Who's To Blame for Packers' Playoff Loss to the Cardinals?

[Maxie the Taxi]

Seriously, if I had to blame someone, I'd blame McStubby. That's where the buck stops. And here's why:

1. The Pack is playing a playoff game away from home. It's the first playoff game for a lot of our guys. We're the youngest team in the league. Our QB is real good, but it's his first playoff game. Arizona tricked us up and closed the roof instead of leaving it open as advertised. In short, you've got a bunch of young guys chomping on the bit, bursting with adrenylin. McStubby should have deferred after winning the coin toss. If he was going to not defer, he should have came out running the ball for the first series or two, punted if he had to and then the butterflies are gone and Warner starts with less than stellar field position. By coming out cold, throwing, McStubby was asking for trouble. The running game's been stellar lately and the Cards were ranked low in run defense so we might not have had to punt.

The Pack came out as they normally do. I really didn't have a problem with the early on playcalling. Rodgers throws a dumb pass and Driver gets stripped. Exactly how is that bad playcalling when this general philosophy worked all season?

2. Related to #1. After the first interception by Rodgers on the first play of the game, and after Warner gets the Cards into the end zone with no problem, why not play to keep Warner off the field? Why not use the run to allow Rodgers time to settle down? The first play after the Pack gets the ball, Grant gashes the Cards for 10 yards! Cool! I figure, "Now we're cooking!" The Cards can't stop the run, yet McStubby has to get greedy, goes to the shotgun and Rodgers gets sacked.

That is incorrect. The next play was a very safe short pass to Driver which he fumbled.

3. Related to #1. Everyone knows playoff games are all but decided on turnovers. After the first Packer turnover, McStubby should have played more conservative, especially close to our goal. When he didn't and we turned it over again, the slide downhill was on.

He did go more conservative, see the above answer. It wasn't like we came out the second drive throwing bombs.

4. The Pack played four games against elite QB's and lost them all by doing what they did Sunday against Warner. Why did McStubby not decide to do something different? They say the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. I hear all the talk about if we would have blitzed heavy, Warner would have killed us. Dah! He killed us anyway! Why not send the LB's and try to force the Cards into a turnover. If Warner gashes us on a big play, so be it. We don't have the horses yet to play cover defense on a guy like Warner or Favre or Big Ben.

5. Why didn't McStubby insist that Capers adjust immediately to Warner's success over the middle. It was obvious to all watching that something was amiss. Why wait till half time when even then Capers didn't really change much.

Agree here. He should have done something to force Capers to switch things up. Don't know if he tried or not, but it was obvious what was being called wasn't working.

6. Why did McStubby go for the long-shot 54-yd field goal at the beginning of the second half? Especially given Crosby's recent crappy kicks? Why give a hot Warner the ball on a short field? Why not try to pin the Cards in the shadow of their own goal posts? Maybe something good would happen on defense. In fact, on the next series Fitzgerald DOES fumble and Matthews recovers! Or just maybe Warner would play a bit more conservative. Maybe we stop the run and they punt. McStubby's been giving up field position like this all season long.

Agree as well. I thought the FG call was stupid.

7. Why didn't McStubby go for the win at the end of the game. He's played shoot-the-lights-out, go-for-broke football all game long, why play conservative at the end of the game and send the game to OT? They're playing IN Arizona. Warner IS hot as hell. You KNOW the Packers are going to score. Why score with a minute and 46 seconds left on the clock? GB has the ball, 1st and 10 on the Arizona 25 with 3:12 left. Grant runs on 1st down and gains 5 yds! Why go to the shotgun on the next three plays? Why not keep it on the ground and wind the clock down to where Warner has only 15 or 20 seconds?

I would have liked to have seen a run play as well on first down to eat up some clock. But I'm not going to turn down a TD though when the opportunity presents itself.

I hear what you're saying, Cheesehead, but I do have a few things to add:

1. The Pack did come out as they normally do, and that's my point. It DIDN'T work all season. Sure, it worked against the weaklings (except for Tampa), but it didn't work when they played against an elite QB who could best Rodgers in a shootout. Rushing game = ball control = less time for an elite QB on the field. (Sorry for the broken record, but you asked. )

2. You are correct, but the play before that was a run by Grant that gained 10 yards. Grant don't fumble and the Cards couldn't stop him. That's my point. Why put it up in the air at all. What's the urgency?

