Texas Vike wrote: ↑Fri Nov 06, 2020 5:20 pm
Our secondary was decimated; he would have picked us apart even worse than he usually does. Our whole D looked decent because they knew passes beyond 20 yards would be nearly impossible given the conditions.
I don't know if I agree with that.
Rodgers hit some deep balls and had a few more on target that didn't land. He nearly hit Adams on a deep route where Kendricks might have affected it at the end, nearly hit a deep throw over Harrison Smith for a TD that Smith got back just in time to break up, and did hit on a nice deep ball to a wide open TE on what might have been a blown coverage.
I could agree with what you're saying if there was any evidence those attempts were affected significantly by the wind, but none of them seemed to be unless Rodgers somehow found a way to compensate for it. If he did, he's even better than I thought he was.
As for Cousins and the Vikings not passing, that's what they've always done when the running game is getting it done. Why pass if you don't have to? I don't think that is an indictment of Cousins as much as it it's a reflection of taking the path of least resistance. If running and short passes are working and you're moving the chains and scoring with relatively low risk, why go to the air and possibly higher risk plays?
I just don't think the weather explains what we saw. Rodgers threw plenty and his accuracy didn't seem way off. He did seem more hesitant than the first game, though, almost as if what he was seeing wasn't what he expected to see and he wasn't sure what to do with what he saw. He also didn't look super comfortable in the pocket.
Scroll down to comparison of QB stats. Rodgers was 27/41, and he only attempted 6 passes over 20 yards and completed a meager 2 of them. I think it goes without saying, that's not normal for Rodgers.
His postgame interview is telling too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYYhhOgqxk0
10:30 Wind was the top 3 windiest he's ever played in Lambeau. "Definitely had an effect on throwing the ball".
5:35 The wind changed direction." We [GB] took the wind in the 4th but ended up kinda going against the wind"
We won because we were the better team that day. Giving more credit the environment is weak af. Packers could have called a different game plan just like the Vikings did. Instead of giving credit to the wind how about giving full credit to Cook, the defense, and the play calling.
I swear we finally win a game against a rival during this ugly season and people still try to find a way to kill the vibe.
Dmizzle0 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 07, 2020 4:09 pm
Giving more credit the environment is weak af.
What an odd thing to say. Would you say that as a tornado picks you and your house off the ground? Or as a hurricane swept up your entire city? 30-40 MPH winds is no joke and by both objective and subjective measures it is abundantly clear that it was THE major influence on how the game was played. See my last post's stats and Rodger's comments.
It was the perfect conditions for us to pull off a MAJOR upset, as it covered up our deep deficiencies in the secondary, kept their strengths in check (Rodgers couldn't throw beyond 20 yards), and allowed our O to focus on our true star (Cook) and took pressure off our overpaid, nervous Nelly of a QB.
Dmizzle0 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 07, 2020 4:09 pmI swear we finally win a game against a rival during this ugly season and people still try to find a way to kill the vibe.
Killing the vibe is not my intention at all. If you see my first post in this thread, I think that's evident. It was an exciting game and it was super clear to me that our team has not given up on this season. That's really heartening. Kendricks has become my favorite player, due to his determination and perseverance. We dealt with the conditions better and some of our unsung DL had great games. That was fun to watch.
