NFC Championship Game Thread

[Al Zarilla]

Watching the replay, If not for Bostick, that ball falls right into Nelson's hands, game over. It looked bad live, but it looks ten times worse in slow motion. Bostick seemed inconsolable after the game. Gotta feel for the guy, even if it's all on him.

McCarthy threw Bostick under the bus, not as badly as some we've heard like Peyton did to his Oline years ago, but nevertheless, at 1:20 in the McCarthy video. Don't know how to embed it. Also, when the Pats and a lot of other teams lose, the head coach will say it's on everyone, including the coaches, who have to coach better. McCarthy never said anything like that, never took any blame. Instead, he said "Oh I have no regrets. I don't regret anything." 
 
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nwe/2007.htm

 

[Stitch01]

McCarthy stated he ran the ball on the last couple of drives partly because he had in mind a target that 20 runs in the second half would be very helpful in winning the game.  Just let that sink in for a minute.  Hes hilariously awful.

 

[rodderick]

McCarthy stated he ran the ball on the last couple of drives partly because he had in mind a target that 20 runs in the second half would be very helpful in winning the game.  Just let that sink in for a minute.  Hes hilariously awful.

 
What. The. Fuck. I'd fire him on the spot, jesus. I mean, I thought Rodgers threw McCarthy under the bus pretty hard in his press conference, but I can sympathize with a guy of his ability having his prime wasted by that bumbling moron.

 

[SumnerH]

Obviously rules is rules, but nobody's bothered by a conference championship overtime game ending with one team never touching the ball?

I'm long on record as advocating another quarter rather than some weird overtime scheme (and the same in all sports--soccer, hockey, whatever). The NBA and MLB get this right. And NBA players get tired, too. Conditioning is part of the game.

 

[dynomite]

Obviously rules is rules, but nobody's bothered by a conference championship overtime game ending with one team never touching the ball?

Not really.

I mean, the Packers could have gotten the ball back if they kept them out of the end zone. They allowed 3 offensive TDs to the Seahawks in, what, 6 minutes of game time? That's really bad.

 

[Tony C]

The rule is so much superior to the previous one that I don't think the losing team can complain -- a FG winning the game used to be truly ridiculous.
 
And Macarthy being satisfied about hitting his 20 run "target" had to be one of the truly stupid statements of all time.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

McCarthy stated he ran the ball on the last couple of drives partly because he had in mind a target that 20 runs in the second half would be very helpful in winning the game.  Just let that sink in for a minute.  Hes hilariously awful.

I know a lot of people have been on McCarthy's case for awhile now (myself included), but this is absurd to the point of being literally unbelievable.

This is like the mirror image of Andy Reid saying "I'm not sure why Jamaal only touched the ball 8 times today."

 

[BlackJack]

I'm long on record as advocating another quarter rather than some weird overtime scheme (and the same in all sports--soccer, hockey, whatever). The NBA and MLB get this right. And NBA players get tired, too. Conditioning is part of the game.

I agree it should be a full 15 minute period in football with no sudden death. But in hockey (and soccer) I think the sudden death works well. Possession in sports like that is inherently different than baseball, basketball and football.

The current football OT rules are a mess though. Imagine if an extra innings game ended in the top of the inning if the visiting team hit a grandslam? Or if they scored any runs in the top of the 11th?

 

[Stitch01]

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/288978271.html
 
Enjoy!
 
 

I know a lot of people have been on McCarthy's case for awhile now (myself included), but this is absurd to the point of being literally unbelievable.

 

[Gunfighter 09]

 
This play forever changed my opinion about guys running with the ball after an INT.  If you've got a clear lane to the end zone, go for it.  But if you're going to have to run through traffic, I'd prefer that the guy hit the deck and let the offense try to score.

 
I think that the all 22 (which comes out later today) will show that he had a very good chance of scoring, with 2+ blockers in front of him and nearly all of Seattle's fast players (save Wilson) behind him or completely out of position. 

 

[Ralphwiggum]

McCarthy is stunningly bad.  It's like he saw one of those stats about teams that run the ball 20 times in the 2nd half almost never lose in the playoffs and figured that the only thing he had to do to win the game was make sure they got 20 rushing attempts in the 2nd half regardless of game context.