7. Just to be clear, what I wanted the Packers to do here was eat up some more clock, then go for 2 points and the win. There wasn't a person at my house watching the game who didn't think Warner could get the Cards at least a field goal with a minute 46 left on the clock. We should have lost right then and there, but guy missed the FG and gave us a gift. I would have liked to see Warner do that with 15 seconds left. And I would have respected McStubby for putting it all on the line going for 2.

[Maxie the Taxi]

KY, great post. Maybe we weren't going to beat the Cards Sunday no matter what we did.

On the other hand, maybe we could have given ourselves a better chance of upsetting the Cards if McStubby would have made a few changes like the ones I suggest...especially RUNNING THE BALL!!!!

For crying out loud, the Cards ended the season 25th in the league in Rushing defense, giving up 4.5 yards per carry. And guess what? That's exactly the yardage they gave up against the Packers Sunday!

[KYPack]

KY, great post. Maybe we weren't going to beat the Cards Sunday no matter what we did.

On the other hand, maybe we could have given ourselves a better chance of upsetting the Cards if McStubby would have made a few changes like the ones I suggest...especially RUNNING THE BALL!!!!

For crying out loud, the Cards ended the season 25th in the league in Rushing defense, giving up 4.5 yards per carry. And guess what? That's exactly the yardage they gave up against the Packers Sunday!

Well Maxie, you'll never hear me say that running the ball more/better might not have helped in a close loss. I'm sure every coach thinks the same thing when they break down film after losing a close one.

I started looking at our D on the recorded copy I have of the game. Naturally, I started with the Dline. I was really struck at the job the Cardinals did in the OLine. They did the job and most of our guys on our Dline didn't piss a drop in that game . Levi Brown, for instance, pitched a no-hitter. There were plays that Brad Jones barely got out of his stance. Brown just whipped his ass all day long.

One thing that did stand out was what a badass CMIII is. That kid is one of the best OLB's in the NFL right now. He's strong, quick, active and plays with fire every single snap. Just like his daddy. The Cardinals recognized this, and accounted for him almost every snap. That's a helluva compliment for a rookie OLB.

You have to give credit where credit is due. The Cards won the battle in the trenches and it's tough to win games when that happens.

[SnakeLH2006]

Snake is usually pretty right on the money, but I don't like coronating Warner as King of the NFL QB's.

Snake never said Warner was the end all QB, but given time (aka no pass rush) he's still elite tossing the pigskin around the field. That was the whole point. PB reiterated my whole point. No DL pass rush (our DL guys got manhandled for the most part at the POA), made it damned hard to disrupt the old man Warner. It looked like he was tossing balls around in training camp practice for much the game.

All season long we manhandled (for the most part) lesser opposing QB's/offenses, but got killed by the big time QB's (Favre twice, Big Ben, Warner, etc.). McFatty plays it safe and gets killed by big time QB's by not bringing the heat, or the lack of effectiveness in execution with his gameplanning.

I do agree with your McFatty assessments for the most part though, Maxie. The early passing with spread formations made it tough for Arod early. We should have ran the ball more on the porous Cardinal D. The late game mismanagement of the clock really baffled Snake, as well. McFatty should have taken more time off the clock (yeah they missed the FG), and me and my buds were hoping we'd have gone for 2pts instead of the PAT. Strike while the iron is hot and sneak out of there with a win.

In retrospect 5 things stood out in the loss for Snake:

1) McFatty should have deferred possession early in the game in a loud stadium with a young team.
2) When falling behind early (or even before that occurred), he should have stuck with the run game better. It's a miracle after 17-0 we even had a chance to catch up late (god bless Arod and his coolness...sky is the limit for that kid).
3) When gaining so much momentum late, he ought to have thought about going for 2 points, esp. with Warner in such a rhythm.
4) Why is Jarrett Bush still on this team? (Snake gives credit to Red for his tenacity on the subject)
5a) Bottom line...As I stated immediately, and ThunderDan and PB followed up on, our lack of a pass rush from any interior lineman on D killed us.
5b) I was thinking of getting rid of my mid-season avatar of TT eyeballing McFatty (adopted after we were 4-4). Not gonna happen.

[pbmax]

OK, here we go:

1. I don't buy the notion that McCarthy should have deferred (a strategy I cannot recall being used in the NFL - except by the Lions in error) or run more early to calm down the nerves of his team or take the crowd out of it. Given the way the Cardinals moved the ball, the crowd would have been at an even higher pitch if the Packers defer and the Cardinals open by scoring. Not an attractive option. And given the way the game played out, the odds of a Cardinals' score is much higher than a Packer turnover.

