▼ Count 1 New England Patriots 2006 2016 109 16 0 0.872 125 2 Green Bay Packers 2006 2016 94 14 0 0.870 108 3 Denver Broncos 2006 2016 68 11 0 0.861 79 4 New Orleans Saints 2006 2016 81 14 0 0.853 95 5 Pittsburgh Steelers 2006 2016 82 16 0 0.837 98 6 Seattle Seahawks 2006 2016 72 14 0 0.837 86 7 Chicago Bears 2006 2016 60 12 0 0.833 72 8 Baltimore Ravens 2006 2016 82 17 0 0.828 99 9 Philadelphia Eagles 2006 2016 79 17 0 0.823 96 10 New York Giants 2006 2016 69 16 0 0.812 85 11 Indianapolis Colts 2006 2015 77 18 0 0.811 95 12 New York Jets 2006 2016 59 14 0 0.808 73 13 San Francisco 49ers 2006 2016 61 15 0 0.803 76 14 Arizona Cardinals 2006 2016 56 14 0 0.800 70 15 Atlanta Falcons 2006 2016 62 17 0 0.785 79 16 Houston Texans 2006 2016 58 18 0 0.763 76 17 Dallas Cowboys 2006 2016 58 19 0 0.753 77 18 Buffalo Bills 2006 2016 46 16 0 0.742 62 19 Kansas City Chiefs 2006 2016 55 20 0 0.733 75 20 San Diego Chargers 2006 2016 65 24 0 0.730 89 21 Jacksonville Jaguars 2006 2015 40 15 0 0.727 55 22 Carolina Panthers 2006 2016 63 24 0 0.724 87 23 Minnesota Vikings 2006 2016 53 20 1 0.723 74 24 Cincinnati Bengals 2006 2015 61 23 2 0.721 86 25 Tennessee Titans 2006 2016 45 22 0 0.672 67 26 Miami Dolphins 2006 2015 42 22 0 0.656 64 27 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 2006 2016 38 21 0 0.644 59 28 ?????????? Rams 2006 2016 41 27 1 0.601 69 29 Detroit Lions 2006 2016 35 27 0 0.565 62 30 Oakland Raiders 2006 2016 31 24 0 0.564 55 31 Cleveland Browns 2006 2016 36 28 0 0.563 64 32 Washington Redskins 2006 2015 35 29 0 0.547 64 Total 2006 2016 1913 604 4 .760 2521
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
vince, can you post the link or the Game Finder settings you used to get those lists? Having trouble duplicating.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Old school/new school is completely irrelevant terminology and accurately describes nothing with respect to the question at hand, but I get that you're equating old school with ineffective running strategy, an overemphasis (by your opinion) on the game clock, and going "conservative" which you understand to be self-definingly negative. By your perspective, old school is no longer relevant in today's game that emphasizes passing. You've loaded the term so heavily in the negative that it can't possibly be effective.
Taking this definition and your identification of McCarthy with these negative traits, I've researched the reality of the situation, and it turns out that there are extensive, incontrovertable facts about the reality of McCarthy's level of effectiveness in closing games iwth the lead -without regard to any labels applied. Once the negative labels are applied, the facts of the situation prove the negative connotations to be not merely inappropriate but completely and entirely wrong.
I've seen zero evidence, much less a hint of factual results, that even suggest that "New school" approach carries any level of success in closing out leads whatsoever. Your "proof" I'm assuming is your mind's reference to 1 ihighly emotional failure of the "old school" approach. No matter how emotional, one lone exception in the face of 10 times as many proof points doesn't disprove the rule. "Man it felt like it could have failed if the opponent wouldn't have run out of time" doesn't disprove the rule. "if this hypothetical would have happened it would have failed" doesn't disprove the rule. "Man they almost lost." doesn't disprove the rule. "I tell you what if there would have been a fifth quarter in that game, the Packers would have been beat by 2 touchdowns" doesn't disprove the rule. "They blew them out in the first half. McCarthy took his foot off the gas and they ALMOST lost." doesn't disprove the rule. "It worked in the first half" doesn't disprove the rule.