 

[Kevin Youkulele]

McCarthy is stunningly bad.  It's like he saw one of those stats about teams that run the ball 20 times in the 2nd half almost never lose in the playoffs and figured that the only thing he had to do to win the game was make sure they got 20 rushing attempts in the 2nd half regardless of game context.

It's bad enough that announcers point to things like this as if the direction of causation is obvious.  For a head coach, whose job requires an advanced understanding of the game, to fall for something like this is just stunning.  
 
Belichick would stand out even if all other NFL coaches were at least competent in all phases of their jobs.  Things like this make him appear as a giant among insects.

 

[Kull]

The DB going down with the ball looks terrible in retrospect, but keep in mind that through 55 minutes of a 60 minute game, the Seattle offense had done absolutely nothing. 99 times out of a hundred the team with the 12 point lead - and the ball - is not losing the game. The end of this game was just off-the-chartss improbable.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

If there's any justice in the world, McCarthy will be long forgotten by the time Rodgers takes his place in the Hall. Guy is blessed to have an all-world QB to make him look good. And he still doesn't look good.

 

[johnmd20]

It's bad enough that announcers point to things like this as if the direction of causation is obvious.  For a head coach, whose job requires an advanced understanding of the game, to fall for something like this is just stunning.  
 
Belichick would stand out even if all other NFL coaches were at least competent in all phases of their jobs.  Things like this make him appear as a giant among insects.

 
More than that, he felt ok saying it in the press conference. Which is not only stunningly bad, but it's clear McCarthy doesn't even realize how stunningly bad it is. What a moron. Yes, it's a travesty that Rodgers' prime is being wasted by that idiot.

 

[wibi]

A pretty cool story came out this morning on MMQB about how the Seahawks were only going for the fake FG if a specific player was lined up in one of two positions.  
 
http://mmqb.si.com/2015/01/19/nfc-championship-game-seahawks-special-teams-onside-kick-fake-field-goal/
 

 
Now for the bigger and bolder decision, the play that ignited Seattle’s comeback, punter Jon Ryan’s 19-yard touchdown pass to Garry Gilliam on a fake field goal. Ryan had been lobbying for the call during the week of practice, after special teams coach Brian Schneider’s staff identified the weak link in the Packers field goal block team.
 
Reserve linebacker Brad Jones was recklessly aggressive coming off the edge on film. He consistently darted hard to the inside in an effort to get the block, and often went to unnecessary lengths to do so. Against Dallas in their divisional game, he lined up on the left side three times and on the right once, and on one attempt he tried to leap over a blocker only to get stonewalled.

 
So with five minutes left in the third quarter and Seattle still trailing 16-0, Carroll gave Ryan the go-ahead to execute a fake specifically designed for this game. Ryan had two options:
 
1. Take the snap and roll out to Jones’ side with either Garry Gilliam (left side) or Luke Willson (right) as a receiving option. If the linebacker covers the receiver, Ryan should run. If not, throw it.
 
2. If Jones isn’t on the field, take a delay of game penalty and then kick the field goal.
 
“Kickers are head-jobs anyway,” Ryan said within earshot of Hauschka, “so you don’t want to screw them around.”
 
Jones showed up on the left side, which meant undrafted rookie tackle Garry Gilliam would get the throw if necessary. Gilliam, a converted tight end out of Penn State, hadn’t caught a touchdown since high school.

 

[Al Zarilla]

McCarthy's job is safe.
 
http://packerrats.com/showthread.php?27563-Please-quit-blaming-the-coaches

 

[Toe Nash]

One coaching decision I haven't see mentioned that made ZERO sense was McCarthy calling timeout before the game-tying field goal with 19 seconds left instead of letting it run down to 1 or 2 seconds. There is only downside to that call, unless you were going to fake the FG or something. It didn't end up mattering but why would you give Seattle the chance to run a couple plays there?

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Why are all these assholes crying in their post games? Act like you've been there before. Idiots.

Have you forgotten Michael Jordan's bawling like a baby after the Bulls beat the Sonics in the finals?

It's funny what can trigger memories of your dead father.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Rodgers with the "we were the better team today" nugget.

