49ers @ Packers - NFCD Playoff GDT - 1/22 - 7:15 CST
Moderators: NCF, salmar80, BF004, APB, Packfntk
- TheSkeptic
- Reactions:
- Posts: 2208
- Joined: 25 Mar 2020 01:37
I don't have a problem with Lancaster being on the FG special team. I have a big problem with him being on the wing. And I have a big problem with him lining up so far outside and so deep. He needed to be inside and to have someone like Lewis or Deguara on the outside. DT's shouldn't be asked to block two fast guys. The guy who blocked the punt was their starting safety. There is no way on God's green earth that at DT can block a safety and an cornerback in space. He wound up taking the outside CB and Jimmy Ward blocked it.
Meanwhile Yosh Nijman and Runyan both of whom are 1000% better blockers and more mobile than Lancaster were inside. Only an IDIOT coach asks a player to do what he is physically incapable of doing, and the slowest Dlineman, the backup NT, was not physically capable of doing what he was being asked to do. Lancaster never had a snowball's chance.
Meanwhile Yosh Nijman and Runyan both of whom are 1000% better blockers and more mobile than Lancaster were inside. Only an IDIOT coach asks a player to do what he is physically incapable of doing, and the slowest Dlineman, the backup NT, was not physically capable of doing what he was being asked to do. Lancaster never had a snowball's chance.
- Scott4Pack
- Reactions:
- Posts: 2928
- Joined: 26 Mar 2020 03:41
- Location: New Mexico
Yes, they are. And they are still human.RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑26 Jan 2022 19:53And these are our Coach of the Year and MVP submissions. C'mon Man. Sounds like a drinking town with a football problem to me.Scott4Pack wrote: ↑26 Jan 2022 07:28I'm not the analyst, but it seems those Warner videos reveal 1) lots of patterns going downfield, taking time to develop and most of them were well covered, and 2) So many opportunities that Aaron didn't see or use, especially that last play that would've gotten us 30 yards or so.
Only bad words coming to mind.
Scheme blame to MLF and then Aaron just didn't stay within the offense.
As for Rodgers, I truly think that he plays differently in January than he does in the regular season. I’m not alone in saying this. The guy who could be the MFP for 17 weeks can legitimately be the biggest of the dogs come playoff time. That’s why they play the game.
:-)
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!
- Scott4Pack
- Reactions:
- Posts: 2928
- Joined: 26 Mar 2020 03:41
- Location: New Mexico
After having a week to grieve and consider the loss to the Niners last week, I still think the Pack would win that game 3 times out of 5.
The trouble is that they didn't. The more trouble is that they didn't against the Bucs last year either, nor the Niners two years ago. Favored three times in a row. But three times in a row the other team was more motivated and/or better coaching and/or fewer big errors, or a combination of all three. Veeeeeery slim margin for errors in the playoffs.
The trouble is that they didn't. The more trouble is that they didn't against the Bucs last year either, nor the Niners two years ago. Favored three times in a row. But three times in a row the other team was more motivated and/or better coaching and/or fewer big errors, or a combination of all three. Veeeeeery slim margin for errors in the playoffs.
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!
I'm just glad SF lost yesterday. I've had that team up to here.
The loss to SF 2 years ago didn't bother me. They were favored and I think we all figured that they were the better team.Scott4Pack wrote: ↑31 Jan 2022 06:11After having a week to grieve and consider the loss to the Niners last week, I still think the Pack would win that game 3 times out of 5.
The trouble is that they didn't. The more trouble is that they didn't against the Bucs last year either, nor the Niners two years ago. Favored three times in a row. But three times in a row the other team was more motivated and/or better coaching and/or fewer big errors, or a combination of all three. Veeeeeery slim margin for errors in the playoffs.
The last 2 years are crushing though. Homefield and couldn't get it done.
Yup.Acrobat wrote: ↑31 Jan 2022 09:18The loss to SF 2 years ago didn't bother me. They were favored and I think we all figured that they were the better team.Scott4Pack wrote: ↑31 Jan 2022 06:11After having a week to grieve and consider the loss to the Niners last week, I still think the Pack would win that game 3 times out of 5.
