NFL

[Macca 16,922]

Pats being investigated for ball tampering, deflating balls. Hhahahaa

SI.com have a story on it ... about the 5th story down.

It sounds a bit dodgy but we are talking about the Pats - they've got a bit of history in bending the rules

Regardless, it looks as though the Colts didn't bother to turn up today ... I've only caught a few highlights of the later game.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

Russell Wilson is one lucky mofo. I gave Seattle no chance after his last pick. As Macca said its not just the onside kick recovery. The red zone field goals, Rodgers second pick was a miscommunication and dropped passes also added to the latest loss. Green Bay have the blue print to beat Seattle though and if it's a type of game where we see offense vs offense then Brady will murder Wilson and beast mode.

[pantaloons 2,019]

Sorry Macca, what a painful way to go.

Just a reminder that KC beat both Super Bowl teams this season. No mention please of the fact that we also lost to teams drafting 2 and 4 in April though.

The Super Bowl is set up nicely. I thought Seattle was hot garbage for most of the season and got away with sleepwalking through the campaign. Turns out that worked out for them again today. I'll pick New England in a tight one.

[titan_uranus 24,974]

Perhaps Bostick could have done with some 'Blu-Tack' on his hands ... that's a costly missed chance. McCarthy let him have it but we lost the game in a few other areas (including not being able to convert enough red zone opportunities)

In all honesty we've only got ourselves to blame ... all the way back to losing that game against the Bills (and thus losing home field advantage throughout the playoffs)

To play that well and then hand it back to them is hard to cop. 5 field goals and only 1 TD was costly ... we're renowned for getting into the end zone and we just couldn't get it done.

The better team won but the Packers were far from disgraced - I hope this loss steels us for next year. It should.

No it didn't.

I'm biased (I hate the Seahawks with a passion), but they played 5 minutes of football and won the game. You were all over them for 3.5 quarters. Your defence smothered them at the line and your offence controlled the tempo.

Your two main problems were an inability to turn the dominance into TDs - five field goals left the door open all day, Seattle should never have been able to win by scoring just two TDs, they should have needed 4 or 5 - and your choke at the end (you intercepted Wilson with 5 minutes left and a 16 point lead).

Bostick also shouldn't have been catching that ball - he said himself his job was to block for Jordy Nelson to make the catch and you can see Bostick kinda jumps in front of Nelson as he turns to make the catch. Terrible play.

[Macca 16,922]

Playoff tipping comp leaderboard

8 - JV7, Go the Biff

7 - pantaloons, Macca

6 - Georgiou R.R. Martin

4 - Gorgoroth

3pts on offer for the SB winner

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

No it didn't.

I'm biased (I hate the Seahawks with a passion), but they played 5 minutes of football and won the game. You were all over them for 3.5 quarters. Your defence smothered them at the line and your offence controlled the tempo.

Your two main problems were an inability to turn the dominance into TDs - five field goals left the door open all day, Seattle should never have been able to win by scoring just two TDs, they should have needed 4 or 5 - and your choke at the end (you intercepted Wilson with 5 minutes left and a 16 point lead).

Bostick also shouldn't have been catching that ball - he said himself his job was to block for Jordy Nelson to make the catch and you can see Bostick kinda jumps in front of Nelson as he turns to make the catch. Terrible play.

I agree. Packers were by far the better team. Seattle were outplayed for nearly the whole game. The read option got them going again but to be down by 2 scores in the 4th and win is amazing but it also feels like a bit of a robbery as well. It would make more sense if there was a terrible "Fail Mary" call by the refs again. Still dunno how they won.

[Macca 16,922]

No it didn't.

I'm biased (I hate the Seahawks with a passion), but they played 5 minutes of football and won the game. You were all over them for 3.5 quarters. Your defence smothered them at the line and your offence controlled the tempo.

Your two main problems were an inability to turn the dominance into TDs - five field goals left the door open all day, Seattle should never have been able to win by scoring just two TDs, they should have needed 4 or 5 - and your choke at the end (you intercepted Wilson with 5 minutes left and a 16 point lead).

