BB's timeout calling late game.

[Tom meets Kaepernick]

Ridiculous how you always feel the need to defend every decision Bill makes. We all make mistakes. 4 and 13 with an offensive line that was getting Tom killed is not a great idea.

 

[RobertWeathers]

"Plenty proven"? A 75% kicker in 2006 and a guy with a long of 45 in 2007? I'll take my chances with Brady, thanks. Ridiculous how you think there is a "right" decision in this circumstance. Even more ridiculous, that you, and not Belichick, had access to the information that proves your decision to be the "right" one.

He was proven. If BB didn't have confidence in him he would not have been on the team

If Gost was hurt then that is a good reason not to kick the FG.

Every other explanation he may offer is very questionable.

 

[fightingirish595]

Bill could've immediately called a timeout, Arizona could've made the kick, And rearguards if we won or lost i doubt anyone would've said "Bill shouldnt have called timeout." I deifnitely get Bills line of thinking here and he knows 100000000 times more about football then I could ever dream of knowing

 

[fightingirish595]

“What I should have probably done is just taken the timeout as soon as they completed the pass. But I didn’t want to do that because I thought they might just go out there and kick it and we would have the [final] timeout for our final drive in case we needed to call a timeout to complete a pass in bounds and kick a field goal.”

Bill admits he probably should have called timeout right away

 

[letekro]

He was proven. If BB didn't have confidence in him he would not have been on the team

If Gost was hurt then that is a good reason not to kick the FG.

Every other explanation he may offer is very questionable.

Assuming BB is a somewhat rational actor (and I think there is quite a bit of evidence supporting that), the explanation is that, in BB's mind, going for it gave them the best chance to win the game. If you really think BB "should" have followed your advice, then one of the following must be true.

1. You and BB both knew all of the relevant facts, but your superior knowledge and/or experience gives your opinion more weight than his.
2. You had a better handle on the relevant facts than BB did and therefore your opinion was better informed than his was.
3. You concede that BB had access to more of the relevant facts and has more and better experience, but he failed to consider the relevant facts that, according to you, clearly led to the decision to kick.

With all due respect, while you are a great poster here, I think the only conceivable possibility is (3). I'm curious which facts you were aware of that you think it is possible that BB failed to consider.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Assuming BB is a somewhat rational actor (and I think there is quite a bit of evidence supporting that), the explanation is that, in BB's mind, going for it gave them the best chance to win the game. If you really think BB "should" have followed your advice, then one of the following must be true.

1. You and BB both knew all of the relevant facts, but your superior knowledge and/or experience gives your opinion more weight than his.
2. You had a better handle on the relevant facts than BB did and therefore your opinion was better informed than his was.
3. You concede that BB had access to more of the relevant facts and has more and better experience, but he failed to consider the relevant facts that, according to you, clearly led to the decision to kick.

With all due respect, while you are a great poster here, I think the only conceivable possibility is (3). I'm curious which facts you were aware of that you think it is possible that BB failed to consider.

You are being kind of a smarty-pants here.

Of course BB knows more about football than I do. He has insights into the game and information that I am not privy to and even if I did have it, I most likely would not know what to do with it.

With that admission out of the way, in a 7-3 game going for it on 4th and 13 at the 31 was not a wise decision. Just like going for it on 4th and 2 vs the Colts wasn't and just like BB admitting on Dale and Holley that he mismanaged the time out on the FG try and they should have double-teamed Fitzy more last night.

The man is human. He makes mistakes. He admits it. Not kicking the FG was a brain fart. I bet if you get a scotch in front of him and ask him the question he'll admit in hindsight he should have kicked the FG.

 

[letekro]

Soumds like: "it was a bad decision, because I thought it was a bad decision, and I bet BB would agree with me if he were being honest." Not very persuasive but i guess we will just agree to disagree on this one (and, as you might guess, the 4th and 2 matter as well).

Btw, BB looking back at loss and saying, yeah i could have or should have done this or that differently is not the same as saying it was a bad decision at the time it was made. Im sure a decision to double a receiver, for example, is the result of extensive film review. While admitting it didnt work out is one thing, saying you botched the analysis is another

 

[RobertWeathers]

Soumds like: "it was a bad decision, because I thought it was a bad decision, and I bet BB would agree with me if he were being honest." Not very persuasive but i guess we will just agree to disagree on this one (and, as you might guess, the 4th and 2 matter as well).

Btw, BB looking back at loss and saying, yeah i could have or should have done this or that differently is not the same as saying it was a bad decision at the time it was made. Im sure a decision to double a receiver, for example, is the result of extensive film review. While admitting it didnt work out is one thing, saying you botched the analysis is another

Why would he agree with you? He just admitted that he should have done 2 things differently during a game that they won. That means he believes that he made bad tactical decisions during the game.

Maybe he was being modest but I don't think so. There is no one or nothing stopping BB from saying, "I felt ok letting the time tick off because......" or "We left Fitzy in single coverage because...."

 

[letekro]

Why would he agree with you? He just admitted that he should have done 2 things differently during a game that they won. That means he believes that he made bad tactical decisions during the game.

Maybe he was being modest but I don't think so. There is no one or nothing stopping BB from saying, "I felt ok letting the time tick off because......" or "We left Fitzy in single coverage because...."

