Post Game Chat with Cleft Crusty (at Bengals)

[MJZiggy]

If a bad play disqualifies you from having a good day, then no one in the NFL had a good day. Matthews had a Hall of Fame half. The forced fumble for a touchdown was a play that perhaps 5 linebackers in the history of the NFL could make. Matthews have several of those a year. Many on the defense played very well, only allowing two significant TD drives, one after Matthews left the game. Shields was spectacular, but had a bad play - and it cost a TD. Starks and Franklin were both outstanding, but Starks made the mistake of getting injured and Franklin had the horrible fumble. Maybe Jordy Nelson-had a near perfect game.

Masthay?

[Cleft Crusty]

After that game, you really want to talk about kickers?

[Brandon494]

The forced fumble for a touchdown was a play that perhaps 5 linebackers in the history of the NFL could make.

[red]

After that game, you really want to talk about kickers?

they were two of the few bright spots that didn't end up hurt

[Cleft Crusty]

they were two of the few bright spots that didn't end up hurt

Don't count your chickens before they reach the training room. Wait until the injury report is released.

[Cleft Crusty]

That's an effective argument, if you're three years old.

[Cleft Crusty]

On the play in question, Clay Matthews covered ten yards and forced a fumble in about .085 seconds, +/- 0.2 seconds (using a my trusty sundial). Clefty has never seen a forced fumble quite that sudden, but has seen LBs with that kind of quick twitch (like LT, Derrick Thomas).

[mr_blonde]

2011, before losing Collins. Nice out? That's reality. The amazing thing about this team is how well they play even when half the team is missing due to injury. This is a team that is unique in rarely being blown out - that's a testament to a solid organization.

You seem perfectly content with style over substance. I'm not.

I'm not concerned about "how well they play even when half the team is missing due to injury". You are using injuries an excuse as to why this team loses or worse, as an excuse to lose.
The fact that the Packers are rarely blown out is not a "testament to a solid organization". The testament of a "solid organization" (which should read a "great organization" is measured by Super Bowl Championships. I expect this team to win Championships. With Rodgers turning 30, their window to do so is four, maybe five years.

I don't care if Matthews had a "Hall of Fame" first half or if Shields was "spectacular" except for one bad play etc. The Packers lost. They lost a game they should have/could have won. A 2-1 record would have been a lot better than 1-2 going into the bye. Vince Lombardi WOULD NEVER accept your "injuries" excuse for losing. He would have slapped you silly if you told him a testament to a "solid organization" was not "being blown out".

Now, how was that for an unbraiding????

[Cleft Crusty]

You seem perfectly content with style over substance. I'm not.

I'm not concerned about "how well they play even when half the team is missing due to injury". You are using injuries an excuse as to why this team loses or worse, as an excuse to lose.
The fact that the Packers are rarely blown out is not a "testament to a solid organization". The testament of a "solid organization" (which should read a "great organization" is measured by Super Bowl Championships. I expect this team to win Championships. With Rodgers turning 30, their window to do so is four, maybe five years.

I don't care if Matthews had a "Hall of Fame" first half or if Shields was "spectacular" except for one bad play etc. The Packers lost. They lost a game they should have/could have won. A 2-1 record would have been a lot better than 1-2 going into the bye. Vince Lombardi WOULD NEVER accept your "injuries" excuse for losing. He would have slapped you silly if you told him a testament to a "solid organization" was not "being blown out".

Now, how was that for an unbraiding????

I could care less if the Packers win or lose, except that when they lose I have more fun with crazy people, trolls, etc. It's delicious to counter spoiled fans who expect wins every week and decompensate when they lose. Lombardi had to deal with injuries and guys losing time due to gambling etc. etc. It's part of the game. It's not an excuse, it's reality. Lombardi certainly wouldn't run his guys down for playing their hearts out (except for individuals, if they needed it; Lombardi tailored his teaching to the natures of the various players). McCarthy also clearly doesn't use injuries as an excuse - he expects the next guy to come in and play well; so does Thompson - perhaps it is that very attitude that results in a rookie like Franklin coming in and having a big half, even though he's never played a down in the NFL. But go ahead and make the fumble the sole source of your analysis, but know that the Packers organization will never do that.

A dispassionate, rational evaluation of the game shows that the Packers were the better team, but lost due to injuries and a critical rookie mistake at an inopportune time.

[red]

cleft, what do you make of the sideline spat between a-rod and fat mike. everyone seems to think it was nothing and the camera showed them being all buddy buddy afterwards

but for me, where there's smoke there's fire. for a-rod to blow up like that means he doesn't like something, and he hasn't liked it for awhile

reason to be concerned?

[George Cumby]

A dispassionate, rational evaluation of the game.

Cleft, excuse my ignorance, but in fan-speak, does this not translate into "Homerism?"

Just curious.

[Cleft Crusty]

cleft, what do you make of the sideline spat between a-rod and fat mike. everyone seems to think it was nothing and the camera showed them being all buddy buddy afterwards

but for me, where there's smoke there's fire. for a-rod to blow up like that means he doesn't like something, and he hasn't liked it for awhile

reason to be concerned?

This is just a guess, but I'm betting Rodgers wasn't getting the ball out fast enough for McCarthy. Rodgers left a couple of pretty big plays on the field waiting. Ironic though how later the quick toss ultimately ruined them with all the batted balls.

I also wonder if Rodgers wasn't losing confidence due to the wind. It seemed swirly, but no one else seems to be mentioning this. The swirly wind might just have been Cleft Crusty gas; probably need to take more Di-Gel and cut down on the metamucil.

[pbmax]

Don't think Rodgers liked the run calls near the end zone was my first reaction and then didn't like the pass play that followed. Could also be Ross in backfield rather than Franklin. Just guesses though.

More concerned with another QB helmet hit and then terrible QB play after it. Though it got better the longer the game went.

[Cleft Crusty]

Don't think Rodgers liked the run calls near the end zone was my first reaction and then didn't like the pass play that followed. Could also be Ross in backfield rather than Franklin. Just guesses though.

More concerned with another QB helmet hit and then terrible QB play after it. Though it got better the longer the game went.

That sounds ominous, but it has a strong ring of truth to it. That pass play to Ross looked bad from the start. It did look as though Rodgers could have completed it with a reasonable chance for a TD - and he avoids the head shot.

[pbmax]

That sounds ominous, but it has a strong ring of truth to it. That pass play to Ross looked bad from the start. It did look as though Rodgers could have completed it with a reasonable chance for a TD - and he avoids the head shot.

He wasn't clear for the TD, but he was open (just not ignored as they may have expected). Rodgers should have tossed it to him I think.