Recap: Green Bay Packers Defeat Bears, 21-14

by Brandon on Dec 14, 2009 7:00 AM CST in Analysis Comment 35 comments

The Green Bay Packers are trying to pull away from the rest of the NFC for a wild card spot, so every win is a good win. Especially when it comes against a division rival, which helps in case they need it for a tiebreaker. It's their 5th win in a row, and it moved them up into the top wild card spot. Another good thing: Mike McCarthy said only 4 players were injured during the game and they all returned. Here's the big recap from the Sports Network.

A couple things that didn't make it into my play-by-play recap after the jump. I was expecting a big game from OLB Brad Jones against backup Bear RT Kevin Shaffer, but instead Jones didn't record a single stat. I also noticed during the game that there were several times when the Packers went with one defensive lineman (DE Cullen Jenkins) and 5 linebackers. Defensive coordinator Dom Capers has been showing some unusual formations this season, but that was very usual and I'm not sure it's good that he calls that defensive package 'Psycho'. It's not something I expect to see against every team, but the Bears running game has been toothless all season, so they weren't as likely to get burned by a power running formation.

This game reminded me of last week's game against the Ravens. They were in control for most of the game, but their opponent kept it close so that their opponent was able to get back into it with a couple TD drives. The Bears offense didn't do much, they only had 254 yards of offense in the entire game, but managed 136 yards on their two TD drives. I'm not sure if that's just the normal flow of the game, but it didn't make sense that the Packers were behind when it seemed like they had outplayed them. Overall it was a dangerous game, but they were better than the Bears and they deserved the win.

Packers vs Bears coverage, Packers vs Bears recap, Packers vs Bears boxscore, Windy City Gridiron

The play-by-play comes from NFL.com:

First Quarter:

2-M.Crosby kicks 62 yards from GB 30 to CHI 8. 13-J.Knox to CHI 20 for 12 yards (36-N.Collins).

I was worried about the special teams in this game, and they did a very good job on kick coverage. They didn't allow a kickoff return for more than 26 yards.

(13:23) 25-R.Grant left tackle for 62 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

Well that was a surprise. Nothing exceptional about the play. The o-line blocked well and LG Daryn Colledge got into the 2nd level to block LB Lance Briggs. The cornerback was blocked, and the safety ran to the other side of the field, which left a wide open path for RB Ryan Grant on the left side.

(11:05) (Shotgun) 6-J.Cutler right guard to GB 44 for 21 yards (36-N.Collins). PENALTY on CHI-68-F.Omiyale, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at CHI 35 - No Play.

Usually it's the Packers who are hurt by penalties, but in this game, it was the Bears doing most of the self inflicted damage. And this was a legitimate penalty that effected the play: Omiyale held Jenkins left arm back as he tried to reach out and tackle QB Jay Cutler.

(7:49) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete deep right to 85-G.Jennings (33-C.Tillman). PENALTY on CHI-91-T.Harris, Defensive Offside, 5 yards, enforced at CHI 36 - No Play. Green Bay challenged the incomplete pass ruling, and the play was Upheld. (Timeout #1.)

(3:40) 2-M.Crosby 33 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-61-B.Goode, Holder-10-M.Flynn.

How was that not a TD pass to WR Greg Jennings? I'm no rules expert, so I don't have some hair splitting reason why. Settling for a FG a few plays later added some sting to it.

(3:31) 6-J.Cutler pass deep right intended for 19-D.Aromashodu INTERCEPTED by 21-C.Woodson at CHI 48. 21-C.Woodson to CHI 39 for 9 yards (13-J.Knox).

Another one of those INTs that make all Bear fans groan. It looked like Cutler threw off his back foot with pressure in his face. Maybe he under threw it, or maybe the receiver ran the wrong route. I couldn't tell for sure.

Second Quarter:

(13:07) 2-M.Crosby 26 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-61-B.Goode, Holder-10-M.Flynn.