The trouble is that they didn't. The more trouble is that they didn't against the Bucs last year either, nor the Niners two years ago. Favored three times in a row. But three times in a row the other team was more motivated and/or better coaching and/or fewer big errors, or a combination of all three. Veeeeeery slim margin for errors in the playoffs.
The last 2 years are crushing though. Homefield and couldn't get it done.
I don't care when we talk about playoff losses in 2015, 2016, 2019 because we weren't a team that was primed to win it all. And you're not going to have teams that are top tier every single year. It's 2011, 2014, 2020, and 2021 that are the missed opportunity seasons. Even 2013 I think was a major, major missed opportunity.
Those are the ones that bother me. I think if you are having a "legit top team" 3 years+ out of 10, you are doing really, really well as management. We have had that. And so coming away with 0 SB appearances with that I think is a failure.
When you realize that in the last 20 years, only Detroit, Minnesota, Dallas and Washington have less NFC Champions trophies than you do....that's pretty unbelievable.
you keep mentioning 2011 as though that was a solid and well balanced team, it was anything but that, it had a prolific passing attack and that is about it, if more team focused on deep coverage and Rushing the passer we would have never finished 15-1, at least that has always been my impression.go pak go wrote: ↑31 Jan 2022 09:45Yup.Acrobat wrote: ↑31 Jan 2022 09:18The loss to SF 2 years ago didn't bother me. They were favored and I think we all figured that they were the better team.Scott4Pack wrote: ↑31 Jan 2022 06:11After having a week to grieve and consider the loss to the Niners last week, I still think the Pack would win that game 3 times out of 5.
The trouble is that they didn't. The more trouble is that they didn't against the Bucs last year either, nor the Niners two years ago. Favored three times in a row. But three times in a row the other team was more motivated and/or better coaching and/or fewer big errors, or a combination of all three. Veeeeeery slim margin for errors in the playoffs.
The last 2 years are crushing though. Homefield and couldn't get it done.
I don't care when we talk about playoff losses in 2015, 2016, 2019 because we weren't a team that was primed to win it all. And you're not going to have teams that are top tier every single year. It's 2011, 2014, 2020, and 2021 that are the missed opportunity seasons. Even 2013 I think was a major, major missed opportunity.
Those are the ones that bother me. I think if you are having a "legit top team" 3 years+ out of 10, you are doing really, really well as management. We have had that. And so coming away with 0 SB appearances with that I think is a failure.
When you realize that in the last 20 years, only Detroit, Minnesota, Dallas and Washington have less NFC Champions trophies than you do....that's pretty unbelievable.
I agree we have under achieved in the other 3, 2014 came down to mostly conservative play towards the end off the game, and dumb mistakes, which is also the case with 2020 and 21, we tend to beat ourselves.
like KC last night, we jump to a multi score lead, then coast trying to protect it, play prevent defense and allow opponents to catch back up, then do some bone headed stuff and lose, imo thats our track record.
- TheSkeptic
- Reactions:
- Posts: 2208
- Joined: 25 Mar 2020 01:37
Watch the last pass in this evaluation. Rodgers had 2 guys open deep and he throws deep to Adams who was double covered - incomplete.
The guy who did the evaluation puts a disclaimer on his statement - he said that Rodgers does not suck. But he is wrong. In that game, Rodgers did suck.
- Scott4Pack
- Reactions:
- Posts: 2928
- Joined: 26 Mar 2020 03:41
- Location: New Mexico
There were other film studies where you see EVERY passing play and what Rodgers was looking at during his progressions. He could've played a worse game. But he had his share of real bad plays. We expect more from a MVP player, humanity and all.TheSkeptic wrote: ↑04 Feb 2022 05:30
Watch the last pass in this evaluation. Rodgers had 2 guys open deep and he throws deep to Adams who was double covered - incomplete.
The guy who did the evaluation puts a disclaimer on his statement - he said that Rodgers does not suck. But he is wrong. In that game, Rodgers did suck.
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!