[Bob Loblaw]

Just some thoughts on the game. These are different teams then they were 15 weeks ago so take it for what its worth

Tommie Harris didn't play and while having a disappointing year he has picked up 3 sacks in the last 2 games which is 6 times as many as he had all season prior. Safety Chris Harris also missed a quarter or so. Not sure about Packer injuries. I know Starks didn't play.

Some key plays...

Bears elected not to tie the game and went for it on 4th and goal at the 1 and failed.

Hester has a big return right before the half that leads to a Bears TD completely changing all the momentum heading into the locker room. Hester then returns one for a TD giving the Bears the lead in the 4th quarter. My guess is McCarthy won't make the mistake of punting to Hester again.

Rodgers somehow dodges 4 Bears and miraculously escapes a sack on 3rd down. He completed the pass and this play leads to a FG rather than what would have been a punt. 99 times out of 100 Rodgers is sacked there.

Bears possibly could have won by 7. It was 3rd and goal at the 1 with less than a minute left and they were stuffed. Normally I wouldn't bring up a play in which the defense did its job but I only bring it up this time because GB had no timeouts and everyone in the stadium knew they would run the ball and kick the FG if they had to. Had GB had to think about the passing game at all maybe the Bears score a TD.

I can't believe how many time I read the Bears were lucky to win this game because of penalties. I just don't think that's true at all. NFL Network cut out some of the game but from I just watched the Bears deserved to win that game and almost all the penalties the Bears and their crowd either forced or they had little to no impact on the game.

#1 Woodson Pass Interference - Obvious call. Assuming Hester catches the ball the penalty probably saved the Packers a few yards after catch. Bears forced this penalty.

#2 Colledge Holding - Obvious call as he basically tackled the DL but it likely had no impact on the play as Rodgers got rid of the ball quickly. It was a momentum killing penalty that lead to a FG when it looked like they were heading in for a TD. Dumb penalty.

#3 Don't know what this penalty was because they didn't show it but it was a 5 yard penalty on 1st down. It had no impact as the Packers picked up a 1st down 2 plays later.

#4 Sitton Holding - Sitton was beat. The holding more than likely saved a sack. Bears forced this one.

#5 Tauscher Holding - This one took a TD off the board but Peppers had him beat and he clearly held him on what would likely have been a sack. Bears forced this one.

#6 False Start - Meaningless penalty that cost them nothing as they were inside the 1 yard line.

#7 False Start - Another meaningless penalty as it came right after the meaningless penalty I have listed at #6.

#8 5 yard penalty on 3rd and 1 they didn't show. Not sure what happened but I'm guessing false start. At this point I've got to chalk it up to the Bears crowd as this would have made it the 3rd false start penalty in 3 downs. The crowd was extremely loud on this entire Packer series.

#9 Another 5 yard penalty they didn't show. With the crowd still going nuts I'm guessing it was another false start. This had no impact as the Packers picked up a 1st down the next play.

#10 Roughing the Passer on Matthews. This one takes an INT away from the Packers but it was an easy call and had a direct impact on the play as Matthews' head was planted in Cutlers grill as he was throwing the ball.

#11 Unnecessary Roughness on Collins - Extremely dumb penalty that cost them 15 yards on a drive that lead to the tying FG. However it was 1st down and Bears were already on the Packers side of the field and drove with ease on that drive before stalling inside the 10. There's a good chance Bears tie it up without the penalty but it was still a dumb penalty that could have had impacted the game.

#12 Intentional Grounding - Briggs and Urlacher cause a fumble on the next play but who knows if the the play call is the same had grounding not been called. This was a bad penalty as Rodgers wasn't in much danger and he didn't have to throw it away like he did.

#13 Pass interference - Catch is made anyway and the penalty is declined

#14 Pass interference on Burnett - This takes an INT off the board but again had a direct impact on the play. They showed a couple interviews with Packers players complaining about this one but I don't see how it could be called any other way. Burnett and Bennett are both engaged with each other but Burnett doesn't even know where the ball is (behind him) while Bennett is trying to get to the ball but can't get Burnett off of him. This gives Collins an easy pick.

