NFL 2009 Season Week 17 Picks

Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2018 Season Super Bowl Picks.

Jeremy's PicksMatt's PicksJon's PicksSarah's Picks
Colts 7 @ Bills 30
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
9 Picks - 45% 11 Picks - 55%
Bills
Bills
Colts
Colts
Bills
Bills
Bills
Bills
Bengals 0 @ Jets 37
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
6 Picks - 30% 14 Picks - 70%
Bengals
Bengals
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Giants 7 @ Vikings 44
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
6 Picks - 30% 14 Picks - 70%
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Steelers 30 @ Dolphins 24
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
15 Picks - 75% 5 Picks - 25%
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
49ers 28 @ Rams 6
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
18 Picks - 90% 2 Picks - 10%
Rams
Rams
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
Patriots 27 @ Texans 34
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
9 Picks - 45% 11 Picks - 55%
Patriots
Patriots
Texans
Texans
Texans
Texans
Patriots
Patriots
Saints 10 @ Panthers 23
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
7 Picks - 35% 13 Picks - 65%
Saints
Saints
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Panthers
Falcons 20 @ Buccaneers 10
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
17 Picks - 85% 3 Picks - 15%
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Bears 37 @ Lions 23
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
20 Picks - 100% 0 Picks - 0%
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Eagles 0 @ Cowboys 24
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
8 Picks - 40% 12 Picks - 60%
Eagles
Eagles
Cowboys
Cowboys
Cowboys
Cowboys
Eagles
Eagles
Jaguars 17 @ Browns 23
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 12:00pm
14 Picks - 70% 6 Picks - 30%
Jaguars
Jaguars
Jaguars
Jaguars
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Ravens 21 @ Raiders 13
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 3:15pm
19 Picks - 95% 1 Pick - 5%
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Raiders
Raiders
Titans 17 @ Seahawks 13
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 3:15pm
18 Picks - 90% 2 Picks - 10%
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Redskins 20 @ Chargers 23
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 3:15pm
3 Picks - 15% 17 Picks - 85%
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Packers 33 @ Cardinals 7
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 3:15pm
8 Picks - 40% 12 Picks - 60%
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Cardinals
Packers
Packers
Chiefs 44 @ Broncos 24
Final
Sun, 1/3/10 3:15pm
1 Pick - 5% 19 Picks - 95%
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Week Record8 - 8
0.500
Worst Place
12 - 4
0.750
14 - 2
0.875
First Place
11 - 5
0.688
Season Record163 - 93
0.637
168 - 88
0.656
167 - 89
0.652
173 - 83
0.676
Scotttime Record665 - 391
0.630
650 - 406
0.616
662 - 394
0.627
670 - 386
0.634
No-Pack-Vike Record2517 - 1476
0.630
2447 - 1546
0.613
2530 - 1463
0.634
2492 - 1501
0.624
Lifetime Record1342 - 781
0.632
1261 - 862
0.594
1332 - 791
0.627
1329 - 794
0.626
click me!
Other Nut Canner Picks
scott.jpg
Colts
Bengals
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Patriots
Saints
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Browns
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Packers
Broncos

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:174 - 82
0.680
Lifetime:679 - 377
0.643
newalex.jpg
Bills
Jets
Vikings
Dolphins
49ers
Texans
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Eagles
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Packers
Broncos

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:167 - 88
0.655
Lifetime:654 - 400
0.621
goodlooking.jpg
Colts
Jets
Giants
Steelers
49ers
Texans
Saints
Falcons
Bears
Eagles
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:150 - 91
0.622
Lifetime:633 - 403
0.611
image.jpeg
Bills
Jets
Vikings
Dolphins
49ers
Texans
Panthers
Buccaneers
Bears
Cowboys
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:133 - 69
0.658
Lifetime:252 - 169
0.599
vignette.bmp
Colts
Bengals
Giants
Dolphins
49ers
Patriots
Saints
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Packers
Chiefs

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:124 - 72
0.633
Lifetime:446 - 267
0.625
avatar2345.jpg
Bills
Jets
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Texans
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Redskins
Packers
Broncos

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:154 - 84
0.647
Lifetime:465 - 304
0.605
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpg
Bills
Jets
Giants
Steelers
49ers
Patriots
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Eagles
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Redskins
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:166 - 90
0.648
Lifetime:452 - 273
0.623
pyzamOmgWtf.jpg
Bills
Jets
Giants
Dolphins
Rams
Patriots
Panthers
Buccaneers
Bears
Eagles
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Packers
Broncos

Week:8 - 8
0.500
Season:135 - 62
0.685
Lifetime:353 - 196
0.643
070809_romo2_vmed_8p.widec.jpg
Colts
Bengals
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Patriots
Saints
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:150 - 75
0.667
Lifetime:411 - 223
0.648
picture07.bmp
Bills
Jets
Giants
Steelers
49ers
Texans
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:160 - 92
0.635
Lifetime:322 - 172
0.652
blonde_gleam.gif
Colts
Bengals
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Patriots
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Browns
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Packers
Broncos

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:171 - 82
0.676
Lifetime:302 - 153
0.664
FB_IMG_1499398490950.jpg
Colts
Bengals
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Patriots
Saints
Falcons
Bears
Eagles
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:8 - 8
0.500
Season:167 - 88
0.655
Lifetime:167 - 88
0.655
question_mark.gif
Colts
Jets
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Texans
Saints
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Jaguars
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:149 - 81
0.648
Lifetime:149 - 81
0.648
question_mark.gif
Bills
Jets
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Texans
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Browns
Ravens
Titans
Chargers
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:14 - 2
0.875
Season:156 - 67
0.700
Lifetime:156 - 67
0.700
Me at work.JPG
Bills
Jets
Giants
Dolphins
49ers
Texans
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Cowboys
Browns
Ravens
Seahawks
Redskins
Cardinals
Broncos

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:46 - 36
0.561
Lifetime:46 - 36
0.561
question_mark.gif
Colts
Jets
Vikings
Steelers
49ers
Texans
Panthers
Falcons
Bears
Eagles
Jaguars
Ravens
Seahawks
Chargers
Packers
Broncos

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:43 - 21
0.672
Lifetime:43 - 21
0.672
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

Colts 7 @ Bills 30

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Don't mess with Karma Colts. You play to win the game!