The second half becomes increasingly different situation than the first have as the end of the game nears. That factor, combined with how the point differential is working for or against you and other trends (defensive energy for example comes to mind) potentially change the "winning" strategy. Denying the wisdom of whether and how the "winning" strategy might change as the game ending nears flies directly in the face of two facts. 1) It's pretty much universally accepted that McCarthy changes his approach based on point differential and time remaining, and 2) McCarthy has a 10 year proven track record of elite level success when leading and as the time remaining gets increasingly closer to the end than the beginning.
Your opinion to your "open question" has no basis whatsoever at this point, while you characterize the successful strategy as stupid, out-dated and irrelevant there is extensive and overwhelming factual results over the last 10 years and including the present that prove both its relevance and effectiveness.
Doesn't that at least give you some pause? The approach you're deeming as wrong is in fact, highly successful, while the approach you're deeming as correct has no evidence of success whatsoever, at least that's been offered here. I'd love to see it. I'd say any objective observer would either do more than pause or try to find some evidence of its relevance to the conversation much less limited positive results.
It could be argued that throwing on first down was indeed foolish. However, the punitive negative impact of the incompletion on first down (as compared to a run for no gain) absolutely impacts the wisdom of passing again on 2nd down. McCarthy can't control the success or failure of any play as we agree, but his failure to control the negative impact of failure a second time after failing to take that control the play prior would indeed by a foolish decision.
The fact that a coach has very limited control of when and where a failure will occur (he can draw on experience to estimate its chances of happening and to what extent) is EXACTLY the reason they do control what they can - and that is the IMPACT of failure if/when it occurs - late in games with the lead are the instances where doing so is most successful - and failing to do so carries the greatest risk. By minimizing the potential impacts of failure through risk averse decisions, coaches can help position their team to close the game successfully, not in spite of the uncrontrollable factors but by minimizing their negative impacts to the goal of winning the game.
Last edited by vince; 09-29-2016 at 11:00 PM.
Total games toggle at the top and at the bottom of the selection set of the first Additional Criteria are the "Halftime score margin" and "Score margin after 3 q" for each query, each set to greater than or equal to 1 obviously. The others like year range, all teams etc. I'm sure you'll find obvious.
Description reads:
Current search:
In multiple seasons, from 2006 to 2016, requiring Score margin after 3 Qtrs >= 1, sorted by most games matching criteria
Yeah there's obviously a correlation between winning in any scenario and successfully closing games with the lead, so a coaching staff's player development effectiveness, weekly preparation, and a host of other important coaching skills impact hide themselves in a coach's game management decisions. In general, I think game management has a relatively small impact on a coaches ultimate success relative to the preponderance of other skills a coach needs. Most fans tend to focus on that component to the exclusion of the others in their judgments of coaches. The aspect where game management does have a bigger impact is closing games with the lead though.
The Falcons had a decent run for a stretch the last decade.
You see, that's where I disagree with you. The stats that you provide prove nothing relative to the "reality of McCarthy's level of effectiveness." I see McCarthy's name no where in the stat tables you provide. The tables compare team winning percentages; they say nothing about how or why those percentages are as they are. Stats do not conclude. YOU conclude based on the assumption YOU bring to the table, namely that Head Coaching strategy and game management is directly and solely responsible for the team winning percentages listed.
In fact, any number of factors could be responsible for the stats. Head Coaching strategy and game management is only one factor. Another might be a great offense and superior excellence in the QB position. Another might be overall excellence of players at all positions. Another might be consistently effective performance by the defense. In fact, one could just as easily conclude from the data that Dom Capers is as much responsible for the Packers' won/loss percentage in the stats as McCarthy.
Moreover, it is possible the Packers may have scored high in these won/loss results despite iffy Head Coaching offensive strategy and game management in the second half and 4th quarter. You cannot prove otherwise by reference alone to the statistics you provide.
The truth is that a coach is not simply a risk manager. Yes, each and every play in a football game carries "x" amount of risk of "bad things" happening (lost yards, fumbles, penalties, interceptions, etc.) which the coach must assess and consider based on his knowledge and experience. But each and every play also carries "y" amount of reward potential for "good things" happening (yards gained, field position, scoring position, 1st down gained, time off the clock, etc.) which the coach must assess and weigh against the risk.
How the coach chooses to weigh risk against reward potential tells us whether he is "conservative" or "aggressive," "old school" or "new school" or however we want to describe it. Stubby has proved time and time again that he is, generally speaking, old school conservative.
