Richard from Madison, WI
I notice your sidebar still has links to the great Rodgers-Bradshaw debate. Are you aware there's a similar one going on between ESPN's Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless on Rodgers vs. Favre? They both make some pretty good points about the greatness of both.
I just don't understand these debates and how they become so intense. The intensity of the Rodgers-Bradshaw debate makes absolutely no sense. I covered both quarterbacks so I was asked to compare their strengths, which I did. All of a sudden, my inbox is in an uproar. Why? I have a feeling it has something to do with Super Bowl envy. He got four, and I think that caused a lot of readers to attempt to discredit Bradshaw's accomplishment. Why?
Blake from Lake Charles, LA
One week ago, Vic, we had the readers all talking about having perspective and enjoying the ride. But now our defense lost its edge in one half of a game that appeared closer than it was (we could have scored again at the very end, although that would have been questionable sportsmanship) and suddenly that perspective is gone. Amazing, isn't it? Amazing that fans and media alike forget this was a defense that came up huge, championship-caliber huge, just over a week ago against a team that was being ordained as the likely Super Bowl champions.
Each week must have a headline issue or someone will invent one. The second-half performance by the defense on Sunday is this week's issue. We'll beat on it until there's nothing left to say or write. Next week there'll be another issue.
Sean from Rio Rancho, NM
According to nfl.com, the Packers can clinch a playoff spot this week if they win and Dallas loses, plus, the Packers clinch strength of victory tiebreaker over Dallas. Can you explain to me what this means?
It means with a win in Buffalo and a Dallas loss in Philadelphia, the Packers will have clinched a wild-card playoff berth. Strength of victory is a down-the-line tiebreaker that's not likely to be used.
Luke from San Diego, CA
Vic, after Monday's game, most sports writers or so-called pros of the game are saying how our defense can't win a Super Bowl. Wasn't it just last week this same defense contained the high-powered Patriots offense?
Do you remember what I said about statements? They last one week; that's all.
Bill from Raleigh, NC
Vic, so the NFL added hyper-sensitive pass-defense rules to reduce the enjoyment of the game, and the Seahawks are still suffocating their opponents. I guess you were right all along: It's players, not rules. We better win the last three games.
That's a good observation. As hard as the league has tried to take down the Seahawks defense, the league couldn't do it. That's some defense the Seahawks have.
James from Whitewater, WI
Vic, in the playoffs, I don't see the Packers playing a team they haven't already played. Is it an advantage at all?
Yes, it is, but it cuts both ways. I think having played the Seahawks early in the season would help the Packers in a rematch. Should the Packers have to play the Eagles again, I think it'll help the Eagles. It's difficult to do the same thing to a good team twice.
Nick from Acton, MA
A while back, when asked about the Packers peaking too early, you mentioned that you felt the Packers would continue to progress but have little bits of adversity along the way. Was this defensive performance their little bit of adversity? I feel fans are over-reacting to this. The way I see it, this reminds the team there's room to grow and keeps them hungry to improve, which is something the Packers lacked a few years ago.
The defense certainly wasn't playing at peak performance in the second half on Monday, therefore, peaking too early should no longer be a concern. We worry about the most ridiculous things. Think back to last December. What was worrying us then? That worry was real.
Thomas from Milwaukee, WI
Is it possible Julio Jones is just that good, Vic?
Of course he's that good. He leads the league in explosive receptions. That shouldn't have been a surprise. Everybody was saying he was the guy that could beat the Packers. He backed off the coverage. He created a cushion, and that says it all about the defenders' opinion of his ability.
Seth from Fallon, NV
So last week against the Patriots our defense was solid. This week, not so much. What happened?
The opponent changed. The day changed. Everybody wants FULL CONSISTENCY. There is no FULL CONSISTENCY. Stop seeking it. Just win the game, and then move on to the next game.
Gary from Belle Mead, NJ
I think the big lead at the half was one of the defense's worst enemies in this game. In the second half, they were going against a desperate offense, willing to go for it on fourth down multiple times and unfortunately they were successful every time.
When a team is in the situation the Falcons were in, it gets the equivalent of 25 percent more downs per offensive possession. It's the same as a team having the ball in the final two minutes of the game and needing to score a touchdown to win. The punter can take his shoes off. When a score gets out of hand as Monday's did, all sense of order deteriorates. The trailing team gets ultra-aggressive, and the team with the lead tends to become passive and play the clock instead of the opponent. We have perseverated long enough on this topic.
Dennis from Edina, MN
Why do you continue to defend Capers and his horrible defensive strategy? New England finds the right players and adjusts to the teams they play. That was a joke with Atlanta. New England or Seattle will crush Green Bay playing defense like that. New England wins that game if played in New England.
Hey, that's great. Now, would you do me a favor? Please go away. I can't take any more of this. I'm experiencing emotional distress from this mind-numbing angst my inbox has suffered from the second half of Monday's win. Write to somebody else. Ask him or her what they think of the defense. Please, don't ask me. I don't want your unique visit. I don't want your page view, time on site or retention. I want my sanity and you are threatening it. It was kind of funny when the guy from Georgia wrote that winning the Super Bowl isn't good enough, but that's so nuts that I think that kind of opinion is beginning to drive me nuts. You people need your own website with an editor that wants to fire everyone all the time. Find that website, please.