Unfortunately the turnover doesn't lead to a TD. They converted two first downs, including one 4th down conversion, but couldn't find the right play near the end zone. The only thing I've noticed about their red zone offense is that they don't seem to attack the sidelines. There aren't a lot of fade routes to the corner type of plays. Those are low percentage plays, but it wouldn't hurt to try something new either.

(12:07) 4-B.Maynard punts 37 yards to GB 34, Center-65-P.Mannelly. 87-J.Nelson to GB 39 for 5 yards (32-K.Bell, 65-P.Mannelly).

By this point, the Bears have had the ball 4 times and have 10 yards of total offense (plus 1 INT).

(9:02) (Shotgun) 32-B.Jackson left guard to CHI 41 for no gain (92-H.Hillenmeyer, 91-T.Harris).

This is just my preference, but I hate it when it's 3rd and short, they are in the shotgun, and they hand the ball off. I have no idea what the success rate it on these plays, but I would expect it's low.

(1:54) (Shotgun) 6-J.Cutler pass deep right to 13-J.Knox for 19 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

The first of the Aromashodu drives. He had 3 catches for 37 yards on this drive alone. It's understandable that he might have come as a surprise to the Packers. He only had 2 receptions on the season coming into this game. I wasn't expecting anything from the Bears' receivers other than WR Earl Bennett and Knox. No flag on CB Tramon Williams on this play, he just got beat. I'm not sure why SS Atari Bigby came over so late. Was he supposed to help on deep coverage?

(:21) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short middle to 88-J.Finley to CHI 36 for 19 yards (24-A.Afalava). FUMBLES (24-A.Afalava), RECOVERED by CHI-38-D.Manning at CHI 31. 38-D.Manning to CHI 30 for -1 yards (80-D.Driver).

It was a careless fumble by TE Jermichael Finley and it took points off the board. They were at least in field goal range. But it was the 2nd game in a row that Finley was the leading receiver. He's been playing very well, this fumble aside, since he returned from injury last month. Over the last 4 games, he's been just as important as Jennings and WR Donald Driver (who was very quiet in this game).

Third Quarter:

(12:56) 12-A.Rodgers to CHI 36 for -7 yards. FUMBLES, and recovers at CHI 36. 12-A.Rodgers to CHI 38 for -2 yards (92-H.Hillenmeyer). FUMBLES (92-H.Hillenmeyer), RECOVERED by CHI-95-A.Adams at CHI 41. 95-A.Adams to CHI 44 for 3 yards (63-S.Wells).

It's Rodgers's 10th fumble of the season (4th lost) which isn't good. It's also the 2nd drive in a row that ended in Bears' territory with a Packer turnover. They could have easily had scored 30 points in this game.

(10:27) 6-J.Cutler pass deep right to 13-J.Knox pushed ob at GB 10 for 22 yards (21-C.Woodson).

(9:41) 6-J.Cutler pass short right to 19-D.Aromashodu for 10 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

An unusual set of plays where CB Charles Woodson was beaten for 32 yards and 1 TD by two different receivers. He's having a great season, but he isn't unbeatable. This was a good 56 yard drive by the Bears, but it was their last hurrah. On their last 5 possessions, they gained a total of 69 yards.

(8:09) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short middle to 85-G.Jennings pushed ob at 50 for 25 yards (33-C.Tillman, 24-A.Afalava).

This was on 3rd and 10. There were a times when the Bears seemed to have more trouble stopping the Packers on 3rd and long then on 3rd and short.

(2:10) 32-K.Bell right tackle to GB 45 for no gain (20-A.Bigby, 56-N.Barnett).

In hindsight, the Bears probably should have gone for it. The Packers only managed two drives of more the 50 yards in the entire game, so it was unlikely the Packers would have turned this into a TD. Great play by Bigby to dive into the gap and stop it for no gain.

(:17) 6-J.Cutler pass short middle to 22-M.Forte to CHI 30 for 3 yards (56-N.Barnett). PENALTY on CHI-74-C.Williams, Illegal Use of Hands, 10 yards, enforced at CHI 27 - No Play.