One time Lombardi was disgusted with the team in practice and told them they were going to have to start with the basics. He held up a ball and said: "This is a football." McGee immediately called out, "Stop, coach, you're going too fast," and that gave everyone a laugh.
John Maxymuk, Packers By The Numbers
Well, we may have to give Vince and pugger (and Beveraux?) a medal because if you take vince's search and make some changes, its clear we are talking about less than a handful of games where the situations we describe here make a difference.
If you look at just playoff games, there are 2 games you might remember:
Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com: View Original TableCode:Rk Tm From To W L T W-L% Count 1 Denver Broncos 2011 2015 5 0 0 1.000 5 Ind. Games 2 Arizona Cardinals 2008 2009 4 0 0 1.000 4 Ind. Games 3 New Orleans Saints 2006 2013 4 0 0 1.000 4 Ind. Games 4 New York Giants 2007 2011 4 0 0 1.000 4 Ind. Games 5 Carolina Panthers 2014 2015 3 0 0 1.000 3 Ind. Games 6 Philadelphia Eagles 2006 2008 3 0 0 1.000 3 Ind. Games 7 Chicago Bears 2006 2010 2 0 0 1.000 2 Ind. Games 8 Houston Texans 2011 2012 2 0 0 1.000 2 Ind. Games 9 New York Jets 2009 2010 2 0 0 1.000 2 Ind. Games 10 Jacksonville Jaguars 2007 2007 1 0 0 1.000 1 Ind. Games 11 Baltimore Ravens 2008 2014 8 1 0 0.889 9 Ind. Games 12 Pittsburgh Steelers 2008 2015 5 1 0 0.833 6 Ind. Games 13 Green Bay Packers 2007 2015 7 2 0 0.778 9 Ind. Games 14 New England Patriots 2006 2015 8 3 0 0.727 11 Ind. Games 15 Seattle Seahawks 2006 2014 5 2 0 0.714 7 Ind. Games 16 Indianapolis Colts 2006 2014 7 3 0 0.700 10 Ind. Games 17 San Francisco 49ers 2011 2013 4 2 0 0.667 6 Ind. Games 18 San Diego Chargers 2006 2013 3 2 0 0.600 5 Ind. Games 19 Atlanta Falcons 2012 2012 1 1 0 0.500 2 Ind. Games 20 Kansas City Chiefs 2013 2015 1 1 0 0.500 2 Ind. Games 21 Minnesota Vikings 2009 2015 1 1 0 0.500 2 Ind. Games 22 Dallas Cowboys 2006 2014 1 3 0 0.250 4 Ind. Games 23 Detroit Lions 2014 2014 0 1 0 0.000 1 Ind. Games 24 Washington Redskins 2012 2012 0 1 0 0.000 1 Ind. Games Total 2006 2015 81 24 0 .771 105
Generated 9/30/2016.
The Packers list is this:
Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com: View Original TableCode:Pass Marg Rk Tm Year Date Time LTime Opp Week G# Day Result OT Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Sk Yds Q1 Q2 Q3 1 GNB 2007 2008-01-12 4:33 3:33 SEA 19 17 Sat W 42-20 18 23 78.3 173 3 0 1 0 0 11 15 2 GNB 2010 2011-01-09 4:40 4:40 PHI 18 17 Sun W 21-16 18 27 66.7 171 3 0 2 9 7 11 11 3 GNB 2010 2011-01-15 8:15 8:15 ATL 19 18 Sat W 48-21 31 36 86.1 346 3 0 2 20 -7 14 28 4 GNB 2010 2011-02-06 6:34 5:34 N PIT 21 20 Sun W 31-25 24 39 61.5 288 3 0 3 16 14 11 4 5 GNB 2015 2016-01-10 4:42 4:42 WAS 18 17 Sun W 35-18 21 36 58.3 205 2 0 1 5 -5 6 6 6 GNB 2015 2016-01-16 8:15 6:15 ARI 19 18 Sat L 20-26 OT 24 44 54.5 251 2 1 1 10 -7 -1 3 7 GNB 2012 2013-01-05 8:09 7:09 MIN 18 17 Sat W 24-10 23 33 69.7 250 1 0 3 24 4 14 21 8 GNB 2014 2015-01-18 3:06 12:06 SEA 20 18 Sun L 22-28 OT 19 34 55.9 171 1 2 1 7 13 16 9 9 GNB 2010 2011-01-23 3:05 2:05 CHI 20 19 Sun W 21-14 17 30 56.7 236 0 2 1 8 7 14 14
Generated 9/30/2016.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
So 13th ranked win% in playoffs (77.8). Doesn't look tremendous, but there are 10 undefeated with much more limited experience (Packers tied for third most playoff games with lead after 3rd Q, Broncos are undefeated but have 5 games under these conditions).
