NFL 2009 Season Week 17 Picks

nieve

why are you commenting on every game?

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

With Minnesotas win, the Packers-Cardinals game has been rendered meaningless. They will play each other next week.

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!!!

You can rationalize it all you want, it was stupid.

Rodgers, Woodson, Jennings, Driver, etc get hurt,

You feel vindicated that the guy who made the stupid decision agrees with the decision?

Ah yes, that all-veteran Colts team.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

Packers playing Sunday at 3:30.

Bengals play the Jets again too.

And regular season picks champ means nothing.

34-0

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.

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?

Right, but you don't usually pull people from a meaningful game before halftime. That conversion doesn't start until halfway through the third.

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.