Weak.

No one on the 03 Sox was quoted as saying that. Do you believe none of them thought it? How we've forgotten Grady in these parts...

 

[dynomite]

A pretty cool story came out this morning on MMQB about how the Seahawks were only going for the fake FG if a specific player was lined up in one of two positions.  
 
http://mmqb.si.com/2015/01/19/nfc-championship-game-seahawks-special-teams-onside-kick-fake-field-goal/
 

Good article, thanks for linking.

Although I like that he opens his article by saying:

SEATTLE — Russell Wilson to Jermaine Kearse will be the lasting image from Sunday’s NFC Championship Game.

... And then immediately goes on to break down the onsides kick, which is the actual lasting image from the NFC Championship game.

Now, that may be unfair to Bostick and the Seahawks, but I do think this was an '86 Buckner situation: from what I can tell everyone will remember this as the "Miracle Drop," not the long TD in OT.

 

[wibi]

Now, that may be unfair to Bostick and the Seahawks, but I do think this was an '86 Buckner situation: from what I can tell everyone will remember this as the "Miracle Drop," not the long TD in OT.

 
What's sad is that in both cases the player who screwed up should have never been put into that situation but previous coaching decisions led them to be in that spot.  

 

[Kevin Youkulele]

 
What's sad is that in both cases the player who screwed up should have never been put into that situation but previous coaching decisions led them to be in that spot.  

Don't understand for Bostick - his job was to block, but he decided for himself to go for the ball.  
 
Or are you charging McCarthy with precipitating the whole onside kick situation by settling for FGs and otherwise not having his team put the game away while SEA was sucking?  Even so, I don't understand saying he should never be put in an onside kick situation.  Is there a reason someone other than him should have been given the blocking assignment if an onside kick situation came up?

 

[wibi]

Don't understand for Bostick - his job was to block, but he decided for himself to go for the ball.  
 
Or are you charging McCarthy with precipitating the whole onside kick situation by settling for FGs and otherwise not having his team put the game away while SEA was sucking?  Even so, I don't understand saying he should never be put in an onside kick situation.  Is there a reason someone other than him should have been given the blocking assignment if an onside kick situation came up?

 
The second time.  McCarthy should have gone for the throat when the Seahawks were down and gasping for their last breath.  Bostick is in that situation because GB's coaching staff was extremely passive at a time where the shouldnt have been.

 

[Al Zarilla]

Don't understand for Bostick - his job was to block, but he decided for himself to go for the ball.  
 
Or are you charging McCarthy with precipitating the whole onside kick situation by settling for FGs and otherwise not having his team put the game away while SEA was sucking?  Even so, I don't understand saying he should never be put in an onside kick situation.  Is there a reason someone other than him should have been given the blocking assignment if an onside kick situation came up?

But the ball came right to Bostic, right at his head. It would be something like a basketball player getting a rebound right under the basket and handing it off to a teammate to lay it in or dunk it. You can't even say that Bostic is not a "skill" or a hands player. He's a tight end.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Bruschi was just on WEEI talking about how he used to play that position on the on-sides team. Said you have to ignore the ball and block your man no matter what.

 

[Al Zarilla]

Bruschi was just on WEEI talking about how he used to play that position on the on-sides team. Said you have to ignore the ball and block your man no matter what.

Tough one. Rules is rules, and when you play for Belichick, you will carry them out to the letter. Still, when the ball comes right to you, instinct can take over. Too bad for Bostic he blew it. 

 

[dynomite]

 
What's sad is that in both cases the player who screwed up should have never been put into that situation but previous coaching decisions led them to be in that spot.  

Indeed. The fact that every Red Sox fan hates Bill Buckner but doesn't remember Calvin Schiraldi's name is a crime. The Sox had so many other chances to win that game and that Series and blew it.

Same with the Packers. Their defense and special teams completely and utterly imploded up 16-0 and a quarter from a Super Bowl. Not to bring everything back to Belichick, but there's a reason he always talks about the three phases.

 

[Marciano490]

Indeed. The fact that every Red Sox fan hates Bill Buckner but doesn't remember Calvin Schiraldi's name is a crime. The Sox had so many other chances to win that game and that Series and blew it.

