Aaron Rodgers after the game, "We were the better team today"

[Dolemite censored]

monumental. collapse.

 

[wood20ks]

The difference? Hawks played hard the full 60 minutes, and the Packers took their foot off the gas pedal. Need to score TDs in the red zone.

And I`m still not understanding why shield laid down after taking RW`s 4th interception.
There was a lot of real estate to be had.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

I think those 5 turnovers netted GB 6 or 9 points.

That's what I mean. If GB was playing so much better then why was it still close? I understand that it did look like GB was kicking butt, but when you actually look at the stat lines for both teams you suddenly realize that a.) Yes Seattle played bad, and b.) GB also didn't have a very good game.

Statistically Seattle did play a better game. Which, going by the eye test, is hard to believe.

 

[PackManDan]

A few things:


Packers didn't deserve to win: Everyone saying the Packers deserved to win yesterday is retarded. The Packers played well albeit got many gifts (5 turnovers) but they didn't play well the entire game. A team that doesn't capitalize on 5 turnovers in a Championship game when everything is on the line does not deserve to win. A team that allows a 3rd and 20, an onside kick recovery, a 2 point conversion, a 12 point lead erased in 45 seconds does NOT DESERVE TO WIN.


Seattle did not deserve to win: A team that turns the ball over 5 times does not deserve to win. A team that plays very poorly for almost 55 minutes does not deserve to win.


You have two teams so of course one of them has to win but that doesn't mean either team deserves to win. I think the better team overall yesterday was Green Bay but it didn't work out. I think all the stars aligned in one of those fluke-fest type games. I do think luck was involved. But that's how it goes sometimes.


I saw a poster say that the onside kick recovery wasn't luck, it was a guy not doing his job. Yea...luck. I don't know percentages but onside kicks are recovered maybe 20% of the time? 15%? Less? So the chances of you getting it are very rare. When you do, maybe there is a bit of luck involved. And when you are down 12 points with 4 minutes left and throw up a prayer 2 point conversion and somehow complete it, get an onside kick recovery and all the stars align then yes it is luck.


But who the hell cares. Bottom line. Seattle won. Green Bay lost. Game over for the Packers. Seattle goes to the Super Bowl again on a weird game.


On a side note: I have no problems with Russell Wilson. He seems like a stand up guy. He seems like a "wholesome" guy. I do have a problem with a lot of the Seahawks fans saying he is a god. Wilson is what seems like a slightly above average QB who just happens to play on a team with an amazing defense, a killer instinct and a great head coach. If you put Wilson on the Cleveland Browns he isn't successful at all. Of course that is a moot point because he doesn't play on Cleveland he plays on Seattle but it gets a bit tiresome to see Seahawks fans try backing up their argument that he is "elite" by saying that he is the youngest QB to go to two Super Bowls.


Football is a team sport not an individual sport. It's because of his team, not necessarily him. He fits into their scheme well but to call Wilson elite or one of the top QBs in the game is absurd, plain and simple. But in the end, who the hell cares. If he works out for you guys in your scheme and you keep going to the Super Bowl then all the more power to you.

 

[Anointed One]

Seattle had a lot of TO's that allowed GB to gain the lead they did... Then Green Bay had TO's in opportune times, which made it seem to many that they choked... Point is, both teams had TO's at inopportune times throughout the entire game... Hawks screwed the pooch in the first half and GB screwed the pooch in the second half... Lynch had 120 yards rushing, 26 yards receiving in that 2nd half... Wasn't just the TO's... It's 60 minutes of football regardless if you have a TO the first minute of the game or the last minute of the game...

Last time I checked, Hawks were still losing 19-14 when they got the TO (or onside kick)... GB still had a chance to hold them for the win but, well we all know what happened after that...

 

[Dolemite censored]

And I`m still not understanding why shield laid down after taking RW`s 4th interception.
There was a lot of real estate to be had.

At the time he made that play they were up 19-7, so I don't blame him for that.

He was probably thinking, let me make damn sure I don't do stupid shit with the ball while trying to score.

 

[wood20ks]

How so? Baldwin turns the ball over on the KO and it's well earned, but GB screws up on the onside kick and it isn't? They lost because they lived in the red zone the entire first half and kept kicking field goals.

This is soooooooo true.

 

[Louie]

I think those 5 turnovers netted GB 6 or 9 points.

And Green Bay only scored one TD all day. One TD with 5 turnovers, that is terrible.

 

[PackManDan]

Open your eyes.......Realize the real picture.

Once again, the team you root for tells me what I need to know. Your opinion is skewed because naturally you don't like the Packers and you don't like the Packers players. If your own team players say that you have no problem but since it came from the Packers you have a big problem. It's not rocket science.