Bengals 0 @ Jets 37

sarah.jpg
Sarah
My heart is telling me that the JETS will lose this game because that's what they do for their fans. My fingers are still pickin' them though.

Giants 7 @ Vikings 44

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
The Vikings got Favre for a reason. They played Childress ball in the first half against the Bears, Brett audibled and played his game in the second half. I feel like Brett has the slight edge. Let's please stop pretending the coach always knows best just because that's what we're supposed to say.
sarah.jpg
Sarah
Isn't every week a Giants/Vikings game?
matt.jpg
Matt
I think that the Cowboys have a good shot at beating the Eagles today, so the Vikings better win this game.
jon.jpg
Jon
I'd be quite disappointed if Minnesota can't win here. New York has to be phoning this in anyway. Go Dallas.

Steelers 30 @ Dolphins 24

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Pass

49ers 28 @ Rams 6

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Colors....doo wop

Patriots 27 @ Texans 34

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Are players playing this week? Or are most games going to be first string vs 6th string? I need some wins to take it all.

Saints 10 @ Panthers 23

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Panthers are on a roll! Maybe they should've tried winning earlier, the whole season might've been a little better for them. Didn't Delhomme throw like 6 interceptions in the first game? And he was still their starter after that? Crazy. Glad to see the Saints and Vikings failing right now when it counts.

Falcons 20 @ Buccaneers 10

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Just realized I am supposed to comment on every single game. I'll save my witticisms to one a game.

Bears 37 @ Lions 23

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Suck it Sox, suck it Tigers. Just rewatched Game 163... A-MAZ-ING

Eagles 0 @ Cowboys 24

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
Go get em, 'Boys
sarah.jpg
Sarah
An NFC East game I actually want to watch? Huh odd.

Jaguars 17 @ Browns 23

sarah.jpg
Sarah
I should pay more attention to the AFC.

Ravens 21 @ Raiders 13

sarah.jpg
Sarah
I do not do well picking Raiders games.

Titans 17 @ Seahawks 13

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Success!

Redskins 20 @ Chargers 23

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Epic fail Redskins, epic fail.

Packers 33 @ Cardinals 7

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Let's do this thing!
matt.jpg
Matt
Hopefully the Vikings can make it so that this game doesn't matter (I'm already assuming an Eagles loss).
jon.jpg
Jon
I will be very interested to see if Arizona can pressure Rodgers. I might have to wait a week to see it though. If I see it at all. If you care, by the way, here's my thinking on this game: Rodgers is too valuable to risk injury. He shouldn't play much. The Cardinals should take the same approach with their best players, assuming they don't have anything to play for. Leinart should be able to flash back to his USC days and lead Arizona to the victory.

Chiefs 44 @ Broncos 24

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Have you made all of your donations for 2009?
FB_IMG_1499398490950.jpgJDUB316
12/29/2009 @ 06:38:54 PM
 Quote this comment
THE EAGLES ARE GONNA TAKE IT ALL THE WAY!!!!!! IT BURNS SO BAD DON'T IT......HA..HA..HA
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - How do you use these things?
12/29/2009 @ 06:40:11 PM
 Quote this comment
http://www.nfl.com/probowl/story?id=09000d5d8155c2fa&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Pro Bowl - Should be interesting how this works out since it's the week before the Super Bowl
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
12/29/2009 @ 06:44:54 PM
 Quote this comment
Oooh, Favre and Rodgers on the same team again! Of course, Favre won't play as usual.

Nick Collins, good for him. He is quitely becoming a pretty solid player.

edit: For those of you who want to know what you are clicking on, that link is for the NFL Pro Bowl Rosters.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 12/29/2009 6:50:39 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/29/2009 @ 07:01:11 PM
 Quote this comment
Also, I sort of thought Clay Matthews may have had a shot at a pro bowl spot considering he is 3rd among NFC linebackers (inside or outside) in sacks. He's also recovered 3 fumbles. Now, I'm not nieve enough to think that for a position like linebacker can be summed up in a couple of stats. But, I will declare that Clay Matthews is good, and if nothing else, he is worthy of being in the conversation. Now, I do think defensive rookie of the year should be his, but I'll admit to a bias only that I haven't looked at other rookies.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - Tag This
12/29/2009 @ 07:07:07 PM
 Quote this comment


lol
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
12/29/2009 @ 09:11:18 PM
 Quote this comment
or naive
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
12/29/2009 @ 09:15:31 PM
 Quote this comment
why are you commenting on every game?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/30/2009 @ 07:26:30 AM
 Quote this comment
ESPN seems to think Clay Matthews got robbed, so I wasn't so biased afterall. And apparently Ryan Grant may have been deserving too.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 12/30/2009 7:27:11 am
2887.gifAlex - 3618 Posts
12/30/2009 @ 01:23:26 PM
 Quote this comment
How about those Badgers? I was pretty worried at the start of the game, but then I remembered when Ohio State ran the opening kickoff back against Miami and then proceeded to get demolished. Ohio State, you have been avenged. You're welcome, Wisconsin

ps Most of our starters are returning next year, and don't expect us to give you a freebie win again like we did this year
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - So's your face
12/30/2009 @ 05:35:49 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:15:31 PM
why are you commenting on every game?


