OT: Schefter and Green go at it about the strategy at end of KC Denver game

[ahmed]

Green's point is from a pro's perspective which is do your job and as a WR that is to score. what would the narrative be if he took a knee and they fumbled it on one of the next 3 plays and KC ran it back for a winning TD? He should have scored.

Easy to talk with benefit of hindsight. He did his job by getting the TD. D did not do their job by giving up a TD and a 2 point conversion.

Since we like to play what if...the O should have gone for 2. that is the only questionable call on O. they go for 2 and if they make it it's a 9 point game and it's over. they don't make it and KC ties with a TD and extra kick.

 

[Tony2046]

That was a real kick in the nuts by Green.

It didn't sink in at first but then I remembered.

 

[Froob]

He single-handily cost them the 2016 NBA Championship.

If he were a Celtic and pulled that crap the fans would run him out of town.

Boy was it funny when "Cavs only won because Green was out!" and then LeBron proceeds to drop 41 again with Green in the lineup lol...

 

[RobertWeathers]

Boy was it funny when "Cavs only won because Green was out!" and then LeBron proceeds to drop 41 again with Green in the lineup lol...

Cavs won because they played better over 7 games and made the plays that mattered. I give LeBron all the credit in the world. However I maintain that with Green in G5 which was in SF and b/c they had the momentum going they would have closed them out.

With that said you could argue that if Green played in G5 LeBron would have dropped 41 on him anyway and still won 3 in a row.

 

[patchick]

Awesome, I hope every single player calls out media scumbags...media, all media, including sports, political, is the epitome of slime and scum

Calling out the media when they're right does nothing to encourage better reporting. Schefter made a totally solid point. Maybe it's unrealistic to expect the WR to think through the strategy in the moment, but that doesn't make scoring immediately the right choice.

 

[farn]

Green : winning IS more important. Which is why NE 2014 > NE 2007. Which is why the Warriors amazing regular season means very little.

Schefty > Green

 

[fightingirish595]

so according to green, people who havent played should not comment at all on the game. great.

Let me preface this by saying what I'm about to say has nothing to do with Adam schefter

Their are writers in the media who have never been around the game in anyway who get paid large amounts of money and try to tell people what they are watching. They do not know anymore than me or you or anyone else. Heres an example, They come up with this dumb stat called QBR. Just another dumb stat invented by people that never played or coached, but they come up with these things And act like they have all this knowledge when they do not. They try to manipulate the stats to tell you what you are seeing. I think its stuff like that, that athletes and coaches have a problem with.

 

[Galeb]

Whilst true, Schefter has no elevation of credibility just because he operates a you tell me this, I'll say that for you racket. Schefter is and always will be a fan and as far as I'm concerned, a company man, a pawn to be used whenever his masters feel like calling. As for Green, I understand the competitive mind so he's not necessarily wrong but he isn't implicitly right either.

Have you considered taking Schefter's idea at face value before judging it's merits by his resume?

 

[Galeb]

Calling out the media when they're right does nothing to encourage better reporting. Schefter made a totally solid point. Maybe it's unrealistic to expect the WR to think through the strategy in the moment, but that doesn't make scoring immediately the right choice.

You are correct, it would be silly to think a WR should automatically think about it while the play is going on. That said, this wasn't in a vacuum. A thinking player would have understood the situation before the ball was ever snapped, and would have known long before he got the ball what should have been done.

 

[ausbacker]

Have you considered taking Schefter's idea at face value before judging it's merits by his resume?

Please point out to me where I said his idea didn't hold merit.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

In that same vein, there is going to arise a situation when a team (likely the Pats) will score late in the game or with no time left to take a one point lead or even a two point lead, awaiting the extra point. Instead of trying for the extra point, they will take a knee and forego the attempt. Why? so they don't end up like New Orleans losing to Denver when they went for the extra point ( their situation was different because the game was tied) got it blocked and returned the other way for 2 points and the loss. BB will likely have to explain it multiple times for most of the media types to understand it...

 

[Galeb]

Please point out to me where I said his idea didn't hold merit.

Perhaps I misunderstand this part of your post:

"Whilst true, Schefter has no elevation of credibility just because he operates a you tell me this, I'll say that for you racket. Schefter is and always will be a fan and as far as I'm concerned, a company man, a pawn to be used whenever his masters feel like calling"

 

[ausbacker]

Perhaps I misunderstand this part of your post:

"Whilst true, Schefter has no elevation of credibility just because he operates a you tell me this, I'll say that for you racket. Schefter is and always will be a fan and as far as I'm concerned, a company man, a pawn to be used whenever his masters feel like calling"

Yes, a statement about Schefter not his comment. Just because he works in the sporting industry does not mean he has any more credibility than a fan when discussing football.

 

[fightingirish595]

Yes, a statement about Schefter not his comment. Just because he works in the sporting industry does not mean he has anymore credibility than a fan when discussing football.

He has as much credibility or less as anyone on this board

 

[ausbacker]

He has as much credibility or less as anyone on this board

I agree when it concerns actual football. When it concerns reporting on football, then he is without equal.

 

[fightingirish595]

I agree when it concerns actual football. When it concerns reporting on football, then he is without equal.

Yeah thats what Im talking about

 

[patchick]

Personally, I've seen no evidence that coaches who played in the NFL are more successful than coaches who haven't (e.g. nearly the entire New England Patriots coaching staff). Similarly, I've seen no evidence that football reporters and announcers who have starred in the NFL reliably provide better analysis than those who haven't. (Dan Marino, anybody? *shudder*)

Green is making a pure ad hominem argument -- attacking the person rather than his position. If Schefter's claim is wrong, Green should be able to say why it's wrong. Insisting on dissing the person rather than arguing the facts is a red flag that you don't actually have a substantive argument to make.

 

[XLIX]

The Broncos WR probably figured he was safe scoring the touchdown bcause even with 2-3 minutes left, Andy Reid would have the offense huddle up, run left for 2 yards, huddle up, run right for 4 yards, huddle up, QB draw for 3 yards, huddle up, QB sneak, huddle up....

 

[Froob]

Cavs won because they played better over 7 games and made the plays that mattered. I give LeBron all the credit in the world. However I maintain that with Green in G5 which was in SF and b/c they had the momentum going they would have closed them out.

With that said you could argue that if Green played in G5 LeBron would have dropped 41 on him anyway and still won 3 in a row.

I think they win either way, I thought Cavs would win game 5 and lose game 6 back home. It was pretty funny to see the stories about what the Cavs need to do in the offseason quickly evaporate. I'd have thought people would have had more respect for a guy as good as he is than to bury him even down 3-1.

 

[fightingirish595]

Personally, I've seen no evidence that coaches who played in the NFL are more successful than coaches who haven't (e.g. nearly the entire New England Patriots coaching staff). Similarly, I've seen no evidence that football reporters and announcers who have starred in the NFL reliably provide better analysis than those who haven't. (Dan Marino, anybody? *shudder*)

Green is making a pure ad hominem argument -- attacking the person rather than his position. If Schefter's claim is wrong, Green should be able to say why it's wrong. Insisting on dissing the person rather than arguing the facts is a red flag that you don't actually have a substantive argument to make.

Thats different though because those guys started in small positions or grew up around the game. Either way they learned the ins and outs of the game. I do agree that Greens statement is ad hominem. And that schefter is not out of place to say what he said. But there are certain things in the world of sports "sabermetrics\sabermetricians" who really do not know what they are talking about and trying to reincent the game and acting as if they know more than the guy who watches the game just like them