 

[Anointed One]

Regarding Russell Wilson, some of his best games have come when Lynch had his worst games... Lynch isn't the only reason RW has had success...

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

On a side note: I have no problems with Russell Wilson. He seems like a stand up guy. He seems like a "wholesome" guy. I do have a problem with a lot of the Seahawks fans saying he is a god. Wilson is what seems like a slightly above average QB who just happens to play on a team with an amazing defense, a killer instinct and a great head coach. If you put Wilson on the Cleveland Browns he isn't successful at all. Of course that is a moot point because he doesn't play on Cleveland he plays on Seattle but it gets a bit tiresome to see Seahawks fans try backing up their argument that he is "elite" by saying that he is the youngest QB to go to two Super Bowls.


Football is a team sport not an individual sport. It's because of his team, not necessarily him. He fits into their scheme well but to call Wilson elite or one of the top QBs in the game is absurd, plain and simple. But in the end, who the hell cares. If he works out for you guys in your scheme and you keep going to the Super Bowl then all the more power to you.

Yes he has a great D, but he's got zero to work with offensively outside of Lynch.

Luke Willson (TE) wouldn't even make the Pats team period.
Doug Baldwin is a DECENT slot receiver and is probably the #4 in Green Bays system.
Jermaine Kearse might as well play for the Packers cause he was battin up balls for INTs.


I love how you try and put everything in context yet fail to put your own post in context.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

A few things:


Packers didn't deserve to win: Everyone saying the Packers deserved to win yesterday is retarded. The Packers played well albeit got many gifts (5 turnovers) but they didn't play well the entire game. A team that doesn't capitalize on 5 turnovers in a Championship game when everything is on the line does not deserve to win. A team that allows a 3rd and 20, an onside kick recovery, a 2 point conversion, a 12 point lead erased in 45 seconds does NOT DESERVE TO WIN.


Seattle did not deserve to win: A team that turns the ball over 5 times does not deserve to win. A team that plays very poorly for almost 55 minutes does not deserve to win.


You have two teams so of course one of them has to win but that doesn't mean either team deserves to win. I think the better team overall yesterday was Green Bay but it didn't work out. I think all the stars aligned in one of those fluke-fest type games. I do think luck was involved. But that's how it goes sometimes.


I saw a poster say that the onside kick recovery wasn't luck, it was a guy not doing his job. Yea...luck. I don't know percentages but onside kicks are recovered maybe 20% of the time? 15%? Less? So the chances of you getting it are very rare. When you do, maybe there is a bit of luck involved. And when you are down 12 points with 4 minutes left and throw up a prayer 2 point conversion and somehow complete it, get an onside kick recovery and all the stars align then yes it is luck.


But who the hell cares. Bottom line. Seattle won. Green Bay lost. Game over for the Packers. Seattle goes to the Super Bowl again on a weird game.


On a side note: I have no problems with Russell Wilson. He seems like a stand up guy. He seems like a "wholesome" guy. I do have a problem with a lot of the Seahawks fans saying he is a god. Wilson is what seems like a slightly above average QB who just happens to play on a team with an amazing defense, a killer instinct and a great head coach. If you put Wilson on the Cleveland Browns he isn't successful at all. Of course that is a moot point because he doesn't play on Cleveland he plays on Seattle but it gets a bit tiresome to see Seahawks fans try backing up their argument that he is "elite" by saying that he is the youngest QB to go to two Super Bowls.


Football is a team sport not an individual sport. It's because of his team, not necessarily him. He fits into their scheme well but to call Wilson elite or one of the top QBs in the game is absurd, plain and simple. But in the end, who the hell cares. If he works out for you guys in your scheme and you keep going to the Super Bowl then all the more power to you.

You make a good point. It's pretty fair I think, but you must admit that without Wilson there is no comeback. You have to give credit where's it due. The defense kept Seattle in the game for 57 minutes but Wilson orchestrated the three drives to win. That was pretty special regardless of who the QB would have been.

 

[PackManDan]

Yes he has a great D, but he's got zero to work with offensively outside of Lynch.

Luke Willson (TE) wouldn't even make the Pats team period.
Doug Baldwin is a DECENT slot receiver and is probably the #4 in Green Bays system.
Jermaine Kearse might as well play for the Packers cause he was battin up balls for INTs.


I love how you try and put everything in context yet fail to put your own post in context.

I stand by what I say. I have no issues with Wilson. I'm not a Wilson hater. But I am a realist. He is not a top 5 QB like many Seahawks fans claim. He is very lucky to be on a great team at the right time. Does he make some great plays? Sure. Is he a threat scrambling? Sure. But is he elite like lots of posters are saying? Far from it.

