From: Michael.P.Colburn@dartmouth.edu (Michael P. Colburn)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Packers 7 - Giants 27 (Packer & Giant fan perspective)
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:49:29 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Nov9.162826.17540@macc.wisc.edu>
heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM ) writes:

> Stat of the game:  Turnovers: Packers 8, Giants 2.  The Packers 8 
> turnovers include 2 fumbles lost, 3 INTs, a blocked punt, a mishandled 
> snap on a punt, and a muffed punt.  The Giants scored 24 of their 27 
> points as a result of Packer miscues.  I think the Giants are glad it 
                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> was the Packers they were playing this week and not a good team.

Indeed...with games remaining against KC, Washington, Dallas, the Cards
and Philly (2), the Giants can ill afford to perform this poorly if
they still entertain any ideas about the playoffs. 
> 
<deleted stats showing Pack's domination on paper...>

> I don't know what to say about Favre's performance.  He threw 3 INTs 
> when the Packers were within reach (only 6 pnts behind) in the final 4 
> minutes.  Still, 27-44 is over 60%.  If you're more concerned about 
> his development as a QB than about the final score you'd say he had a 
> pretty good day.  One thing he's been doing consistantly lately is 
> underthrowing the bomb.  He did it twice again this week.  He 
> *overthrew* so many earlier that I think he's now purposely taking 
> something off it when he throws deep.
> 
Well, if I were a Packer fan, I would take heart...Favre is an accurate
short, medium range passer...he has good receivers in WR Sharpe, TE
Harris and RB Sydney...what he needs is another good WR beside Sterling
Sharpe.  With another good WR, the Packers would have a passing offense
that could possibly rival the some of the best in the league.

<text deleted>

> Packers had a decent day rushing.  Packer defense stuffed the #1 
> rushing offense in the league - no question.

Absolutely no question...other than Hampton's final 8 yard TD run, I
believe the only runs over 5 yards by the Giants were called back for
offensive holding...

<passing stats deleted?

> Sharpe, as usual, was great.  Packer fans have got to be happy about 
> the emergence of Jacke Harris.  Favre finally has someone other than 
> Sharpe to throw to.  (Note that the 2nd and 3rd WRs did not catch a 
> single pass yesterday.)

Harris looked good and Sydney proved effective out of the
backfield...as I said earlier, the Pack needs another good WR to
balance out their passing game.
> 
> Defense:
> 
> The Packer defense kept good pressure on Hostetler all day.  They 
> ended up with 3 sacks for -13 yards.  Tony Bennett had 2.5.  I don't 
> know who had the other 1/2.  The big story though is that the Packers
> kept the #1 rushing offense in the NFC (NFL?) to just 57 yards.

Well, I don't know about good pressure...IMHO, Hoss had more time in
the pocket than he's ever had in any game this season.  Also, IMO, the
sacks registered by the Packers were more coverage sacks than
anything...and as far as the Giants running game, what happened to the
O-line run blocking?  Also, why did the Giants continue to try end
around as they consistently were stuffed.  The only successful end
around was the TD by Hampton and I think just about everyone thought
the Giants were going to run the clock out, so I would count this
one...is it the Giant line or is it Handley's play selection...my vote
goes to play selection.
> 
> Special teams:
> 
> Oh man, what a mess!  McJulien had another blocked punt (again it was 
> on a blown blocking assignment) and bobbled a low snap and then threw 
> an incomplete pass.  McJulien averaged just 36.3 yards on the punts 
> that weren't blocked.  Terrell Buckley fumbled a punt and muffed 
> another.  Chris Jacke missed a 49 yard FG attempt.

Yep, Green Bay's special teams do need work...the Giants offense
(although impotent) had good field position most of the game and the
rookie mistakes by Buckley really hurt the Pack (he also got caught for
pass interference).  The Giants also had 109 return yards as compared
to Green Bay's 15.

> 
> Notes:
> Johnny Holland and Bart Oates were tossed out of the game right at the 
> end for fighting.  Probably Holland's fault.  The Giants had the ball 
> at the Packer 7 with 43 secs left and were kneeling to run out the 
> clock.  I didn't see it but Holland probably tried to pound his way in 
> to force a fumble.  This failed of course and on the next play the 
> Giants ran off tackle for a TD, a fight ensued and Holland and Oates 
> were ejected.

I was wondering what spurred the Giants on to their final score...I was
just about to switch over to the Buffalo - Pittsburgh game when it
appeared the Giants were going to sit on the ball and the next thing I
know, Hampton goes around end for the TD and there's pandamonium in the
endzone.  

Even though Green Bay lost this one, the Giants have nothing to crow
about... this was an extremely ugly win.  The Packers dominated the
Giants, but the combination of turnovers and the kicking game (good for
the Giants, poor for the Pack) gave the Giants a hollow victory. The
loss of LT could signal the end of any hopes the Giants might have in
making the playoffs this year as he was the team leader, the team
motivator... however, if the other players, like Pepper Johnson and
Carl Banks adopt the attitude of "win it for LT", who knows.....anyway,
good luck to the Pack against the Eagles next week and let's hope the
Giants can avoid the Elway curse at Mile-High...

Mike Colburn                         =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dartmouth-Hitchcock                  "Pulu-see-ba-goomba" -- Gilligan 
Medical Center                       =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lebanon, New Hampshire  03756        :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
Land of the Giants