Rodgers has shown to be very good at dealing with the pressure to play well and Driver is a playoff vet, I don't think a logical case can be made for predicting this would happen. Philbin said he may have been tight and his first throw was a bad decision, but it was not his only odd decision of the year and no one was claiming nerves on the other ones.

2. Running the football. Running the football limits possessions, eat clock and depresses scoring by both sides (assuming you can be effective). Running more after being down by 17 would have made the comeback less likely to happen. Even with the lead, the Cardinals ran just 23 times compared to the Packer 20.

Running to help give the defense a breather, I am not buying this either. Time of Possession was 1:34 in favor of the Cardinals. Even with the lead, they ran only 23 times. Whether the Packers run more or not, they face the same ratio of pass attempts, and the pass rushers are just as blown. 33 pass attempts was nothing extraordinary this year for the Packer D to face. The problem was the number of yards those throws covered. Not fatigue.

I do buy Maxie's argument that running early would have led to less exposure to a turnover risk. But given how careful the offense had been all season, there was no reason to expect them to lose the handle at a greater frequency.

3. In short, I don't think this was coaching. McCarthy has his flaws. But Driver fumbling and Rodgers throwing where he had no business throwing are not coaching errors. They are player errors.

The fault for the loss is the defense, even if the offense could have saved their bacon with one or two fewer errors.

[Fritz]

KY, great post. Maybe we weren't going to beat the Cards Sunday no matter what we did.

On the other hand, maybe we could have given ourselves a better chance of upsetting the Cards if McStubby would have made a few changes like the ones I suggest...especially RUNNING THE BALL!!!!

For crying out loud, the Cards ended the season 25th in the league in Rushing defense, giving up 4.5 yards per carry. And guess what? That's exactly the yardage they gave up against the Packers Sunday!

Well Maxie, you'll never hear me say that running the ball more/better might not have helped in a close loss. I'm sure every coach thinks the same thing when they break down film after losing a close one.

I started looking at our D on the recorded copy I have of the game. Naturally, I started with the Dline. I was really struck at the job the Cardinals did in the OLine. They did the job and most of our guys on our Dline didn't piss a drop in that game . Levi Brown, for instance, pitched a no-hitter. There were plays that Brad Jones barely got out of his stance. Brown just whipped his ass all day long.

One thing that did stand out was what a badass CMIII is. That kid is one of the best OLB's in the NFL right now. He's strong, quick, active and plays with fire every single snap. Just like his daddy. The Cardinals recognized this, and accounted for him almost every snap. That's a helluva compliment for a rookie OLB.

You have to give credit where credit is due. The Cards won the battle in the trenches and it's tough to win games when that happens.

This analysis, and I do trust KY's analysis, suggests to me that MM and TT have some serious food for thought this offseason.

How can they counter a team (Arizona, NO, Minnesota, Indy, San Diego, Pitt) that features a very good QB and an offensive line that can put up a wall for that QB? What's the answer?

One point would be the side opposite Matthews. Is Brad Jones going to get better as time goes, or would Kampman have provided a better alternative against Ariozona had he been healthy?

If the defensive line could not get pressure, do you draft more, or do you think about better (faster?) inside linebackers who can get pressure up the middle?

Is Lee an answer or does the coaching staff not know yet?

Lots and lots to consider this offseason. It's clear this is a good defense against teams that don't feature a star QB and a wall of an offensive line. But those are the teams, the ones with that QB and line, that you'll face in the playoffs.

What to do, what to do? A few games ago, per the draft I was thinking offensive line, safety, running back. Now, I'm wondering if a new inside or outside linebacker taken high is a need.

Hmmm. I don't know. I just don't know.

[pbmax]

I am not sure Arizona puts up a wall like, say, the Cowboys could a year or two ago. NO got to Warner.

Also, on the Packers offensive struggles in the first half, we might refer back to the combo coverages that flummoxed the offense against the Bears in Week 1.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/walkthrough/2010/walkthrough-combo-coverage

[denverYooper]

Lots and lots to consider this offseason. It's clear this is a good defense against teams that don't feature a star QB and a wall of an offensive line. But those are the teams, the ones with that QB and line, that you'll face in the playoffs.

What to do, what to do? A few games ago, per the draft I was thinking offensive line, safety, running back. Now, I'm wondering if a new inside or outside linebacker taken high is a need.

Hmmm. I don't know. I just don't know.

I've been thinking about this. I think they foritfy the O-Line by bringing in some tackles and focus on making a fortress for Rodgers. Then let him throw for 200 yards apiece per game to Finley and Jennings. One more year of experience and good protection and just let Rodgers out throw the other guy.