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

[PackManDan]

Best way to win in OT is not give the other team a chance to touch the ball. Wilson did that twice this year against two of the best QB's in football, Rodgers and Manning. To say Russell doesn't come up big in big moments is crazy. The guy is clutch as can be when it counts.

Can't fault the Seahawks for taking advantage of their OT coin toss win. But I think that rule needs to be changed. Regardless of a TD the other team should have one chance to come back and tie the game. I think that rule is so dumb. You are putting so much on whoever gets lucky enough to win the coin toss because if they happen to score a TD then game over.

 

[Mondo Jay]

I do. I think Sherman is in Rodgers head. I think its hard to say otherwise considering the last two games they've played each other.

As we were watching it yesterday, we joked that Sherman was faking it to bait Rodgers into throwing it his way.

 

[SonnyCID]

To me, a team that turns the ball over 5 teams in a Championship game no less does not deserve to win. We obviously have differing opinions. You feel that since Seattle overcame these trials and tribulations in the last 5 minutes that they deserved it. I feel like both teams played shitty yesterday and neither of them deserved to win.

History doesnt remember the 5 turnovers and all the struggles the niners had in the 81 NFCCG against Dallas. You wont hear anyone say they didnt deserve to win that game, even Dallas fans. Overcoming adversity should not be written off as blind luck.

 

[SonnyCID]

Can't fault the Seahawks for taking advantage of their OT coin toss win. But I think that rule needs to be changed. Regardless of a TD the other team should have one chance to come back and tie the game. I think that rule is so dumb. You are putting so much on whoever gets lucky enough to win the coin toss because if they happen to score a TD then game over.

Defensive players get paíd too. Keeping a team out of the EZ in order to give yourself a chance is not too much to ask.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

As we were watching it yesterday, we joked that Sherman was faking it to bait Rodgers into throwing it his way.

I seriously was wondering the same thing. I wonder if Rodgers thought that too.

 

[PackManDan]

Defensive players get paíd too. Keeping a team out of the EZ in order to give yourself a chance is not too much to ask.

I know all of that. Doesn't change my opinion whatsoever. I think the rule should be changed. If they give a team a chance to score on offense, they should give the other team a chance to score on offense too. That's how I feel.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

That is a pretty solid post, but yes, Seattle did deserve to win.
How many teams would have folded at the 5 minute mark remaining in the game after just throwing ANOTHER INT being down 19-7?
To say the on side kick was luck because 10 or 20% of them are successful might be right. How much luck is involved in taking 1st possession at your 13 yardline in OT and driving 87 yards for the nail in the coffin TD? I bet those similar opportunities end up with a 10 or 20% chance of success as well.
Teams improve their chance at good luck with lots of preparation. They tend to create their own luck.

SEA absolutely deserved to win and GB deserved to lose.

There was nothing lucky about the onside kick imo...from a technical standpoint it really wasn't a great effort...it popped up right into the GB player's hands...I think the guy just panicked a bit, maybe thinking he was going to get plowed or something and lost focus on the ball.

What I found interesting was GB defended SEA well for nearly the entire game, but when the Hawks simply HAD to score, they defended terribly....I will say...the TD for the game was a beautiful pass and catch...that was great coverage...even PI and he still caught it.

 

[Uhsplit]

I can agree with you there. No matter how he gets it done, no matter how bad he plays, his team finds a way to win. And since he is at the most important position a lot of that glory is all his. But I have seen quite a few Seahawks fans say that Wilson is elite and a top 5 QB. So that I do not agree with.

QB position is like this. It is the most important position on the field. When your team wins you get a whole lot of the glory. When your team loses you get a lot of blame. It just so happens that Wilson is on the Seahawks at the right time when they aren't losing very many games at all so he is getting lots of the glory. What happens if the Seahawks start going 8-8 for the next few years? Wilson will get lots of the blame and people saying he is elite will recant those statements. That's all I'm saying. He is a winner yes but not one of the best.

I am not busting your chops because of how you value RW. Nor should you bust ours if we think he is elite.

I'm going to get slammed for this but in no way would I take Manning over RW. He is past his prime as Russell is still a ways from hitting it.

 

[PackManDan]

I am not busting your chops because of how you value RW. Nor should you bust ours if we think he is elite.

I'm going to get slammed for this but in no way would I take Manning over RW. He is past his prime as Russell is still a ways from hitting it.

I don't think that says a whole lot that you wouldn't take Manning over Wilson. Hell, you said it yourself Manning is past his prime, way past his prime. He is what, 38 years old?

 

[Wazmankg]

11 pages ? Well I didn't read them. What's the big deal ? He's right. The Pack was the better team yesterday. The Hawks got lucky. A jump ball misplayed into a 2 point conversion ? An onside kick that bounces off a Pack helmet after going through one of their "hands team" guys hands ? Winning the coin toss ? He probably shouldn't have said it, but he was right... and I don't like Mr Discount Double-Check and I'm very happy his team will be sitting out the SB, fwiw.