Bostick also shouldn't have been catching that ball - he said himself his job was to block for Jordy Nelson to make the catch and you can see Bostick kinda jumps in front of Nelson as he turns to make the catch. Terrible play.

I'll always give credit to the winner in a loss. It's more an acknowledgement of the other team rather than a huge compliment.

Seattle were the better team because they converted their chances more than the Packers did ... we also should have "gone for it" on at least 1 of those 4th down field goal conversions. A game can be won or lost early in the game too but we tend to place more emphasis on the ending.

When you're on the road against a good team you've almost got to factor in that the home team are going to score touchdowns. Seattle would have been happy for us to take those field goals too ... and you should never do what the opposition wants you to do.

Poor play calling and I thought it at the time. As we all know it takes 3 field goals to outscore 1 converted TD but often the 3 points feels "safer" ... it can come back to bite later on though. McCarthy would almost certainly be re-evaluating things in the next few days with regards to those 2 goal line 4th downs.

For most of the 2nd half they were only 2 scores from leading - in the end, the gap wasn't big enough and watching the game, I never felt comfortable. 2 TD's can be scored in 2 minutes in this sport and that's exactly what happened. Wilson's 2nd half was very good also.

Of course I'm annoyed at the loss but there's good reasons why we did lose ... part of it was our own doing and part of it was their own good play and never give in spirit. Considering how poorly Seattle played in the first half we should have been a lot further in front at half time - that's our fault for not taking advantage.

Not sure I'd describe it as a choke though ... the game was always within Seattle's reach if they were able to score a TD and then recover an onside kick (it was a terrifically well executed onside kick too - Bostick should have caught it nonetheless)

What we saw happen we've seen happen a stack of other times over the years. It's a bit like soccer that way. 1 or 2 late goals happens in soccer quite regularly.

[Macca 16,922]

Sometimes a game can be won or lost early in proceedings ... in the first quarter the Packers were in 4th and 1 situations (twice) ... both times 1 yard from the end zone. Both times we elected to take the field goal.

In my opinion McCarthy took the 3 points on offer because of 4 reasons ...

A) He doubted our capacity to convert those 4th downs because of Seattle's defense

B) He didn't want to hand the ball back to Seattle even though they would have been 100 odd yards from scoring - he didn't have enough faith in his own defense if we did hand the ball back

C) The 3 points on offer "seemed" attractive at the time.

D) He seemingly didn't have enough faith in Rodgers

Meanwhile ...Seattle know all this and were probably quite happy to concede both field goals. We've got arguably the best QB in the business and we're not going to take a chance for 1 yard? Twice? When both times you're 1 yard from the end zone? A risk not taken can sometimes be a huge risk.

We're not the sort of team to grind out wins ... the way we win is to score early and to score TD's. We win by blowing teams out of the water (early) This has the effect of making teams take undue chances which in turn can create more scoring opportunities. Field goals aren't usually high on the agenda.

We gave them a sniff and even though it took them a while, they took advantage.

Play by play (1st quarter)

[Go the Biff 3,414]

Have gone with the head over the heart through the playoffs.

Head says Seattle.

F8#k it. Patriots 31 - 24. Would love to see Brady get that 4th ring.

[DeeSpencer 25,464]

It's harsh to call McCarthy a bad coach. I know I'd love a superbowl winning coach who also developed the best QB in the game. But I get the feeling he's far from perfect. I think some of it stems from him being the play caller. I don't know the stats but I just don't like head coaches calling plays. It's hard to hire an offensive genius without them then calling the plays as head coach, maybe Belichick's got it right. Hire Josh McDaniels, get him to flame out in Denver then come crawling back with a point to prove, but due to Pats coaches failing once they leave the nest no one wants him for another shot!

The reason's for Green Bay losing I'd summarise as this:

- 80% luck - we've got the onside kick, the crazy 2 point conversion that had no right to land in a receivers lap and the coin toss just to name a few. An unbelievable sequence

- 5% on the poor guy who muffed the onside kick

- 5% on the Packers defense and special teams, both who have been great for most of the game giving up big plays late

And getting back to where I started:

- 10% on McCarthy's play calling in the second half. You've got Aaron Rodgers! Yes I know you want to kill the clock but run, run, run, punt with Eddie Lacy whilst Rodgers is there doesn't get the game wrapped up. Nor was there any big play attempts. I know all about Seattle's secondary but you have to give up one play to try for 40 yards deep to Nelson or Cobb right???