#15 Forward Pass - Meaningless penalty as they were just throwing laterals all over the place with no time left on the clock

#16-#18 - They didn't show these ones but looking through the box score it looks like a #16 was a 5 yard penalty in which they picked up the 1st down the very next play anyway. #17 was a 5 yard penalty on an XP that was probably assessed on the kickoff on a drive Cutler threw a pick on and can't figure out where #18 came into play

With all these penalties that were called there was one big one that wasn't and another on the Bears that maybe shouldn't have been called. Clifton had an obvious hold on Peppers on a 2nd and 12 that even the announcers were laughing at how obvious it was. If Peppers doesn't get the sack he's likely getting Rodgers to throw it away at the very least. He picks up a 1st down on this play. Then on the 6 yard line Melton is called for helmet to helmet on Rodgers. It was only a 3 yard penalty but it was a big 3 yards as Rodgers ended up scrambling on 3rd down and he scores the go ahead TD with 7 minutes left breaking the goal line by less than a yard before Urlacher meets him at the pylon. He doesn't score on that play if he has to go those extra 3 yards. This penalty was very questionable as they only showed one replay but the Clifton hold was obvious.

The Bears have been called lucky all year and like most of the other cases I think this is another completely false claim of a lucky win. Gun to my head I would pick the Packers but don't for a second think the Bears need luck to beat the Packers like so many have claimed.

If I sound like a homer in this thread, I apologize. Not trying to at all and like I said I would pick the Packers if I had to. Just trying to give a summary of what I just saw in relation to the way people have talked about this game.

[Stevedore]

What excuse are you going to give us for the fact that since 2009 the Bears offense has scored only 3 td's in 59 drives against the Packers defense?

[d2bets]

Bears are a much better and different team than they were Week 3. Not even sure how relevant it is to examine that game. But Hester is a huge issue. And those were only on punts. Hester wasn't even back there on kickoffs in that game. You can be sure he will in this one. And Crosby is incapable of kicking touchbacks. It's not that easy to just say they'll punt away from him. Easier said than done, especially for a rookie punter. Just ask Tom Coughlin about rookie punters. Special teams importance is so underrated. Between punts, kickoffs, FG's you're looking at 15-20 plays. Field position can win games.

[xxxvince]

packers will win this one, bears are lucky to be in finals. hope packers beat the shit out of stupid bears def!

[Sunde91]

A Packers franchise record of 18 penalties for 152 yards is lucky for the Bears in the sense that it NEVER happens; it changes the game so dramatically in the Bears favor and is a big reason for their winning; and it can't seriously be considered when analyzing future meetings.

Totally unforeseeable, egregious penalties that change game + Packers still outgain Bears by 100 yards + Packers still win TOP by 10 minutes + Both Bears TDs being generated by Special Teams, which is rare + Packers fumble on last drive in tie game that led to a last second FG loss = Bears outplayed/lucked out

There's luck in every game, but Packers would normally beat Bears 6 or 7 times out of 10 in that game if played 10x.

[d2bets]

What excuse are you going to give us for the fact that since 2009 the Bears offense has scored only 3 td's in 59 drives against the Packers defense?

Well FWIW it looks like it's 4 offensive TD's actually (vs. 7 for GB since 2009).

[Bob Loblaw]

What excuse are you going to give us for the fact that since 2009 the Bears offense has scored only 3 td's in 59 drives against the Packers defense?

Nice post. What's your point? I already said twice I think the Packers win this game. What do you want me to say? The Packers were a playoff team last year, the Bears were a sub .500 team. What's the point in bringing up a stat like that (which is inaccurate btw)?

[Bob Loblaw]

A Packers franchise record of 18 penalties for 152 yards is lucky for the Bears in the sense that it NEVER happens; it changes the game so dramatically in the Bears favor and is a big reason for their winning; and it can't seriously be considered when analyzing future meetings.

Totally unforeseeable, egregious penalties that change game + Packers still outgain Bears by 100 yards + Packers still win TOP by 10 minutes + Both Bears TDs being generated by Special Teams, which is rare + Packers fumble on last drive in tie game that led to a last second FG loss = Bears outplayed/lucked out

There's luck in every game, but Packers would normally beat Bears 6 or 7 times out of 10 in that game if played 10x.

