Packers: 26 Patriots: 21

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly from the Packers' win over the Patriots. 

Mike McCarthy, Aaron Rodgers, Dom Capers

Mason Crosby

Nagler, For Picking the Pats

 

 

Sponsored by The Stillmank Brewing Co.

Proudly Served at Lambeau Field

Proudly Served at Lambeau Field

0 points

Comments (65)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
joepacker's picture

November 30, 2014 at 11:30 pm

Man. I am so high. And, I've been sober for years.

0 points
0
0
joepacker's picture

November 30, 2014 at 11:29 pm

Thank you for being wrong, Aaron.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

November 30, 2014 at 11:30 pm

Good: Aaron Effen Rodgers, MM/Capers, Davante Adams

Bad: Mason Crosby, Tramon Williams, Shawn Slocumb

Ugly: The Bovine

0 points
0
0
Otto's picture

November 30, 2014 at 11:38 pm

The Good: David, TJ, Corey, Josh, Brian

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:55 am

That's what I'm talking 'bout!

0 points
0
0
Idiot Fan's picture

November 30, 2014 at 11:46 pm

So much good; so little bad. Love it.

I agree with Crosby in the bad, though the NE kicker, who had only missed one kick all year, missed his by about 15 yards, so I'm guessing the conditions were not great.

0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:51 am

Kickers think Lambeau is the toughest place to kick in the NFL. The south end zone in particular was squirrelly yesterday.

Best way to fix that is to FIRE SLOCUM and CUT CROSBY
-Packers fanalysts

0 points
0
0
Irish_Cheesehead's picture

December 01, 2014 at 01:48 pm

Cut Crosby???? The guy has only missed 3 kicks all season. He wasn't the one deciding to squib kick yesterday - that comes from Slocum. And who would you bring in to take Crosby's place? Giorgio Tavecchio ?

0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

December 01, 2014 at 12:24 am

Adams was a dropped pass away from being in the good... so I'll give it to Cobb. Once again he made a number of clutch catches, especially the last one.

Ugly - what is it with Crosby's kickoffs. What a disadvantage he puts us at. He's supposed to have such a strong leg, yet he hits line drives to the 10 yard line when he's not kicking out of bounds. He needs to clean that up or it's going to cost us.

0 points
0
0
DraftHobbyist's picture

December 01, 2014 at 04:33 am

I understand that the TD drop was big, but even with that I think we have to put Adams in the good. Did you know that if you add Cobb's receiving yardage to Nelson's receiving yardage you end up with only 17 more yards than Adams alone? And this was a guy who was supposed to be behind Boykin this year. I don't understand how you can pick Cobb over Adams, when the expectations for Cobb are higher, and Adams had 36 more receiving yards (neither had a TD). Even if you add on the rushing yardage for Cobb, Adams still had 28 more yards.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

December 01, 2014 at 05:04 am

Thank you, Adams was huge all game long! Without him we don't have 23 points in the first half. Cobb dropped the same exact pass in a game earlier this year at the goal line then proceeded to begin to tear DB's up. The kid played GREAT!

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 07:59 am

I can just about guarantee that Crosby is being told to kick those line drive/squibbers.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:58 am

I totally agree and absolutely hate it.

We know our (KO) ST group isn't too good - and that's putting it lightly.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:03 am

I dunno...aside from the one that went out of bounds, it seemed to work alright.

0 points
0
0
murphy's picture

December 01, 2014 at 11:14 am

Was I the only one having flashbacks of this every time the ball was kicked short?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDyPOyg6-Ko

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

December 01, 2014 at 04:29 pm

Yea,it worked - but I still have little-to-no faith in our KO unit. Now, I don't know how the Pats rank in KO returns, but I could understand doing those types of kicks against horrible KR teams (even with our unit being below average).

0 points
0
0
Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

December 01, 2014 at 12:49 am

The most beautiful ugly: Brady dropping multiple F bombs on camera.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 01, 2014 at 01:48 am

Very classy comments: no one commented on the straight line offered up by Mr. Nagler in putting himself in the ugly classification! So far.

0 points
0
0
DraftHobbyist's picture

December 01, 2014 at 04:48 am

I really don't agree with putting Dom Capers in the good. This defensive performance is being so overrated. Brady passed for a passer rating of 102.7. Their team rushed for 4.4 yards per carry, and Blount rushed for 5.8 yards per carry. Also, as much as we are saying Gronkowski didn't destroy us, he did some serious damage. He had 98 yards, so really are expectations were really low to be happy with holding a TE to 98 receiving yards.

