Stoney's He-Man Steeler Haters NFL Playoff Thread ... No Yinzers allowed

You can't even say that. Green Bay scored in the 4th quarter is not equal to Green Bay would have just kept on scoring in the 4th quarter.

If/Then'ism is the worst thing about sports chat.

 

Didn't say "was going to", did say, was likely to. That's evidence-based opinion. Rodgers was lighting it up. Sure, there could've been a turnover or a big sack, but Green Bay was moving the ball consistently and indeed did so AFTER the fourth-down pass.

 

Was going to, Was likely to in this case is the same thing, Mike.

We all watch sports with different perspectives but I see things like that, and especially from national guys and gals, who are supposed to think critically, and it bugs me.

But it's my flaw. It's just sports. Who cares about If/Then of Sports™ in the grand scheme of things.

 

I think this is one of the very few times in which the if/then-ism -- which is a really nice phrase, by the way -- is spot-on. I say that because the situation Dallas and Green Bay faced after the turnover on downs is almost identical to what they would have faced had Dallas scored a touchdown: Dallas had to stop Green Bay and Green Bay had to get the ball down the field.

 

First, most of those saying this would have said the same last week when Detroit had a chance to win the game. I thought they were going to lose. But let's play it out. If they score (likely on 1st & goal), they go for 2 to try to go up 3. Maybe they get it, maybe not (do they even have a play for 2 yards when they only have 12 to play with?). Are you saying a game winning touchdown with a gimpy Rodgers is a likely possibility?

 

There's a difference between needing a couple of 1st downs and needing a TD. The further you have to go, the more chances you give someone on the defense to make a play. That's what happened against the Lions.

 

Would've just needed a field goal, right? It would've been either 29 or 27-26 Dallas, as Cowboys would try for two.

 

Hell, they'd just gone 80 yards to go ahead on their previous possession. Rodgers was gimpy then, too, wasn't he?

 

Green Bay would have had the ball back with 5 plus minutes, Detroit got it back with no timeouts and just over 2 minutes left. I'm not sure the situations are similar at all.

The Cowboys couldn't stop that gimpy Rodgers who went I believe 15 of 20 in the second half?

I think at the very least a field goal was likely and you take your chances from there.

 

Is lunging and stretching the ball toward the goal line "an act common to the game?"

Does the act of switching the ball into his left hand and extending it not convey a certain level of control?

And how in the world can anyone say there was CONCLUSIVE video evidence to overturn the call on the field ... you know, the standard the NFL supposedly holds itself to?

I eagerly await answers from the all-knowing, all-seeing, great and benevolent JC.

 

Debating what is or isn't a catch two days later is fun.

 

Mike Carey is still not sure