Eat sh!t, Skippy!

Oh, I have no idea what he said, as I would rather have a feral badger chew my face off than listen to him.  I assume he made excuses for NE, probably used "Well at NE..." argument, etc.  

 

 

Colin said that when they meet again the NE pats will win by a significant margin on a

neutral field. He felt that BB was setting the packers and mccarthy up for the next meeting

by gushing about GB and congratulating MM. Said that NE used a vanilla defense on purpose

and didnt want to show too much. 

 

He is BS of course but needs to say this to get the ratings.

After watching those two teams play yesterday....

 

You put Green Bay's offense up against NE's defense indoors on a fast track and Green Bay would hang 45 on them without much trouble.

 

Hoodie was anything but vanilla yesterday. He was cycling through the defensive binder at warp speed.   

And if Green Bay tries to rely on Cobb and Nelson in standard formations, the Patriots own them. The Patriots played a pretty solid game all-around. They pretty much nutralized Nelson and Cobb at wideout excepting Nelson's TD and did a pretty decent job of limiting Lacy. They made Green Bay beat them with Adams, Boykin and a cavalcade of generic TEs.

Oddly it feels like San Diego will represent the AFC in the SB.

NE didn't look like their typical selves yesterday, it can be said.  I don't know how much of that was what GB did to them and how much was by their own design.  I would never suggest a team would intentionally tank a game to "better position themselves" down the road, with so much left on the schedule (playoff seeding, HFA, etc.), but I think some coaches or coaching staffs do hold things back at times.  It would be a helluva rematch in PHX.

Colin also mentioned the real NE team would have run much more on the bad GB run defense.

Also will rush more than 3 and not use a one high safety formation in the SB if they meet. Thinks GB and mccarthy will expect the same NE offensive attack and be too full of themselves if they get to the SB.

 

Crazy, crazy, crazy man!!!!!

He really said NE was playing vanilla to save something for the Super Bowl?  

 

Holy ****balls.  I figured he'd go full derp, but holy ****ing ****.  That's beautiful!

Just for tits and giggles...let's say that that is true.   What would be BB's reasoning for playing vanilla?   The loss put them with a tie with Denver.  If Denver wins out and N.E. loses one more, the HOF goes to the Bronco's.   Maybe he believes they will win out anyway so it won't matter?

 

I'm just trying to think of the logic for going vanilla?  

So funny to hear the talking heads say that BB went vanilla...then later in the day during MM's presser he said that the Pats gave them some new looks they haven't seen all year

 

 

Just proves skippy knows nothing and just has a bad case of diarrhea of the mouth.

the boneheads keep saying that Brady was off. The way I see it, Rodgers was off too. No way Rodgers misses some of the passes he did yesterday. The pass to Jordy that Browner barely broke up was a touchdown if Aaron leads him six more inches. A couple of guys were also open in the endzone that Rodgers just missed. 

 

Who is to say that Rodgers does not go Atlanta Falcons playoff Rodgers on their ass next time they play. 

After hearing about how great Brady was for a week before we played him, I really thought he was no better than Bridgewater(Sp?).  He missed a lot of throws by wide margins especilly when the Pack was putting some pressure on him.  

I'll say this about ESPN, they've definitely accomplished their goal amongst people on this forum. Creating the controversy and ratings they are so blatantly aiming for. Do you know how Ludicrous  all of this sounds? That is, what is being debated.

I'm going to guess that no one on this forum is a Nielson Poll viewer.

 

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question433.htm

 

 

Perhaps I'm just used to watching AR, but I was really surprised at how easily Brady appeared to crack with the slightest bit of pressure. Any sort of disruption in the pocket whatsoever and he didn't handle it well at all.

How is it safe to assume New England will even make the Super Bowl?   The AFC is pretty balanced at the top of the conference and anything can happen come playoff time. 

New England does have some flaws. As good as they are they don't have one receiver that is a legit deep threat.   I also don't think their OL is top notch and while they have Browner and Revis you can move the ball on them. 

Had GB scored TDs and not FGs this game would have been a blowout.   I also agree that on a fast track GB is even more dangerous on offense.  