The key was long drives by the Packer offense that held possessions for the Patriots down, and kept them off the field for long periods of time. Each team only had 9 drives, but that includes a :14 second driver for the Patriots at the end of the half, and of the other 8 drives, the defense allowed 3 TD's.

What stats really jump out as a positive for this defense? Not including the 1 play drive at the end of the half, the Packers allowed TD's on 37.5% of their drives. If we want to win a Super Bowl then we need this defense to take another step.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

December 01, 2014 at 07:21 am

The defense forced a prolific Patriots offense to punt on 50% of their legitimate possessions, to use your figure of 8. Taking away the possession before the half, it was 9 possessions to 8. The Packers got ONE extra legitimate possession out of their first half, when they started with the ball. If you have an odd number of possessions, someone is going to get one more. And did you notice that the Packer D allowed 20 yards or less on four possessions (not counting the one at the end of the half)?

They played a team with the best TE in the game, an excellent running game, and a HOF QB who may not be at his peak, but he is still extremely efficient. All of the things this defense supposedly could not handle. And they stepped up. So yes, give this D some credit. This not an all-time great D, but they played a hell of a game.

0 points
0
0
DraftHobbyist's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:02 am

Well, IMO you haven't dealt with my stats, but I'll try to deal with some of yours:
I find the 4 possessions of 20 yards or less to be a weird stat first of all, and I'm not sure how many possessions are typically held to 20 yards or less. But assuming that's even a good stat, lets look at those possessions:
Possession 1 (Qtr1): NE penalty of illegal shift.
Possession 2 (Qtr1): 4th and 1 on the 49 and NE punted.
Possession 3 (Qtr3): NE penalty of offensive holding.
Possession 4 (Qtr3): Good hold.

So 50% of those possessions benefited from a penalty, and 25% of them had a controversial call. I think the defensive was severely helped by the Packer offense sustaining long drives and the Patriot offense self-destructing, not to mention BB getting out-coached by MM.

I'd also point out that 12/28 other teams that played so far had 21 points or less, while few games had as bad of conditions.

But like I said, I really question what the standard of your "allowing drives of 20 yards or less" is/should be. In the Denver-Kansas City game, Kansas City scored 16 points while being held to 8 drives of 20 yards or less. In fact, they were held to 4 drives with negative yardage. I mean, if a team starts with the ball on the 20 and gets 20 yards, they still got to the 40 and flipped field position. Heck, the Packers had a 7 play 20 yard drive that took 4:57 off the clock.

Personally, I think my stats on passer rating, YPC, etc. are better, more established stats. If you'd like to add some context to your stats of how many drives a team tends to allow on average of 20 yards or less, that would be helpful, because the first game I looked at between Denver and the Chiefs (2 good teams with around the same score and similar weather conditions) showed that maybe the stat wasn't as good as it initially sounds.

0 points
0
0
Ruppert's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:50 am

Forget drilling down into individual-game stats for a bit. I don't think anyone is saying that this defense is upper class in the entire league. They aren't. In two separate games they couldn't so much as force one lousy punt.

Now look at the improvement from those games to yesterday. That amount of improvement is enormous. And Dom's decision to move Clay and ditch Hawk for Barrington, among other things, contributed largely to that improvement. They aren't the '85 Bears, but they improved enough in a short period of time to deserve a "good" classification by Nags for yesterday. No question.

0 points
0
0
green19's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:00 am

"So 50% of those possessions benefited from a penalty, and 25% of them had a controversial call. I think the defensive was severely helped by the Packer offense sustaining long drives and the Patriot offense self-destructing."

Offensive holding almost always happens because a player is getting beat, not because a team is "self-destructing". You just can't say the defensive stop wasn't legit because of a holding penalty. I saw Packer defensive players winning match-ups all over that line all day long. Regardless, the defense held the Patriots to 7 points in the second half. That is a victory any way you look at it against the best offense in the league coming into this game.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:00 am

98 yards and no TDs from Gronk?? Any team would be thrilled with that.

0 points
0
0
DraftHobbyist's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:15 am

Really? Because up to this point Gronkowski had averaged less than 74 receiving yards per game in better conditions. I don't know if the word I'd use is "thrilled".

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:42 am

100%.

I don't care what his per-game stats say (he also wasn't healthy for the first 4-6 weeks of the season), but Gronk is more than capable of completely taking over a game. Keeping him out of the end zone = a big win.

0 points
0
0
zeke's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:52 am

Gronkowski is the best TE in the league, and it isn't close. Brady is a HOF QB coached by a HOF coach, both still at (or near) the top of their games. NE still has the best record in the league, has (arguably) fared better against better competition than GB, and by all accounts lost a very well-played game. But that's not enough because fantasy stats. This is why we can't have nice things.

0 points
0
0
DraftHobbyist's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:58 am

You just don't want to admit that this was Gronk's 4th most receiving yards of the season, do you? I understand that some Packer fans just want to support the team no matter what. I prefer to analyze.

0 points
0
0
zeke's picture

December 01, 2014 at 11:03 am

I admit that Gronk had the 4th best game of the season yesterday. I am appropriately shamed.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 11:11 am

I'll happily admit that. And I still say it was a great job on him. He didn't have any game-breaking plays. That's all I really care about when it comes to guys like him (or Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson, etc...). Those guys will get their yards, the goal is to not let them beat you. And Gronk didn't.

0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:34 am

I half-way agree. The bottom line is, don't believe the hype. The Patriots are not really a Super Bowl caliber team (any more than that Cardinals are a Super Bowl caliber team). The Patriots will not make it to the Super Bowl with Brady, Gronk and an offense loaded with scrap heap players like LaFell, Edelman and Blount.

"Pretty good" teams go on long winning streaks and great teams have slumps. At the end of the day, it comes down to which team has the best players playing their best ball. The Patriots just don't have enough great players.

Having said that, the Packers beat a "pretty good" team playing its best ball. Capers and the defense did what 9 other teams failed to do this year.

0 points
0
0
Bugeater's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:59 am

I think its pretty funny that each time the Packers beat a team there are people who say "Don't believe the hype. That opponent really wasn't that good."

Ever think that maybe the Packers are reducing their opponents to not looking so good? The Eagles, now that they aren't playing the Packers, are suddenly looking good again. What a miracle! And I don't know a single expert out there who doesn't acknowledge that New England is a Super Bowl contender.

0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:45 am

Meh. "Experts" are a fickle bunch. What were the experts saying two-months ago when Brady was benched for Janine Garafalo? What were the experts saying about the Packers two months ago? What were the experts saying about the Cowboys in October? What were the experts saying about the Seahawks and Cardinals two weeks ago? The experts' opinions are little more than a snapshot of which teams are hot right this second.

Hats off to them if the Patriots make the Super Bowl with Brandon LaFell and LaGarrett Blount, but I don't see it happening.

The Packers won because they have much better players. End of story. The underlying point that those players will still need to step up their games to make it through the playoffs is a legit point.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:07 am

"The Patriots are not really a Super Bowl caliber team..."

Such silliness.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

December 01, 2014 at 05:30 pm

"The Patriots are not really a Super Bowl caliber team" - this is probably the most ridiculous statement I've heard when it comes to NFL teams in quite some time. If the Patriots are not, then who is?
they lead their division and will easily win it. And, they played against all 3 other AFC division leaders at the moment. Here are the results:
vs Bengals 43-17
vs Broncos 43-21
vs Colts 42-20
Not only did they beat the 3 other division leaders, they demolished them with an avg margin of victory of more than 23 points... And oh yes, just to point out something, the Bengals and Broncos Ds who were "lightyears ahead of the Packers D" gave up more than 43 points each against a team that could only score 21 against the Packers D...
But in any way, clearly the Patriots are the best team in the AFC at the moment.

It's truly amazing to me that we've had to hear for weeks if not months that the Packers couldn't beat a "legitimate contender". In the last 3 weeks, they've won 3 times against 3 teams with a combined record of 23-13. Before the games against Eagles and Patriots we were told that the other teams would not only beat the Packers, but blow them out. Didn't happen. And suddenly the hyped-up teams before the games are not really a SB caliber team anymore... So what was the excuse yesterday? For the Eagles, at least one could point to Sanchez. Yesterday? Did a mouse fart during in the middle of the night in Brady's room and hence he couldn't sleep and was inaccurate as a result? Is Brady simply overrated and never was a good QB? Is the hoody just an average coach who has no clue about football? You complainers need to make up your mind who and who is not a SB caliber team. From all I've seen the last few weeks, I know one thing for sure: The Packers are !!!

0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

December 01, 2014 at 06:33 pm

"this is probably the most ridiculous statement I've heard when it comes to NFL teams in quite some time. "

Yeah. I haven't been posting as much as I used to otherwise that certainly wouldn't be true.

Anyhow. Nobody has come in to challenge my central points that: (1) the New England offense is made up of Brady + Gronk + Scrapheap Players; or that (2) teams *usually* need a little more talent to run through the playoffs.

I'm just a little less giddy about beating the Patriots than others are. Big deal. I also wasn't jumping out the window when the Packers lost to the Seahawks. It's a long season.

Don't believe what Peter King tells you, though. That was not a "Super Bowl" preview. The Packers have the talent to make a run. The Patriots do not.

0 points
0
0
Norm's picture

December 01, 2014 at 06:57 pm

Okay DD, if not the Patriots in the AFC then which AFC team does have the talent to make a run? Must not be one of the 3 division leaders that the Pats have already smoked. Maybe the Chargers, who they play next week in San Diego? Or maybe the Dolphins or Chiefs, who've both beaten the Patriots earlier in the year (but are you really willing to bet money on either of them to win in NE in the playoffs)?

I can't predict the future but to say the Patriots do not have the talent to make a run, that's just plain wrong. They have QB talent, TE talent, defensive secondary talent, and perhaps most importantly, coaching talent.

Who do you see in the AFC with more talent? Or do you not think anyone from the AFC will make the Super Bowl this year?

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

December 01, 2014 at 07:48 pm

You said it perfectly, Norm. Who has the talent to play as the AFC team in the SB if not the Patriots? I'd really be interested to hear that answer. Since I'd really look to see on who could possibly have the talent since the Patriots have beaten pretty much any AFC contender this season. Just like the Packers, they didn't start that well into the season, but as we all should know by now, it doesn't matter how one plays in September, it matters what happens in November and December. Plus, I'd take the combination of one of the best QBs in the NFL and the best TE in the NFL and a very good secondary over almost any team. Not the Packers, as we have seen, but who has comparable talent??? In the AFC? Nobody. And one AFC team has to play in the SB. That much we know without having to be Nostradamus.

0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:11 pm

Applying this logic--> there is no way the Packers will beat the Lions or Seahawks and the Packers better pray that the Saints don't sneak into the playoffs.

As to which team will make it out of the AFC, the Broncos would be the most obvious pick. The Steelers are another team that could go on a run. They have been erratic and underachieving, but anytime you have the league leading wideout and a top two running back, you have dangerous contender come playoffs. To make the Super Bowl you need good players and you have to catch fire at the right time.

The last time the Patriots made the Super Bowl they had Welker and Hernandez. You don't replace those guys with LaFell and Julian Edelman and get the same results. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit. Not even Belichick can.

The bottom line is: the Packers shouldn't be thumping their chests about beating the Patriots. The Patriots should be patting themselves on the back for hanging tough against a better team on the road.

The Packers won because they are a much better team. They still need to learn how to tackle if they are going to get through the Seahawks in the playoffs.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

December 02, 2014 at 04:25 am

Neither Lions or Seahawks lead their division, and Saints are 5-7. So if you want to use the logic I am using maybe you should compare apples with apples...

And ah yes, the Steelers. The ones who won't even make the playoffs. the ones who lost to Tampa and the Jets. Yeah, great and talented team. Especially since they drafted Shazier, right?
Denver is a good team, but at the same time, playing the Patriots they clearly got outplayed and hammered. The game wasn't even as close as the score would indicate.

0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

December 02, 2014 at 08:48 am

I guess I didn't realize the playoffs start this weekend. I was under the apparently mistaken impression that there was a whole month left. Let's wait and see.

The Patriots were a team that everyone said was on the ropes in September (same with the Packers). Now apparently the Patriots are an unstoppable juggernaut. Same with the Packers. The truth is somewhere in between. The difference between the two is that the Packers have good players, and in particular, good ascending young players.

Again, not a single person has chimed in to say: "actually Brandon LaFell is really good." The *only* rebuttal point is that the Patriots have a great regular season record through 75% of the season.

It's cliche but once the playoffs start, the great records don't mean much. I just can't think of a Super Bowl team that was *that* thin at the skill positions unless they had a top 2-3 shutdown defense (which the Patriots also lack).

Wouldn't be the first time, I was wrong. It also wouldn't be the first time, my (admittedly) contrarian viewpoint was correct.

As an aside, I didn't expect to see so many Patriots homers on the CHTV. Things sure have changed around here.

0 points
0
0
Bugeater's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:37 am

Stats seldom tell the whole story. For example, the Packers only had one sack, but it was a HUGE sack. And even though there was only one sack, there was almost always somebody bothering Brady - disrupting the pocket, getting a hand on him when he was throwing, tipping a ball, or putting a hit on him right as he released a throw. That takes its toll and Brady was clearly frustrated as the game wore on.

The fact that the Packers ended up settling for FGs in the red zone and the Defense was able to end Patriot drives quickly was tremendous. I'll take that over 'stats' any day.

Oh, and Rodgers having another great game despite getting his hand crunched (yeah, non-throwing, but in that cold it must've hurt like heck) - That's not showing up in the stat sheet either.

The Packers were ready for this game and hopefully that type of preparation continues through February. They were a team that would not be denied. This has been another great ride already, and its only gonna get better.

0 points
0
0
zeke's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:33 am

I guess I'm not exactly sure of what reaction I expected when I logged into CHTV today, but "the win wasn't convincing enough" was not one of them.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:41 am

haha. It's the unwritten rule: Wins that involve the other team committing penalties count for half.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

December 01, 2014 at 05:33 pm

The complainers, Vikings fans, etc need to justify why they think the team isn't good enough. With all the expectations that they'd get blown out by Eagles and Patriots, and the talk that those were elite teams that would take the Packers D to the woodshed, there is panic and disbelief in Vikingland and any other place where the Packers are hated that this team is not only on the way to the playoffs but has a legitimate shot at the no 1 NFC seed...

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 02, 2014 at 02:17 am

Agreed, Packer Pete. To give DD Driver his due, he does state that GB was simply a better team than NE. However, his central point is flawed. NE is a super bowl contender, and it probably was the favorite prior to playing us. I do note that DD Driver states that he has not been posting much lately. His profile seems to show that he is new to this site (at least under that monicker), and so far has only posted 5 comments (I count 4 comments in this thread).

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

December 02, 2014 at 04:20 am

ah, I see. Thanks for pointing that out Reynoldo. So what I am hearing is that this may be someone we know and who is now posting under a different moniker. That explains the love for the Steelers. I assume they are so good since they drafted Shazier, the great one with a total of 26 tackles...

0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

December 02, 2014 at 11:11 am

I used to post here daily about 4-7 years ago. Same handle. It started out as Donald's Designated Driver. Then CHTV changed commenting formats and for some reason my posts weren't showing up so I gave up.

I don't give a rip about Shazier. The Steelers are dangerous because they have the top wideout in the NFL and the second best RB in the NFL. I'd still pick the Broncos to go. But it wouldn't surprise me in the least if a team like the Steelers knocked the Pats out of the second round.

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:56 am

1 STAT POPS OUT. The Pat's had won their last 4 games against good competition winning by at least 22 points and they only scored 21 against the Packers defense.

Get a GRIP on REALITY.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

December 01, 2014 at 07:49 am

The Good:
McCarthy's scheme adjustments. The Patriots didn't have any answer's for the new wrinkles the Packers threw at them.

The OL. They played so well. Gave Rodgers plenty of time.

Rookie's not playing like rookies. This is as close to one of the best drafts Thompson has had. Clinton-Dix made plays, Adams was huge in this game even with the dropped TD. Rodgers is really starting to step up (1 TD in each of the last 2 games). Linsley IMO is the offensive rookie of the year. UDFA's Pennel and Elliot continue to get more and more playing time.

The Bad:
The players weren't bad, but the plays were.
Crosby's missed FG. That could have been the game changing play. If he hits that the Packers are up by 8 in the end.
Adams dropped TD pass. That is a learning moment for the youngster. He set it up perfectly, got wide open for an easy walk-in TD. But he forgot to catch the ball. Like Crosby's missed FG, that could have been the game changing moment in the game.

The Ugly:

We'll go with Cow's Bold predictions and trying to talk to much crap.
First Cow's last 3 predictions were about as bad as it gets. Bears, Eagles and Patriots all blowing out the Packers.
Secondly if he would have learned to not make such asinine comments and statements he would still be here... I doubt he will be gone for long, probably as soon as he gets out of the hospital from having surgery removing his foot from his mouth.

0 points
0
0
lucky953's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:38 pm

Agree with everything you said about the good, and would add 3rd down defense.
Obviously the red zone offense was bad. The game could easily haven been out of reach by halftime, like 35-14.
Crosby kicking out of bounds and giving NE possession at the 40 was ugly.

0 points
0
0
badaxed's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:48 am

COW! COW! COW!
When will the COW come home?
not before he jumps over the moon
with the dish and the spoon!
I predict!

0 points
0
0
Bugeater's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:38 am

The Good - Packers almost pantsing Gronk. That was hilarious!

0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

December 01, 2014 at 09:42 am

Well, you know, FIRE CAPERS and a dynasty is guaranteed
-Packers fans for years

0 points
0
0
Jonathan Wieser's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:02 am

Mason as a bad? Sure he only made 80% of his kicked and made one mistake on 7 kickoffs. Overall he was 13 for 15 with 14 points which is pretty damn good.

0 points
0
0
green19's picture

December 01, 2014 at 10:48 am

Well, he missed a 40 yard field goal and kicked a kick-off out of bounds. That gets a kicker "bad" regardless of how many other kick-offs he managed to keep in bounds.

0 points
0
0
DraftHobbyist's picture

December 01, 2014 at 11:06 am

You can't ignore the conditions. Look at how the opposing kicker missed the only FG attempt. The ball was all over the place. You can't underestimate how tough it is to kick a ball in weather that feels near 0 degrees with 26 mph crosswinds.

0 points
0
0
White92's picture

December 01, 2014 at 01:43 pm

I agree there. Kicking to the south endzone appeared to be much more of a challenge.

0 points
0
0
Amanofthenorth's picture

December 01, 2014 at 05:31 pm

Add Eddie lacy to the good. Besides his usual steady stuff his collision with that linebacker and subsequent pancake of him was one of my favorite moments.

That's our three down half back out there proving every week why he is a three down halfback.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

December 01, 2014 at 05:40 pm

Sometimes I'm truly amazed who posts and what is posted here. I was too giddy last night to post. Had not time the whole day. Log an here and if I didn't see the game, I'd have thought that we either lost or won only with incredible luck. Or that the Patriots are really a below average team that just isn't good enough. Get a grip on reality ! The Patriots are a legitimate contender for the No 1 AFC seed, and if they do. they will have a good chance to reach the SB. Look at what they have done to the other 3 teams leading their AFC divisions! So instead of trying to find reasons why the Packers shouldn't be in the lead in the NFC North or shouldn't be good enough to make the playoffs, admit that this team is one of the elite teams in the NFL, period. Why do people come here and try to troll or spew their negativity if they aren't really fans? We're trying to talk about good football here.
As far as the good goes, McCarthy's schemes and game planning was superb. That to me was above anything and everything else. I cannot really find anything in the bad category, except for a few individual plays. In the ugly category, I really would only put the predictions of so-called Packers fans who predicted a blow-out loss...

0 points
0
0
Amanofthenorth's picture

December 01, 2014 at 08:11 pm

Amen

0 points
0
0
Paul Griese's picture

December 02, 2014 at 07:49 am

More and more ugly as I think about it was the Brady F-bombs. Now I realize this is his pouting about losing out an another MVP award. If this was Rodgers, it would overshadow everything about the game, of course. Brady should not get a pass on this. It will be interesting to see his effort for the rest of the season. Rodgers made Davante Adams into a 100 yard reciever, and Richie Rodgers had a bigger play than any of Gronks, then he sealed the deal with a pin point strike to Cobb. Thats when Brady dropped the bombs again, so thanks for your Rodgers MVP ballot Tom, but you could just do a Manningface. Oh wait, your Uggs contract does not allow?

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

December 02, 2014 at 08:51 am

I may be in the minority, but I have no problem with Tom Brady's reaction. He was sitting on the sideline, hoping for the chance to win the biggest regular season game of the year. The Patriots still had a chance. Speculation about whether he was upset about the MVP ballot implications or not are just that, speculation. Even if it was about the MVP ballot, I'm not sure it changes much for me. I admire the competitive drive. Some guys are more emotional than others. I don't mind seeing that competitiveness leak out. If he didn't care, it wouldn't have happened.

0 points
0
0
Imma Fubared's picture

December 02, 2014 at 02:17 pm

Not to mention he is very concerned about letting Denver back in the fold and his own home field advantage in the playoffs. If he was ok with losing he wouldn't have won super bowls.

0 points
0
0
Imma Fubared's picture

December 02, 2014 at 02:14 pm

The good, Mac's offensive scheme. Davante Adams being prepared for that scheme and executing it. Sam Barrington adding speed to the inside position that Hawk seriously lacks.

The bad. AJ Hawk and his lack of filling the hole in the middle. ALways the second or third on the pile.

The Ugly. Poor tackling on those running plays. The wind.

0 points
0
0