You need to read BBs comments again as both you and the copywriter that wrote the WEEI update misinterpreted them. "I probably should have done x, but i wanted to y" is a common construction in English that means "based on what actually happened, i maybe should have done y, but based on what i thought would reasonably happen at the time i made the decision, I did x". Thats not saying the decision was faulty, it's saying, the way it played out was not as i expected when i made the decision.

 

[RobertWeathers]

You need to read BBs comments again as both you and the copywriter that wrote the WEEI update misinterpreted them. "I probably should have done x, but i wanted to y" is a common construction in English that means "based on what actually happened, i maybe should have done y, but based on what i thought would reasonably happen at the time i made the decision, I did x". Thats not saying the decision was faulty, it's saying, the way it played out was not as i expected when i made the decision.

I listened to his comments.

He thought they would go right to the line and kick it and based on his experience he should have called the time out. Once he noticed them putzing around he then called the time out. He admitted that his delay didn't kill them but if he had called the TO they would have had more time to work with after the FG.

Now with that said, he didn't want to burn the time out but they made him. He also saw them mucking around with the kickers timing and was surprised that they did that.

 

[Fencer]

People are conflating the Gost of the last few years with the subpar, skittish guy of 2006-2007.

When Gost was an All-Pro and Pro Bowler the season after the (non)-kick in question, how surprised were you?

 

[Fencer]

1. You and BB both knew all of the relevant facts, but your superior knowledge and/or experience gives your opinion more weight than his.
2. You had a better handle on the relevant facts than BB did and therefore your opinion was better informed than his was.
3. You concede that BB had access to more of the relevant facts and has more and better experience, but he failed to consider the relevant facts that, according to you, clearly led to the decision to kick.

4. He just did a bad job on his calculations.

By your logic, an inferior chess player would NEVER beat a superior one, except in cases where they had a decisive advantage in memorized opening lines, or something like that.

 

[Joker]

you guys should seriously consider writing monologues for Sominex.

 

[The Brandon Five]

"Plenty proven"? A 75% kicker in 2006 and a guy with a long of 45 in 2007? I'll take my chances with Brady, thanks. Ridiculous how you think there is a "right" decision in this circumstance. Even more ridiculous, that you, and not Belichick, had access to the information that proves your decision to be the "right" one.

Was the 4th and 13 pass out of the endzone a 75% play (especially in the light of the complete breakdown of pass pro in the game)?

 

[letekro]

When Gost was an All-Pro and Pro Bowler the season after the (non)-kick in question, how surprised were you?

No.

4. He just did a bad job on his calculations.

By your logic, an inferior chess player would NEVER beat a superior one, except in cases where they had a decisive advantage in memorized opening lines, or something like that.

I dont see how your 4 is different from my 3. I would ask you the same question, which calculation was "wrong" and what is the proof of that.

 

[scout]

I agree 100%. A 47 yard field goals is VERY makable by NFL standards these days. I'd much rather have almost 1:30 and no timeouts instead of 35 seconds and no timeouts.

The guy missed the kick so obviously not taking the time outs will naturally get spun as "Belichick's mind games wins the game" but in reality I think they were lucky the guy missed the field goal.

I'm going to get flamed. Trust me, it was a GREAT WIN and as such hate to introduce anything negative, but I'm just responding to the topic of the thread. While I don't agree with the time out usage at the end of the day I"m elated that the score still worked in our favor.

VERY makable for a "good kicker". Arizona's kicker was 1 for 4 over 45 yards. Not to mention, everything is on the line (pressure) and WTF, no time out being called? We are lucky to have BB as coach, but not lucky that we win tight ball games.

 

[Fencer]

@letekro,

One can't prove a move was bad in football the way one can in chess.

That said, BB's choice defied all relevant known percentages, and nothing about the specifics, whether in advance or in retrospect, seems to give a reason to think those percentages were inapplicable in the particular case.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Was the 4th and 13 pass out of the endzone a 75% play (especially in the light of the complete breakdown of pass pro in the game)?

Look at it this way: 75% of 3 is 2.25. To go for 7 there you should have a play that is at least a 32% play. I guess they thought that they had that in pass play. I would be surprised if that kind of situation is converted at anywhere near that rate. Mind you, they didn't go for the first down. They tried to score.

 

[letekro]

@letekro,

One can't prove a move was bad in football the way one can in chess.

That said, BB's choice defied all relevant known percentages, and nothing about the specifics, whether in advance or in retrospect, seems to give a reason to think those percentages were inapplicable in the particular case.

For all of you taking this position, you are simply substituting your judgment for his. Thats the sum total of all this. There is no calculation that quantifies BB's perception of Gost's mental or physical condition, or any number of dozens of variables of which BB has infinitely more knowledge than us. I generally defer to the experts in these situations, particularly when the expert is the greatest in the history of his field. You are free to disagree but dont be under the impression that there is some objectively correct calculation that you can point to.

 

[Rob0729]

I thought Belichick coached a magnificent game, but his explanation and reasoning for why he delayed calling the time out is flawed. He thought that Arians might call for a quick kick, but why would any head coach call for that in that situation. The logical thing for the Cards to do was to run down the clock as much as possible before kicking giving the Pats the least amount of time to come back and score the game winning field goal.

So Belichick wasted 20 seconds on the off chance that Arians was too stupid to run down the clock before kicking.