Comments on: Still absorbing the awesomeness of the Super Bowl

By: Susannah Tuttle

Susannah Tuttle — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:26:45 +0000

Not sure if any of you guys on this board got a chance to see how adorable Clay was on Ellen

By: Vincent Almazar

Vincent Almazar — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 19:55:36 +0000

Hey guys, check out this crazy photo shoot Clay did with Five Four. He’s even wearing one of their Five Four Green Bay Super Bowl Shirts.

http://www.fivefourclothing.com/post/february-blog-2011/studio_five_four_presents_the_five_four_jump

By: awhayes

awhayes — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:25:07 +0000

Christo – I think you ask a great question here. While the Pack actually was 3-1 with Finley in the line-up (then they lost 2 in a row after his injury), I do agree with you that the offense was not in a very good rhythm when he was playing. (Of course the offense really did have rhythm problems all year…) I think there may be several reasons why our offense looked out of sync when Finley was playing early in the year: Finley’s size and running ability might have cramped the routes of our WRs; Rodgers/MM were too eager to get him the ball (because of the match-up issues he causes); our other playmakers simply weren’t playing that well (Jennings). But I think the main reason why the offense looked off was because of Grant’s injury. I think when Grant went down in the first game, McCarthy essentially had to rework his whole game plan for the year (or at least McCarthy THOUGHT he had to do this), because McCarthy suddenly had no faith in his running game. (If you had multiple beers with McCarthy, he’d eventually admit this.)

In the end, I think McCarthy and Rodgers would have eventually figured stuff out and Finley would have helped raise our offense to an elite level (up from the very good level it operated at all year). And next year, I think there is real potential for this offense to be virtually unstoppable with Finley (and especially Grant and Starks) back. As long as the O-Line can be even mediocre, this offense should really cause problems for opposing defenses.

By: Joe P.E.

Joe P.E. — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 05:20:20 +0000

I just spent the last few hours (random Tuesday night) watching the game again…still puts a big smile on my face and a hop in my step!

I think, if anything, FInley is going to give us an insane amount of depth next season. The team adjusted well to playing without him and adding him back to the mix will only–like DaveK wrote–cause ‘headaches’ for defenses. It was hard enough for teams to defend our receivers this year…it’s only going to be harder next year.

By: Tweets that mention Still absorbing the awesomeness of the Super Bowl « packergeeks -- Topsy.com

Wed, 16 Feb 2011 04:15:41 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Green Bay Packers, ctpaps18. ctpaps18 said: Well said –> http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/still-absorbing-the-awesomeness-of-the-super-bowl/ [...]

By: DaveK

DaveK — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 23:33:01 +0000

Finley causes headaches for defenses because MM can essentially use him as a WR or a TE. They play coverage you run. They stack the run you put him out wide on a route and he runs better then any LB or S and he physically dominates any CB. I would agree that maybe MM got too enamored with that mis-match each week and ran his offense on how the defense was trying to deal with Finley. Lesson learned I would hope. Let’s hope he uses Finley next season to augment what they built this year on offense instead of trying to run everything off what Finley brings to the table. I think MM was a superb play caller the 2nd half of the season. I’ll trust him to find a way to use Finley, Jennings, Grant, etc…

By: 56coop

56coop — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 23:21:01 +0000

Christo– I think maybe Finley was targeted a little too much during the first 5 games when others were open. I think he was usually who Aaron was looking for. I think I even remember it being mentioned here early in the season. I think after this year that will not be a problem next year. If Finley can stay healthy he should be a great assett

By: christo

christo — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 20:28:09 +0000

I hear you Dave in Tucson… but remember in the preseason when they said that this offense would simply be unstoppable? Well, in the first few games, 26.5 pts per game aside, they never really lived up to the hype, in my humble opinion. Perhaps some of those points were also attributable to haviing Grant in the backfield ( i know, i know, he’s no LT)… my other major point is that while Finley was in, Jennings was essentially forgotten: this is not how you build a dynasty… by having an offense that only utilizes SOME of your players… MM has to figure out how to use ALL of his weapons AND keep everybody happy: NO SMALL TASK – especially since running the ball will be given more of a priority next year, there will be many WRs running routes and not catching any balls…

By: Dave in Tucson

Dave in Tucson — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 20:20:39 +0000

@christo, you’ve got some work to do to make the case the Packers were better off without Finley:

Finley went out on the first drive of week 5. The first four games, the Packers averaged 26.5 points per game. The last twelve, they averaged 23.5 ppg.

I’m not sure what you mean by “[the offense] couldn’t establish any rhythm”, but if it doesn’t result in points on the board, it doesn’t really matter.

D∈T

By: christo

christo — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:22:54 +0000

Yes, like all of you, I’m still absorbing the experience, but part and parcel of this experience are my continual thoughts about Finley: as crazy as it sounds, I think it was easier to win the big game WITHOUT him, than with him.

While he was still playing, the offense had so many threats that Jennings was not getting the ball…. and they couldn’t establish any rhythm. It was only after JF was out that they started to rev their motor.

Is he going to want the ball that much more because he’s been out for a season? How is the team going to deal with him if he gets frustrated with limited catches?

After hearing from almost everyone who writes about football what a difference maker he is, I would hate to lose him.

Please Mr Packer Geek, could you begin a new discussion thread on Finley as I would keenly like to hear what everyone’s thoughts are on Jermichael, “the best tight end in the NFL”, according to Aaron Rodgers, as he sat down with the NFL network crew after the game. In my eyes, I took this as AR saying: Please stay with us, you’re awesome, we need you!