The penalty part of the post was just for the numerous people that have said the only reason the Bears won was because of the penalties and if the Packers aren't called for 18 penalties they would have killed them. I don't think that's true at all. People see there were a bunch of penalties and assume luck but don't stop to think how sacks were saved, completions were saved, etc.

[KingJIM]

Nice post Bob. You should do another one like it for the Week 17 game if they show it.

[bobbyk1133]

GB had 19 penalties in the 1st meeting and were still on their way to winning until a last minute fumble. CHI is goin down.

[sweethook]

i see the home team winnin this

[BetWeather]

Bears don't have a prayer.

[Stevedore]

Nice post. What's your point? I already said twice I think the Packers win this game. What do you want me to say? The Packers were a playoff team last year, the Bears were a sub .500 team. What's the point in bringing up a stat like that (which is inaccurate btw)?

Came off to harsh, my bad. Your post was long and didn't get to the part where you thought GB was probably the play.

As for my info, got it from a Footbal Futures forum. Not sure if you're counting ST td's, those wouldn't count.

As for the game, I think GB wins if they don't beat themselves. It's happened 6 times this year and it could happen again in Chicago. Hope it doesn't.

[Stevedore]

The penalty part of the post was just for the numerous people that have said the only reason the Bears won was because of the penalties and if the Packers aren't called for 18 penalties they would have killed them. I don't think that's true at all. People see there were a bunch of penalties and assume luck but don't stop to think how sacks were saved, completions were saved, etc.

Wasn't Cutler picked off 3 times in that first game and all three were negated by penalties? That game was an aberration for GB as far as penalties go. They are one of the least penalized teams in the league. That first game seemed real fishy to me as far as how the game was officiated. Huge $$ was on GB in a primetime game. Makes you wonder...

[Lucky1g]

Thx for the post bobby L...nice breakdown

[shade3599]

nice analysis bob. i like the bears in this game. getting 3.5 points is a lot of value.

[Bob Loblaw]

Wasn't Cutler picked off 3 times in that first game and all three were negated by penalties? That game was an aberration for GB as far as penalties go. They are one of the least penalized teams in the league. That first game seemed real fishy to me as far as how the game was officiated. Huge $$ was on GB in a primetime game. Makes you wonder...

2 by my count as I wrote in #'s 10 and 14. But that's what I'm saying here. Why does that have anything to do with luck or why is that fishy? If they don't commit those penalties then neither INT happens. Same with some of the holds. If they don't hold then they're sacked. That has nothing to do with luck. And as I also said I think the biggest penalties in this game was the holding that wasn't called and the roughing the passer that was called on the Packers final TD drive. Bears have a bigger gripe when it comes to penalties in that game. Those were missed plays by the refs that lead directly to a Packer TD. There wasn't a single Packer penalty that was called that shouldn't have been. I didn't see any Bears penalties that weren't called that should have been.

[$Burm$]

lol, it def sounds like a homer thread..bears are better than people give them credit for but they have definitely caught some large breaks to be where they are today..every team needs to catch breaks though. the thing about the packers is that they have 16 guys on the IR and still are playing the best football out of any team in recent games. Should be a good one..Also, if James Jones fumble goes out of bounds instead of stays in play, Packers win.

[Bob Loblaw]

lol, it def sounds like a homer thread..bears are better than people give them credit for but they have definitely caught some large breaks to be where they are today..every team needs to catch breaks though. the thing about the packers is that they have 16 guys on the IR and still are playing the best football out of any team in recent games. Should be a good one..Also, if James Jones fumble goes out of bounds instead of stays in play, Packers win.

Not sure I follow that logic. If the ball goes out of bounds it's 3rd and 12 at the Packers own 46 with 2:18 to go in a 17-17 game. I don't see how you can grant them a win in that scenario. Packers didn't convert a 3rd down longer than 6 yards all game. You can't assume they convert one twice that long and then drive another 20 yards or so and make a FG.

[mlb]

thread really doesnt hold much weight because you are looking at each individual play ... if any of these went differently then the next play would have been different and the next play after that and so on...

you'd be better off looking for trends in the game in strategy, personnel and how this time around things will change regarding these

[Stevedore]

"Bears have a bigger gripe when it comes to penalties in that game."