The people demanded it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - How do you use these things?
12/30/2009 @ 05:59:15 PM
 Quote this comment
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091230/ap_on_sp_ot/us_tec_cable_tv_dispute

Don't some of our readers have Time Warner? That would suck if you weren't allowed to watch Sunday's games, college games, etc. Seems a little weird that Fox wants to charge for a channel you could get with the ol' rabbit ears. Unless I'm missing something because I just skimmed the article.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
pyzamOmgWtf.jpgJfk10intex - 229 Posts
12/30/2009 @ 10:47:22 PM
 Quote this comment
lol yeah, time warner wants to raise prices and time warner is saying no price raise because a price raise means they are going to raise prices on customers, so I think Time warner is playing hardball, lol. Sarah, yeah the fab four ( Sarah Matt Jon Jeremey) should comment on all the games, due to the fact its the last game of the entire season before playoffs start. I enjoy reading all the commentary. I dont have a chance to watch ESPN when they discuss the NFL, so I like reading your imperfect expertise :D, especially when I get to correct you! :D
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - 2847 Posts
01/02/2010 @ 09:42:10 AM
 Quote this comment
Alex Wrote - 12/30/2009 @ 01:23:26 PM
How about those Badgers? I was pretty worried at the start of the game, but then I remembered when Ohio State ran the opening kickoff back against Miami and then proceeded to get demolished. Ohio State, you have been avenged. You're welcome, Wisconsin


Do you mean against Florida?

When Ohio State played Miami, OSU won in overtime.

Also, if you're going to make me comment on a college game, please do it in the appropriate thread. (Oh no I didn't!)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Jon screwed with this at 01/02/2010 9:44:14 am
question_mark.gifJfk10intex(sent from iPhone) (Guest)
01/03/2010 @ 12:38:42 PM
 Quote this comment
Uh. Ur times on the games are wrong. WTF nutcan?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 03:21:21 PM
 Quote this comment
With Minnesotas win, the Packers-Cardinals game has been rendered meaningless. They will play each other next week.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - 2078 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 04:19:28 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:21:21 PM
With Minnesotas win, the Packers-Cardinals game has been rendered meaningless. They will play each other next week.


emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - 4091 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 05:02:26 PM
 Quote this comment
I sure hope Woodson is ok!!! (And can we please get the rest of our starters out before something happens?)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Sarah edited this 2 times, last at 01/03/2010 5:06:10 pm
blonde_gleam.gifLysmal
01/03/2010 @ 06:34:51 PM
 Quote this comment
Chiefs 44----Broncos 24, What a way to end a bad year.......emoticon
"GO CHIEFS" next year.emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
01/03/2010 @ 06:44:44 PM
 Quote this comment
Meaningless game or not, I think Mike McCarthy did the exact right thing by playing this game all out. The Packers are the 3rd youngest team in the league, you have a QB who will be making his first start in the playoffs next week. As a coach of that team, you do not have the luxary of taking the week off and resting your guys. From a mental standpoint of a young team, you absolutely need your players to go into every game with the mentality that you are playing to win. And as far as guys getting hurt, I can't fault a coach too much if you play your players and someone gets hurt. Those things happen. Look at Arizona: they clearly did not have any desire to play very hard at all in this game, and even still they had two key players (rodgers-cromartie and Boldin) go down with possible serious injuries. Things happen.

On a somewhat related note, the Packers and Cardinals will play each other in back-to-back games, and Philly and Dallas will play each other in Back to back games. I wonder when the last time that happened to two teams in one season going into the playoffs? Someone find that answer or I will just have to look myself.

And I officially won the Regular Season Picks Championship!!! emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 01/03/2010 6:46:40 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!?
01/03/2010 @ 06:54:49 PM
 Quote this comment
So were the Packers under the impression that any points scored today would carry over to the playoff game? Bizarre.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
Jeremy edited this at 01/03/2010 6:55:07 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.
01/03/2010 @ 07:00:26 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 06:44:44 PM
Meaningless game or not, I think Mike McCarthy did the exact right thing by playing this game all out. The Packers are the 3rd youngest team in the league, you have a QB who will be making his first start in the playoffs next week. As a coach of that team, you do not have the luxary of taking the week off and resting your guys. From a mental standpoint of a young team, you absolutely need your players to go into every game with the mentality that you are playing to win. And as far as guys getting hurt, I can't fault a coach too much if you play your players and someone gets hurt. Those things happen. Look at Arizona: they clearly did not have any desire to play very hard at all in this game, and even still they had two key players (rodgers-cromartie and Boldin) go down with possible serious injuries. Things happen.

On a somewhat related note, the Packers and Cardinals will play each other in back-to-back games, and Philly and Dallas will play each other in Back to back games. I wonder when the last time that happened to two teams in one season going into the playoffs? Someone find that answer or I will just have to look myself.

And I officially won the Regular Season Picks Championship!!! emoticon


Really? If Rodgers, Woodson, Jennings, Driver, etc get hurt, you wouldn't question why the Packers were playing a game that was always meaningless for them, and by kickoff was pretty much their 2nd preseason game against the Cardinals, like they were playing to clinch a playoff spot? Please. You can rationalize it all you want, it was stupid. A Colts team gave up an undefeated year just so they could do what you had a free opportunity to do. All you did was risk injury, add wear and tear (you don't have to be officially "injured" for a game to take a toll), and show the Cardinals how you'll react to a given situation.

And regular season picks champ means nothing. emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - 4091 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 07:16:43 PM
 Quote this comment
Packers playing Sunday at 3:30.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Sarah edited this 2 times, last at 01/03/2010 9:38:31 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 08:02:43 PM
 Quote this comment
Clearly there is an enormous difference between the Colts (a verteran team with Super Bowl experience) and the Packers (3rd youngest team in the NFL). To compare the two teams as if they are equals in that regard is at best dubious, and at worst unthoughtful. Having a veteran team gives you the luxary of being able to take the rest, as a veteran team probably is less likely to lose some sort of edge they might have. A young team needs to be handled differently, and I would have questioned the Packers coaching if they took this game off. I didn't post it on the Can, but I was thinking/saying this same thing all week.

Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 08:00:26 PM
You can rationalize it all you want, it was stupid.