[Macca 16,922]

McCarthy's play calling in the first half was even more questionable and conservative (especially in the 1st quarter) Again, the focus goes onto the big moments in the last quarter when in fact the whole game needs to be looked at if a proper appraisal is to be made.

Also, 2 of Wilson's interceptions were after the ball had bounced off 2 of his own players (who both could have caught the ball) ... another was a bit of a fluke catch by Clinton-Dix. It's not like all 4 of his interceptions went directly to Green Bay players.

Sure, there was some bad luck involved but not nearly as much as some might think ... there's a bit of bias against Seattle involved as well. That can cloud people's thinking.

By trying to play in a careful and safe way on offense we played into Seattle's hands. McCarthy has to cop a lot of the blame but he is what he is. A good and sometimes very good coach but not a great one. Rodgers sounded more than dissatisfied with the play calling after the match.

We had our chances to put them away and didn't.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

I didn't mind the way Green Bay went about it. The early field goal then lead into a fumble recovery from kick off and if any of us had been told that you could put up 16 points to nothing on Seattle at seattle you would take it. Those early points plus a Green Bay defense that was stuffing Seattle and causing turn overs made for a pretty good first half. Bloody hell what was it 19-7 with 5 minutes left in the 4th and Wilson throws his 4th pick. It was game over. Seattle fans left the building. I thought they were cooked as well.

[Macca 16,922]

I didn't mind the way Green Bay went about it. The early field goal then lead into a fumble recovery from kick off and if any of us had been told that you could put up 16 points to nothing on Seattle at seattle you would take it. Those early points plus a Green Bay defense that was stuffing Seattle and causing turn overs made for a pretty good first half. Bloody hell what was it 19-7 with 5 minutes left in the 4th and Wilson throws his 4th pick. It was game over. Seattle fans left the building. I thought they were cooked as well.

We've seen Rodgers make great plays when given the opportunity to do so

In this game he wasn't given that opporrunity

Poor play calling and we didn't go for the jugular

3pt field goals? Not the Green Bay way

[pantaloons 2,019]

Dallas beats Detroit courtesy of a shonky piece of officiating.

Green Bay beats Dallas courtesy of a questionable decision.

Seattle beats Green Bay with some outrageous malarkey at the death.

New England beats Seattle 28-27 on the last play of the game.

Tom Brady traded to Kansas City at season's end.

[Macca 16,922]

The worst football loss ever? Cousin Sal & Bill Simmons are leaning towards thinking it is. I know I haven't felt this bad about an NFL loss since the 2007 NFC Championship game loss to the Giants (in O/T)

Anyway, for lots more chatter about the Packers catastrophic collapse/ meltdown / choke (?) ... here's the BS Report (in this podcast, McCarthy isn't spared nor are all the big moments which led to the loss)

[DeeSpencer 25,464]

We've seen Rodgers make great plays when given the opportunity to do so

In this game he wasn't given that opporrunity

Poor play calling and we didn't go for the jugular

3pt field goals? Not the Green Bay way

But it's 16-0 at the half, partly thanks to the SeaHawks themselves going for a big 3rd down TD, getting picked and not getting the 3 points because of the scoreboard pressure you applied. The Pats are the best team in football due to the Patriot way, which in short is by doing what you need to win and not holding fast to a stereotype. So I really think you're over critical of a change in game plan that worked for a half. The first field goal you had 3 goes from inside 7 and didn't get there. I understand taking the points. The second field goal gave Rodgers two goes and he got to the 1. I would've gone for it from there. But 5 minutes later you get a TD! So it might have been 10-0 but then no touchdown. Again by this stage it's 13-0. The third field goal - In hindsight I go for it at 4 and 1 from your 22, but if you don't convert then it's 13-0 and on the next drive Wilson checks it down at 3 and 8, the convert the field goal and it's 13-3 at half time not 16-0.

