NFL playoff thread

What do the kids call this, PWNED?

 

I thought the fake on the 56-yard touchdown was one of the better executed plays I've seen in awhile... The Packers have been pretty mediocre against the run for most of this season, but it says a lot that well before halftime, Kaepernick had the playoff rushing record for a QB. I think everybody knew he was athletic, but I didn't know he was capable of a game like that, and I've watched every Niners game but one this season (I missed the Rams tie).

It certainly doesn't hurt having an offensive line like the Niners have.

 

It was mainly John Fox who cost the Broncos the game on Saturday. His playcalling was abysmal. He didn't have Tim Tebow or Jake "I am a Cajun who needs to stay at" Delhomme as QB but one of the best in history. Elway brought him in to get to New Orleans. Fox got way past conservative and they went double overtime.

 

Speaking of failing to remember the game properly, blaming him for those two sacks proves that you don't. Joey Porter came untouched from Manning's blind side on both. Manning had absolutely no chance on either play. That was the game that Manning was criticized for throwing his offensive line under the bus. I remember hearing the comments and thinking Manning shouldn't have said anything, but he wasn't wrong.

Regarding those incomplete passes, one of them he had Reggie Wayne one-on-one deep against Bryant McFadden, then a rookie cornerback playing in the nickle package. He took the shot, which was the right read. Bryant just happened to make a good play on the ball.

You bring up the 46-yarder as if that was outside of Vanderjagt's range. At the time, he was one of the elite kickers in the game and he hadn't missed in the dome all season. That's a kick he should make.

 

True.

Also true that Peyton Manning did not have a good game.

That Colts team started 13-0. It's fair to say they didn't live up to expectations. And the quarterback playing poorly was a leading driver of that failure.

 

All I ask is that people be honest with themselves and admit WE FAILED instead of always projecting their failures:

"We expected you to run roughshod over those teams . . . you failed to do so . . . therefore, you failed."

Perhaps a better way of looking at the Steelers-Colts playoff game in 2005 is like this:

"WE FAILED going into the game to see the Steelers as a serious playoff threat. WE FAILED to see their 5-game winning streak entering the game as having any significance. Likewise, WE FAILED to see the Colts' 3-game losing streak coming into the game --- and the fact that they had gone more than a month without a victory --- as perhaps an omen that an upset was possible, if not probable. WE FAILED to see that an offensive line that let their QB be sacked only 17 times all season would be steamrolled by Pittsburgh and let the Steelers sack the QB 5 times and be in his face all day, this playing a major role in his sub-par performance. WE FAILED in just about every analytical dissection of this game and allowed the Colts to go into that game as ridiculous 9.5-point favorites against a team that would wind up winning Super Bowls that season and again two years later."

Isn't that a little more fair than the usual "X's team lost = X choked" nonsense that passes for analysis around here?

 

Note that I just easily countered most of his post. So no, I don't think that's what the kids mean by PWNED.

In other words, wrong again, Alphabet boy.

 

The "WE" is a collective group whose membership has changed over time. But there remains one constant.

 

If that were the only time it happened, maybe.

Three times they lose at home when favored by 9-9.5 points ... what did we fail to see this time, that the Ravens' late-season swoon and letting the Broncos plow over them last month was just a rope-a-dope?

EDIT: Also it was a one-game losing streak. The last two games were Bill Polian having his starters put their thumbs up their asses. You're in full-on excuse-making mode if you're going with "three-game losing streak." That was a historic team that had the '72 Dolphins nervous.

 

The defense didn't show up for the first quarter. That kinda hurt, too.

Manning didn't play nearly as poorly as you suggest. As I already demonstrated, your memory of the game beyond the stat sheet isn't nearly as good as you thought it was.

 

You demonstrated nothing, but getting into a fight with you is the lowest form of civilized communication, so ... bygones.

 

You failed to see a 70-yard TD reception with 30 seconds left that, statistically, has about an 0.5% chance of succeeding. Nothing wrong with not seeing that . . . but those are the "Hail Flutie" types of things that change games and reputations.

With 40 seconds left in the game, if you play it out statistically 100 times, the Broncos come away with a 7-point win 99 times. Not too off the mark from expectations.

Correct. And WE FAILED to see that the 9.5-point favorites came into that game with about as much momentum as a dead snail. Hadn't played competitive NFL football in a month.

It's funny . . . stories you see this week talk about how the 49ers are peaking at the right time, yada, yada, yada. The 2005 Colts came into the Steelers game as the 180-degree opposite of that . . . but WE FAILED to read it as having any significance.