That's why I'm glad you don't coach the Packers.emoticon Did it carry some degree of risk? Sure. Does blowing out a team regardless of the scenario give your young team an irreplaceable confidence going into the playoffs? Absolutely. Gutsy and genius. And on top of that, the Packers came out and smacked the Cardinals in the mouth, and may have knocked two of their stars out of next weeks game in the process.
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 08:00:26 PM
Rodgers, Woodson, Jennings, Driver, etc get hurt,

If a hurricane came and destroyed the city that would be pretty devistating too.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Scott messed with this 5 times, last at 01/03/2010 8:09:14 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 09:10:51 PM
 Quote this comment
Packers Post-Game Notes
I feel a little vindicated seeing as how the Packer's coach basically said the exact same think I posted earlier. Although I can't prove that I didn't look at this before posting what I did, you'll just have to take my word for it.

Highlights
McCarthy on playing the game the way he did: "Every team is different. Some teams want an opportunity to rest their players. Some teams maybe feel more comfortable doing that. We're a young team. We were not in the playoffs last year, so I felt it was clear that our football team needed to continue to stay on the pace and continue to make progress."

"I felt very fortunate that we came out of the game healthy. I understand the risk as much as anybody and I understand the concerns that people would have going with this plan. It's in the best interest of our football team to play the best football going into the playoffs. That's why we took this approach."
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 09:13:53 PM
 Quote this comment
Ah yes, that all-veteran Colts team.

Colts Age Break Down (at least appearing in 10 games)
Median Age-25
Mode Age-24
Mean Age-25.9

Packers Age Break Down (at least appearing in 10 games)
Median Age-26
Mode Age-23,24,26
Mean Age-26.5

You feel vindicated that the guy who made the stupid decision agrees with the decision? I think I'd have grave concerns if he didn't. McCarthy on playing the game the way he did: "I have no idea what that oafish moron was thinking, the game had all the meaning of a little league practice and he's still trotting his starters out there until the 4th quarter? Crazy!"

And yes, a hurricane and a key player getting hurt are indeed equally likely events.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this at 01/03/2010 9:18:57 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 09:33:36 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:13:53 PM
You feel vindicated that the guy who made the stupid decision agrees with the decision?

No, I feel vindicated that my analysis of the extremely smart decision was echoed and executed by the coach who made the decision.

Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:13:53 PM
Ah yes, that all-veteran Colts team.

I'm not really sure that all those cherry picked stats are all that applicable here, but I'll give it a try. The Colts have 9 players on their current roster who have started (and won) in a Super Bowl. The Packers have one who has even started. Plus, the Colts organization has been to the playoffs for like 7 straight seasons. But hey, I'm sure playoffs and Super Bowl experience don't mean anything.

Again, comparing these two teams as if they are equals in that regard is foolish.

(edit: on further review, seeing the average age of guys who played the most games does put things into perspective a bit, but it still in no way changes my opinion on whether or not the Colts are a more experienced team than the Packers, which they clearly are).
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this 4 times, last at 01/03/2010 9:45:23 pm
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
01/03/2010 @ 09:40:18 PM
 Quote this comment
And, and interesting and sort of eery stat that I heard:
Brett Favre became the first QB in NFL history to throw for as many as 30 TDs and fewer than 7 ints in a single year. Quite the accomplishment no doubt. Not to be outdone, however, that record was tied not three hours later by one Aaron Rodgers, who also threw for 30 TDs and 7 interceptions.

Also, does anyone have a link that says for certain that the Packers play Saturday night?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this 2 times, last at 01/03/2010 9:49:03 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
01/03/2010 @ 09:49:21 PM
 Quote this comment
I don't see how that's "cherry picked." Your opening comment was about how you can't compare teams because one is a "veteran team" and one is full of infants. That's false. The Packers barely edge out the Colts over all, and have older players amongst the ones that wouldn't need 4 guys to get hurt to see the field. How is that not relevant? And even if we decided you can't compare the Colts to the Packers, necessarily, you can't pretend the Colts are the only team to ever rest their key players anyway. So, on point one, you fail.

Point 2:
Scott Wrote - Today @ 09:33:36 PM
The Colts have 9 players on their current roster who have started (and won) in a Super Bowl. The Packers have one who has even started. Plus, the Colts organization has been to the playoffs for like 7 straight seasons. But hey, I'm sure playoffs and Super Bowl experience don't mean anything.

Again, comparing these two teams as if they are equals in that regard is foolish.


Sure, playoff experience is important. No question. If you point out how in any way shape of form this game against the Cardinals practice squad qualifies, or in any way helps, I'll concede point 2. The argument of "the team is young and needs confidence" is just as relevant as "this team is young and might now be too over confident going into the game that matters." This point is especially stupid because half the point of resting your key veterans IS getting the young guys some playing time, in case they need to step in.

Scott Wrote - Today @ 09:40:18 PM
And, and interesting and sort of eery stat that I heard:
Brett Favre became the first QB in NFL history to throw for as many as 30 TDs and fewer than 7 ints in a single year. Quite the accomplishment no doubt. Not to be outdone, however, that record was tied not three hours later by one Aaron Rodgers, who also threw for 30 TDs and 7 interceptions.


Nice massaging of the lies, damn lies, and statistics. And I'm the one cherry picking? emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 2 times, last at 01/03/2010 9:52:59 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 10:00:15 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:49:21 PM
Nice massaging of the lies, damn lies, and statistics. And I'm the one cherry picking?

Well, I didn't come up with the stat, I just heard it on the radio, and I may even have the exact numbers off. I just found it interesting, and I am saying it from memory since I cannot validate it anywhere. I was listening to ESPN radio, if that means anything.


As for the rest of it, I basically got off track a bit when the Colts got thrown into the equation. The Packers are a young team. That doesn't mean they are full of rookies necessarily, and it doesn't mean that other teams are just as much in some sort of need of confidence. Facts are facts: me saying the Packers are young does not automatically assume that every other team is infinitely more experienced. Every football analyst will tell you that playing your best football at the end of the season as as important as anything when it comes to making it in the playoffs. The Packers are clearly playing their best football right now, and McCarthy wanted to keep up that momentum. And yes, that can be a huge confidence boost for a team that doesn't have a ton of playoff experience. If we bring the colts into the equation for reasons other than experience, they have now essentially taken 2 weeks off and have yet another bye week. So they will go into their first playoff game with almost a month since the last time they attempted to play a meaningful football game. That can be a recipe for disaster. So in reality, maybe the Colts should have continued to play to win.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 01/03/2010 10:02:24 pm
scott.jpgScott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on?
01/03/2010 @ 10:04:10 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:49:21 PM
If you point out how in any way shape of form this game against the Cardinals practice squad qualifies, or in any way helps, I'll concede point 2.