I think this was the play when Bear LT Chris Williams tried to take off LB Clay Matthews's head.

Fourth Quarter:

(13:39) (Shotgun) 6-J.Cutler pass short left intended for 13-J.Knox INTERCEPTED by 36-N.Collins at CHI 42. 36-N.Collins pushed ob at CHI 11 for 31 yards (22-M.Forte).

Cutler's first INT was bad, but this was worse. Not just because of the big return by FS Nick Collins. Cutler was throwing off his back foot (again) and this time the receiver was in the right place. Cutler just didn't get enough on the throw. It was a good idea, he saw Williams come on a corner blitz and he threw it to the man Williams was covering, but he threw it far too late.

(12:46) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short left to 80-D.Driver. PENALTY on CHI-35-Z.Bowman, Defensive Pass Interference, 4 yards, enforced at CHI 5 - No Play.

(12:42) 25-R.Grant right guard for 1 yard, TOUCHDOWN.

(Pass formation) TWO-POINT CONVERSION ATTEMPT. 12-A.Rodgers pass to 85-G.Jennings is complete. ATTEMPT SUCCEEDS.

First, there is a pass interference penalty in the end zone, and it was not called on Tramon Williams. Second, the Packers retake the lead and I can relax again. Third, how can a team that has struggled in the red zone go for a two point conversion? And where has this play been: throwing to Jennings along the side of the end zone. They couldn't have tried it earlier?

(9:42) 25-R.Grant left tackle pushed ob at GB 29 for 17 yards (24-A.Afalava). PENALTY on CHI-24-A.Afalava, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at GB 29.

Thanks to the 15 yard penalty on the rookie safety, the Packers got themselves out of a hole quickly.

(8:31) 12-A.Rodgers pass short middle to 88-J.Finley to CHI 25 for 25 yards (33-C.Tillman).

(6:10) 2-M.Crosby 42 yard field goal is No Good, Wide Right, Center-61-B.Goode, Holder-10-M.Flynn.

I hated this 2 and 1/2 minute series of plays. After Finley's reception got them down to the Bears' 25 yard line, they ran three plays (two runs, and a dropped pass on 3rd down) that seemed designed to run off some clock and settle for the FG. And then K Mason Crosby missed the FG anyway. Most of his misses have been beyond 50 yards, so they've been low percentage attempts anyway, but this is the 2nd week in a row he's missed FGs that he should be making. Kickers run in streaks, so hopefully it's better that he's missing them now instead of during the playoffs.

(4:58) 6-J.Cutler pass incomplete deep middle to 82-G.Olsen (36-N.Collins). Chicago challenged the incomplete pass ruling, and the play was Upheld. (Timeout #1.) Timeout #2 by CHI at 4:51.

This was the bizarre series of timeouts by Lovie Smith. First he called a timeout, and then he wasted another timeout for a challenge. I briefly saw his press conference after the game when he tried to explain the situation, but I had to turn it off. I didn't want to get vertigo from all the spinning he had to do to explain himself.

(3:06) 34-A.Green right tackle to GB 36 for -1 yards (95-A.Adams).

I didn't mind the Packers running out the clock here. It forced the Bears to use their last timeout, but it would have been nice if they actually had converted on 3rd and 1.

(2:19) 7-J.Kapinos punts 51 yards to CHI 18, Center-61-B.Goode. 80-E.Bennett to CHI 20 for 2 yards (51-B.Poppinga). PENALTY on CHI-21-C.Graham, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at CHI 19.

The Bears were copying the Packers' usual game plan of penalties and poor special teams.

(1:13) (Shotgun) 6-J.Cutler pass incomplete deep right to 80-E.Bennett (21-C.Woodson).

And the game ends on a 4th and 9 pass attempt that was far off the mark.

0 recs | Comment 35 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

the no-catch...

How was that not a TD pass to WR Greg Jennings? I’m no rules expert, so I don’t have some hair splitting reason why.

