Braedenstearns Posted October 15, 2013 Author Share Posted October 15, 2013 My two cents, the Bill's should have mixed up the play calling, spread the offense. Should have went 4 or 5 WR set. Like what I have seen them do on two point conversions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfbillsfan Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 A little late on this, BUT, Marv Levy would kick the field goal and take the points, every single time. Just sayin. GO BILLS!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 A little late on this, BUT, Marv Levy would kick the field goal and take the points, every single time. Just sayin. GO BILLS!!!!! Marv had much more confidence in his offenses ability to move down the field the rest of the game as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 A little late on this, BUT, Marv Levy would kick the field goal and take the points, every single time. Just sayin. GO BILLS!!!!! Marv was also badly outcoached in the Bills/Giants Superbowl. Bill Belichick--one of the people who outcoached Marv--is known for going for it on 4th down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfbillsfan Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Marv was also badly outcoached in the Bills/Giants Superbowl. Bill Belichick--one of the people who outcoached Marv--is known for going for it on 4th down. I prefer to take the points. Just my preference. Goiing for it on 4th in the situation in quesiton and not making it is equilivant to taking three points off the board and/or giving the opponent 3 points. Also, getting STUFFED on that play was a big momentum changer. Come off the fileld with the field goal, and we still have some bounce in our step! Additionally, in my eyes, Marv Levy can do no wriong, ever! Love Marv and his book! I mean, where else would you rather be!?!?!?! GO BILLS!!!!! One more thing in reference to Bilicheat, when he went for it on 4th down on us in the season opener and we stopped them, I was going NUTS!!!!! LOVED IT! GO BILLS!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) Yeah... BUT if you take the points. It is only 3 points. They went for it on 4th early in the 4th quarter and got a TD. If they would have went for both points on 2 occasions, that is only a gain of 6 points total. They earned 7 points taking a chance! I argue that they tied the games because they went for it on 4th on first occasion. IMO, they would have lost by 2 points in regulation if the game didn't play out like it did... No way they make the 2 point conversion to tie the game! Again... It is a wash because they made a TD on 4th later in the game. They came out with a net gain of 1 point rather than going the conservative route both times! And even that isn't a gimme... The second kick would have been a 39 yarder. Edited October 18, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I prefer to take the points. Just my preference. Goiing for it on 4th in the situation in quesiton and not making it is equilivant to taking three points off the board and/or giving the opponent 3 points. Also, getting STUFFED on that play was a big momentum changer. Come off the fileld with the field goal, and we still have some bounce in our step! Additionally, in my eyes, Marv Levy can do no wriong, ever! Love Marv and his book! I mean, where else would you rather be!?!?!?! GO BILLS!!!!! One more thing in reference to Bilicheat, when he went for it on 4th down on us in the season opener and we stopped them, I was going NUTS!!!!! LOVED IT! GO BILLS!!!!! Have you read his novel, "Between the Lies"? Tom Landry would never have gone for it either and he and Marv are both in the Hall of Fame and coached in a combined 20% of all SuperBowls. No matter how much the Marroners want to say it was a good call, they'll never convince me otherwise. They fail to take into account the momentum aspect which you so astutely point out. GO BILLS!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) Have you read his novel, "Between the Lies"? Tom Landry would never have gone for it either and he and Marv are both in the Hall of Fame and coached in a combined 20% of all SuperBowls. No matter how much the Marroners want to say it was a good call, they'll never convince me otherwise. They fail to take into account the momentum aspect which you so astutely point out. GO BILLS!!!!! Perhaps a scientific statistical analysis will sway you instead of a good book. Consider this study of the situation: http://fifthdown.blo...go-for-it/?_r=0 To me 4th and goal at the one early in a close game is basically a no brainer go for it situation most of the time, as this analysis illustrates. Edited October 18, 2013 by vincec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 marrone is thinking he is at home and it appears it is going to be an offensive high scoring game. He went for it. The call was not great, but the idea of going for it was. Marrone understands he has a young team overall that plays very emmotionally. He was hoping to get on a roll. And the Bills do not win by kicking the field goal. Listening to Boomer and Solomon repeat that over and over again was terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Perhaps a scientific statistical analysis will sway you instead of a good book. Consider this study of the situation: http://fifthdown.blo...go-for-it/?