 

[Sgt Brutus]

I do. I think Sherman is in Rodgers head. I think its hard to say otherwise considering the last two games they've played each other.

That's a pretty big assumption. The more logical reason is they liked a match up somewhere else on the field which is not surprising considering Sherman is a top 3 CB.

 

[SonnyCID]

I know all of that. Doesn't change my opinion whatsoever. I think the rule should be changed. If they give a team a chance to score on offense, they should give the other team a chance to score on offense too. That's how I feel.

Im fine with it the way it is. Enough with the marginalization of defense.

 

[SonnyCID]

11 pages ? Well I didn't read them. What's the big deal ? He's right. The Pack was the better team yesterday. The Hawks got lucky. A jump ball misplayed into a 2 point conversion ? An onside kick that bounces off a Pack helmet after going through one of their "hands team" guys hands ? Winning the coin toss ? He probably shouldn't have said it, but he was right... and I don't like Mr Discount Double-Check and I'm very happy his team will be sitting out the SB, fwiw.

They didnt win the game just on those plays. They still had to go down and score TDs, and stop the Packers drives.

 

[packerzrule]

I don't think that says a whole lot that you wouldn't take Manning over Wilson. Hell, you said it yourself Manning is past his prime, way past his prime. He is what, 38 years old?

WHAT??? Tom Brady is 37 and he looked damn sharp yesterday.

 

[PackManDan]

WHAT??? Tom Brady is 37 and he looked damn sharp yesterday.

And everyone is an individual. You get different results with different people, don't you? Just because Brady is almost the same age as Manning doesn't make their situations the exact same, does it? We aren't talking about Brady. We are talking about Manning. And Manning is way past his prime.

 

[Wazmankg]

They didnt win the game just on those plays. They still had to go down and score TDs, and stop the Packers drives.

Yeah except that the Pack wasn't trying to "drive" until the end when they absolutely had to and quickly moved it into FG range. If any of "those plays", which were rather flukish, doesn't go in the Hawks favor they lose. Look I'm not saying the Pack is the better team. They were just the better team yesterday and sometimes the better team loses. I was rooting for the Hawks and picked them giving the points. Good luck against the Pats.

 

[wood20ks]

Can't fault the Seahawks for taking advantage of their OT coin toss win. But I think that rule needs to be changed. Regardless of a TD the other team should have one chance to come back and tie the game. I think that rule is so dumb. You are putting so much on whoever gets lucky enough to win the coin toss because if they happen to score a TD then game over.

When did you start watching football...This year?

The rule was changed here not too long ago.(but according to you it would be years ago).
It used to be if you kicked a fg the game was over.Not anymore.

This rule goes for both teams.Too bad,so sad.

Rodgers winning the SB was years ago..Yeah right.

 

[blstoker]

So you give the Packers no credit for playing better in the first half lol

Oh, I give them a great deal of credit for playing better in the first half, but why is it that the Seahawks don't get credit for playing better in the second half? People keep saying that it was luck and gift wrapped, but Seattle executed. If it was Packer fuck ups that let the Seahawks win, why can't it be Seahawk fuck ups that gave the Packers the lead?

 

[gohusk]

11 pages ? Well I didn't read them. What's the big deal ? He's right. The Pack was the better team yesterday. The Hawks got lucky. A jump ball misplayed into a 2 point conversion ? An onside kick that bounces off a Pack helmet after going through one of their "hands team" guys hands ? Winning the coin toss ? He probably shouldn't have said it, but he was right... and I don't like Mr Discount Double-Check and I'm very happy his team will be sitting out the SB, fwiw.

So the Packers mistakes are Seahawks luck while everything that went wrong for the Seahawks was forced by the Packers. It's a crock of shit. Baldwin coughing up a kick return deep in Seattle territory was just as big of a bone-head play as the onside kick. The difference was that Seattle turned it into 8 while the Packers only got 3. The Seahawks won because they were the team that was able to keep it together for 60+ minutes when the Packers obviously weren't. I don't have many problems with Rodgers but he's always struck me as pompous and smug. He should look at his own play first when talking about who played better or worse.

 

[Uhsplit]

I don't think that says a whole lot that you wouldn't take Manning over Wilson. Hell, you said it yourself Manning is past his prime, way past his prime. He is what, 38 years old?

Personally, I don't really care who is considered top 5 elite QB's but when the subject comes up all of us have a right to respond.
In this thread the names of the top 5 QB's came up with some mentioning Manning. No sweat and I can see why some folks feel that way. Yet, those opinions are based off of what has happened and not what is happening now.