I have explained it a couple of times in replies under your brief recap, however, here’s the short version.
The ball gets knocked loose instantly after his second foot hit the ground, he did not regain possession/control before going to the ground (and OOB) the ball hit the ground, thereby an incomplete pass.

by Jarlsberg on Dec 14, 2009 7:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

The key phrase there would be after his second foot hit the ground. He’s in the end zone, all you have to do is establish possession and everything after that should be null and void. One foot, two foot, over. TD.

Godspeed...

by _William_ on Dec 14, 2009 9:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

From the official rulebook:

A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.

This quote don’t say much about fumbling the ball after clearly possessing the ball with two feet down, but it seems to me that in the end, the refs got it wrong. If this is an incomplete pass, than so is DD’s fumble on MNF. The NFL needs to do something about it, because the Raiders suffered from it in week 1 too if you recall.

Anyway, you gotta give props for Tillman for the incredible play he made, and complain about Jennings’ ball handling issues of late.

Why do we bake cookies & cook bacon?

by A-Rodge12 on Dec 14, 2009 11:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"From the official rulebook"

A-Rodge12 …
you’re at least a year behind. the quote you put in, includes the force-out, which was (thank god) removed before the 2008 season.

I see there are several posts here, with “quotes” from the official NFL rulebook, unless some here are actually an NFL official, I seriously doubth they have a copy (that book is very exclusive) My main experience is from the NCAA rules, from which there are about 140 differences to the NFL, (i.e NFL two feet down and NCAA you only need one), however, the priciple and requirements for firmly possessing the ball and a completed catch/recovery is excactly the same in both NFL and NCAA.

First, the same rule aplies all over the playingfield (inside the boundarylines (sidelines and endlines)) there is no difference between the endzone or field of play for this matter.

The key factors here are, you need to have firm control of the ball, and two feet (or another bodypart except the hands) touching the ground inbounds.
Bit-by-bit for this play:
Jennings catches the pass, get his first foot down, then his second foot, before his “third foot” touches the ground it is knocked loose, then without any shift in momentum, both players are going to the ground OOB, (it doesn’t actually matter where they go to the ground) and the ball hits the ground. in this situation the “going to the ground” part will aply, because Jennings is being knokced to the ground almost instantly, him going to the ground is a continious action of his momentum.

The big key here is: did Jennings firmly possess the ball at all ? in my view, no. In slow motion replay, it may look like he had the ball for long enough, well, the game isn’t played in slow motion, if you see it in gamespeed, you will see he only has the ball for a split-second, which is not firmly controlling it.
You need to see this play/ situtation excatly the same as if it happened in the field of play. If it did, Jennings would have to catch the ball, get both feet (or a bodypart) down, and then be able to make a “football move” while firmly possessing the ball, before it comes loose, if he’s being contacted as well, he needs to maintain full control of the ball until after he hits the ground.
So let’s say this excact same thing happened in the field of play. Is Jennings in firm control of the ball, and able to make a “football move” before the ball comes loose? No.
If this would be ruled a completed pass in the field of play, it would also be a fumble, which is why the requirements are what they are for a completed catch, nobody wants a cheap turnover. Please tell me if you want to see this ruled a completed pass (and thereby a catch-fumble) in the field of play !!! I would not like that.

Now, it remains to be seen if this play is discussed on this weeks official review, I hope, but I doubth it, I see it as too obvious and correct, and similar plays have been discussed before. If it is, I will post the link here.

by Jarlsberg on Dec 15, 2009 8:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually the “Football move” part was changed after this last year. I’ve heard it mentioned during numerous games now. That said, I still didn’t see the play and I don’t know the exact rule so I am staying out of this one.

by TrevorR on Dec 15, 2009 6:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The ball only needs to be inside the end zone with possession for a nano second and it's a TD

by Danwood on Dec 14, 2009 11:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

this /\

See, this is what happens when the Sox bunt.
Discord is sown. Brother fights brother. Misunderstandings abound.

-TAEG

by blackoutsox on Dec 14, 2009 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If they had upheld that as a touchdown,

The game likely would have had a wider margin of victory.