We'll have to agree to disagree on this take.

The hold on RT Tausher negating a GB touchdown was a bad call. The helmet to helmet on Zombo negating Cutler's duck that was picked off on Chi.'s winning drive was a bad call too. A clean shot to Cutler's upper chest just under his chin. Those were the two biggest calls against GB in that game and it directly led to Chicago's win.

GB had over 100 yards In penalties In that game and if you don't think that a direct impact on the game in a positive way for Chi than you don't know squat about football.

How many penalties did GB have in the 2nd game? Hardly any and Chicago had to win the game by themselves and they couldn't do it.

[brewcrew2k]

How about the Jones, fumble, if he doesn't fumble without a doubt they win that game.
the bears got everything on those penalties-everytime green bayt had momentum, a penalty would appear.
the bears could not move the ball that game, they got in tons of lucky spots that made them score.

[Bob Loblaw]

"Bears have a bigger gripe when it comes to penalties in that game."

We'll have to agree to disagree on this take.

The hold on RT Tausher negating a GB touchdown was a bad call. The helmet to helmet on Zombo negating Cutler's duck that was picked off on Chi.'s winning drive was a bad call too. A clean shot to Cutler's upper chest just under his chin. Those were the two biggest calls against GB in that game and it directly led to Chicago's win.

GB had over 100 yards In penalties In that game and if you don't think that a direct impact on the game in a positive way for Chi than you don't know squat about football.

How many penalties did GB have in the 2nd game? Hardly any and Chicago had to win the game by themselves and they couldn't do it.

You need to watch the game again. The Tauscher hold was as obvious as it gets. To call it a bad call is absurd. And as the announcer said 2 seconds after the call "That's easy to see. Tauscher's beat at the top and he clearly grabs him." There is no question there was a hold that allowed Rodgers to escape the pocket and throw a TD.

The helmet to helmet on Cutler was just about as square to his facemask as you can possibly get. If this penalty isn't called then there is no point in ever calling a helmet to helmet because they don't get much clearer than this.

I don't know why you're bringing up the 2nd game. That was in GB, not Chicago. GB was fighting for their lives, Chicago wasn't and Chicago still held the lead or was tied for more than 3 quarters.

[Bob Loblaw]

How about the Jones, fumble, if he doesn't fumble without a doubt they win that game.
the bears got everything on those penalties-everytime green bayt had momentum, a penalty would appear.
the bears could not move the ball that game, they got in tons of lucky spots that made them score.

I already addressed this. #1 How can you honestly say they win without a doubt when it would have been 3rd down for the Packers on their own side of the field? #2 Bears force fumbles. That's what they do. That's what they've been doing better than any other team for a long time now. Cutler can turn the ball over, the Bears D can force turnovers. It's part of who they are.

The point of this thread isn't to say who should and shouldn't have won. I wanted to #1 Just a give a recap of how it played out and #2 Negate the statements that Bears would have been crushed if it wasn't for 18 penalties. The Bears forced the Packers to take many of those penalties because they beat them on certain plays. That's it. To look at a box score, see 18 penalties, and assume the Bears got lucky and the refs wanted them to win is wrong in my opinion.

[lakerboy]

The bottom line is that 80% of bettors are gonna take GB. Keep doing that and see how long you survive gambling in the NFL playoffs. No one learned anything from the saints and pats losses. THe bears defense can stop gb and have proven that as recently as two weeks ago when gb only scored 10 points in a must win game. THe bears offense of course wasnt gonna show anything there. This game is a coin flip. Im telling you people now that either the bears or jets win su on sunday. Books DO NOT pay out large public plays in these type of situations. Use your head.

[riggs]

The bottom line is that 80% of bettors are gonna take GB. Keep doing that and see how long you survive gambling in the NFL playoffs. No one learned anything from the saints and pats losses. THe bears defense can stop gb and have proven that as recently as two weeks ago when gb only scored 10 points in a must win game. THe bears offense of course wasnt gonna show anything there. This game is a coin flip. Im telling you people now that either the bears or jets win su on sunday. Books DO NOT pay out large public plays in these type of situations. Use your head.