Winning a football game in blowout fashion, regardless of the circumstances, a week before the playoffs? Do I need to explain this anymore?

Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:49:21 PM
And even if we decided you can't compare the Colts to the Packers, necessarily, you can't pretend the Colts are the only team to ever rest their key players anyway. So, on point one, you fail.

I actually don't remember even suggesting that the Colts are the only team to ever rest their key players (in fact, the Colts would have never even crossed my mind if you hadn't brought it up)? I suggested that different teams need to be handled differently depending on different circumstances. So how can I fail on a point when I never attempted to make that point.


So you can now concede point 2, and I never made point 1, so I'm up 2 at this point I think, or maybe just 1 since point 1 never really existed.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 4 times, last at 01/03/2010 10:14:50 pm
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
01/03/2010 @ 10:25:07 PM
 Quote this comment
I'll end my night with this:

The Packers played the whole game all out (sort of, McCarthy admitted to a somewhat vanilla playbook) to keep the momentum going obviously running the risk that some of his key players might get hurt. The Cardinals played one quarter and wanted to rest their stars, and they were playing half-speed even at that, and they still managed get have 2 probowlers and another key guy get hurt and possibly knocked out of next week's game.

You can rest a player to prevent them from getting hurt, or you can rest a player who is sort of banged up (the Packers did rest a number of players who were banged up a bit). Or you can play your players and treat the game as a tune-up. There probably isn't any one clear-cut science of an option for what you choose to do. However, I believe that in this case McCarthy made the correct decision, and absolutely it would have been bad if any one of his key players got hurt. But sometimes you can't just follow what a textbook says about what to do at the end of the season in a meaningless game.

And I'm not saying this in a "my coach can do no wrong" type of way. I was thinking this same thing before the game. And as a fan who tries to do his homework, I'm always delighted when my amateur analysis/prediction/desire comes to pass.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 01/03/2010 10:27:46 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - I believe virtually everything I read.
01/03/2010 @ 10:25:56 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:04:10 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 09:49:21 PM
If you point out how in any way shape of form this game against the Cardinals practice squad qualifies, or in any way helps, I'll concede point 2.

Winning a football game in blowout fashion, regardless of the circumstances, a week before the playoffs? Do I need to explain this anymore?


If I were to look up any of the Packers stats in the playoffs, would this one be in there? Would there be an asterisk by them explaining "Well, he doesn't have any playoff experience, but he was on the roster of a team who beat up on a Cardinals team that was showing nothing, and starting almost no one, so that helps."

Look, although you could say that the Packers might get too cocky now, is it bad to beat up on a team? No, but who said it was? That was never really the argument. Aaron Rodgers being in a meaningless game against a team you're going to play for everything in 6-7 days until the forth quarter is indefensible, if the score was 0-44, 21-21, or 44-0, is just exacerbates the stupidity that you were up enough that the "should we pull him" talks should have started if this was a week 13 game by then, let alone a preseason game. Am I advocating that the Packer's starters should have played zero snaps? No. That's a straw man you set up. However, when it was 16-0, and the Cardinals pulled Warner, what was left to prove? I think Woodson has all the experience he needs, he doesn't need to waste reps and potentially get hurt so he can pick off draft busts/party-animals. Rodgers took the field at 16-0, 26-0, and 26-0 again, all after which Warner was resting for the matchup that matters.

I'm also not necessarily putting my stamp of approval on what the Colts did, I think they probably made the right move playoffs wise, but I also think an undefeated season is worth shooting for. Though I find it humorous that you laud their organizations playoff experience, and then cite that as why you need to do the opposite of one of their largest "playoff related" decisions to date. "See, that company there is the class of the stock trading world because they're always diversified, looking long term, and invest mainly in here to stay brick-and-mortar stalwarts, which is exactly why, to be like them, I fully support our company's risky short term investments in dot-coms"
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 01/03/2010 10:28:55 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 10:44:43 PM
 Quote this comment
Ok, forget the Colts, I never meant to get on that topic, and I'm not sure your conculsions of my analysis of the Colts is that accurate anyway. The fact that the Colts have Super Bowl experience does not mean that all teams should copy everything they do. In fact, it is probably the exact opposite (as your conclusion says is wrong), since a team with Super Bowl experience probably has a better idea of how to prepare for the playoffs than a team without it.

The meaning of the blowout is simply confidence? What were you asking about it for? You want momentum going into the playoffs? Blowout a team or watch the game from the sidelines.

Rodger never had a finger laid on him all game. If he was getting hit, I guarantee McCarthy pulls him early. The Cardinals never got within 5 yards of hitting Rodgers. That is at least noteable to why he kept him in there.

Generally, things are more defensible than you make them out to be. I think it is absolutely debateable whether Rodgers (and others) should have been in the game. If the Packers lay an egg with Matt Flynn in at QB, that could put a huge downer on their overall mentality going into the next game. Now, the Packers can go into the next game knowing among other things that they are the number 1 team stopping the run, among other things that resulted from that game. Sometimes, milestones like that can be a big deal. Again, if the Cardinals were bringing the heat, Rodgers would have been pulled.