Same with the Packers. Their defense and special teams completely and utterly imploded up 16-0 and a quarter from a Super Bowl. Not to bring everything back to Belichick, but there's a reason he always talks about the three phases.

I don't hate Buckner. Especially now. And didn't he get a standing ovation at Fenway?

 

[dynomite]

True, but it's still the "Bucker Game."

 

[Leather]

He's gotten two standing Os. One was in the early 90's, I believe, but of course that doesn't fit the narrative.

 

[Super Nomario]

Tough one. Rules is rules, and when you play for Belichick, you will carry them out to the letter. Still, when the ball comes right to you, instinct can take over. Too bad for Bostic he blew it. 

Instinct only takes over if you haven't drilled the play enough to override your instincts. The same on the fake FG - the Seahawks knew that Brad Jones was undisciplined and overaggressive and they could take advantage. On some level such lapses are the player's fault, but they are not the hallmarks of a well-coached team.

 

[JimD]

Indeed. The fact that every Red Sox fan hates Bill Buckner but doesn't remember Calvin Schiraldi's name is a crime. The Sox had so many other chances to win that game and that Series and blew it.

 
This doesn't describe me or just about any Sox fan I know.  At all.
 
If you want to associate 'hate' with 1986, I'd say the majority of fans blame John McNamara first, with a healthy disdain for Schiraldi for collapsing under pressure like a wet cardboard box.

 

[dynomite]

Okay, good for you. I didn't mean to start a whole thing with the Buckner line. Yes, it's oversimplified to say that all Sox fans hate Buckner. We all are aware that Buckner's not to blame.

It's remembered as the "Buckner Game," yeah?

.

 

[DJnVa]

Okay, good for you. I didn't mean to start a whole thing with the Buckner line. Yes, it's oversimplified to say that all Sox fans hate Buckner. We all are aware that Buckner's not to blame.

It's remembered as the "Buckner Game," yeah?

.

 
Sure, and everyone remembers 1975 Game 6 as the Fisk HR game, but that doesn't mean people don't know Carbo hit a rather important bomb earlier.

 

[GeorgeCostanza]

[QUOTE="Hriniak]Have you forgotten Michael Jordan's bawling like a baby after the Bulls beat the Sonics in the finals?
It's funny what can trigger memories of your dead father.
[/QUOTE]
That game was on Father's Day

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Yes, yes it was.
 
Are you saying Wilson couldn't have been overcome with emotion after the game thinking of his father because it was the wrong day for that?

 

[GeorgeCostanza]

No no, not at all. Thought you were referring to Jordan's experience remembering his father as funny timing. Not funny "ha ha" obviously.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

No, I was answering leather's DukeSox's post remarking how "all these assholes crying in their post games" should "act like you've been there before." 
 

Since helping the Seahawks to their first title last February in a blowout of the Denver Broncos, Wilson has gone through a divorce and parted ways with his agent. He also mentioned his father, Harrison, who died in 2010 but had "the best seat in the house" for his son's heroics Sunday.

 
Link
 
---
Edit: players, scorecard, etc.

 

[GeorgeCostanza]

That makes sense. Sorry for the confusion. I lost my dad when I was 8 so any of this father/son stuff just shreds me to my core.

 

[bowiac]

This would make me vomit:
 
https://twitter.com/RobDemovsky/status/557632358107852802

 

[Dollar]

Yeah I'd say that if you ran that return from there ten times, at least five would result in touchdowns, and worst case would be the Seattle 40. So dumb.

 

[bowiac]

That said, in the moment, even knowing the game situation and clock, I mostly liked the decision to go down. Fumbles happen a lot off interceptions (I can't find good numbers, but 10% wouldn't surprise me).
 
In retrospect, seeing the all 22, I think the ideal answer would have been to make a beeline towards the sideline at around the Seattle 47-45, but that's obviously unrealistic.

