Coaching has been horrible down the stretch and stupid today

mosslost said:

hmm. maybe we should have just let them minus 3 off the board too.. Maybe our play calling would have improved even more.. WTF??

Click to expand...

I'll play your game. Down 8 we kick a FG. Now down 5. Score a touchdown we're up 2. We kick an onside kick Denver recovers with :12s on the 50 needing a FG.

Actually since play calling didn't change we went for 2 and got picked, so only up 1 and Denver gets the ball.

mosslost said:

I already did, you are creating a "straw Man" Argument. Also, you are getting slammed by the other posters its not just me. Like ten disagrees on you every time you disagree with me... LOL

Click to expand...

Dont use words of when you have no clue what they mean. Because it is quite obvious you have no clue what a straw man is.

glm said:

No you didn't, now you're just lying. And I haven't received a disagree yet, let alone ten of them. Now show me where I used hindsight to fuel my arguments. I'm still waiting.

Click to expand...

glm, you were one of the ones saying the Pats made the right call in giving the jets the ball 1rst in OT because the offense was putrid and the defense was playing well in the 4th quarter.

Well, the Pats D was laying very well against the Broncos in the 2nd half. Why not trust your D here in this situation? I want your answer. Thanks.

I loathe the games when Belichick transforms into a mere human being.

FourierSeries said:

Should have taken the 3, and we'd be off to SB50. We didn't play our best game, but played well enough to win.

Oh well. Can't win em all.

Click to expand...

Still happy we got to go to Denver?

Use the Force Luke.. Luuuuke.

mosslost said:

I have addresses his "points" perfectly. And you are a fool if you agree with not kicking that FG

Click to expand...

No, your idea of addressing points is saying stupid **** to deflect any actual discussion of said points. You even did it in this post I'm quoting: "And you are a fool if you agree with not kicking that FG." You literally have nothing to add but ******ed trollish responses. It's pathetic really.

BTW: you have the worst username on this board. Just thought I should let you know.

luuked said:

God. I never said they made the right call to give the Jets the ball first. Similarly I personally would have also preferred a FG instead of going for it.

But at the same time I understand why the coaching staff thought they should go for it. My entire point is that it was not a stupid but a reasonable decision. I never said I would have done the same.

Click to expand...

fair enough.

Kjmass1 said:

I'll play your game. Down 8 we kick a FG. Now down 5. Score a touchdown we're up 2. We kick an onside kick Denver recovers with :12s on the 50 needing a FG.

Actually since play calling didn't change we went for 2 and got picked, so only up 1 and Denver gets the ball.

Click to expand...

Why would they kick an onside kick if they are up by two?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kjmass1 said:

I'll play your game. Down 8 we kick a FG. Now down 5. Score a touchdown we're up 2. We kick an onside kick Denver recovers with :12s on the 50 needing a FG.

Actually since play calling didn't change we went for 2 and got picked, so only up 1 and Denver gets the ball.

Click to expand...

so.. hmm... why would we kick on sides winning the game? interesting

tmajr3 said:

thats a great way to look at things. If someone makes a dumb decision, oh well, it has worked x amount of times before. BB wasn't playing to win, he was playing to TIE. Knowing that he needed a TD AND 2 PT conversion, why not kick a FG to take the 2 PT conv out of the conversation? PM hadn't done anything in the second half, take the damn points and have faith in Brady to score a TD

Edit: BTW, I love how taking 6 points is somehow playing conservative. Yet, when I say going for 4th and 6 is dumb, you say NO MAN BB IS A GENIUS WITH BALLS. No, it was the wrong decision

Click to expand...

I admit it may have been "wrong" in that there are no absolutes. The Pats D was stopping everything Denver was doing and could have been trusted to hold after a FG, as they did anyway.

But if they kick the FGs (assuming they make one or both) then the field position situation does not remain constant, Denver has the ball in a more advantageous position and their punter was burying NE most of the day. The only TDs Brady scored were a desperation heave (after a desperation heave) and a short field TO score off a great play by Bolden. Just like there have been times over the years there's been little reason to have faith in the D to make a stop there was little reason to assume the offense would just show up all the sudden and put down a 60/80 yd drive again to win.

I'm not saying it was right or wrong because that judgment doesn't exist. It didn't work, so I guess it was wrong. But it was consistent with BBs coaching style and decision making, which has proved fairly successful. I think he wasn't sold on the fact that the offense could make it back down the field, so they took their shot while they were there.

mosslost said:

so.. hmm... why would we kick on sides winning the game? interesting

Click to expand...

Because the play calling was the same. Same reason the game played out the same with Denver up 8 vs 5.

glm said:

No, your idea of addressing points is saying stupid **** to deflect any actual discussion of said points. You even did it in this post I'm quoting: "And you are a fool if you agree with not kicking that FG." You literally have nothing to add but ******ed trollish responses. It's pathetic really.

BTW: you have the worst username on this board. Just thought I should let you know.

Click to expand...

glm is so amazing. And who gives a **** you moron

Kjmass1 said:

Because the play calling was the same. Same reason the game played out the same with Denver up 8 vs 5.

Click to expand...

dumb

I completely agree on not kicking the field goals. Kick either one and we might be playing in two weeks. Belichick loves to gamble (not calling the timeout in the Super Bowl) and I wonder if he'd have more success if he just played it straight.

mosslost said:

I am able to grasp concepts.. You are not.

Click to expand...

You didnt make a single point that didnt use hindsight so yeah whatever.

PatriotSpy said:

glm, you were one of the ones saying the Pats made the right call in giving the jets the ball 1rst in OT because the offense was putrid and the defense was playing well in the 4th quarter.

Well, the Pats D was laying very well against the Broncos in the 2nd half. Why not trust your D here in this situation? I want your answer. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Your trying to change the subject change the subject by bringing in a completely different situation. Electing to kick in overtime and trying to gain 1 yard are not the same situation. Nice try though.

Now I'm still waiting for you to enlighten me why it's a better decision to drive the length of the field to score a touchdown against the defense that's ranked 1st against the pass and 3rd against the run rather than trying to gain 1 yard in your own red zone. Take your time, please.

PatsfanTN said:

You'll get blasted, but I have to agree. Last two games of regular season, end of first half of jets game, first half of Miami game, and not kicking the field goal, are all bad decisions imo. Get ready for the disagrees.

Click to expand...

Eagles game too

luuked said:

You didnt make a single point that didnt use hindsight so yeah whatever.

Click to expand...

nothing wrong with hindsight. If a guy goes into a house uninvited and gets shot, in hindsight, you can say he should not haven gone into said house.

you're thinking has flopped since the last time I talked with you. Interesting.

mosslost said:

Use the Force Luke.. Luuuuke.

Click to expand...

Who gives a crap what the sheep think?