_r=0 This is a nice theory. If football were played on graphs and charts instead of the field and if "expected points" counted on the scoreboard then maybe so. Again, it doesn't take into the account the momentum factor, which is HUGE in football. Forcing the other team to turn it over on downs, especially on the goal line is the most macho thing you can do in football with the exception of a safety. Causes a big emotional (momentum) lift for the defensive team and a let down for the team not getting it. Ignore this part of it at your own peril (99 yard scoring drive). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) This is a nice theory. If football were played on graphs and charts instead of the field and if "expected points" counted on the scoreboard then maybe so. Again, it doesn't take into the account the momentum factor, which is HUGE in football. Forcing the other team to turn it over on downs, especially on the goal line is the most macho thing you can do in football with the exception of a safety. Causes a big emotional (momentum) lift for the defensive team and a let down for the team not getting it. Ignore this part of it at your own peril (99 yard scoring drive). Wait, didn't you just laud Marv for playing the percentages and kicking it at the goal line? Turns out that this wasn't really the percentage play. You can say that your "gut" says to kick a field goal because of momentum or whatever but the percentage play is actually to go for it. That is demonstrable statistically. Edited October 18, 2013 by vincec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Have you read his novel, "Between the Lies"? Tom Landry would never have gone for it either and he and Marv are both in the Hall of Fame and coached in a combined 20% of all SuperBowls. No matter how much the Marroners want to say it was a good call, they'll never convince me otherwise. They fail to take into account the momentum aspect which you so astutely point out. GO BILLS!!!!! And in hindsight, pin your hopes on a 2pt. conversion... Wait, that 2pt conversion rule was not in place during Landry's time and only @ the end of Marv's. Both of those guys would have easily lost that game in regulation... The way that game played out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 And in hindsight, pin your hopes on a 2pt. conversion... Wait, that 2pt conversion rule was not in place during Landry's time and only @ the end of Marv's. Both of those guys would have easily lost that game in regulation... The way that game played out. You know, I keep reading that on here. But you can't predict with any more certainty that if we had taken the FG we would have been behind by 11 at the time we went for the 4th and 8 than you can to say that 3 points would have won us the game. If it's 10 - 10 and the Bungles don't get the huge momentum lift for the Goal Line Stand, it's a different game. None of us can know would have know what would have happened. I'm just saying, down 10-7 is the second quarter, I go for the FG every doggone time. I can't say if we would have won or not and neither can anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 You know, I keep reading that on here. But you can't predict with any more certainty that if we had taken the FG we would have been behind by 11 at the time we went for the 4th and 8 than you can to say that 3 points would have won us the game. If it's 10 - 10 and the Bungles don't get the huge momentum lift for the Goal Line Stand, it's a different game. None of us can know would have know what would have happened. I'm just saying, down 10-7 is the second quarter, I go for the FG every doggone time. I can't say if we would have won or not and neither can anyone else. I understand what you are saying about momemtum. Yet, turning over on downs still pins them deep. Kick the FG readjusts the field position battle. What you are saying really is a non-factor, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 I understand what you are saying about momemtum. Yet, turning over on downs still pins them deep. Kick the FG readjusts the field position battle. What you are saying really is a non-factor, IMO. OK. We'll have go agree to disagree. Momentum plays a big role in football IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 (edited) OK. We'll have go agree to disagree. Momentum plays a big role in football IMHO Fair enough. We did get stuffed, but our D should have been licking their chops to get at them so deep in their zone. Momentum was zapped out of O... D should have never let them break out! Edited October 19, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 (edited) OK. We'll have go agree to disagree. Momentum plays a big role in football IMHO Actually, "momentum" is a non-factor and I believe that too has been statistically proven. But even so, I would argue that timidly kicking a FG in that situation, then kicking off to the other team swings the "momentum" to the bengals. And would not scoring a TD have created huge "momentum" for the Bills? If losing momentum sucks, then isn't it worth the risk to try to affirmatively capture it? How does that work on your "momentum" scale? Edited October 20, 2013 by mannc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 It's over. Focus squishing the Fish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 Actually, "momentum" is a non-factor and I believe that too has been statistically proven. But even so, I would argue that timidly kicking a FG in that situation, then kicking off to the other team swings the "momentum" to the bengals. And would not scoring a TD have created huge "momentum" for the Bills? If losing momentum sucks, then isn't it worth the risk to try to affirmatively capture it? How does that work on your "momentum" scale? I agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts