Big Games / Close Games

1st question. No, for some reason I'll come up with later.

2nd question. No. The official figure for close games is 4 points. I'll also explain that later.

Bears game - close, but not nail-biting close. To me, nail biting close is when the offense needs to score or it's a loss or defense needs to stop a team from scoring or it is a loss.

Best Bears could do was tie. To me, that is not the same thing.

I think your last line is incorrect. The stop by the d was imperative. I truly believe the Bears were going for 2 at the end if they scored the TD.

While a Packer/Rodgers hater would flip out and correctly point out that these weren't technically playoff games I'd say anyone with a real clue knows these were both playoff games the last 2 weeks.

Before the Giants game I said the Packers needed to go on a 6 game winning streak to take this whole damn thing. 2 down, 4 to go. It's going to be a tough haul but it can be done.

Yep, "best they can do is tie" is probably not correct.

Why would Lovie extend this game if he could end it on one play?

Not a nail biting game? My ass.

quote:

Originally posted by phaedrus:
Bears game - close, but not nail-biting close. To me, nail biting close is when the offense needs to score or it's a loss or defense needs to stop a team from scoring or it is a loss.

Best Bears could do was tie. To me, that is not the same thing.

If the Bears scored a TD, You don't think Lovie would have went for 2? I do.

This was a big game I don't care what anyone says.

Wow. I thought I was the only one. All through that Bears' final drive, I was thinking to myself, "if they score, he's going for 2." I won't say i was certain of it, but I thought it was highly likely. He had nothing to lose, and everything to gain.

Of course he would've gone for 2. The game meant nothing to Chicago other than the satisfaction of knocking out Green Bay if they win. Why wouldn't he take a shot at winning the game?

Do people think he would've wanted to push the game to OT and further risk the health of key players?!?!

I guess the Packers should have let the Bears score then stopped them on the 2 pt conversion or won in OT. Then MM could have boosted his "close game" record.

Sadly CU, that's probably the only way some of the knuckleheads will acknowledge it.

I thought everyone knew Lovie would go for two? He would have been crazy to take it to overtime.

He wanted some more reps to try to injure Favreler in OT.

quote:

Originally posted by phaedrus:
Bears game - close, but not nail-biting close. To me, nail biting close is when the offense needs to score or it's a loss or defense needs to stop a team from scoring or it is a loss.

Best Bears could do was tie. To me, that is not the same thing.

What game were you watching? Ridiculous.

I thought the same thing. Bears were going to go for 2, if they scored, and our season would have come down to 1 play. Glad it didn't come to that.

On another note, the difference between a BYE week and a WC spot, is teh Calvin Johnson call. RIDICULOUS!!!!!

I had no doubt the Packers were going to stop the Bears on the last drive. Even my wife asked why I was so quiet at the end of the game.

quote:

I had no doubt the Packers were going to stop the Bears on the last drive.

I agree. Was just waiting for the Cutler INT. And whatta ya know, lookie there, he did it!

Brain fart on not seeing Bears would go for 2.

Still...

The Bears had to go 97 yards and then get a 2 point conversion. And they were riding a fairly short clock.

So, what do I mean by nail-biting? How about if a team's final drive is such that time is barely a factor and all they have to do is score a FG to win? Or for less nail-biting than the above, if they only need 6?

Your mileage may vary. My point is other scenarios are more stressful to watch for me.


Signed,

knucklehead

True, but for me you can assume that the closer a game is, the more stressed I am!

So I guess if the Bares scored a TD thus went for two it would've qualified for a close game?

Any game where the outcome is not decided until the final possession is a close game. To think or try to fancily state otherwise isn't sound IMHO. While I was confident GB would make that last stop, that game wasn't over until Collins' INT. If folks want to tell themselves that this wasn't a close game or that it shouldn't be thought of as such, so be it. It was, and games don't get any bigger than win-or-else like the last two games were for GB.

quote:

Originally posted by phaedrus:
Signed,

knucklehead

Knucklehead??

quote:

Originally posted by phaedrus:
Bears game - close, but not nail-biting close. To me, nail biting close is when the offense needs to score or it's a loss or defense needs to stop a team from scoring or it is a loss.

Best Bears could do was tie. To me, that is not the same thing.

Here. Reread my first post.

I already said it was a close game.

it was dum the first time

This dum goes to 11... it is 1 dummer.

quote:

Originally posted by Iowacheese:
it was dum the first time

Look, dude, I already said I brain farted with respect to overlooking that Bears would go for 2.

But, let's review what dumb means.

I state quite clearly the game was close and in response people write posts that explicitly state I said it wasn't close.

Moron.

Allright. Enough out of everyone.

Happy New Year.

quote:

Originally posted by phaedrus:

But, let's review what dumb means.

Moron.

A little too binary for my tastes

Agreed, Happy New Years! all dum is forgiven.....Guess I would be a bit edgy too if I lived in SoDak.

Hey, thanks Iowa, that was nice of you.

Man, did we have a whopper of a storm last Thursday and Friday. Unreal.

After reviewing the topic, I see I morph'ed from its subject matter (were the games close). Yes, they were.

If I could give an example of a kind of game that for me had the feel of being even closer, take the TO 49'ers playoff win. My guess is they started further upfield. They had Young, Rice, TO (even though TO basically sucked until the TD play), and all they needed was a TD (no 2 pointer) to win.

Closer game (to me), but yesterday's game definitely a close game and hat's off to the Pack for winning a close game.

In fact, in the +/- topic, I gave a + to Rodgers for accurate long passes in the 4th quarter. Wonderful to see.