Again, clear-cut right/wrong in general for sitting your players? Absolutely not. In this case was it a good decision? I think it was.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 10:45:01 PM
 Quote this comment
All the fact that no Packers got hurt while some Cardinals proves is the Packers are still lucky headed into the playoffs, nothing more. Obviously players can get hurt. They can get hurt on the first play. I don't think Rodgers should have sat out totally, and I do know that in whatever tune-up is generally accepted by the "textbook" (that pesky little thing that lists past trials and errors, logic, formulas to winning, etc) he could break his leg. That DOESN'T mean it also has to be taken to the extreme that it's wise, or even helpful, to have him out there going up 5 scores on a team that's now officially running fans out onto the field to throw passes. It was stupid. You say "risky." What do you have to gain? Maybe a little confidence. What do you have to lose? A player that makes the difference between one and done and a legitimate threat. Those two don't balance out. It's "risky," yes. A stupid risk. He's not vindicated just because he got lucky enough that no one got seriously hurt. There's a different in betting a thousand dollars with a 1% chance at $100,000 and betting $1000 at a .5% chance at $20,000.

The only pertinent question here is did Rodgers, Woodson, Driver, Jennings, and all the other guys that matter gain more in experience/confidence than would have been lost if they got hurt and the now all the more inexperienced player had to step in? The answer is almost certainly no. Make a list of pros and cons and see what one outweighs the other.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Super Chocolate Bear
01/03/2010 @ 10:46:29 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:44:43 PM
Rodger never had a finger laid on him all game. If he was getting hit, I guarantee McCarthy pulls him early. The Cardinals never got within 5 yards of hitting Rodgers. That is at least noteable to why he kept him in there.


How many hits did it take to end Tom Brady's season last year? (Unless of course your point is McCarthy actually can see the future and knew no one would EVER get within 5 yards of him, which is all that really matters.)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 01/03/2010 10:52:44 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i
01/03/2010 @ 10:49:36 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:44:43 PM
The fact that the Colts have Super Bowl experience does not mean that all teams should copy everything they do. In fact, it is probably the exact opposite (as your conclusion says is wrong), since a team with Super Bowl experience probably has a better idea of how to prepare for the playoffs than a team without it.


My head esplode.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
01/03/2010 @ 10:55:26 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:49:36 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 11:44:43 PM
The fact that the Colts have Super Bowl experience does not mean that all teams should copy everything they do. In fact, it is probably the exact opposite (as your conclusion says is wrong), since a team with Super Bowl experience probably has a better idea of how to prepare for the playoffs than a team without it.
My head esplode.


can you not understand that team that has been to and won a super bowl (as well as a wealth of other playoff experience) might be able to prepare for the playoffs much better than a team that doesn't? My elementary school teachers made me show all my work on math problems to make sure I knew what I was doing. Should I have protested because that college math major can do long division in his head and I should be following his example since he clearly has shown a history of success? No, you've got to learn to crawl first.

The Packers don't have much playoff experience, and thus certain steps need to be taken to make sure they keep their focus. The Colts have 9 guys who have started and won a superbowl. They clearly know how to win in the playoffs and maybe don't need to take the same steps as a non-experienced team to stay focused on the playoffs. What is so confusing about that?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 10:58:38 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:44:43 PM
Generally, things are more defensible than you make them out to be. I think it is absolutely debateable whether Rodgers (and others) should have been in the game. If the Packers lay an egg with Matt Flynn in at QB, that could put a huge downer on their overall mentality going into the next game.


See, now we're still talking past each other. You're saying Aaron Rodgers playing period isn't stupid, which I'm not refuting. I'm talking about the late second and beyond, late into the third. Aaron Rodgers should not be in a meaningless game, that late, to go up 33, against a team that conceded the loss an hour and a half ago, when losing him would mean everythng. Any argument you could make about accomplishing this and that was already said and done.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this at 01/03/2010 11:18:51 pm
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
01/03/2010 @ 11:06:05 PM
 Quote this comment
Well, ok, I'll sort of concede a little bit there. I was getting slightly nervous when he was still in in the third. I sort of thought they would pull Rodgers especially in the third, but they didn't. Why? Maybe they had their reasons. So essentially, since we are now talking about the same thing, keeping him and others into the third was probably questionable, and I didn't mean to debate that. I didn't see clearly that you were referring to the third quarter as the basis of your debate.

Let me try this again.

Playing Rodgers and the starters for the first half was a good decision as it helped a team with little playoff experience keep their focus going into the playoffs. It was questionable that some of the key players played into the third qtr, but fortunately no one got hurt, and they can take the confidence from this game into next week.

It turns out that we were sort of debating the same thing then, ulimately. Touche...until next time.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 11:06:20 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:55:26 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:49:36 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:44:43 PM
The fact that the Colts have Super Bowl experience does not mean that all teams should copy everything they do. In fact, it is probably the exact opposite (as your conclusion says is wrong), since a team with Super Bowl experience probably has a better idea of how to prepare for the playoffs than a team without it.
My head esplode.


can you not understand that team that has been to and won a super bowl (as well as a wealth of other playoff experience) might be able to prepare for the playoffs much better than a team that doesn't? My elementary school teachers made me show all my work on math problems to make sure I knew what I was doing. Should I have protested because that college math major can do long division in his head and I should be following his example since he clearly has shown a history of success? No, you've got to learn to crawl first.

The Packers don't have much playoff experience, and thus certain steps need to be taken to make sure they keep their focus. The Colts have 9 guys who have started and won a superbowl. They clearly know how to win in the playoffs and maybe don't need to take the same steps as a non-experienced team to stay focused on the playoffs. What is so confusing about that?


Because I don't think you're seeing the forest for the trees. I get the point that not everyone is the same, that maybe this team can't turn it off for a week and then turn it back on, while the colts can, I just think you're really over looking the fact that taking the week light to rest IS how the successful teams prepare for a long playoff run. In that sense the sentence "a team with Super Bowl experience probably has a better idea of how to prepare for the playoffs than a team without it." is really ironic. You're saying this team has the experience, so they probably know best what to do, and then you're ignoring the #1 factor in them doing what they know they should from that experience.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Robots don't say 'ye'
01/03/2010 @ 11:11:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 11:06:05 PM
Well, ok, I'll sort of concede a little bit there. I was getting slightly nervous when he was still in in the third. I sort of thought they would pull Rodgers especially in the third, but they didn't. Why? Maybe they had their reasons. So essentially, since we are now talking about the same thing, keeping him and others into the third was probably questionable, and I didn't mean to debate that. I didn't see clearly that you were referring to the third quarter as the basis of your debate.