If the Bears go down 14-0 at home in the first quarter, even with Cutler, I don’t see them coming back. The game’s outcome probably isn’t even 24-14, most likely wider margin of victory.

Bound for New York City: January 6-9! Can't wait!

by Vermont Cubs Fan on Dec 14, 2009 1:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not true.

You are applying the rules for a running play into the end zone to a passing play. They are not treated the same in the rule book, particularly when out-of-bounds is in the picture. The receiver must maintain possession to the ground. From games I have watched over the past several years, I think they are calling this consistently.

by Ben T on Dec 14, 2009 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The receiver wasn't going to the ground

Thus the going to the ground clause doesn’t mean anything.

A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession. This rule applies to the field of play and in the end zone.

The ball was knocked out after he had clear possession with two feet on the ground, while standing, not falling. TD at that point. The going to the ground clause applies if the receiver is falling or tackled to the ground, neither of which occurred on this play.

by Danwood on Dec 14, 2009 2:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn’t see the play but this seems like the best argument I’ve seen so far.

by TrevorR on Dec 14, 2009 6:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Mike Carey didn't see it that way

His explanation while upholding the incomplete call was that this particular play fell under the “going to the ground” rule. Here’s Jennings’ take:

Jennings on his touchdown being called incomplete: “I still, to this moment, that was a touchdown. I mean, credit to him, he knocked the ball out. He did knock the ball out. I got two feet in and almost a third. But you can’t leave that gray area. And when he knocked the ball out, that’s the gray area. The way he explained it to me was had I been standing up when he knocked the ball out, then it would have been a touchdown….It is what it is. They try to do the best they can. Obviously you’re not going to get every call right. I’m not saying he didn’t get the call right because I don’t want to get fined by the league. But definitely tough.”

(From: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/79178102.html)

The ref felt that Jennings was not fully vertical when the ball was knocked loose, and as I recall from the replay, he may have been correct in that assessment. Jennings caught the ball and was immediately hit by Tillman, causing him to stumble forward, rather than take two upright steps. Tillman knocked the ball loose while he was still stumbling and in the field of play. The ball ended up out of bounds, however.

Jarlsberg also posted these links here :
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d812adbab/Official-Review-Week-1 http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d8133c7c5/Official-Review-Week-4

NFL VP of Officiating Mike Pereira gives a very thorough explanation (and the actual language!) of the “going to the ground” rule.

This is going from memory, though. I cannot find a video of the play online. If anyone has it, I’d like to see it again. OTOH, I imagine it will be one of the plays reviewed this week on NFL Official Review – I’ll look again on Thursday or Friday to see if it’s available in that way, and to see what Mike Pereira has to say about the call.

"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root

by Clutch16 on Dec 14, 2009 8:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Jennings never went to the ground

I mean, any receiver running at full speed and making a catch, isn’t fully vertical. So I still don’t buy it (not necessarily arguing with you). My interpretation of the spirit of the rule is 2 feet + possession = catch at that moment, now that they have done away with the “football like move” clause. If you fall making the catch, are hit and tackled, etc., then you get into the G2G clause. I’m still waiting for that phone call from the Ref’s union to tell me to suit up for a game, though.

I hope they do review the play this week on the NFL Official Review. I don’t have any video links but my memory is that he caught it nearly in stride, he did lean over because he was catching and had Tillman on his back, but at no point looked like he was falling to the ground. Then again, if the ruling is based on nuances that small, I’m not sure why that’s reviewable as it’s clearly a judgement call (hence our discussion), and judgement calls are supposed to be, by definition, non reviewable…

by Danwood on Dec 14, 2009 9:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I can see where you're coming from on him not being fully upright in any circumstance

From Pereira’s comments on the rule, though, it sounds like Tillman being all over him is what made the refs look at it under the G2G rule. Not saying it’s right or that I’m fully convinced, but I’m a lot more open to that interpretation than I was when I first saw the play and the replay.

Obviously, MM and company will talk to the NFL about it this week. If the discussions around here are any indication of the attitude of Packer fans in general, I’m sure one reporter or another will keep following up on it. Hopefully, we’ll get more info as the week goes on.

"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root

by Clutch16 on Dec 14, 2009 9:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

My interpretation of the spirit of the rule is 2 feet + possession = catch at that moment

yes, but the key is possession must be firm control for more than a split second, the ball is knocked loose within a split-second after the 2nd foot is down, thereby the firm control part is missing.

by Jarlsberg on Dec 15, 2009 8:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Again…didn’t see the play but if the play doesn’t go to the ground, the rule about going to the ground doesn’t apply. PERIOD.

by TrevorR on Dec 14, 2009 11:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

From what I saw I would think that the play going to the ground shouldn’t be applied but I did watch the game on my computer haha. So I didn’t exactly have a great view of it. He definitely had 2 feet down and possession of the ball, and I always thought that as soon as you have possession of the ball across the goaline, it’s a TD. So I guess I assumed Jennings falling to the ground wasn’t even applicable, but I have heard this year about the new rule dealing with the ground being able to cause an incompletion.

Haha I don’t know, I’m too lazy to look at the exact rules but that’s what I had thought when the play originally happened. Regardless, we won the game, and it seems kind of silly that we’ve been arguing over whether it should have been a TD or not.

by packallday555 on Dec 14, 2009 11:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think it's that silly

It’s the second or third time this year that a play like this has had a large impact on the game. If the Packers didn’t have Cutler playing for them the game might’ve ended 14-13. Plus, isn’t this why God created Monday through Saturday, to talk about the prior week’s game/upcoming game? ;)

by Danwood on Dec 15, 2009 6:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Haha true

It’s just different people interpret different things in different ways. Haha lots of differents in that sentence! For example, I don’t think going to the ground should have had any effect on this play. The second a Rb or any other play for the matter puts the ball across the goaline it’s a TD. No matter what. Obviously this differs when a pass is caught in the endzone because you have to have 2 feet down for a pass to be considered a completion, but too me, Jennings had 2 feet down and possession of the ball. So for me, I would think the second Jennings second foot comes down it’s a TD, no matter what.

by packallday555 on Dec 15, 2009 6:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

endzone ?

The ball only needs to be inside the end zone with possession for a nano second and it’s a TD

this is not true what so ever. (sorry) there is however a big difference between runningplays and passing plays for this matter.
to have a compelted catch anywhere, the receiver must possess the ball and have both feet (or a bodypart other than his hands) on the ground inbounds. the player must maintain possession (or re-establish it before the ball hits the ground, or is OOB) if he’s going to the ground. To get possession, the player must firmly control the ball, he must be able to make a “football move”, so to put it a bit easier, the player must control the ball for a second or so.
A passing play ends in the same instand as the catch is completed (and in the same instant it turns into a runningplay) if the pass is completed in the opponents endzone, the play is over at that moment.
On a runningplay, the ball doesn’t actually need to be “in” the endzone at all, it’s enough that the forwardmost part of the ball touched the plane of the goalline.

by Jarlsberg on Dec 15, 2009 9:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the player must maintain possession (or re-establish it before the ball hits the ground, or is OOB) if he’s going to the ground.

This is a new rule as of this year correct?

To get possession, the player must firmly control the ball, he must be able to make a "football move", so to put it a bit easier, the player must control the ball for a second or so.

The “football move” rule no longer applies, or at least that’s what I’ve heard from numerous analysts. From what I heard yesterday during the 49ers game, as soon as the player has 2 feet down he is considered to have possession of the ball.

by packallday555 on Dec 15, 2009 6:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Correct, the Football move has been out for at least a couple of seasons now

by Danwood on Dec 15, 2009 7:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No, the rule about a player haveing to maintain possession (or re-establish…) is not a new rule, don’t remember excactly what year it was introduced, but it’s been that way for quite a few years.

The “football move” rule still applies, but the wording “football move” has not been used by analysts for a few years, I’m not sure what excact words are in the NFL rulebook, but the priciple applies, it has also drifted more into the recievere possessing/controling the ball for a period of time (a second or so (by judgement of course)) as opposed to actually making a move after the catch.
Don’t believe what you hear from the announcers, their knowledge of the rules is very basic.
Just haveing controll of the ball and two feet (or a bodypart) down is not enough to establish possession, if the ball is knocked loose instantly either by an opponent or by the receiver going to the ground (with or without contact). the receiver must maintain control after any part of him touches the ground.
I think some of this confusion might come from the fact that, if the ball is caught (and possession is maintained) the ball is dead the instant a receiver has both feet down in the endzone (in regards to PF/late hit)

the best way to learn the NFL rules, is by watching the Official review on NFL total access (or NFL.com) or by paying attention to the announcements made by the Ref after reviews on the field (most of them try to explain in detail)

by Jarlsberg on Dec 16, 2009 12:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"Football move" requirement was removed from the rules and replaced by the going to the ground requirement.

It was not a catch, but your explanation is not correct as to why.

I’ll do a fan post with the explanation.

Some people say the glass is half empty, some say half full. I say, are you going to drink that?

by BleedsbluinMI on Dec 16, 2009 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

5 wins in a row following a real tough loss to the Bucs which left us with a record of 4-4,

I think McCarthy truly does deserve some credit for this turn around, he was blasted following the loss to the Bucs (me included). This team has done a 180 from that point in the season and for that I applaud Mike McCarthy

Green and Gold / Black and White

by OznCoop on Dec 14, 2009 8:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I absolutely agree.

Also, did you see that graphic about the Packer’s average ages? The youngest team in the NFL for 3 of the last 4 years, and the second youngest the other year. Now, if that continues, maybe that isn’t so good. But, I think it shows they have been successful finding good young talent. My hats off to MM, TT, and Capers for what is going on.

I like these two stats from yesterday: 4 penalties for 30 yds, that is quite an improvement. Also, Grant 20 rushes for 137 yards, 2 TDs. It was said elsewhere that he didn’t much beyond the big one. I disagree, I thought he ran well through a well blocked line most of the day. He did get stuffed a few times, but also had three runs of 7 or more yards, not including the big one. Also, taking out the big one, he still averaged 4 yards per carry. I don’t think he gets enough credit for his workhorse abilities as he again went over 1000 yds for the season.

Some people say the glass is half empty, some say half full. I say, are you going to drink that?

by BleedsbluinMI on Dec 14, 2009 8:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

reducing penalties

this will be a key element against Pittsburgh and Arizona, and throughout the playoffs. I can overlook OL holdings if they are done CLEARLY to protect Rodgers, or DB penalties to save TDs, but that is it.

by Squatbulk on Dec 14, 2009 10:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The play in which Chris Williams tried taking off Clay Matthews' head

May have been the play you mentioned, but I seem to remember it being a 15-yard penalty. In which case, it might have been this play:

(5:25) 6-J.Cutler pass short right to 22-M.Forte to GB 49 for 16 yards (36-N.Collins). PENALTY on CHI-74-C.Williams, Personal Foul, 15 yards, enforced at CHI 35 – No Play.

Bound for New York City: January 6-9! Can't wait!

by Vermont Cubs Fan on Dec 14, 2009 10:10 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

That play should have been in block quotes.

Bound for New York City: January 6-9! Can't wait!

by Vermont Cubs Fan on Dec 14, 2009 10:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I said it after in yesterday's post game thread

Nick Barnett is playing the best football of his career. I just filled out another pro bowl ballot and picked Patrick Willis and Nick Barnett as my inside linebackers. I suggest all of you do the same.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Dec 14, 2009 2:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Da Bears still suck, Da Bears still suck...

Gotta Love that song!

by ajgraham on Dec 14, 2009 4:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Hey guys,

Clutch16 sent these links to me. What do you think of the following for victory signs for future games? I would still celebrate Green Bay scores in the same way that I do now, this would only be used for Packers victories.

Any comments/suggestions?