NO ONE HAS BROUGHT THIS UP....

[STEEL CITY SELECTIONS]

i thought it wouldnt have been a bad play for mike mccarthy to take a safety instead of punting from the endline of the end zone.

yeah, the score wouldve been 12-9 and a fg wouldve given sea. the tie.
you take the free kick and more than l.ikely sea. starts its drive from its own 20. so sea. wouldve needed roughly 45 yds. in 40 secs. to tie you with a fg.

or the alternative, which gbay chose to do...punt from end zone and sea. started from gb 45 and need to td to win.

safer choice to me was worst case senario take safety and tie.....in either case sea. had to go 45 yds with no timeouts to beat you with td or tie you with fg.


i couldnt believe the announcers never brought it up at the time??

what ya think??
make sense or am i crazy.....

burgh....

 

[TeeMo]

I disagree......you don't willingly give the opposing team the points and the football with enough time on the clock where a FG ties the game....

Green Bay did it right......and they won the football game. They simply got rat fucked......that's all.

 

[JIMMYBOY]

I disagree......you don't willingly give the opposing team the points and the football with enough time on the clock where a FG ties the game....

Green Bay did it right......and they won the football game. The simply got rat fucked......that's all.

Well said TEEMO :0074

 

[bleedingpurple]

It's rare that a team starts at the 20 on a free kick. The pack would of had to kick from their own 20! Seattle would of only needed about 25 yards to get into fg range

 

[heleanth]

I'm sure McCarthy considered taking a safety and then decided against it. I think he made the right call.

Goodell is gutless. At the very least, he should have said the official (Lance Easley) and the referee (Wayne Elliot) blew the call and cost the Packers the game.