New England has to secure homefield advantage to make it to the Super Bowl IMO

Did anyone catch Steven A. Smith say that the team that had the best chance to beat Green Bay in Green Bay in the playoffs would be Dallas?  I almost choked on my breakfast when I heard him say that! 

 

I'm proud to say I'll never catch anything Screamin' A Smith has to say the moment he says it. 

 

That said, he may not be far off. Seattle would be the logical choice. But Seattle isnt Seattle on the road. Dallas would be top 3 with a chance along with Philly. I'm not sure where I stand on AZ after Sunday either. If SF gets their **** together we know they can win at Lambeau. Personally, I'd love to see Seattle or SF. 

 

Just have to keep winning first starting with Atlanta. 

quote:

Did anyone catch Steven A. Smith

Quite frankly, no, I didn't.

If NE and Green Bay meet up in AZ the only thing I think Hoodie does different is swap out Ninkovich with a safety on passing downs as ARs spy. 

 

The problem NE will always have with GB is there defense was built to press receivers at the line and disrupt routes knowing the QB they were going to face was an immobile lump and the guys up front had one spot they need to get to. Get a QB that can extend plays and be lethal on the move and its a huge problem for them. 

 

Also can't overlook the sheer number of options at Rodgers disposal. Jordy, Cobb, Adams, Quarless, Rodgers, Lacy and Starks running or catching it. It's damn near impossible to cover all that especially with the guy distributing the ball. And if you do manage to cover all that AR can pull it down and grab 10-15 yards and move the chains. 

 

The vanilla chatter is stupid. Having a healthy Chandler Jones would help them. GB having a fully healthy Nick Perry would help them too. I don't see a game between the two teams ending up much differently if they played again except GB winning by a wider margin than 5 points. 

Couple things.  

 

The point that "GB would have won by much more if they hadn't gone 0-4 in the RZ, so..." is kind of a fallacy.  They didn't and it wasn't because of mistakes by the our offense.  NE secondary is very good and when you shorten the field for them, they can be stifling.  GB's avg in the RZ is much higher than zero but NE played some really good D down there.

 

What I can see BB doing differently if they meet again is switching up their coverage a little more on Cobb, Nelson and Adams.    They focused more on C&N to start the game and AR burned them with Adams until BB adjusted.   NE D made adjustments in the second half and we scored 3 points.  Should have been 7 but still a significant drop off from the first half.  

 

Assuming we're healthy, I still take the Pack on neutral ground.

No more a fallacy than 'BB kept it vanilla' or 'BB didn't want to show them anything' in case they play again.  That's the sorta garbage you hear out of Queenie fans after a loss.  

 

The 'yeah-but' crowd is running out of BS.  

 

GB destroys the Queens... YEAH-BUT... Christian Ponder!

GB embarrasses the Barfs... YEAH-BUT... Jay Cutler!  WAIT UNTIL GB HAS TO PLAY A LEGIT PLAYOFF TEAM LIKE PHILLY!

GB kicks slop all over Philly... YEAH-BUT... Mark Sanchez!  WAIT UNTIL THEY PLAY A REAL QB!

GB beats NE... YEAH-BUT... BB DIDN'T TRY TO WIN!

 

It's getting sillier by the week.  

Very well said.

Not quite the ending Brady had in mind.

 

"I hate to take a sack in that situation. I really would have liked to score there," he said.

"I just wish we would have won this one. We put a lot into this one, and this was a great test for us. I think the guys knew how important this was for our season."

 

Sure sounds vanilla to me

Yes and no. GB missed a few of their own volition, some were the result of the defense

On the play where Rodgers had 11 seconds to throw, Browner tackled Jordy in the EZ- no call

 

On the opening kickoff, Harris was an inch from breaking a big return, If Lattimore hadn't slipped, his guy wouldn't have made a shoestring tackle and there was a lot of open field

 

At the 3:52 mark in the 3rd, Jordy and Aaron had another one tee'd up and Rodgers missed by 6 inches allowing Browner to get a finger on it. Otherwise, its off to the races again

 

Game of inches and  both teams just missed on a couple of chances. That being said, this game was a lot closer to being another home blowout than many realize.

