More Banjo - Packers vs. 49ers

[Fritz]

Well, you can't disregard the fact that the special teams was responsible for a ten-point margin of difference, between the blocked FG and the blocked punt for a touchdown. And that's without accounting for the incredible field position SF had over and over again thanks to poor ST coverage.

Yet I do not disagree. Rodgers is supposed to be the one who takes this team over the top, and in the past two years, he had plenty - plenty - of chances to win the games for the team (twice in the SF game last week, with six minutes left and then with four minutes left). And he did not. In fact, he pooped the bed. Smeared it, really.

[kcpackman]

Well, you can't disregard the fact that the special teams was responsible for a ten-point margin of difference, between the blocked FG and the blocked punt for a touchdown. And that's without accounting for the incredible field position SF had over and over again thanks to poor ST coverage.

Yet I do not disagree. Rodgers is supposed to be the one who takes this team over the top, and in the past two years, he had plenty - plenty - of chances to win the games for the team (twice in the SF game last week, with six minutes left and then with four minutes left). And he did not. In fact, he pooped the bed. Smeared it, really.

Both statement are completely true. Here is the thing for me - every "fail" in the playoffs over the last 10 years have been = well the team lost because of "_________" fill in the blank. All true statements in there own right - BUT, in all of those situations, there has been been one thing common. The coach changed, the players have all changed,, except 2 - Rodgers and Crosby. I am happy Rodgers admitted that he made some bad decisions after last Saturday, maybe the Packers or some other team will reap the benefits of that - maybe, if he really believe it.

[run pMc]

I've heard the summation that special teams cost them 10 points but Rodgers cost them the game.

Your best players need to play their best when the stakes count, and he didn't.

Two years in a row they've had the top seed, home games at Lambeau, and Rodgers hasn't been good enough.
He didn't target a WR not named Adams until the 4Q.

That's not winning QB play. I think it's fair to expect better from the presumptive MVP...especially when receivers were open.

[Joemailman]

I've heard the summation that special teams cost them 10 points but Rodgers cost them the game.

Your best players need to play their best when the stakes count, and he didn't.

Two years in a row they've had the top seed, home games at Lambeau, and Rodgers hasn't been good enough.
He didn't target a WR not named Adams until the 4Q.

That's not winning QB play. I think it's fair to expect better from the presumptive MVP...especially when receivers were open.

It's a fair point. Rodgers probably makes as much money as all the guys on the punt team combined. And the blocked punt didn't put the Packers behind. It only tied the score. Rodgers still had a chance to move the team in scoring range to win the game. Passing the ball to Lazard would have put them right there.

[scharpcheddar]

You do all this on this is on your damned phone?? Cripes, you're ten times the typist on your phone that I am on my laptop. I envy you.

I hate those damned smart phones.

No, it's one finger and this phone is harder to type on

[Jaire]

Late to the thread. I've been gone a while and missed this game.

It does seem Rodgers missed Lazard, but that wasn't game. For a change Rodgers didn't have to win it. But imo, the injuries caught up with us. Bakh being out, switching Turner to LT.... I was concerned about the banged up OL. You win / lose in the trenches in the playoffs and we had OL problems. Dillard going out didn't help. It was still a very very winnable game........ No, GB should have won it. This was their year like 2014 but with more injuries.

The defense was really really good. Bodes well for next year.

But the special teams definitely cost the game. This was our year, and ST had their worst outing I ever remember. It surpasses the meltdown in Seattle which was more than just ST's, surpasses just by a little. Missed FG you knew was coming, but the blocked punt for (SF's ONLY) TD was the game killer. I don't remember anything like it in Packer playoff history, especially when the defense only gave up only SIX POINTS and 212 yards: that's one of their best performances in Packer playoff history. AR will be back: the D is coming into its own. Sans injury, I'm excited for this team next year. Again, it was theirs and it looked to me like their year (much more than last).

San Fran was the one team I didn't want to see for this game and only one of two teams I was concerned about. They should have won. I'm not nearly as upset as I was about the Seattle game, just because I knew that Crosby was done. You just wished the ST wouldn't botch it.

[RashanGary]

Late to the thread. I've been gone a while and missed this game.

It does seem Rodgers missed Lazard, but that wasn't game. For a change Rodgers didn't have to win it. But imo, the injuries caught up with us. Bakh being out, switching Turner to LT.... I was concerned about the banged up OL. You win / lose in the trenches in the playoffs and we had OL problems. Dillard going out didn't help. It was still a very very winnable game........ No, GB should have won it. This was their year like 2014 but with more injuries.

The defense was really really good. Bodes well for next year.

But the special teams definitely cost the game. This was our year, and ST had their worst outing I ever remember. It surpasses the meltdown in Seattle which was more than just ST's, surpasses just by a little. Missed FG you knew was coming, but the blocked punt for (SF's ONLY) TD was the game killer. I don't remember anything like it in Packer playoff history, especially when the defense only gave up only SIX POINTS and 212 yards: that's one of their best performances in Packer playoff history. AR will be back: the D is coming into its own. Sans injury, I'm excited for this team next year. Again, it was theirs and it looked to me like their year (much more than last).

San Fran was the one team I didn't want to see for this game and only one of two teams I was concerned about. They should have won. I'm not nearly as upset as I was about the Seattle game, just because I knew that Crosby was done. You just wished the ST wouldn't botch it.

Welcome back. Come on over to FYI if you

[Jaire]

Welcome back. Come on over to FYI if you

are not responding from your phone.

[bobblehead]

Now that news is out that Rodgers and Shailee are done as an item I have to wonder if they were on the rocks and it affected him in this game. I mean, going through a tough breakup can fuck with you....and he played just awful.

[call_me_ishmael]

Now that news is out that Rodgers and Shailee are done as an item I have to wonder if they were on the rocks and it affected him in this game. I mean, going through a tough breakup can fuck with you....and he played just awful.

I don't think they actually are, though based on the interview yesterday. She was laughing in the background. Unless it was some other broad.

[Fritz]

Now that news is out that Rodgers and Shailee are done as an item I have to wonder if they were on the rocks and it affected him in this game. I mean, going through a tough breakup can fuck with you....and he played just awful.

Rodgers plays particularly badly in the second half of playoff games.

I wish his girlfriends/fiances would quit calling him at halftime of these important playoff games to tell him it's over.

[bobblehead]

Rodgers plays particularly badly in the second half of playoff games.

I wish his girlfriends/fiances would quit calling him at halftime of these important playoff games to tell him it's over.

Yea. Second half. I haven't seen him play a good QUARTER in years. Ok, thats not fair. He was pretty good against the Rams. But he is 0-2 in his last 2 and he is approaching 40.

[RashanGary]

A good team is hard to beat. It is a coin flip. We just need one more chance to hopefully win our coin flips.

[Joemailman]

ESPN is deep in negotiations with Fox Sports’ Troy Aikman to make him its lead analyst on “Monday Night Football,” The Post has learned.

Aikman’s deal is not completed yet, but there is an expectation that it will be finalized. Aikman has also been courted by Amazon.

The exact figures of Aikman’s deal are not yet fully finalized, but for him to leave Fox it is expected to be comparable to or exceed Tony Romo’s 10-year $180 million deal with CBS

.

[Fritz]

Romo, after being so insightful and refreshing his first season, has really fallen back into the pack, so to speak. He just echoes numbly what the lead announcer says, or he gives us pap that even I could come up with. "Yeah, it's hard for an offense when it gets penalties." Or "There's a reason Aaron Rodgers has been the MVP the last two years!" Deep stuff like that.