Andy Reid to blame??

[gjn23]

If the eagles don't want Reid, ship him down here to the big D. I would much rather have him than Parcells.

We all know it's a growing process for teams. When you get there sometimes it takes a whilet o get over the hump. That goes for players and for coaches. He's a very good coach that gets the most out of his team. That 4th down call was ok by me. No matter what he did on that play there was going to be people that criticize.

Hey Emerson, maybe he should have asked for a replay or something so he could waste a timeout. Oh wait, that's what the great Marty did to screw his team. Give me a freaking break.

how can anyone say the 4th down call was fine or correct??????

after phils last to, there was 1:37 left in the game.......assuming a run (5-7 seconds) and then a no timeout at the end of the playclock (39 secs), there would have been 52 seconds left......assume a 8-10 second punt play with a net 40 yard punt, philly gets the ball back with approx 40 seconds left, no timeouts and the ball on their own 25 still trailing

THAT IS A GOOD DECISION?

:shrug:

lets see......if tob-o-shit-decision-maker thinks his defene is gonna make a miraculous 3 play stand, then go for it on 4th down and if-when you fail, all the same scenarios above still apply except that when you get the ball back it's at the 20 if no punts it into the endzone (happens all the time on pooch punts) so you've given up 5 yards from scenario 1 OR they down it inside the 20.........BUT AT LEAST YOU WENT FOR IT WHILE YOU HAD THE BALL AND TRAILED IN A DO OR DIE PLAYOFF GAME....and guess what you could have gained 15 yards, you could have gotted a 5 yard illegal contact penalty for an auto first down, you could have gotten a pi for a first down, no could have picked the ball off, which would have been the same thing as your valued punt......BUT AT LEAST YOU WENT FOR IT WHILE YOU HAD THE BALL AND TRAILED IN A DO OR DIE PLAYOFF GAME.

every talking head that says it was the right decision is a complete idiot (most are anyway)

now, if tub-o-shit-coach has 3 timeouts left, THEN his punt scenario might be the correct call.....still, his defense hadnt stopped the saints on the ground the entire game and esp the previous drive when no was running out the clock before bush fumbled.

 

[layinwood]

Well, if you went for it you could have been in the same position or you could have been down by 6 and needed to drive the whole way down the field instead of getting in field goal range.

I'm not saying it's the right or wrong call, I said it was fine by me. Percentages wise I think it's very close but I think you give yourself a better % chance if you punt to get the ball back than if you go for it and get a first. If you punt and can play d for 3 downs you guarantee yourself of getting a chance to go down and just have to kick a fd, if you go for it and don't get it there's a very good chance they kick the fg and your down by 6 and even more screwed. GJN, you're assuming that NO would have to punt if phili went for it, stopped them and the it was 4th. I don't think you can assume that.

But more than anything I said that no matter what call he made he was going to have people being critical of it if it didn't work.

 

[Emersonboozer]

Well, if you went for it you could have been in the same position or you could have been down by 6 and needed to drive the whole way down the field instead of getting in field goal range.

I'm not saying it's the right or wrong call, I said it was fine by me. Percentages wise I think it's very close but I think you give yourself a better % chance if you punt to get the ball back than if you go for it and get a first. If you punt and can play d for 3 downs you guarantee yourself of getting a chance to go down and just have to kick a fd, if you go for it and don't get it there's a very good chance they kick the fg and your down by 6 and even more screwed. GJN, you're assuming that NO would have to punt if phili went for it, stopped them and the it was 4th. I don't think you can assume that.

But more than anything I said that no matter what call he made he was going to have people being critical of it if it didn't work.

Where your logic is flawed is that there are less than two minutes left and you are giving the ball back to the opponent. The chances of getting the ball back with any time left are miniscule, especially if you add in the Deuce Mccallister factor and not being able to stop the run all day. You simply have to be in four down territory when there is less than 2 minutes left. Its not Rocket Science. Did the Eagles ever run another play? NO
Case closed

 

[layinwood]

Emerson, the better question is "What would Marty have done?"

 

[gjn23]

Well, if you went for it you could have been in the same position or you could have been down by 6 and needed to drive the whole way down the field instead of getting in field goal range.