I'd be annoyed in hindsight. But it's probably the 3rd field goal that would really give me grief and I'm still thinking it's 16-0 at half time despite Rodgers throwing two picks.

At 19-7 I think that was the time to say ok if they get the ball back they're looking at an onside kick either way to get the two scores. What does it matter if they have 5 minutes or 3 minutes. In fact you throw the ball it gives you more time to have more plays on offense.

These are the two series that I would have regrets about:

1. Green Bay Packers at 06:53
2. 1-10-GB 13(6:53) (Shotgun) 44-J.Starks right end to GB 14 for 1 yard (50-K.Wright).
3. 2-9-GB 14(6:09) (Shotgun) 44-J.Starks up the middle to GB 19 for 5 yards (50-K.Wright).
4. 3-4-GB 19(5:26) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to 81-A.Quarless (50-K.Wright).
5. 4-4-GB 19(5:22) 8-T.Masthay punts 37 yards to SEA 44, Center-61-B.Goode. 19-B.Walters to SEA 46 for 2 yards (31-D.House; 86-B.Bostick).

1. Green Bay Packers at 05:04
2. 1-10-GB 43(5:04) (Shotgun) 27-E.Lacy left tackle to GB 39 for -4 yards (94-K.Williams).
3. Timeout #1 by SEA at 04:57.
4. 2-14-GB 39(4:57) (Shotgun) 27-E.Lacy left tackle to GB 37 for -2 yards (72-M.Bennett).
5. Timeout #2 by SEA at 04:50.
6. 3-16-GB 37(4:50) (Shotgun) 27-E.Lacy up the middle to GB 39 for 2 yards (54-B.Wagner; 72-M.Bennett).
7. 4-14-GB 39(4:00) 8-T.Masthay punts 30 yards to SEA 31, Center-61-B.Goode, out of bounds.

The first series kind of worked, 2 runs to get in to a 3rd and manageable that Rodgers then converts because he's Aaron Rodgers right. But even the throw is short when the defense was all up trying to get a huge stop. I guess Rodgers' mobility might've factored in but I'm thinking you have to get Nelson or Cobb involved and play to your QB's strength which is brilliant throws to WR's who always find the soft open spot, not a quick pass to a back up TE. The second series of runs are really just killing time outs. The 3rd play is oh crap we now have 3 and 16 so we can't throw it anyway but that's where I think you look for a screen because a run up the middle in to a 9 man box with the Seattle defense just won cut it. At least some kind of funky screen might have given you a chance. You could even target Sherman because at this stage I don't think he was moving his left arm at all so he's not going to come flying in to bust up a screen. Not sure on Earl Thomas and his shoulder either.

Maybe the runs and time outs forced the onside kick. But if you do 1 run and 2 passes even if they are incomplete you are still kill some time. They take over at 4;30 with maybe 1 more time out, but then maybe they run the ball a bit more knowing they have time to score twice without rushing. They went the onside kick with 2 minutes left. Even if they had 2:30 or 3 minutes left I'm still taking the onside kick because I'm scared of giving the ball back to Rodgers who never gives it back to me.

IT's all in hindsight and comes back to 'don't fumble the onside kick'!!! But still it's those last two series that would annoy me more than the points left on the field in the first half.

I'll say one more thing as well. The miraculous come back from Seattle does deflect from the stupid overtime rules. I feel robbed that we didn't get a college style over time with both teams having shots from the 40. Lets be honest, with the lack of big plays these days we don't watch games for special team kick offs. Nor do we want to see just one half of the game in overtime. Wilson/Lynch at one end punching it in from the 40 and Rodgers going for it on all downs to get the tying score from the other is what the game deserved. I don't feel like it's unfair on Green Bay so much, I mean play good defense and you get the stop, I just think it's unfair for the fans!