You're 100% right LB, but it won't be the Bears...

[d2bets]

Something else on the matchup the last game of the season. I realize the Bears played their starters, but you can be sure that the coaching staff showed GB nothing. Plain vanilla stuff. Same stuff they did the first game. On defense, they just did straight cover 2 vanilla. They worked on fundamentals and did it well for the most part. On offense they ran the same stuff GB had already seen which busted a lot up. GB knew all the hot reads, all the formations, everything. Bears are gonna look a lot different this next time. I think that matchup set the Bears quite well. GB didn't have the luxury of holding back and setting up a potential rematch, the Bears did. Bears have a smart, veteran group of coaches. They know how to game plan.

[BigTenBets10]

I am (not) an expert handicapper or gambler so take what I have to say for what it is worth, Riggs!!! you are the man, and I have been following you a long time so I agree with you that Green Bay wins this game. If I was quick enough to pull the trigger I would be on the Packers at -3 just like you are advising others to do, but now that the line has moved to -4 on most sportsbooks, that changes things for me. I don't believe in buying points, and while i think Green Bay wins this game, I am still confident in taking the Bears +4. I believe the Packers will win with a field goal late, take the +4 and i am confident that the Bears will cover. You gotta love a home team getting points in the NFC Championship. The Green Bay defense, and Rodgers will not look as dominant as they did last week in the Georgia Dome! In my opinion this one will come down to the the final drive. The Packers will be going to the Super Bowl, but if you take Chicago +4 now at most sportsbooks you gotta be confident that they can cover.

[Sunde91]

LB, would Jets have lost if 90% of public was on them instead of most on Pats

Pure supersition to say a team (you weren't even taling about sides) somehow has a better chance to lose SU cause the public is on them. If the line is empirically fair, and there's no abnormal movement (even when there is, like with Oregon, it often doesn't mean a lot), it doesn't make any practical difference who "the public" is on toward the actual outcome.

[HauntingTheHoly]

Wednesday morning and everyone still betting the Pack as the line moves slowly to show this. Question is: WHEN will the smart money start coming in on the Bears? Friday night? Saturday afternoon, night?

[JassieJames]

What scares me is everyone and their dog is on Green Bay. I think Chicago moves on, as much as I hate them.

[Wrecktangle]

Although I like GB, 3.5 is too much chalk to eat with the cheeseaters on the road and possible crap weather.

It really depends on whether the "good" Cutler or the "bad" Cutler shows up.

CHI +3.5 is the right side.

[Richards]

Green Bay has more overall talent and team speed. Bears play a tough disciplined fairly vanilla defense that is hard to beat consistently. The packers play a speedy flying around defense that creates turnovers and big plays/sacks.

I think Green Bay's offense has an edge on Chi offense but Green Bay's offense has lacked consistency this year at times they've been out of sync and have struggled in those games. James Starks has added a dimension now that defenses at least have to respect the run.

In the first game mentioned here bears just play deep safeties and Peppers could lock on like a heat seeking missile to rodgers. If the pack happened to try a run play oh well it could be stopped without a big gain.

Now if the bears play deep safeties and defensive line stunts to get to the QB they risk starts gashing out big gains. This new balance for GB gives them a "pick your poison" type approach.

I think the one area where the Bears are very superior to GB is on special teams. They can block kicks, return punts and kicks, and pin people down inside the 20 on punts.

Packers punt teams are ok, but kick return and especially Kick off coverage teams are borderline terrible at times. If the game is very close the Bears special teams edge could very well come into play.

That said in the end the Packers are my pick because of the newfound offensive balance they have, as well as Rodgers high standard of play in past weeks, and finally their defense is just plain tough to score on.

[Stevedore]

Nice post ^^^. I worry about the ST factor too. But in a close game at Lambeau GB's punter made Hester obsolete. He had great hang time on his punts resulting in fair catches. He's really improved his punting since the first Bears game.

[d2bets]

Wednesday morning and everyone still betting the Pack as the line moves slowly to show this. Question is: WHEN will the smart money start coming in on the Bears? Friday night? Saturday afternoon, night?

Probably not until a few hours before kickoff.