I'm not saying it's the right or wrong call, I said it was fine by me. Percentages wise I think it's very close but I think you give yourself a better % chance if you punt to get the ball back than if you go for it and get a first. If you punt and can play d for 3 downs you guarantee yourself of getting a chance to go down and just have to kick a fd, if you go for it and don't get it there's a very good chance they kick the fg and your down by 6 and even more screwed. GJN, you're assuming that NO would have to punt if phili went for it, stopped them and the it was 4th. I don't think you can assume that.

But more than anything I said that no matter what call he made he was going to have people being critical of it if it didn't work.

your point makes the decision reed made even less sense

so if your defense holds no to a fg attempt then it's a 47-56 yard fg attempt...make it, congrats...load up on the kick return and go get a td....if you miss.....thanks for the better field position than i would have, had i punted and stopped you and got the ball back after your punt....and with the same amount of time left.

YOU CANT GIVE UP THE BALL WITH UNDER 2 MINS LEFT IN THE PLAYOFFS WHEN YOU ARE TRAILING AND CANT STOP THE CLOCK 3 TIMES.

this is the easiest decision in the world and people are fine with it or defending it?????

amazing.

 

[gjn23]

Emerson, the better question is "What would Marty have done?"

marty would have had two options on 4th and 15:

1) punt

2) go for it but run a fullback dive up the middle and hope to block them and gain 15 yards the old fashioned way.

 

[layinwood]

GJN, let me ask you a question. If you had 3 timouts there would you have punted? (you said "now, if tub-o-shit-coach has 3 timeouts left, THEN his punt scenario might be the correct call")

Now my question to you is, if that's the correct call then you still have to stop them and make them punt, correct? So by your logic if he would have had 1 more timout then he should have punted and still would have lost because NO was able to get the first. So the extra TO meant nothing.

So if he would have been able to stop them then with only 2 timeouts left he guarantees his team another chance to drive down and kick a fg.

:shrug:

 

[gjn23]

i still would have went for it because i dont want to "hope to get the ball back" YOU HAVE THE BALL NOW.....but with 3 timeouts left a punt becomes an option, a small one.....with 2 timeouts left...no way a punt is even an option

 

[gjn23]

GJN, let me ask you a question. If you had 3 timouts there would you have punted? (you said "now, if tub-o-shit-coach has 3 timeouts left, THEN his punt scenario might be the correct call")

Now my question to you is, if that's the correct call then you still have to stop them and make them punt, correct? So by your logic if he would have had 1 more timout then he should have punted and still would have lost because NO was able to get the first. So the extra TO meant nothing.

So if he would have been able to stop them then with only 2 timeouts left he guarantees his team another chance to drive down and kick a fg.

:shrug:

just to clarify......with his defense playing the way they were vs no, 3 timeouts left, 4th and 15 with his offense vs the saints defense....he still should have went for it

with a ravens like defense and 3 to's left and 4th and 15 with the ravens offense.... i might punt

 

[layinwood]

GJN, there's no difference between having 2 or 3(there is but you don't base a decision on it). You either can or can't stop them from getting the first.

And when you go for it don't you have to "hope you get a miracle 4th and 15?"


And although I am having fun with this I will also say that this is the same coach and team that got a miracle completion against GB in the same type of scenario and ended up winning becuase of it.

 

[gjn23]

GJN, there's no difference between having 2 or 3(there is but you don't base a decision on it). You either can or can't stop them from getting the first.

And when you go for it don't you have to "hope you get a miracle 4th and 15?"


And although I am having fun with this I will also say that this is the same coach and team that got a miracle completion against GB in the same type of scenario and ended up winning becuase of it.

better to have the ball and control your outcome than punt and "hope to get the ball back"

plus i dont understand the logic

4th and 10 = must go for it
4th and 15 = must punt

why?

didnt tubbo just watch his team complete a 20 yard pass on 4th and 10 while before realizing there was a false start?

and yes there is a major difference in 2 or 3 timeouts.....it's 45 seconds.....even with a solid defense you are giving up too much time by punting even if you do stop them.

 

[Emersonboozer]

With less than 2 ninutes left there is no option other than to go for the 1st down. He went for it on 4th and 10. Why does 5 extra yards change his thoughts? Less than 2 minutes and you give the ball away? Game over. Its pretty simple
You have the ball in your hands. Use it