 

[wood20ks]

Once again, the team you root for tells me what I need to know. Your opinion is skewed because naturally you don't like the Packers and you don't like the Packers players. If your own team players say that you have no problem but since it came from the Packers you have a big problem. It's not rocket science.

nope wrong again....

its just Rodgers and Matthews.not another single player or coach I don`t like.

And uh if you ever read what I say on the Bears board,you`d know I can`r stand Cutler.....have for a long time.

But yes,Rodgers is a cocky arrogant ass.But he is a great qb.I can`t take nothing away from that.

Hopefully he practice his Championship belt signature move a little more.
it did him no justice.

 

[Louie]

I stand by what I say. I have no issues with Wilson. I'm not a Wilson hater. But I am a realist. He is not a top 5 QB like many Seahawks fans claim. He is very lucky to be on a great team at the right time. Does he make some great plays? Sure. Is he a threat scrambling? Sure. But is he elite like lots of posters are saying? Far from it.

I don't think most fans would call Wilson an elite or top 5 QB in the NFL, but what fans will say is, Wilson is a "winner".

 

[PackManDan]

You make a good point. It's pretty fair I think, but you must admit that without Wilson there is no comeback. You have to give credit where's it due. The defense kept Seattle in the game for 57 minutes but Wilson orchestrated the three drives to win. That was pretty special regardless of who the QB would have been.

What are we talking about here though? Are you saying if Wilson isn't in and instead the backup QB is in instead there is no comeback? Sure then I agree with you. What about without Wilson but with Tom Brady? Is there a comeback? You bet there is. So I still can't say this comeback was all because of Wilson. That comeback could have happened with other QBs playing as well. It's not like Wilson was the only one in the league to be able to do that. I'm not hating. I'm a realist.

Wilson is not a top 5 QB plain and simple. I have no problems pointing the finger at the Packers too. Their offense is always touted to be so dangerous yet time and time again they lay stinkers in very important games. Rodgers is great during the regular season but he seems to struggle in post season play. Plain and simple.

 

[wood20ks]

I stand by what I say. I have no issues with Wilson. I'm not a Wilson hater. But I am a realist. He is not a top 5 QB like many Seahawks fans claim. He is very lucky to be on a great team at the right time. Does he make some great plays? Sure. Is he a threat scrambling? Sure. But is he elite like lots of posters are saying? Far from it.

I will agree on that:
manning
Luck
Brady
Rodgers
Ben

And that's off the top of my head.

But the other guys does tell the truth.....seattles wrs blow.

They are backups for most teams.

 

[PackManDan]

nope wrong again....

its just Rodgers and Matthews.not another single player or coach I don`t like.

And uh if you ever read what I say on the Bears board,you`d know I can`r stand Cutler.....have for a long time.

But yes,Rodgers is a cocky arrogant ass.But he is a great qb.I can`t take nothing away from that.

Hopefully he practice his Championship belt signature move a little more.
it did him no justice.

Ok, perfect example then. You just admitted you hate Rodgers. So of course no matter what he says you aren't going to like it. How is this hard to understand? Take your favorite QB, whoever that may be, if they say the same comments you have absolutely zero problems with it. But since you hate Rodgers you are biased and HE says it and you have every problem with it. Not rocket science.

 

[wood20ks]

What are we talking about here though? Are you saying if Wilson isn't in and instead the backup QB is in instead there is no comeback? Sure then I agree with you. What about without Wilson but with Tom Brady? Is there a comeback? You bet there is. So I still can't say this comeback was all because of Wilson. That comeback could have happened with other QBs playing as well. It's not like Wilson was the only one in the league to be able to do that. I'm not hating. I'm a realist.

Wilson is not a top 5 QB plain and simple. I have no problems pointing the finger at the Packers too. Their offense is always touted to be so dangerous yet time and time again they lay stinkers in very important games. Rodgers is great during the regular season but he seems to struggle in post season play. Plain and simple.

Now that's wrong...............

 

[Anointed One]

These are games where Lynch had less than 2.7 ypc but Wilson had some of his best games when Lynch had a horrible game... RW has stepped up a lot of times when teams keyed in on Lynch and forced RW to beat them...

'13
@ Car - Lynch 17 rushes/43 yards 2.5ypc; Wilson 25/33 320 yards, 1 TD/0 INT's
vs NO - Lynch 16 rush/45 yards, 1 Fumble, 2.7ypc; Wilson 22/30 310 yards, 3 TD's/0 INT's

'14
@ STL - Lynch 18 rushes 53 yard, 2.5 ypc; Wilson 23/36 313 yards, 2 TD's/0 INT's