 

[wibi]

From FO's quick reads
 

 
Where to begin? First of all, we can confim that this was one of the worst playoff games of all time. In fact, it is the worst DYAR by a winning quarterback in playoff history, by a sizable margin. Wilson breaks the record of Drew Bledsoe, who had -116 DYAR in New England's 1996 AFC Championship Game win over Jacksonville. Now, let's play a game of "what if." Let's pretend that Green Bay had recovered Seattle's fourth-quarter onside kick, and then gone on to run out the final 2:09 of the game. Not a huge stretch, is it? If that happens, the Seahawks never take the lead in the fourth quarter, and obviously don't go on to win in overtime. In our imaginary land of make-believe, Wilson finishes 10-of-25 for 121 yards, with four sacks, four interceptions, a fumbled snap, and only five first downs. He also has four carries for 11 yards and a touchdown. That all works out to -218 DYAR passing, 4 DYAR rushing, and -214 total, and that, dear friends, is one of the three worst playoff games of all time, behind only Kerry Collins' loss to the Ravens in Super Bowl XXXV and Jake Delhomme's notorious meltdown in 2008 against Arizona. We're talking worse-than-Ryan-Lindley numbers here. Of course, in reality Seattle recovered the onside kick, and Green Bay took this sub-Lindley passer ... and let him beat them. After the onside kick recovery, Wilson went 4-of-4 for 88 yards and four first downs (including a touchdown), with one sack, and one run for 15 yards. That's 71 DYAR passing, 6 rushing, 76 total. In six plays! (No, 71 + 6 does not equal 76; the difference comes from rounding errors.) Of all the amazing stats about this game (and there are many), this might be my favorite: In the first 56 minutes of the game, Wilson had three first downs, rushing and passing. After that, he had eight.

 

[Leather]

No, I was answering leather's post remarking how "all these assholes crying in their post games" should "act like you've been there before." 
 
 
Link

Ya, that wasn't me, chief.

 

[singaporesoxfan]

That said, in the moment, even knowing the game situation and clock, I mostly liked the decision to go down. Fumbles happen a lot off interceptions (I can't find good numbers, but 10% wouldn't surprise me).
 
In retrospect, seeing the all 22, I think the ideal answer would have been to make a beeline towards the sideline at around the Seattle 47-45, but that's obviously unrealistic.

 
Couldn't find data for fumbles off interceptions, but again linking to the WSJ article on laterals after turnovers the fumble rate by defenses lateraling after a turnover was 7 out of 77 (9.1%), with 3 of those ultimately being lost (3.9% fumble rate). That seems to suggest to me that the risk-reward ratio is tilted towards advancing the ball rather than going down.
 
Incidentally, I wonder if the Patriots are being coached to try advance the ball after turnovers. They were the only team in the whole NFL to attempt to lateral after a turnover the entire season, and did it three times (Jamie Collins vs Cincy, Logan Ryan vs Detroit, Jamie Collins vs the Jets), though in the case of Collins vs Cincy, his lateral didn't count because he was ruled to have fumbled and it was within the 2 minute mark so he couldn't advance the fumble. Coached or not, Collins and Ryan certainly didn't seem like they were punished for lateraling, so that may indicate how Belichick and the coaching staff view the risks and rewards from what others might see as a high-risk play.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Ya, that wasn't me, chief.

 
No it wasn't. I'm sorry.

 

[Tony C]

From FO's quick reads
 

FO says thus was one of "the worst playoff games ever" - seriously?

 

[Devizier]

FO says thus was one of "the worst playoff games ever" - seriously?

 
I mean, in terms of individual offensive performances, sure. It was a helluva lot more exciting than the Patriots game, though.

 

[johnmd20]

Agreed. There wasn't any real danger until like the 45 or so. It's obviously hard for Burnett to know where everyone is but if Peppers had been a blocker instead of a stop sign, he probably takes that into FG range at least.

In the end, it's certainly not the reason they lost but just one of those many plays that will haunt Packers fans going forward. Just an abysmal loss.

 
I think it is the reason they lost. They thought, at that point, the game was over. So they stopped playing. Green Bay's defensive performance after that point is proof of that. They took the foot off the neck because they thought the Hawks were dead. They weren't and it started a cascade of debacles which ultimately led to the loss.
 
5 minutes left in the game, up 12, is not even close to over. The fact that the defensive players were coached to go down with 5 minutes left is absurd.