[Macca 16,922]

But it's 16-0 at the half, partly thanks to the SeaHawks themselves going for a big 3rd down TD, getting picked and not getting the 3 points because of the scoreboard pressure you applied. The Pats are the best team in football due to the Patriot way, which in short is by doing what you need to win and not holding fast to a stereotype. So I really think you're over critical of a change in game plan that worked for a half. The first field goal you had 3 goes from inside 7 and didn't get there. I understand taking the points. The second field goal gave Rodgers two goes and he got to the 1. I would've gone for it from there. But 5 minutes later you get a TD! So it might have been 10-0 but then no touchdown. Again by this stage it's 13-0. The third field goal - In hindsight I go for it at 4 and 1 from your 22, but if you don't convert then it's 13-0 and on the next drive Wilson checks it down at 3 and 8, the convert the field goal and it's 13-3 at half time not 16-0.

I'd be annoyed in hindsight. But it's probably the 3rd field goal that would really give me grief and I'm still thinking it's 16-0 at half time despite Rodgers throwing two picks.

What's at issue here is when you've got the opposition reeling, you go for the jugular or the knockout punch ... we weren't aggressive enough or rather McCarthy wasn't. The pattern of play was set early by McCarthy and we just didn't take enough risks throughout the match.

The TD after the first 2 field goals made things seem better but in the end, we lost and that's all that matters. And I'm not analysing in hindsight either - I was annoyed at the time and thought that it could come back to bite us later - and it did. Trent Dilfer said as much as well.

The thing is that people need to eliminate all pre-game thoughts - most were thinking that the Packers would do well to stay with the Seahawks but as it turned out, it was the other way around. The hunted became the hunter but the hunter didn't go for the kill.

It was weak kneed play calling on those 2 goal line 4th downs in the 1st quarter and I reckon most will end up seeing it that way. On the road, you've got to take risks. We played into Seattle's hands - right now, too many are focusing on the last 5 minutes of the match.

McCarthy will need to get this team back to the NFC Championship game next year if he wants to keep his job. And he'll probably need to win it and get into the Super Bowl. He had a poor game and for someone who has been in the system for as long as he has, that's unacceptable.

My focus remains on the first quarter when we could have completely blown Seattle away. They were always going to come back at us and we didn't have a big enough lead to hold them off (the last 5 minutes was complete mayhem but that mayhem often has a chance of happening) The finish didn't particularly surprise me.

[titan_uranus 24,974]

Good article on NFL.com about 8 moments which defined GB's loss, most of which Macca has touched on: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000460883/article/how-they-lost-eight-plays-that-doomed-the-packers

The two early field goals when it was fourth and goal from the 1 yard line were definitely bad decisions. That's a little bit of hindsight of course but maybe even allowing for the first one to be a FG for some points, you have Rodgers at QB and on the road you need TDs - should have gone for it.

The two drives in the fourth that Georgiou pointed out above were also important. Rodgers touched the ball once in the six downs Green Bay had. Once. Aaron Rodgers. Look what he did on the final drive to level the scores. I understand running the ball eats the clock up but a first down does even better than that.

Edited January 20, 2015 by titan_uranus

[DeeSpencer 25,464]

What's at issue here is when you've got the opposition reeling, you go for the jugular or the knockout punch ... we weren't aggressive enough or rather McCarthy wasn't. The pattern of play was set early by McCarthy and we just didn't take enough risks throughout the match.

The TD after the first 2 field goals made things seem better but in the end, we lost and that's all that matters. And I'm not analysing in hindsight either - I was annoyed at the time and thought that it could come back to bite us later - and it did. Trent Dilfer said as much as well.

The thing is that people need to eliminate all pre-game thoughts - most were thinking that the Packers would do well to stay with the Seahawks but as it turned out, it was the other way around. The hunted became the hunter but the hunter didn't go for the kill.

It was weak kneed play calling on those 2 goal line 4th downs in the 1st quarter and I reckon most will end up seeing it that way. On the road, you've got to take risks. We played into Seattle's hands - right now, too many are focusing on the last 5 minutes of the match.

McCarthy will need to get this team back to the NFC Championship game next year if he wants to keep his job. And he'll probably need to win it and get into the Super Bowl. He had a poor game and for someone who has been in the system for as long as he has, that's unacceptable.

My focus remains on the first quarter when we could have completely blown Seattle away. They were always going to come back at us and we didn't have a big enough lead to hold them off (the last 5 minutes was complete mayhem but that mayhem often has a chance of happening) The finish didn't particularly surprise me.