Let me try this again.

Playing Rodgers and the starters for the first half was a good decision as it helped a team with little playoff experience keep their focus going into the playoffs. It was questionable that some of the key players played into the third qtr, but fortunately no one got hurt, and they can take the confidence from this game into next week.

It turns out that we were sort of debating the same thing then, ulimately. Touche...until next time.


Ok then. I think a game plan of a half would have been ok, maybe a tad too long, though that either way in practice they should have pulled the plug on Rodgers when it was 19-0 with about 6 minutes left, and the rest of the key starters after the int return, since it was clear long before the Cardinals weren't interested, but I guess we're splitting hairs now.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 01/03/2010 11:19:30 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 11:12:03 PM
 Quote this comment
It's funny, because I was thinking about the "forest from the trees" metaphor early today for something else.

Hmm, while it is an ironic statement, I still think the inexperienced team is better off taking the steps to prevent the loss of focus. It's probably more likely that the teams that are good and experienced got that way because they took those steps initially, and now they have learned how to do without them.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
01/03/2010 @ 11:15:00 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - 01/04/2010 @ 12:11:57 AM
Scott Wrote - 01/04/2010 @ 12:06:05 AM
Well, ok, I'll sort of concede a little bit there. I was getting slightly nervous when he was still in in the third. I sort of thought they would pull Rodgers especially in the third, but they didn't. Why? Maybe they had their reasons. So essentially, since we are now talking about the same thing, keeping him and others into the third was probably questionable, and I didn't mean to debate that. I didn't see clearly that you were referring to the third quarter as the basis of your debate. Let me try this again. Playing Rodgers and the starters for the first half was a good decision as it helped a team with little playoff experience keep their focus going into the playoffs. It was questionable that some of the key players played into the third qtr, but fortunately no one got hurt, and they can take the confidence from this game into next week. It turns out that we were sort of debating the same thing then, ulimately. Touche...until next time.
Ok then. I think they should have pulled the plug on Rodgers when it was 19-0 with about 6 minutes left, and the rest of the key starters after the int return, but I guess we're splitting hairs now.


what would nutcan be if we ever came to a good solid consensus.

Scott Wrote - 01/04/2010 @ 12:12:03 AM
It's funny, because I was thinking about the "forest from the trees" metaphor early today for something else. Hmm, while it is an ironic statement, I still think the inexperienced team is better off taking the steps to prevent the loss of focus. It's probably more likely that the teams that are good and experienced got that way because they took those steps initially, and now they have learned how to do without them.

We are dangerously close to agreement on this, so I better say something chop-busting quick. err sleep.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.
01/03/2010 @ 11:23:52 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 11:15:00 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 11:12:03 PM
It's funny, because I was thinking about the "forest from the trees" metaphor early today for something else. Hmm, while it is an ironic statement, I still think the inexperienced team is better off taking the steps to prevent the loss of focus. It's probably more likely that the teams that are good and experienced got that way because they took those steps initially, and now they have learned how to do without them.

We are dangerously close to agreement on this, so I better say something chop-busting quick. err sleep.


We could probably debate if I used the idiom correctly. It's one of the many words/phrases/idioms I can suss out the context for, but have never really looked up the meaning of.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this 2 times, last at 01/03/2010 11:24:49 pm
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
01/03/2010 @ 11:58:32 PM
 Quote this comment
Well how about Favre being in the game so long? That game was basically over after Minnesota's first drive, and Favre and the 1st team offense were still in the game and going for it on 4th and goal when it was 34-0!

Since I don't think I've commented on it yet, I despise the Colts for what they did. A perfect season is totally worth trying for (since that would include winning the Super Bowl, duh). Plus, you play to win the game.

I missed a lot of the game because I had to log in and save the day for my company, but I agree that at least a half for the starters makes sense, and make sure you win the game. With a big lead in the 2nd half they maybe should have protected guys more.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Alex screwed with this at 01/04/2010 12:03:30 am
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 12:05:26 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:44:44 PM
On a somewhat related note, the Packers and Cardinals will play each other in back-to-back games, and Philly and Dallas will play each other in Back to back games. I wonder when the last time that happened to two teams in one season going into the playoffs? Someone find that answer or I will just have to look myself.


Bengals play the Jets again too.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 12:08:16 AM
 Quote this comment
Well, that's a bit different. They only came in to punch a fumble recovery in from the 5, that said we had been yelling for a while to get Favre out.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 12:15:58 AM
 Quote this comment
34-0
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 07:26:24 AM
 Quote this comment
Sarah Wrote - Yesterday @ 08:16:43 PM
Packers playing Sunday at 3:30.


Aha, you changed it after realzing your error.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 07:27:22 AM
 Quote this comment
Alex Wrote - Today @ 01:05:26 AM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 07:44:44 PM
On a somewhat related note, the Packers and Cardinals will play each other in back-to-back games, and Philly and Dallas will play each other in Back to back games. I wonder when the last time that happened to two teams in one season going into the playoffs? Someone find that answer or I will just have to look myself.
Bengals play the Jets again too.