If you get a chance, watch it again, its rather illuminating

All true.  GB is peaking.  We have had incredible luck with injuries this year (knock on my head) and I hope that isn't wasted.  Does anyone remember the last time we only had one starter on IR all season?  Barclay notwithstanding.  

 

No excuses this year.  Cash it in!

I remember all of those plays.  But aren't all the 'if's' and close calls and missed calls part of every game?  Couldn't we say GB had as much of a chance at a blowout as they did at losing by a couple points, depending on how a couple more plays fall?  The "real" outcome is the only valid one and the better team won.

Why does it feel like.....you are back on the bandwagon

Remove all the speculation and hypotheticals. The one point that can't be argued is that GB controlled that game from start to finish. They won rushing yards, passing yards, average yard per play, 3rd down efficiency, time of possession, first downs, fewer penalty yards, Every meaningful measurement went to GB. And they passed the eyeball test that they were simply a better team. GB ran 16 more offensive plays than NE. The only stat GB failed to win was red zone efficiency. 

 

I think NE tries to run the ball more if they meet again. But unless GB turns the ball over once or twice I don't believe NE has the horses to beat GB indoors on a neutral field. 

Good call IC.

Either the scars are healing up or maybe Boris went to Mexico for a "procedure" to get that fixed 

Either way its great to have our illustrious Leader back on the right track

Yes, for the first time ever he played a vanilla game. DUH!

What y'all can't admit is BB's ability to see into the future. Brilliant!

I watched the Pats post game pressers. I know when a team loses the coach and players are kind of down and BB is a man of few words anyway but you'd swear they just attended a funeral! 

I listened to the Simmons/Cousin Sal podcast while hiking the dogs today.  I haven't done that in a while, but was curious to hear what a Pats fan would have to say about Sunday.  Holy crap did he throw it all against the wall:

 

1. NE didn't play well and still almost won.  

2. BB kept it vanilla.  

3. It's not totally crazy to think BB game-planned with the SB in mind.  

4. NE is still better on a neutral field.  

5. AR was '10 percent better' than Brady Sunday.  

 

I know some Pats fans as well, and pretty much all of them were saying the same thing, but none were throwing every stupid argument out there.  Perhaps it's been too long since Super Bowl 31 for me to remember, but I didn't realize what whiny pissants Pats fans are.  No one ever beats them - the refs screw them or BB is purposely losing as part of his master scheme.  Ridiculous.

 

I would love to see them again in the SB and pound them this time by about 23 points.  I'm sure at that point Pats fans would say BB is just softening them up for next year.

Every Pats fan I have ever met has in some way been a horrible person. I've met Vikings who had likable qualities and seemed like normal well-adjusted individuals. Any reasonably sane Pats fans? No such thing in my experience.

Pat fans have never recovered from the Tyree helmet catch. Not even close. 18-1 is a sledgehammer right to the coin purse. Then the Giants happened all over again in 2011. 

 

There was a small window around 2005-2007 Pat fans were almost tolerable. They were coming off the SB run. Something snapped following the Tyree catch. They became insufferable dickwads. 

 

This year I think they all felt this was THE team. They've been playing great. They destroyed Detroit. They were going to come to GB and kick some Packer ass. Simmons felt the 3.5 line favoring GB was an insult to NE. 

 

When the GB ass kicking never materialized they had to rationalize it. They took it easy. Had an off day. Hoodie was planning ahead. blah blah blah. 

 

It's actually pretty interesting watching an entire fan base want a SB win not because they want a SB the way every other fan base does. But so they can collectively give everyone else the middle finger for 10 years of enduring every "cheaters" joke imaginable. 

OK, there were a few swirls of strawberry in there. Big deal.

FTFY.

If it came out that BB actually played it vanilla to save it for a possible SB rematch he'd get blasted by the fan base and the media if they lost home field and then had to go to DEN, SDG, or IND and lost in the divisional round or the AFC-C.