Response to a friend:
Of course it’s much better to have a good running game than not to have one, but the Packers didn’t need one to be 15-1. The Patriots didn’t need one to be 16-0. Dallas was great until their passing game stumbled. Their running game continued to be very good, but it didn’t matter. You think the Packers won more convincingly in the second half of the season.? They beat the Giants in game 2, something like 35-13, without running. They would have won those games in the second half without a running game if they passed intelligently. Favre was 20 of 21 in the first half of the first bear game (pre-Grant), then they started running. Their offense was unstoppable in the first half of that game, although they stopped themselves by fumbling.
Manning did not outplay Favre. Manning completed half of his passes, had a passing rating half of Favre’s at halftime, and didn’t do much. He threw very high-percentage passes against a stupid press coverage that’s easy to beat. He didn’t win the game, the Packers’ stupid strategies lost it. Burress didn’t school Al Harris. Everyone said Harris played terribly. I think he played very well. When you consider he started one yard off Burress and was very close to him on almost every play, that’s incredible coverage. I don’t know of any other CB who would have been so close. It’s not his fault he was put in a no-win position. It’s impossible to cover playing that coverage, and he did a fantastic job of staying close. Had they backed him off 2 more yards, he would have dominated Burress.
Favre does not play miserably in cold weather. I look at the second bear game as a fluke, as it’s the only time in his career he didn’t want to play. No excuses for that, but the hurricane winds were more of a factor than the cold. Let’s review Favre’s performance. He had a QB rating of over 100 in the first half. First play, 12-yard pass and a first down. Second play, 11-yard pass and a first down. Third play, run for 2 and punt. The Driver pass was on first down. As I’ve told you from the beginning, the only way to make Favre play below his capabilities is for his own coaches to frustrate him. They only had 10 points in the first half, so he felt he had to try to do more. They only had 10 points due to all the running. In the second half, the pass plays were 20 yards or more, which is extremely hard when it’s windy and your hand is numb. Manning wasn’t throwing downfield all game. Had the playcalling been slants and high-percentage short and medium passes, Favre would have looked great. You can’t hold the playcalling against him, as this handcuffs him. This has been the problem with him for most of his career. I’d love to see Brady and Peyton Manning deal with the offensive coordinators he’s had to deal with. Favre would be unbelievable if he played for the Colts or Patriots, as they get it. Why do you say Favre couldn’t make his living off the short passes? How many slants and 7- to 10-yard passes did he throw to receivers? I played football outside for 15 minutes at halftime of the first game, and my hands were numb. How can the offensive gameplan be to throw deeper, as it was not only cold, but there was some wind.
The Packers had 4 lucky victories this year? If you want to say they had 4 lucky victories, they were then 11-5 instead of 15-1. If you’re going to belittle victories that you consider lucky, you surely have to give them victories that the refs stole. Is the Redskin game one of the 4? This is the game the league admitted stealing 2 TD passes from Favre. You can’t compare this very talented team with the ’01 bears, who had very little talent. We didn’t lose to the bears twice, just once, and it was due to hurricane conditions. On a regular day, the Packers win handily. The bears won in ’01 by teams blowing 2- and 3-TD leads late, prompting Terrell Owens to accuse his coach of purposely losing. The bears lost to the Eagles, because the Eagles were much better. The Packers lost to the Giants, even though the Packers were much better, because of idiotic coaching that any layman would have adjusted to in the first quarter, and that McCarthy never adjusted to. Normally, I’m the only one saying these things, but it’s gratifying that others have realized a part of this and he’s coming under some fire. I guarantee you that if the Packers backed off the press coverage in the first quarter and threw high-percentage passes, they would have won by at least 3 touchdowns.
You want to talk about lucky? The Giants fumbled 5 times, and recovered 4. Any one of those recovered by the Packers could have changed the outcome, as they fumbled at the end of regulation, they fumbled at the 1, etc.
The Giants’ running game was effective late, although their yards/carry wasn’t good, because, as I said during the first quarter, the Packers’ press coverage would lead to a large imbalance in time of possession, and the Packer defense would tire later in the game. This was obvious early, but not to McCarthy.
Yes, the Giants helped the Packers with an unsportsmanlike penalty. The Giants got their first TD on a ridiculous roughing the QB penalty, so that evened out.
Why is it lucky for the Packers that McQuarters fumbled the interception, but it’s not lucky for the Giants that McCarthy called a long pass to the sideline in overtime, leading to the interception and the win. Luck isn’t only via the players, but also the coaches. That’s why I tell you that when you say the Eagle game was a lucky Packer win due to the Eagle fumble at the end, I tell you the Eagles were lucky to be in the game and only were because McCarthy decided to run all game. The next three weeks they passed all game, and the Packers scored a lot of points. The Packers would have beaten the Eagles easily with a smarter gameplan.
Yes, Favre’s interception to McQuarters was a bad decision. However, had they run the ball and punted, it would have been the same result. Why can Brady throw 3 interceptions, 2 of which were his fault, in far better conditions, but he’s okay? Favre throws 2 and he’s a gunslinger and terrible. An interception is an interception. And, although I think I’m the only person in the world who believes this, a punt is also a turnover. I don’t know why people don’t agree with this. His bad-decision pass was well downfield, and had almost the same effect as a punt. I’m not saying he should have thrown the ball, but perhaps he thought he saw something. Were Brady’s interceptions any better? Brady might not have looked like he was forcing it, but an interception is still throwing a ball where you shouldn’t have in most cases.