That's 3 rematches, although the Bengals play at home next week, which is the only difference in any of these three games.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - 4091 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 07:27:53 AM
 Quote this comment
not error it was the word on the street
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 09:21:22 AM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 08:00:26 PM
And regular season picks champ means nothing. emoticon


Well, I can't the party I threw for myself back.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 10:11:41 AM
 Quote this comment


Right, but it's different for 4 reasons. 1) The game mattered. You normally don't have the "should we start pulling people" conversation in those games until late in the 3rd. So in that sense they were actually pulled early. 2) They only went back in the mid 3rd at all to turn Jared Allen's sack/strip/recovery on the 7 into another TD for Favre. 3) I never defended the move as the most brilliant managerial decision my head coach has made to date. I also thought this was stupid. The first play they ran to get that meaningless td was a screen to Adrian where Favre may have taken a big shot (since you let people in on a screen) and Adrian got strung out and awkwardly spun down. I didn't like it one bit. 4) The Vikings aren't playing the Giants again next week.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
Jeremy messed with this 4 times, last at 01/04/2010 10:22:49 am
question_mark.gifJfk10intex(from iPhone) (Guest)
01/04/2010 @ 12:09:37 PM
 Quote this comment
Packers will have the following schedule

Packers vs Cardinals
Packers vs Vikings
Packers vs Eagles
Packers vs Patriots, Colts, Chargers, or Bengals
with the exception of the colts I think packers win the super bowl.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - I believe virtually everything I read.
01/04/2010 @ 01:23:17 PM
 Quote this comment
You're picking a NFC Championship of the two wild card teams? Could happen, especially this year, but I wouldn't put money on that.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 01:29:58 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:11:41 AM


Right, but it's different for 4 reasons. 1) The game mattered. You normally don't have the "should we start pulling people" conversation in those games until late in the 3rd. So in that sense they were actually pulled early.


The game was already over.

http://wp.advancednflstats.com/nflarchive.php?year=2009&team=MIN&gameid=54714

Although, so was the Packer game

http://wp.advancednflstats.com/nflarchive.php?year=2009&team=GB&gameid=54718
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 01:43:42 PM
 Quote this comment
Right, but you don't usually pull people from a meaningful game before halftime. That conversion doesn't start until halfway through the third. Obviously a comeback is unlikely, but if you put up 30 points in a quarter and a half, they could too. In other words, winning mattered, and the Giants were actually trying to win, so it's just not the same.

Plus, and pay attention here, I NEVER ADVOCATED THE VIKINGS LEAVING THEM IN, AND IN FACT WAS QUITE UPSET ABOUT IT. So, whatever sort of "you're being a hypocrite" point you're trying to point out isn't valid. A game that means a bye or not, and a game that means nothing to either team who will play each other again in a week aren't the same situation, on top of which, even given that, I thought it was stupid.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 2 times, last at 01/04/2010 1:51:25 pm
face.bmpCarlos44ec - 2078 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 02:12:15 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:54:49 PM
So were the Packers under the impression that any points scored today would carry over to the playoff game? Bizarre.


Spoken like a true DB. Vikes saving some points, or are they trying to prove they can still do it?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/04/2010 @ 02:26:36 PM
 Quote this comment
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 02:12:15 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:54:49 PM
So were the Packers under the impression that any points scored today would carry over to the playoff game? Bizarre.


Spoken like a true DB. Vikes saving some points, or are they trying to prove they can still do it?


Reading is hard.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - Refactor Mercilessly
01/04/2010 @ 04:06:01 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:43:42 PM
Right, but you don't usually pull people from a meaningful game before halftime. That conversion doesn't start until halfway through the third.


I must have missed class the day that rule was being taught...

Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:43:42 PM
Plus, and pay attention here, I NEVER ADVOCATED THE VIKINGS LEAVING THEM IN, AND IN FACT WAS QUITE UPSET ABOUT IT. So, whatever sort of "you're being a hypocrite" point you're trying to point out isn't valid.


You're the one who's assuming I'm out to get you. I just found it odd when you and Scott spent 6 hours dissecting the Packer's situation without anyone questioning what Childress and the Vikings were doing, when they had a bigger lead and an older QB by 14 years (and an opponent that laid down just as much if not more).
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - As Seen On The Internet
01/04/2010 @ 04:40:54 PM
 Quote this comment
They should have gotten Favre out at half time, or just after, though the situations aren't really the same. The Packers were playing a game that actually had less meaning than the preseason game they played against the Cardinals, because no one was trying to make a roster, or get up to game speed. I don't think it's much of a reach to think that in terms of future playoff successes Donald Driver needed a rest more than he needed the confidence boost from career receptions 9,440-9,450.

The Vikings played a meaningful game, both in that it was very important, and unlike the Packers they actually needed to establish a little moxie heading into the playoffs. The Packers won 7 of their last 8, or something like that, and the 1 loss was at the last second. The Packers played a meaningless game, against the very team that wanted to experiment against them, and they only had something to lose by playing it like it mattered. If you look up interviews with the Cardinals, and read between the lines, you played right into their hands, because you basically let them have a 2.5 hour live practice against your starters. I can't find the link, and it might just being face saving, but apparently Whisenhunt had a hard time hiding his elation after the game when asked why the Packers played the game the way they did.

I focused on the Packers because Scott brought it up as a genius move, so that was the issue.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 01/04/2010 4:49:10 pm
sarah.jpgSarah - How do you use these things?
01/04/2010 @ 07:11:25 PM
 Quote this comment
Here are my thoughts, and I apologize in advance because a lot of the goings ons above were sort of skimmed by moi. The Vikings had no reason to leave their starters in for that long. I watched that game and I wasn't even sure if the Giants were even in the dome. After proving that they had some mojo left, they should've taken their starters out in the 2nd quarter. The Packers also should've taken their starters out after a drive in the 3rd or so. Maybe not everyone, but definitely Rodgers, DD, Grant, and maybe even Finley, since he's been a stud but has had some injury issues. Woodson should've come out after the 1st or not played at all. We better not have shown them anything that will work to the Cardinals advantage for Sunday. The Cardinals gave up half way through the first quarter, we didn't need to do anything after that. I think over the 8 game stretch we've had we've gotten enough confidence to win a playoff game, no reason to show everything to the enemy. Kurt Warner's old, but he's smart and could pick apart our defense next week.

With all that being said, are the Cardinals even that good? They're in a crappy division, almost lost to the Lions, lost to the Panthers when they were suckin' it up, and got beat by the good teams. I'm hoping it'll be another blowout.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist
01/04/2010 @ 10:33:35 PM
 Quote this comment
The Cardinals play like the best team ever assembled, or horrible, with little in between. You just don't want to catch them on a good day.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.