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

That pass, if that's what you want to call it, gets broken up 999 times out of a thousand. Lord knows what Clinton-Dix was looking at/for.

 

The gimp and the D made it 19-7 with 4 minutes to play in the toughest stadium ever built. That's pretty much the best thing a Packers fan could have imagined.

The final 4 minutes is something you just can't explain.

It's the Kings being down 5-0 to the Gretzkys with 20 minutes to play but fighting and fighting, one goal at a time, then tying it with 5 seconds to play, then winning in OT on a rookie's slapper from the point. Kings had zero business winning that night.

The Seahawks won their Miracle on Manchester yesterday.

 

I was referring to your Colts point.

 

Luck didn't have it either. He looked off and not just because of thexcellent Patriots defense.

 

Weather did not help. No doubt that Luck missed the friendly confines of Lucas Oil.

 

Wasn't ticked about the field goals early. You need points. The plan played out very well early. (One exception - I thought, up 13-0 with 4th & 1 at the Sea 23, they should have pushed for a touchdown.)

Once it was 16-7, they went into a full offensive shell. In 2014, a good team that's losing will always make a run. I thought the mentality, at that point, should have been to score 23 points. 23 would have, likely, been enough to win.

Kings-Oilers at the Forum in 1982 is one of the greatest YouTube links to ever look up.

That is all.

 

Kings also won a 10-8 game in that series.

 

I haven't watched enough of the Packers, so I will defer to those who have. My question then: what should the Packers do? Get rid of McCarthy and try someone new before the window closes on the elite QB (ala Denver)? Stick with McCarthy and try to develop a young QB for the future, kind of like how Rodgers was groomed behind Favre? Just accept things are the way they are and you'll have to ride out McCarthy's contract?
I'd say GB as a whole choked. I can understand both sides of the field goals early vs. go for it debate. It sure seemed like the Packers were way too conservative in the fourth, especially since Sherman was clearly not 100 percent. And going 1-on-1 with Kearse at the end seemed to differ from the rest of the game. Was that a different look for the defense on that play or not? Regardless, at some point the blame has to be shifted from McCarthy. The botched onside kick, the missed knockdown of the 2-point conversion, getting fooled on the fake FG, etc. Reverse any of those three plays, none of which I think can be pinned to McCarthy, and the Packers are in the Super Bowl.

 

I guess. But seems to me it's simple risk-reward.

There is no risk --- therefore, there should be no hesitation to try for the reward, even if it's basically a Hail Mary.

 

Pretty good read on MMQB about the special teams play for Seattle and how much detail the coach goes into.

Particularly interesting was the fake field goal and what the holder was to do if this linebacker was lined on this side, or the other.

Onside kick recovery, fake field goal in Seattle's NFC title game win | The MMQB with Peter King

Apologies if it was posted earlier. I didn't wade through all the pages on this thread.

 

Carrol deserves a lot of credit. How many times do you see a team down big in the first half giving up on the run and throwing it 45 times.

 

The way the play broke, most, if not all, other quarterbacks would not have been able to avoid the rush to put themselves in position to take that risk.