Moving on McCarthy would be ballsy. I wonder what Rodgers opinion is of him. Not right now, but in the middle of winning streak. Moving on Dom Capers might be better. From the outside his level of support amongst GB and NFL fans wavers. He did a better job this year and I like where your secondary is heading and he made your run defense better this year. Plus after years and years of status quo he made a move on AJ Hawk. From watching the horribly bad Bears defenses the last two years I reckon you can tell a lot from inside linebackers. I think to be a star defensive linemen or star defensive back you need a heap of talent. Coaching, scheme, talent around you etc can and does help, but I feel it takes special athletes at those spot. Of course to be a truly special linebacker like Keuchly or Bobby Wagner or someone of that like you need to be great as well. But to be a standard linebacker I think you need a bit of athleticism, some smarts but really just a good scheme and coaching will get you have way there. If these days running backs are dime a dozen in some ways by default it means two down inside linebackers can be as well. And every year good ones are plucked from late in the draft and put in to good schemes and do very well. So when I see poor play from inside linebackers it makes me question the quality of the coaching.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how close the superbowl is. Last year the real grand final turned out to be the NFC championship game. This year the NFC has had some weaker teams in the bottom of the NFC North and East, as well as the debacle that is the NFC South but still a strong West. The AFC East and West (Oakland aside) were solid, the AFC North all had solid records but lined up against the NFC South for 4 free kicks each. The AFC South turned out 2 mid level teams (sorry Colts) and 2 battlers.

Dallas, Detroit and maybe Arizona with a first string QB were probably all teams who could call themselves solid play off teams. I don't really know what to make of the Colts and Broncos but you can't really ignore their entire seasons just for a bad loss each, though they seem to me like deceptive cats more than horses! Baltimore are sleeping giants that only wake in January. Overall I wouldn't say their was a clear gap in the two conferences and we should be in for a great superbowl.

I'm thinking a tight defensive battle as Seattle shut down Gronk and restrict the Pats running game whilst the Pats restrict Lynch and blanket Wilson. But I reckon it will be a 2 minute drill to win it. Just not sure whether it will be Brady or Wilson steering it in.

[Macca 16,922]

Moving on McCarthy would be ballsy. I wonder what Rodgers opinion is of him. Not right now, but in the middle of winning streak. Moving on Dom Capers might be better. From the outside his level of support amongst GB and NFL fans wavers. He did a better job this year and I like where your secondary is heading and he made your run defense better this year. Plus after years and years of status quo he made a move on AJ Hawk. From watching the horribly bad Bears defenses the last two years I reckon you can tell a lot from inside linebackers. I think to be a star defensive linemen or star defensive back you need a heap of talent. Coaching, scheme, talent around you etc can and does help, but I feel it takes special athletes at those spot. Of course to be a truly special linebacker like Keuchly or Bobby Wagner or someone of that like you need to be great as well. But to be a standard linebacker I think you need a bit of athleticism, some smarts but really just a good scheme and coaching will get you have way there. If these days running backs are dime a dozen in some ways by default it means two down inside linebackers can be as well. And every year good ones are plucked from late in the draft and put in to good schemes and do very well. So when I see poor play from inside linebackers it makes me question the quality of the coaching.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how close the superbowl is. Last year the real grand final turned out to be the NFC championship game. This year the NFC has had some weaker teams in the bottom of the NFC North and East, as well as the debacle that is the NFC South but still a strong West. The AFC East and West (Oakland aside) were solid, the AFC North all had solid records but lined up against the NFC South for 4 free kicks each. The AFC South turned out 2 mid level teams (sorry Colts) and 2 battlers.

Dallas, Detroit and maybe Arizona with a first string QB were probably all teams who could call themselves solid play off teams. I don't really know what to make of the Colts and Broncos but you can't really ignore their entire seasons just for a bad loss each, though they seem to me like deceptive cats more than horses! Baltimore are sleeping giants that only wake in January. Overall I wouldn't say their was a clear gap in the two conferences and we should be in for a great superbowl.

I'm thinking a tight defensive battle as Seattle shut down Gronk and restrict the Pats running game whilst the Pats restrict Lynch and blanket Wilson. But I reckon it will be a 2 minute drill to win it. Just not sure whether it will be Brady or Wilson steering it in.