Patriots have 11, Colts 10, Packers and Balt have 9 games.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
So what about good teams? Same criteria against playoff bound teams:
Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com: View Original TableCode:Rk Tm From To W L T W-L% Count 1 New Orleans Saints 2006 2014 24 4 0 0.857 28 Ind. Games 2 New England Patriots 2006 2015 34 7 0 0.829 41 Ind. Games 3 Pittsburgh Steelers 2006 2015 24 5 0 0.828 29 Ind. Games 4 Baltimore Ravens 2006 2015 27 6 0 0.818 33 Ind. Games 5 Arizona Cardinals 2006 2015 16 4 0 0.800 20 Ind. Games 6 New York Jets 2006 2015 16 4 0 0.800 20 Ind. Games 7 Indianapolis Colts 2006 2015 27 7 0 0.794 34 Ind. Games 8 Green Bay Packers 2006 2015 29 8 0 0.784 37 Ind. Games 9 Denver Broncos 2006 2015 25 7 0 0.781 32 Ind. Games 10 Seattle Seahawks 2006 2015 21 6 0 0.778 27 Ind. Games 11 Minnesota Vikings 2006 2015 18 5 1 0.771 24 Ind. Games 12 Atlanta Falcons 2007 2015 12 4 0 0.750 16 Ind. Games 13 Jacksonville Jaguars 2006 2015 12 4 0 0.750 16 Ind. Games 14 Carolina Panthers 2006 2015 21 7 1 0.741 29 Ind. Games 15 Philadelphia Eagles 2006 2015 18 7 0 0.720 25 Ind. Games 16 New York Giants 2006 2015 17 7 0 0.708 24 Ind. Games 17 Cincinnati Bengals 2006 2015 15 6 1 0.705 22 Ind. Games 18 Kansas City Chiefs 2006 2015 11 5 0 0.688 16 Ind. Games 19 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 2006 2015 11 5 0 0.688 16 Ind. Games 20 Miami Dolphins 2006 2015 13 6 0 0.684 19 Ind. Games 21 San Francisco 49ers 2006 2015 17 8 0 0.680 25 Ind. Games 22 St. Louis Rams 2006 2015 10 5 1 0.656 16 Ind. Games 23 Chicago Bears 2006 2015 18 11 0 0.621 29 Ind. Games 24 Dallas Cowboys 2006 2014 13 8 0 0.619 21 Ind. Games 25 Houston Texans 2006 2014 13 8 0 0.619 21 Ind. Games 26 San Diego Chargers 2006 2014 15 10 0 0.600 25 Ind. Games 27 Washington Redskins 2006 2013 10 8 0 0.556 18 Ind. Games 28 Oakland Raiders 2006 2015 6 5 0 0.545 11 Ind. Games 29 Buffalo Bills 2006 2015 7 6 0 0.538 13 Ind. Games 30 Tennessee Titans 2006 2014 7 7 0 0.500 14 Ind. Games 31 Cleveland Browns 2006 2014 7 11 0 0.389 18 Ind. Games 32 Detroit Lions 2006 2015 6 14 0 0.300 20 Ind. Games Total 2006 2015 520 215 4 .706 739
Generated 9/30/2016.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Very similar to overall numbers when leading after 3 quarters. If you use the best win percentage recorded (Saints), if its all game management, you get 2 more wins.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
OK, different question, what about trailing at 3 Quarters?
Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com: View Original TableCode:Rk Tm From To W L T W-L% Count 1 Cleveland Browns 2006 2015 3 48 0 0.059 51 Ind. Games 2 New York Giants 2006 2015 9 40 0 0.184 49 Ind. Games 3 St. Louis Rams 2006 2015 2 47 0 0.041 49 Ind. Games 4 Houston Texans 2006 2015 6 42 0 0.125 48 Ind. Games 5 Oakland Raiders 2006 2015 3 45 0 0.063 48 Ind. Games 6 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 2006 2015 3 45 0 0.063 48 Ind. Games 7 Jacksonville Jaguars 2006 2015 2 45 0 0.043 47 Ind. Games 8 Cincinnati Bengals 2006 2015 4 41 1 0.098 46 Ind. Games 9 Tennessee Titans 2006 2015 6 40 0 0.130 46 Ind. Games 10 Atlanta Falcons 2006 2015 5 40 0 0.111 45 Ind. Games 11 Buffalo Bills 2006 2015 3 42 0 0.067 45 Ind. Games 12 Detroit Lions 2006 2015 2 42 0 0.045 44 Ind. Games 13 Chicago Bears 2006 2015 5 37 0 0.119 42 Ind. Games 14 Minnesota Vikings 2006 2015 1 41 0 0.024 42 Ind. Games 15 Arizona Cardinals 2006 2015 3 38 0 0.073 41 Ind. Games 16 Carolina Panthers 2006 2015 3 35 0 0.079 38 Ind. Games 17 San Francisco 49ers 2006 2015 3 35 0 0.079 38 Ind. Games 18 Denver Broncos 2006 2015 6 31 0 0.162 37 Ind. Games 19 Kansas City Chiefs 2006 2015 1 36 0 0.027 37 Ind. Games 20 San Diego Chargers 2006 2015 5 32 0 0.135 37 Ind. Games 21 Seattle Seahawks 2006 2015 8 29 0 0.216 37 Ind. Games 22 Miami Dolphins 2006 2015 4 32 0 0.111 36 Ind. Games 23 New York Jets 2006 2015 2 34 0 0.056 36 Ind. Games 24 Baltimore Ravens 2006 2015 3 33 0 0.083 36 Ind. Games 25 Washington Redskins 2006 2015 3 33 0 0.083 36 Ind. Games 26 Dallas Cowboys 2006 2015 5 30 0 0.143 35 Ind. Games 27 New Orleans Saints 2006 2015 4 31 0 0.114 35 Ind. Games 28 Philadelphia Eagles 2006 2015 1 32 0 0.030 33 Ind. Games 29 Indianapolis Colts 2006 2015 7 25 0 0.219 32 Ind. Games 30 Pittsburgh Steelers 2006 2015 5 27 0 0.156 32 Ind. Games 31 Green Bay Packers 2006 2015 4 26 0 0.133 30 Ind. Games 32 New England Patriots 2006 2015 8 20 0 0.286 28 Ind. Games Total 2006 2015 129 1154 1 .101 1284
Generated 9/30/2016.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
You can see they don't trail often (this is all games (reg season and playoffs included) against playoff qualifiers).
At 30 games when behind, they are 2nd ranked behind Patriots (28 versus 30 games meet criteria).
Their win percentage of these games is 9th. In this case, with a modest amount of games, being the best at this scenario would give you four more wins.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Quick takeaway?
1. We probably overestimate the conservative end of game scenario for its impact on wins. I still maintain it exists and costs them games, but the number overall is less than 5.
2. Playoff leads lead me back to the Seattle game. The Cardinal game featured an ineffectual Packer Offense. It still should have featured a 2 point conversion.
I do think the Packers could increase their success with a more efficient late game strategy. But the difference is not huge. In the playoffs though, one more win is big deal.
3. Packers, given talent elsewhere, not a particularly good comeback team. But difference is still modest.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
In regards to the 2 point conversion is has been revealed that Janis was actually hurt on the hail mary and would have been unable to go on a 2pt play. That left GB with only 2 WRs. McCarthy said that he had no two point conversion plays in the playbook based out of a 2WR set
I am better looking than you.
Hard to believe he couldn't have swapped in a short yardage play with two TEs and two WRs. Roll Rodgers right with the weak-side TE going that way and then he has multiple options. Whatever, we now know with utmost certainty that overtime in postseason is instant death for the Packers.
Stubby don't think on the fly.
Yeah, I get he didn't have his preferred plays. But injuries happen, the WR corp was already banged up and you need an emergency list.
Its just malpractice not to have it. His offense had not sniffed the red zone much at all. It was the best scoring chance they were likely to get.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote