Packers fans deserve butter!

As a reader of that paper for years, I stopped reading their dribble mid season (after, I might add, discovering this site through a mention from Greg Bedard). There is more than enough content in the Milwaukee paper and herin for any fan. The GBPG seems to never include real content.

I almost edited my above post by adding "except for Tom P".

Aaron I see the point your making. But i dont really see it as a disservice to Green Bay fans that the editor is calling out the officials. I think it adds more clout to the argument. Did the Packers struggle to stop the Cards...without question. But take away two Larry Fitzgerald touchdowns that were both clear offensive pass interference and the debacle that was the last play in OT... and its a completely different game.

As much as the Packers failed the refs failed more. Basically what I'm saying is that I dont think MV is coming at it as a fan. There were at least 4 or 5 no-calls, that seriously affected the outcome of the game. Just because he can't change the outcome of the game doesn't mean he shouldn't report on it. Both a fan and unbiased journalist can notice that can't they?

I'd add Pete D's scouting reports. He's not the scholar that Bob McGinn is, but he gives a great overview of the next opponent.

This is almost as bad as Rex Ryan crying over the DPOTY award.

Packnic's right. It's one thing if these calls didn't affect the outcome of the game. But these calls were material and have a direct result on the score. However, this won't haunt fans for years. See Jerry Rice's fumble in '98. Does anyone honestly still care about this?

So, I'm always one to take the bad calls when they come figuring that they even out over time and it's not going to change the outcome of the game, but I'm becoming of two minds about it.

The argument of "or defense didn't deserve to win that game", while true, raises the question, did Arizona's defense deserve to win any more than ours? The truth is we played them even through regulation, warts and all from both sides. The fact that our D stunk it up really holds no bearing on whether the refs should get the calls right or not. To me, these missed calls (the last play and the missed blow to the head two plays before) are no better than the Jerry Rice "non"-fumble. That play today would obviously be overturned because of improvements made to the system. I think the refs need to own up to their missed calls and find ways to improve the system, not give some BS "judgement call" explanation.

Sorry, just had to get that out.

If we as fans and the Packer Organization focus on bad calls by the refs we will never see the promise land again. Refs, weather, and unlucky bounces are all part of the game. War is hell. That last play was A-rod going back to what got our offense in trouble when we were 4-4. We go for a long pass play (incomplete) setting up a 2nd and long. A-rod's pocket presence and reading the blitz bit him in the ass again. Is it somewhat fitting that our season ended in a sack/fumble/INT. I hope TT takes that play to heart this off season.

When MM won the coin flip, he should have taken a deep breath and realized he wasn't in a shot out anymore and for the first time in the game the time clock was not working against him. Grant was well rested because the Pack played catch up all game. Yet MM continues the long pass plays in overtime, going back to the weakest part of our offense, pass protection. I think we win the game if we went to our short pass/run game with plenty of time on the clock.

Aaron, I know what you're saying (and this just proves whoever brought up Vandermause last night to get you going is truly funny...Wilde I think?)but I will say someone, not in this fashion perhaps, needs to sound the drumbeat on the crappy officiating (and it seems to be happening). Not because it would have turned the Pack's defeat into a victory, but because I've seen lots of crappy officiating this year and it's going to cost some deserving team a victory at some point. See Phil Luckett's famous coin toss for an example. If the Vikings win because of bad calls I will just be sick.

Complaining about penalties after getting behind the way we did is loser talk and is only a distraction from the real problems that need to be addressed. Its the nature of the game - slow each play and you will find one somewhere (e.g. the Cards were complaining that the fumbled punt recovery never had controlled possession before going out of bounds).
----
Case in point- reversed. I watched a whole segment in a review that showed that Jerry Kramer (64) was actually 'offside' in the Bart Starr sneak TD at the end of the ice bowl!! So I guess we should not have won that game?? .... Hogwash!
----
http://www.funtrivia.com/en/subtopics/Ice-Bowl-Packers-21-Cowboys-17-200...
----

MV is a hack. I never read his crap until it's quoted elsewhere.

I wonder if the NFL would ever consider having a ref that isn't stationed on the field, but rather manning certain video feeds from the booth. They would have the ability to throw flags (somehow) and make calls about catches, ball placement, etc. I'm sure there would be some growing pains and it could easily be overdone, but it's an intriguing idea (at least to me).
-----
btw - This isn't a "we got hosed and should have won" comment, just a discussion point.

I really was just teasing you about the "ma'am", but it was a bit disconcerting.

You said what I was trying to say, but said poorly - wider context. I agree that officiating is always going to have flaws. And Jerry Kramer said in Instant Replay that he thought he was offsides in the Ice Bowl. I guess more so than a victory being in question, officiating is important to prevent injuries.

The wise Holly said it best - that helmet to helmet at the end of the game really bothered me and should have been called. We're going to lose our quarterback if some of this stuff (roughing the passer) doesn't start getting called and that worries me a lot. Not to mention other good people and great players getting hurt.

Aaron I agree guys have to make plays, but long passing plays are a gamble. Overtime play calling is a different game mindset, you score you win. Momentum was on our side so why take risks. With that said I loved the play calling MM made to put us even in the position to win the game. That was MM's best coaching performance, despite the loss. I just think thats an experince MM can look back on and handle differently.

Does it make it right just because it happens for and against everybody though? Sure, I take it when the call goes our way, but I'd actually rather that all (or at least more) calls were right. I'd rather win a game because we're a better team instead of what the ref missed.

Aaron...not so sure I mind the article on the bad calls. After all the title wasn't, "Why the Pack Lost." The guy mighty be a hack (I don't read his stuff), but here he was writing about the officiating. It was a contributing factor in the loss, but it was down the list a bit in my opinion.

BTW, I never like it when someone says IMHO, because there is usually little humility in spouting an opinion. Especially mine because I'm always right.

Bottom line on this issue for me is that although the calls were wrong, you still can't pin the loss on that last no-call since we gave up 45 pts in regulation time and still had a shot in OT solely because the Cards kicker missed a gimme. Overall, no injustice was done IMO but it is a sad commentary on the state of officiating in the NFL. I agree with the comments above that officiating this season seemed particularly suspect. Maybe it's because the players are getting so much bigger, faster, and stronger, and the refs can't keep up. The league needs to look at the crew that officiated Sunday's game, or at least certain members of that crew, to see what the problem was. Why does Kurt Warner get an interference call when two Cardinals offensive linemen pull Jenkins down into Warner, yet Rodgers gets no call on a helmet-to-helmet hit and a grab of his facemask? Why does Fitzgerald get to plow right over Woodson, twice, with no call? In the age of Tim Donaghy, no official is above suspicion in my view. And if the NFL wants to protect the integrity of its game in a way that the NBA has not, it had better keep a close eye on the quality of the officiating. I don't mean to suggest that the game was rigged or that the refs are on the take but the NFL has a premier product in part because it has managed itself far better than the NBA (Donaghy, players fighting spectators, guns in the locker room) or MLB (steroids). If the yellow flags are thrown to give certain players preferential treatment, it at least gives the appearance of something fishy. And I don't buy the argument that "it's always been that way" or that in time, Rodgers too will become a "protected" player, so Packer fans and fans of pro football should just accept it the way it is. Technology now gives us an opportunity to have a more fairly and consistently officiated game. The NFL should act on it and use the Pack-Cards game as an example of how technology can make NFL football an even better product.

"Technology" doesn't have to mean going to the covered booth. If done correctly there are improvements that could be made that wouldn't slow down the game.

I like McCarthy's comments today:

* On no-facemask call at end of game: "I think anytime you're sitting around waiting on calls to win football games you're in the mode of excuses." Only things look for are command of game, communication on sideline -- felt were good in both areas. Only penalties get upset about are player safety. Number of helmet-to-helmet calls to Rodgers over course of year. Felt officials let them play. "You don't want it to come down to an officiating call. ... I'm not going to sit here and try to discredit Arizona's victory by no means." Whether officials admit they're wrong or say they're right, it doesn't change the outcome.

Dave,

I like technology too, but I don't know if I like taking too much of the human element out of the game. I would much prefer to see the ball tracked so that they can easily tell if it crossed the 1st down line or goal line, or where it went out of bounds on punts. I think that would be much more useful, and probably pretty easy with today's technology.

I find it humorous and ironic that the fans of the team that are most upset about uncalled penalties are the fans of the most penalized team in the NFL! It might be better for us if the commissioner enacted low density cameras and used 1 less Ref!!! :>)
----

I just don't see how it's possible to put another ref on the field to watch the ball. How is he going to do that so that he is in a proper position and not get in the way? We've got HD cameras on wires zooming all over the place for TV coverage. Put a couple of guys in a booth in charge of a camera to focus on whatever aspect of the game is delegated to them, with a radio connection directly to a ref on the side of the field who can toss a flag if instructed. I agree, Aaron, you don't want to slow the game down too much. But I think that cameras can be used much more efficiently than they are now. The key is to monitor in real-time and not solely for "review" once a play is dead.

I would say (and not with pride) our team earned every stinking penalty they got. It's not the ones that are called that usually bother me, those can and should be dealt with by improved skills, it's the missed ones. I agree with whoever said above it really is about overall better officiating, not for or against the Packers.

Vandermause clarified in his chat today and (I'm summarizing) said the Packers had the opportunities to make the plays and you can't blame the loss on officiating. Coaches and Players didn't, they had plenty of chances to make plays. He was still critical of the missed calls but not saying it cost the Packers a 'W'.

I pretty much gave up on Vandermause when he got into a public pissing match with Sal Paolantonio over Sal's criticism of Brett Favre a few years ago...remember that?

Mike Vandermause is as big a Packers fan as we all we are.

"“Technology now gives us an opportunity to have a more fairly and consistently officiated game” – it also gives us the opportunity to have games go on for 4 to 5 hours if we continually stop the flow of the game."

GREAT!!! I'll take a 4.5 hour game. E-V-E-R-Y-T-I-M-E! If it means my team is in New Orleans next Saturday or at least had a shot to get there.

Time to cut out the bullshit and make everything reviewable.

I'm actually not stewing over the missed call (more the missed walk off). But, seeing that helmet to helmet PF not called on the Colledge hold is just Bullshit. There is a guy whose job it is to be WATCHING THE QUARTERBACK, and to miss 2 PF's in a matter of just over 1 minute... BAFFLING.

But if it takes an extra half hour for a football game to be played, SO BE IT. As long as everyone walks away knowing it was decided by the two teams, and the best team won... Did anybody come away feeling that Sun? I didn't.

GBP 4 LIFE

And can you really blame Vandermause??? The Packers are pretty awesome.

GBP 4 LIFE

After three days of kicking the dog and calling for Arizona to be given back to Mexico, I do have to agree with TT on this one. There were other reasons for the GB defeat. 45 of them!
_____
I just hope that lesson were learned and they'll be back next year with a vengance.
_____
Lesson 1: there is a dire need for backup players in the D backfield of higher quality than are there now.
_____
Lesson 2: The O line still needs stabilization. The heart of the line is still the Sherman guys, By definition that means they're getting old. Sitton looks good and will probably be a contributor in the future. Lang has shown potential but he is a rookie and did not play enough to get a complete evaluation. The rest, including Colledge, are not much.
_____
Lesson 3: MM needs to develop more patience. A run or two in OT might have taken some of the heat off Rodgers. The first missed pass opened the door for full blitz defense by the Cards. Result holding, a 13 yard gain (could have been a 1st down sans penalty) and the PLAY.
_____
Lesson 4: If TT and MM address the few problems in the off season, I can't wait til next year.

Refs defend their non-call:
--
http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/01/13/perera-incidental-facemask-in-cards-pack...

---

I've ridden Vandermause for years. The GBPG has had a history over the last 30 years or so of being rather petty and agenda-driven. Havel led the charge to essentially smear Sterling Sharpe during his playing days. Now Vandermause has taken a very pro-Packer administration stance, not necessarily a pro-Packer stance.

I rip on him because his biases are so blatant and so sincere. At least if you're listening to Rome or Doyel or Jemele Hill, you KNOW they're just trying to piss you off to get viewership. Vandermause seems to really take himself seriously.

There is a reason for the existense of scores of fan blogs, and that is to publish commentary like the Vandermause article. Do I agree with it? Partly. Do I think it should have been published in a newspaper? No. There is a time and a place for everything. The bloggers need to do their job, and the journalists need to do theirs.

Its great to be back by the way! Final exams are getting underway and I will be a regular reader again at the end of the week. My blog just might come back too... I can't wait!