McCarthy will most likely stay but I hope he learns from this game. He'll know inwardly that he made some poor decisions though - even if he most likely wouldn't admit it. Rodgers just needs to be managed and given his head, not necessarily coached. I've never seen the 2 as a team though - it's not like Brady & Belichick.

McCarthy is not overly liked amongst Packer fans but I form my own opinion without bias or influence. He's a good and sometimes very good coach who can have B grade days. Not too many B grade days but this game was one of them (in my opinion) The coach sets the pattern on game day - a lot rests with them.

I'd much prefer to have a "great" head coach but they're hard to find ... Gruden might yet be coaxed out of retirement

As for the SB, at this early stage I'm leaning towards Seattle but I'll put my "official tip" in when I'm more sure. If the Seahawks find their A game (especially their defense) then they should be able to shut down the Pats (more so the Pats offense) Gronk could prove the difference - shut him down and Seattle are well on their way to winning.

It's a classic match-up all the same. Should be a top game and lets face it, they are the 2 best teams this year. Every other team has greater flaws than these 2 teams. Both teams are hard to "like" but both are well coached and highly skilled.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

The NFC championship game will be one of the most talked about games for a long time. Valid arguments can be made on either side about Green Bay not being agressive enough. I still say 16-0 at the half is a pretty good game plan but I get the other side of the argument. I haven't seen too many New England games so does anyone know how well they shut down receivers? I know they have revis but apart from that I'm at a loss. If the pats can shut down Seattle like Green Bay did in the first half Brady will have plenty of opportunities to win another ring. To be honest I'm sick of both teams winning so I'm not fussed who wins but I think New England will get up.

[Macca 16,922]

Seems the deflated balls story turns out to be true ... I wonder how long they've been doing it? Years? ... it's entirely possible.

11 of 12 Pats footballs underinflated

Yet to be determined is what, if any, penalties may be imposed upon Patriots. One source described the league as "disappointed ... angry ... distraught," after spending considerable time on the findings earlier Tuesday.

And this from SI.com ...

Report: Ravens believe underinflated balls were used against Patriots

No names were given in the report, but La Canfora says some in the Ravens kicking and punting units thought the balls did not get usual depth and distance on some of their kicks.

Edited January 21, 2015 by Macca

[Gorgoroth 12,924]

I've been watching NFL Live and insider and they have been covering this. Consensus I've seen is a fine and possible draft loss. But more they are saying a change to how the balls are handed on the sidelines in the future.

[Macca 16,922]

I've been watching NFL Live and insider and they have been covering this. Consensus I've seen is a fine and possible draft loss. But more they are saying a change to how the balls are handed on the sidelines in the future.

Assuming they're guilty I reckon the penalties might take a fair bit of time to eventuate.

Anything from what you've indicated to maybe a bit worse. I'm leaning more towards Brady being behind it all but I can't see how Belichick wouldn't know to some degree.

Ordinarily I'd reckon fines and loss of draft picks only but they've got some history with spygate and what not. They are repeat offenders.

Too much is being connected to the scoreline against the Colts but I reckon that's irrelevant. Cheating is cheating and having the balls deflated to the extent that they were is a significant advantage (in my opinion) The other question is how long have they been doing it - they barely got over the line against the Ravens.

We're all brought up kicking a footy in oz and you always know when the footy is even a little bit flat.

Brady had to have known and he and Belichick are as thick as thieves. Some over there are saying that Belichick might get a year based on the treatment of Sean Payton by the NFL. If that happens and Brady gets off then Tom would count himself very lucky.

That's if they're guilty of course ... there's still a lot to play out.

It's certainly added a bit of spice to the Super Bowl

[Macca 16,922]

In light of the new information re the Pats, I reckon it's perfectly understandable to be able to review your tips and re-do them if either of you want to. If anyone has any objections please say so.

Remembering that 3pts are awarded if you pick the winner of the SB.

Playoff tipping comp leaderboard

8 - JV7, Go the Biff

7 - pantaloons, Macca

6 - Georgiou R.R. Martin

4 - Gorgoroth